There are things beginning to happen that we’d like to see more of.
Practices that could enhance the value of responsible investment
strategies across the board, whether you’re a PE house, an investor, a
limited partner, a portfolio company, or sitting in another industry.
1) Shift the paradigm – and then don’t forget the carrot
If we can see things differently, change can start to happen.
Ninety-four percent of PE houses are now starting to see differently –
ESG activities are opportunities for value creation, not just matters of
risk and compliance. But have they focused enough on that carrot yet,
or are they still more concerned about the stick?
Let’s look at due diligence.
All survey respondents say they do some type of ESG due diligence,
pre-acquisition. This could be misleading though. All PE houses will
carry out ‘traditional’ environmental, health and safety due diligence,
typically at a site level. Things like contamination liabilities,
asbestos risks and environmental regulatory compliance have all been at
the centre of specialist investigations in the past. This is mainly
about checking for any financial implications that could impact
investment economics; or for legal and compliance reasons; or to uncover
liabilities that would expose the PE house. It’s still about the stick.
Of course, this type of due diligence still has to be done. But
adding ESG due diligence paints a fuller picture. It identifies a
broader range of issues like climate change or water scarcity. These
might impact the quality, availability or price of raw materials in the
future. ESG due diligence considers opportunity: new markets; income
streams; eco-efficiencies; new resources; employee motivation; employee
loyalty. It’s about the carrot as well as the stick.
These kinds of ESG due diligence findings then need to be built into
the 100-day plan (or other targets). If this doesn’t happen, there’s a
risk that ESG action points will be sidelined as niche issues. They
won’t be integrated into core business strategy and practice. ESG value
creating opportunities will be missed. The carrot forgotten.
2) Measure the financial value created – yes, tangible and intangible
While 94% see that ESG activities can create value, only 40% are
measuring it. What’s more, the things that are being measured
quantifiably tend to be the ‘easier to measure’ energy efficiency
initiatives.
PE houses such as KKR and Doughty Hanson have successfully measured
cost savings from eco-efficiency initiatives including waste reduction,
raw material reduction and reduced energy/water use. This is data that
can be expressed in financial terms.
However, even the more advanced PE houses are struggling to measure
the less tangible benefits of ESG issue management. Why is this?
It’s difficult to get the information. To measure value created from
environmental and social initiatives you need relevant financial data.
For most PE houses this is not yet readily available at a portfolio
level. Many interviewed said they’re not yet collecting ESG data
systematically from portfolio companies.
Other PE houses are measuring and monitoring ESG improvements at
their portfolio companies. But they’re using qualitative techniques.
They can’t attribute value in financial terms to any improvements, but
they can still build a picture of progress. They can also compare
performance company -to-company, and year-on-year.
Interestingly, houses that are monitoring and reviewing ESG
performance at a portfolio level are increasingly asking the portfolio
companies themselves to pay for the cost of carrying out these reviews.
This is partly because they recognize that ESG management is about value
creation as well as risk management and compliance.
So what’s the answer? Use existing valuation methodologies. These can
effectively quantify both the intangible and tangible value from
managing environmental and social issues. This kind of valuation
exercise first requires access to data though. PE houses must have the
ability to systematically collect relevant ESG and financial data from
their portfolio companies.
As we saw at the beginning of this document, some PE houses are
starting to capture and report impacts more fully. Let’s take a further
look at KKR.
3) Ramp up reporting – for the sake of all stakeholders
There has been a trend among some PE houses to report ESG progress on
a case-study basis. This can be a particularly effective reporting tool
post-exit, to show the value created while the company was owned by the
PE house.
But soon case studies won’t be enough. LPs are paying much more
attention to the data they are getting from PE houses. They are asking
more of them in their questionnaires. They are pressuring for more
transparency in ESG-related information.
The good news is that PE houses can benefit greatly from the progress
in the corporate sector on sustainability reporting and integrated
reporting. Which key performance indicators (KPIs) should be included in
reports? What metrics can be used to measure intangible value from ESG
activities?
The second piece of good news is that PE houses can share this
knowledge effectively across their portfolio companies during the hold
period. They can strive for consistent reporting from all portfolio
companies. They might host knowledge-sharing conferences for portfolio
companies to learn from each other. They can call on specialists to help
transition portfolio companies through the process.
Some PE houses have already set mini- mum ESG reporting metrics or
KPIs such as the ones above. They expect portfolio companies to measure,
monitor and report upwards, based on these.
With consistent reporting in place, the PE house gets a view of
individual company progress over time. They can also compare,
company-to-company, typically within a given sector.
As they become more sophisticated in reporting, PE houses can engage
more proactively with LPs. They can work together to shape and
streamline future RI reporting to them rather than being on the back
foot and struggling to report similar, but different, information to
individual LPs. CalPERS is doing just this by developing a ‘Manager
Assessment Tool’ to help its manager selection process by ranking
managers on key ESG issues.
More News
Creating value through responsible investment: Are the hard and lean going soft?
Are we brave enough to go this far?
So, fast-forward a few years. PE companies are taking a strategic,
value creating approach to ESG issue management. They have increased
their knowledge through innovative partnerships with NGOs. Deal teams
have been trained on responsible investment. There’s more structure
around measuring and reporting the value of ESG programs. Portfolio
companies are enjoying the benefits of a proactive ESG approach. LPs are
receiving transparent, insightful information.
At this point the PE industry could be in a position to give
something back. Sitting atop integrated reports, consolidated from
across their portfolio companies, using a consistent set of KPIs gives
them a great advantage.
At this aggregate level, sector-based ESG issues and opportunities
will become apparent. By sharing the insight from the integrated reports
back through their portfolio companies they can create a domino effect
of sector-specific learning.
PE houses will have enhanced their understanding of the most useful
KPIs to include in an integrated report from a sustainable accounting
point of view. They can share these with the industry actors in the
corporate sector.
Limited partners could use the insight gained from their private
equity invest- ments to the benefit of their public equity ones. And as
LPs start demanding integrated reports and using the PE model for their
public equity asset managers, they would drive further transparency in
ESG-related information.
More News