The standards for our
stock funds focus on key themes that we believe best capture the strength of a
corporation’s relationships with its partners and promote human dignity and a
healthy natural environment.
These themes help
identify companies that invest in and enrich their stakeholders, building
strong partners who will in turn reward companies in ways that enhance their
long-term financial vitality and productivity. We seek to invest in companies that cultivate the skills and talents of
their employees, that earn the trust and respect of their customers, suppliers,
and investors, that strengthen their local communities, and that enhance the
ecosystems upon which we all depend for survival.
The word partners stresses the importance of what
is, in our view, a necessarily cooperative and reciprocal relationship between
corporations and their stakeholders. Legal contracts can specify many
particulars in these relationships — and are useful in doing so — but their
strength ultimately depends on mutual trust and respect. Fairness, honesty in
dealings, commitment to quality, and regard for the public interest cannot
always be legislated, regulated, or assured by contract. Without the spirit of
cooperation and understanding of mutual benefit that is achieved in strong
partnerships, the more intangible factors so important to long-term corporate
success cannot be realized.
These themes also help
us identify patterns of behavior that impose costs on the company’s partners —
or, in the vocabulary of economics, externalize costs onto society. This kind
of short-term profiteering undermines companies’ relationships with their
stakeholders, incurring burdensome debts that destroy the long-term
wealth-creating potential of both companies and the societies in which they
operate.
Relationships with Stakeholders
It takes
forward-looking, skilled managers to effectively manage their operations
without imposing the costs of doing business onto their partners or onto the
ecosystems within which they operate. Managers without imagination all too
frequently see extracting value from their stakeholders or the environment as
the fastest and simplest road to financial success. Our standards recognize the
critical importance of reciprocity in these transactions. Relationships where
one side only extracts value often do not last long. Our standards help to identify companies run by managers talented
enough to operate profitably while enriching multiple stakeholders and the
environment around them. These managers recognize the importance of
networks of relationships where mutual support helps assure long-term survival.
Not all companies we hold score well on all our themes.
Indeed, we don’t necessarily expect them to.
We recognize that relationships with partners are complicated and even the best
of companies often run into problems day to day. Mixed records to not
necessarily mean that progress is not being made, that companies are not
grappling with the important issues in their industries, or that long-term
value is not being created. These mixed records mean, however, that it is not
always easy for us to make our judgments and that we will invest in companies
with a combination of controversies and praiseworthy initiatives when we feel
that, on balance, progress is being made toward long-term benefits.
Exclusionary Standards
We seek to exclude
from our funds companies with mixed records where negatives substantially
outweigh the positives. There is a wide variety of companies that have mixed
records. Some, for example, may have a range of relatively negligible
negatives, but few countervailing positives. Others may have a variety of
positive characteristics, but have been involved in controversies of
substantial proportions. Still others may have a series of substantially negative
characteristics relating to their core business. We evaluate these companies
case-by-case, looking for signs of improvement and positive trends.
Nevertheless, companies in our portfolios can have substantial controversies on
issues as diverse as human rights, labor standards, diversity, accounting, or
product quality.
We also exclude from
our portfolios companies with significant involvement in the production of
addictive products whose abuse results in substantial health, safety, or
psychological harm: tobacco,
alcohol, and gambling. The more successful such companies are, the more
they can harm their customers and customers’ families and friends and the more
costs they impose on society. This is not a business model we support.
Similarly, we also
exclude corporations substantially involved in nuclear weapons production and military weapons production
more generally, and owners and operators of nuclear power plants.
The dangers of weapons of mass destruction and the international arms trade are
among the greatest we face today, and we view the spread of nuclear power
technology as tied to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The responsibility
for controlling these technologies belongs most appropriately with government,
not with profit-driven private enterprises. The capital markets are highly effective mechanisms for delivering a
wide variety of products and services, but we do not believe they are well
suited to deliver products that have the potential to cause incalculable harm.
Our standards can
lead us to eliminate substantial numbers of companies in certain industries
where prevailing industry norms weight our evaluations toward the negative. For
example, we have historically underweighted the energy and utilities sectors.
Conversely, we have historically overweighted certain industries, such as information
technology, where our evaluations generally tend toward the positive.
Effective
December 1, 2006, all Domini equity funds are submanaged by Wellington
Management LLC, which seeks to add value using a quantitative stock selection
approach while seeking to manage risk through portfolio construction. Within
this investment process, Wellington seeks to mitigate certain industry biases
that may result from the application of Domini’s investment standards.
Laying a Foundation
The themes we use in
assessing the strength of corporations’ stakeholder relations are ones for
which we believe sufficient information is usually available to make judgments
and are themes that represent goals we believe are reasonably achievable. Some
may be achievable, but are not measurable at this time due to a lack of
sufficient data. By assessing companies’ performances against these reasonably
verifiable and achievable goals, we hope to create a forum for public
discussion and debate that improves corporate performance and leads
corporations to compete on the strength of their relationships with
stakeholders, just as they already compete on efficiency.
We also tend to focus
more than outcomes and results than on general corporate policies and
procedures, although both policy and practice, and the interrelationship
between them, are important. Today’s forward-looking policies lay the
foundation for tomorrow’s improved practices.
Ultimately, we
believe that corporations can play a positive role in our lives, but much depends
on their specific actions. If they channel their tremendous energy and
resources to the betterment of the full range of their stakeholders, they can
create great value for the societies in which they operate, as well as for
themselves and their investors. We therefore use our investments to raise
standards and explore themes that we believe will benefit all parties in the
long run, recognizing our obligations as owners in publicly traded corporations
to help create a more just and sustainable economic system, built on principles
of fairness and sustainability, that will last well into the future.