Audits and training

The numbers reported for audits, training and ratings were difficult to compare with 2007 figures. This is because the programmatic enhancements in 2008 reflect an increased scope of activities. They challenged the boundaries of data definitions we use for reporting. For instance, the number of external monitors decreased overall but they carried out a higher percentage of factory audits than in the past. There was also an increased number of monitoring activities with factories that had multiple relationships with adidas Group business entities.

Audit numbers

The reporting designation for ‘audit’ reflects components that were not specifically reported in previous years. Most importantly this includes ‘visits’ which tracked activities outside the parameters of formal auditing. The increased number of initial assessments was directly impacted by disclosure and data-cleansing activities in the FFC.

number of factory audits/visits over four years 2005 - 2008

Independent FLA audits

We continue to be an active member and supporter of the Fair Labor Association (FLA). The number of conventional independent monitoring visits conducted by FLA accredited monitors has gone down for two reasons. The first is that the number of audits due to be carried out is calculated as a percentage of the number of suppliers disclosed to the FLA. This number decreased in the past years.

The second reason is that, because of the adidas Group’s accreditation to the FLA programme, we have been able to redirect some audits to more value-added FLA projects. Read more about this.

KPI assessment

For the KPI assessment and C-Rating, our reporting calculates an average cumulative score. Comparisons with 2007 performance units of measure reflect a considerable lower average score in management commitment and responsiveness, but this is due to the 2008 implementation of a more stringent rating of that measurement. We have strengthened the integrity of our scoring through three upgrades to the KPI tool during the last five years.

Summary

The numbers reported for the 2008 programme activities remain difficult to compare and measure with past years due to the emergence of new and more detailed data which is the result of:

  • Changes in the method and depth of measurement
  • Improvements in programmatic tools and processes
  • Increased relationship management with adidas Group business entities.

See more of our supply chain data