An Analysis of Triple Bottom Line Reporting in Global Business Context

This report provides an analysis of triple bottom line reporting within a global business context. It highlights the limitations of traditional financial analysis that overlooks environmental and social parameters, and emphasizes the advantages of the triple bottom line framework, which integrates economic, social, and environmental performance. The report discusses the flexibility inherent in this approach and its role in improving corporate performance and stakeholder engagement. It acknowledges the potential shortcomings of the framework, such as the challenge of determining sustainability, but suggests that this can be addressed through setting clear objectives and conducting independent audits. The report further suggests that it is important to adopt an internal philosophical change and incorporate the business activities to be more people and environmental oriented rather than keeping the three activities isolated.

GLOBAL BUSINESS
STUDENT ID:
[Pick the date]

One of the main issues with traditional financial analysis is that it fails to take into
consideration the environmental and social parameters and exclusively focuses on the
economic aspects. While there a number of different frameworks that have emerged for
sustainable reporting but the preferred one from those discussed in the given chapter is the
triple bottomline reporting. One of the main advantages of this particular approach is that it
allows the underlying organisation to build in various parameters that are limited not only to
economic performance but also social and environmental performance. Further, there is
immense flexibility that is available to individual organisations to select the various
indicators that they deem suitable to measure the performance of the organisation in social
and environment terms. This flexibility is imperative especially under the current state when
the sustainable accounting is in a period of flux and it is not viable to represent social and
environmental performance in economic terms in a reliable manner (Camilleri, 2017).
Further, the triple bottomline framework is beneficial for the underlying organisations since it
leads to improved corporate performance and also ensures that the stakeholder approach is
endorsed. This is because this approach is not only aimed at society and environment but can
also ensure that these are built into the core philosophy of the organisation. As a result, the
business activities tend to people more people and environmental oriented rather than keeping
the three activities isolated. This is imperative since otherwise under traditional reporting, the
social and environmental damage incurred for economic profits are only mildly compensated
in the form of CSR(Corporate Social Responsibility). However, triple bottomline reporting
through slogans like profit, people and planer ensure that the overall decision making
undergoes an improvement. This in turn enables better decision making and therefore
overcomes the lacunae present in measuring social and environmental performance
(Jacobsen, 2011).
One of the shortcomings of the triple bottomline reporting is said to be that it does not
indicate whether the operations are sustainable are not. However, considering that social and
environmental reporting is voluntary, the best measure of sustainability is for the concerned
company to choose and represent in the form of objectives in advance. This could be in the
form of a sustainability report where the next year targets can be announced so that there is a
level that serves as a benchmark. But as highlighted above, the sustainability as a concept
needs to be internalised by the concerned organisation and hence philosophical change in
overall process and decision making is more critical rather than the tangible measures of
social and environmental performance. Also, it serves best that the measurement of

performance in social and environmental sphere is left to an independent internal committee
coupled with periodic independent audits from an external and independent consultant. This
can potentially ensure to enhance the utility of the triple bottom line reporting for the
organisations especially in an era when reporting in these aspects remain voluntary (Bennett,
James & Kinkers, 2017).
References
Bennett, M., James, P. & Kinkers, L. (2017), Sustainable Measures: Evaluation and
Reporting of Environmental and Social Performance, NY: Routledge
Camilleri, M.A. (2017), Corporate Sustainability, Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, NY: Springer International
Jacobsen, J. (2011), Sustainable Business & Industry, Wisconsin: ASQ Quality Press