Whatever your needs, ISEAL has tools and resources you’ll find useful. Search our extensive archive of reports, publications, data, videos, webinars and other material.
Found 8 item(s)
ISEAL Codes of Good Practice
ISEAL Member Public System Reports
ISEAL members produce and annually update a public system report for each of the ISEAL Codes. The main goal of these reports is to provide a simplified overview of an organisation’s standard-setting, assurance and monitoring and evaluation systems. These are the most recent reports published by each of our standard-setting members. We only publish public system reports after a member has completed an external evaluation (peer review or independent evaluation). Thereafter, each subsequent yearly updated report remains public. Reports for members who are yet to undergo external evaluation are accessible to ISEAL members only. Public system reports do not indicate that a member is in or out of compliance with our Codes of Good Practice, instead they provide information about the standard-setting, monitoring and evaluation, or assurance practices of each our members.
Developing a Theory of Change: The foundation of a robust M&E system
ISEAL's Kristin Komives presents a webinar in the Sustainability Standards Essentials series on key concepts in the development of a Theory of Change (ToC) for a standard system. This webinar broadly covers the key elements of a ToC and three important applications: M&E, strategic planning and communications. In presenting this, Kristin draws on lessons learned from standards systems about how to successfully engage stakeholders in the process of developing a ToC. Kristin illustrates all the core concepts with examples from ISEAL members’ ToC. This webinar is useful for any organisation wanting to learn more about what makes a robust M&E system, a precondition for a credible standards system.
Research Webinar 18: Assessing the Landscape of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives
Research webinar with Ben Collins and Madeline Hung from MSI Integrity on standard-setting multi-stakeholder initiatives and their scope, governance, and operations. In this webinar, held on 21st September 2017, the growth and industry spread of standard-setting multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) is assessed. It examines how these MSIs are governed and the extent to which they include different stakeholder groups. The analysis looks at how MSIs engage, or fail to engage the workers and communities that are most affected by the standards they set and explores if MSIs incorporate basic institutional elements necessary to effectively set and enforce their own standards.
Research webinar 2: Exploring the design of social sustainability standards
This webinar, as part of ISEAL's webinar series on latest research on standards’ impacts, presents research findings that highlight the key differences between measurement systems; those focused on assessing compliance and those emphasizing continuous improvement across the supply chain. In this context, the research explores the role of the standard setter, variation in approaches to assessing social sustainability and key areas of shared good practice. The webinar, held on 28th April 2016, shares the findings of recent empirical research on the design of measurement systems used to assess the social sustainability of global supply chains. Data collected from ten international voluntary assessment initiatives has been analysed using the Deming cycle of plan-do-check-act. The findings highlight key differences between measurement systems as some appeared to be focused on assessing compliance whereas others emphasised continuous improvement across the supply chain. Standards focused exclusively on compliance demonstrated a weak link between the check and act stages of the cycle. Those focused on continuous improvement adopted a longer timeframe of assessment and made explicit the goal of improving labour practices across the entire supply chain. The findings raise questions about the role of the standard setter; is it to act as a watchdog, collaborative partner or both? The findings also highlight the variation in approaches to assessing social sustainability, thus demonstrating that there is no standard practice for assessment. Whilst differing approaches to assessment may be appropriate, the discussion will explore whether there are key areas of similarity whereby good practice can be shared.