Amended ballot results - ISO CD 18617.2

229 Pages·2014·2.43 MB·English

« Sustainable Purchasing » ISO/PC 277
Date: Doc. Number:
2014-09-19 N 048
Assistant: Your contact:
Sandra PAROT Laurence DOUVILLE
AFNOR AFNOR
Direct line: + 33 (0)1 41 62 84 24 Direct line : + 33 (0)1 41 62 86 06
[email protected] [email protected]

Caroline REIS
ABNT
Direct line : + (21) 3974 2385
[email protected]

Amended ballot results – ISO/CD 18617.2

Due to technical issues, we received additional comments
from USA.

Therefore, the ballot results on ISO CD 18617.2 "Sustainable
C
OMMENTARIES/ procurement" have been amended and they are attached.

D
The comments will be addressed during the next ISO/PC 277
ECISIONS
meeting, to be held in Singapore on 2014-11-03/07.

With regard to this resolution of comments, the decision on
next step will be made during this meeting.
F (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) For resolution of comments during the 3rd ISO/PC 277
OLLOW UP
meeting
S
OURCE ISO/PC 277 Secretariat

Association Française de Normalisation 11, rue Francis de Pressensé F – 93 571 La Plaine Saint Denis cedex

http://www.afnor.fr SIRET 775 724 818 00205
Result of voting
Ballot Information
Ballot reference ISO/CD 18617.2
Ballot type CD
Ballot title Sustainable purchasing
Opening date 2014-06-07
Closing date 2014-09-13
Note
Member responses:
Votes cast (29) Argentina (IRAM)
Australia (SA)
Austria (ASI)
Belgium (NBN)
Brazil (ABNT)
Canada (SCC)
Chile (INN)
China (SAC)
Colombia (ICONTEC)
Costa Rica (INTECO)
Côte d'Ivoire (CODINORM)
Denmark (DS)
Egypt (EOS)
Finland (SFS)
France (AFNOR)
India (BIS)
Ireland (NSAI)
Israel (SII)
Italy (UNI)
Japan (JISC)
Netherlands (NEN)
Nigeria (SON)
Norway (SN)
Serbia (ISS)
Singapore (SPRING SG)
Sweden (SIS)
Switzerland (SNV)
United Kingdom (BSI)
United States (ANSI)
Comments submitted (4) IFPSM
Mexico (DGN)
Poland (PKN)
Thailand (TISI)
Votes not cast (0)
Questions:
Q.1 "Do you agree to the circulation of the draft as a DIS?"
Votes by members Q.1
Argentina (IRAM) No
Australia (SA) Yes with
comments
Austria (ASI) We abstain
Belgium (NBN) We abstain
Brazil (ABNT) No
Canada (SCC) Yes with
comments
Chile (INN) Yes with
comments
China (SAC) Yes
Colombia (ICONTEC) No
Costa Rica (INTECO) No
Côte d'Ivoire We abstain
(CODINORM)
Denmark (DS) No
Egypt (EOS) Yes with
comments
Finland (SFS) We abstain
France (AFNOR) No
India (BIS) Yes with
comments
Ireland (NSAI) We abstain
Israel (SII) Yes
Italy (UNI) Yes with
comments
Japan (JISC) No
Netherlands (NEN) No
Nigeria (SON) Yes
Norway (SN) No
Serbia (ISS) Yes
Singapore (SPRING We abstain
SG)
Sweden (SIS) No
Switzerland (SNV) We abstain
United Kingdom (BSI) Yes
United States (ANSI) Yes
Answers to Q.1: "Do you agree to the circulation of the draft as a DIS?"
6 x Yes China (SAC)
Israel (SII)
Nigeria (SON)
Serbia (ISS)
United Kingdom (BSI)
United States (ANSI)
6 x Yes with comments Australia (SA)
Canada (SCC)
Chile (INN)
Egypt (EOS)
India (BIS)
Italy (UNI)
10 x No Argentina (IRAM)
Brazil (ABNT)
Colombia (ICONTEC)
Costa Rica (INTECO)
Denmark (DS)
France (AFNOR)
Japan (JISC)
Netherlands (NEN)
Norway (SN)
Sweden (SIS)
7 x We abstain Austria (ASI)
Belgium (NBN)
Côte d'Ivoire (CODINORM)
Finland (SFS)
Ireland (NSAI)
Singapore (SPRING SG)
Switzerland (SNV)
Comments from Voters
Member: Comment: Date:
Argentina (IRAM) Comment File 2014-09-09
23:07:22
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_IRAM.doc
Australia (SA) Comment File 2014-09-12
00:44:27
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_SA.doc
Brazil (ABNT) Comment File 2014-09-12
19:25:32
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_ABNT.doc
Canada (SCC) Comment File 2014-09-12
21:28:49
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_SCC.doc
Chile (INN) Comment File 2014-09-13
03:31:14
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_INN.doc
Colombia (ICONTEC) Comment File 2014-09-11
04:01:12
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_ICONTEC.doc
Costa Rica (INTECO) Comment File 2014-09-13
21:42:47
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_INTECO.doc
Denmark (DS) Comment File 2014-09-13
18:49:59
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_DS.doc
Egypt (EOS) Comment File 2014-09-13
10:18:03
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_EOS.doc
France (AFNOR) Comment File 2014-09-12
11:36:13
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_AFNOR.doc
India (BIS) Comment File 2014-09-11
07:50:09
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_BIS.doc
Italy (UNI) Comment File 2014-09-11
14:09:39
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_UNI.doc
Japan (JISC) Comment File 2014-09-12
10:34:23
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_JISC.doc
Netherlands (NEN) Comment File 2014-09-12
13:19:29
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_NEN.doc
Norway (SN) Comment File 2014-09-11
10:13:49
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_SN.doc
Singapore (SPRING Comment File 2014-09-15
SG) 13:34:11
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_SPRING SG.doc
Sweden (SIS) Comment File 2014-09-09
10:44:57
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_SIS.doc
Comments from Commenters
Member: Comment: Date:
IFPSM Comment 2014-09-11
15:54:39
IFPSM votes against the current document, but it is not ready yet for the enxt phase. See comments in the
annex.
IFPSM Comment File 2014-09-11
15:54:39
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_IFPSM.doc
Mexico (DGN) Comment 2014-09-12
21:30:29
Yes.
Poland (PKN) Comment File 2014-09-12
11:23:56
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_PKN.doc
Thailand (TISI) Comment File 2014-09-05
03:39:41
CommentFiles/ISO_CD 18617.2_TISI.doc
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: 2014-09-19 Document: PC277N037 Project: ISO CD 18617.2

MB/ Line Clause/ Paragraph/ Type of Comments Proposed change Observations of the
NC1 number Subclause Figure/Table comment2 secretariat

US NA NA Editorial Style in the document moves from Third Pick one style and write the entire document
743 NA Person to Second Person. Section 6, to that style. Or, add information in the
integrating sustainability into the procurement “General” section to indicate the audience for
each section.
process, takes a second person “You should
do this, you should think of this” approach.
Other sections are written in a more neutral
approach. I remember discussions on how
the first section is written for general
management, second section for procurement
decision makers, third section (section 6) for
procurement professionals. The shift in styles
is jarring, when read at one sitting. I realize
that the thought was that not all sections
would be read by all people.
US NA NA Editorial In general, need to be more consistent with Proofer should review and make changes as
744 NA use of bullets and sub bullets through the appropriate.
entire document
US NA NA Editorial In general, need be careful about citing
745 NA external sources and ensure permissions
have been obtained to use tables, cases,
graphs, etc.
DS Ge The DS NMC to PC277 cannot approve on
731 the preset draft af being ready for next step.
More discussions and revisions are needed.
The NMC is in process of developing
technical comments to be submitted asap.
AR ge The spirit and terms of the proposed text does Throughout the text
001 not fully coincide with the established scope. - reference supply chain instead of
value chain

- avoid the use of business oriented
language
- reference policy, not strategy
- ISO 26000:2010 should not be
reinterpreted
CA ge The draft ISO document is not well Overall - No change if Part I is to be circulated
002 introduced/positioned. It is very challenging together with Part II.
for a candid reader to understand where the
1 MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
Page 1 of 223
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: 2014-09-19 Document: PC277N037 Project: ISO CD 18617.2

MB/ Line Clause/ Paragraph/ Type of Comments Proposed change Observations of the
NC1 number Subclause Figure/Table comment2 secretariat

document stand and what purpose it serves
versus social responsibility, Copenhagen, etc.
CA ge It would have been helpful to know which Overall - No change.
003 countries did adopt the current ISO 26000 and
if the draft document could apply to those who
did not adopt it. A possible way to help the
reader could be to attach a list of web links
where to find info on countries’ positioning and
work on this.
CA Although it is intended to both private and Overall – No change. Addressing this might
004 public organizations, the draft document is require changes throughout the document for
lacking consistency throughout the various more clarify which may be challenging at this
sections as to whom the directions provided stage.
are intended to. Some sections are clearly
less applicable to the Public Sector. For
example, Section 5.2, on Supporting People,
invites organizations to review their HR
programs. Many of these programs, however,
are departmental. The GoC, as an
organization, can hardly follow the quite
prescriptive steps as proposed.
Another example is the text box on page 18
which refers to “the ability of the organization
to engage government”. What if the
organization is government? One way to read
this is to consider a lower level (e.g.
municipal/provincial) government to influence
GoC and, in turn, for GoC to influence an
international body such as UNO. This should
be further clarified.
To the contrary, NGOs (=non government
organizations?) are listed among External
stakeholders (Table 2, p.17). This
presupposes that the document is intended at
1 MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
Page 2 of 223
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: 2014-09-19 Document: PC277N037 Project: ISO CD 18617.2

MB/ Line Clause/ Paragraph/ Type of Comments Proposed change Observations of the
NC1 number Subclause Figure/Table comment2 secretariat

governments.
CA ed There are numerous style, typos, grammar Errors to be corrected throughout the
005 and style errors in the draft document which document.
are expected to be corrected. Section 6 is

hard to follow because of references to
Sections 3, 4 and 5 that are obviously not the
right numbers. Will one be included?
An executive summary would be much
appreciated. Inclusion of Part I might or might not resolve
this.
Plain language should be used for the intro

page (page vi) as the key concepts have not

been defined at this point in the text.
Will one be included?
Numerous acronyms are used, some of which

are not even defined. A list of acronyms that

the reader could refer to at any point in reading
To be fixed.
would be very helpful.

The Table of Content should be reformatted To be fixed.
using indents for sub-sections to help the

reader navigate through it.

Two sections (Setting Priorities and Enabling
People) have the number 5.2. This is the case
in both the Table of Content and the core No change. It may be too late to rewrite at this
document. The latest of these two sections, stage.
and all following ones should be renumbered.
Section 4 (p.4ff including subsections) is way 300 – Replace involved in with committed to
too long. It should set the table for Section 5.
It is too long, too complex and there are
repeats within this section and between
sections 4 and 5.
Section 4.3 (p.5): “Organizations involved in
1 MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
Page 3 of 223
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: 2014-09-19 Document: PC277N037 Project: ISO CD 18617.2

MB/ Line Clause/ Paragraph/ Type of Comments Proposed change Observations of the
NC1 number Subclause Figure/Table comment2 secretariat

Social Responsibility” – we may want to rather
say support or commit.
CA all ge Supply chain, supply chains, value chain Please provide consistent usage of these
006 should all be defined and then used terms.
consistently. Currently not consistent.

CA all ge Stakeholder term needs clarification and Please provide consistent usage of these
007 consistency. These terms are used and create terms.
confusion: relevant supply chain stakeholders,
key stakeholders, necessary stakeholders,
wider stakeholder community, internal
stakeholders, external stakeholders,
stakeholder groups, stakeholders.
CA Before an organization develops and Add clause on ‘due diligence’ such as provided
008 implements a ‘Governance framework’ the in clause 7.3 in ISO 26000:
organization should use ‘Due diligence’ to
identify the actual and potential negative ‘Due diligence in the context of sustainable
social, environmental and economic impacts of procurement is a comprehensive, proactive
its procurement decisions and activities, with
process to identify the actual and potential
the aim of avoiding and mitigating those
negative social, environmental and economic
impacts.
impacts of an organization's procurement

decisions and activities, with the aim of
avoiding and mitigating those impacts.
Due diligence may also entail influencing the
behaviour of suppliers, where they are found to
be the cause of human rights or other violations
in which the organization may be implicated.
In any due diligence process, an organization
should consider the country context in which
it’s supplier operates or in which its supplier’s
activities take place; the potential and actual
1 MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
Page 4 of 223