The difficulty in measuring the effects of engagement activities on corporate practices was one of the observations that lead to the launch of this work. Based on this observation, the working group has endeavoured to develop tools to better understand the link between these engagement activities and change within a company (see the concept of ‘output’, p. 3 of the report) and thus to objectify the measurement of influence as much as possible.
The aim of measuring influence – by examining the link between engagement activities and the results achieved against set objectives – is to better assess the added value brought about by engagement when a result has been achieved. This measurement of influence is based on measurable and verifiable elements (e.g. achievement of a result, the existence and number of follow-up activities, a description of the discussions, relational dynamics enabling a compromise solution, stakeholders met, etc.).
However, measuring influence using the VOICE method does not seek to systematically attribute the achievement of an outcome to the engagement activity carried out by a particular investor, since in most cases, the achievement of an outcome depends on a multitude of internal and/or external factors and pressures.
Finally, evidence of influence – which seeks to assess the probability that the engagement contributed to the achievement of an outcome – is only required by VOICE from level 4, which is described as ‘very likely influence’. Only a minority of engagements – those at the ‘very likely’ and ‘recognised’ levels of influence – are subject to a request for detailed justification of the level of influence, and such cases remain rare.