Award categories

The Best Investor Engagement award is presented to the investor that FTSE350 company secretaries consider was responsible for the best stewardship engagement during the year.

Recognising the difference the Code has made to the quality and quantity of investor engagement, company secretaries of all FTSE 350 companies nominate the investor or investment manager they consider to have undertaken the most constructive stewardship engagement in the past year. The five with the highest numbers of votes are shortlisted, and the nominee with the most votes wins the award.

Nominations are not taken for this award.

This award goes to the organisation that has best demonstrated the essential objective of the strategic report: ‘to provide information for shareholders that will enable them to assess how the directors have performed their duty to promote the success of the company’. Companies will typically need to present strong forward-looking commentary alongside a comprehensive review of the previous year.

The judges will be looking for:

• A description of what the company does and why, and how it differs from its competitors
• Clear links between strategy, objectives and business model
• A business model description that sets out how value is generated or preserved over the longer term, and how that value is captured
• A description of the main trends, opportunities, risks and uncertainties affecting the entity, how they are managed, and whether they are increasing or decreasing
• The use of financial and non-financial KPIs in analysis
• Disclosures on diversity, the environment, social responsibility, community and human rights issues, where material

Nominations are not taken for this award.

This award recognises high-quality remuneration reports that don’t shy away from difficult issues, and that make the rationale for key decisions clear. Reports considered for this award will offer an incisive view of best practice, describing how remuneration is considered alongside strategy and the long-term interests of shareholders, and how remuneration policy affects positive change in organisational culture.

The judges will be looking for evidence of reports that have presented real insights into the work of the remuneration committee and that demonstrate innovative thinking and stakeholder engagement.

Evidence considered by the judges will include:

• A clear explanation of how remuneration policy is legally compliant and explicitly linked to delivery of strategy
• Acknowledgement of the external and internal economic environments, and how these are factored into remuneration policy and practice
• Disclosure of targets and a willingness to explain why those targets were deemed the most appropriate for the company
• A description of how the desired culture throughout the organisation is achieved through remuneration
• Clear explanation of any changes in policy and practice

Nominations are not taken for this award.

This award recognises companies that understand the relationship between sustainability and strategy, and that focus their efforts on what will keep their business in operation in years to come.

The judges are interested in companies that show throughout their report that sustainability is at the heart of their business. The judges are particularly interested in reports that show the board’s commitment to sustainability, combined with excellent case studies and data that demonstrate sustainability in practice.

The judging criteria include:

• Recognition and evidence that long-term stakeholder interests and non-financial factors are critical and inextricably linked to strategy, objectives and sustainability
• Identification of value chain and value drivers, together with an explanation of how the company creates its future in terms of vision, values and behaviours
• Insight into how the company accounts for itself on environmental, social and governance matters
• Evidence that sustainability is centred on risk management and opportunities, with a link to strategy and an effective discussion around choice of, and performance against, non-financial KPIs
• Demonstration of engagement with the most important stakeholders in the business and how this drives improvements in performance

Nominations are not taken for this award.

Winners of this award will have offered great detail on the skills of the board, succession planning and induction, and a real sense of the personality of the chairman. Reports will be well presented and clearly written.

The judges look for reports with a strong chairman’s statement and that provide a good explanation of the issues the board faced during the year. The judges are particularly interested in reports that demonstrate how the chair is taking personal responsibility for leading the company, and explain how they lead the board and ensure that the company culture is appropriate.

Evidence considered by the judges will include:

• Board activities during the year, and a discussion on how the tone from the top is cascaded throughout the organisation
• Description of the process around, and outcomes and actions arising from, board evaluation
• Description of attributes required and/or obtained in the course of board refreshment, why these are important to the board and company’s strategic purpose, and clear evidence of succession planning
• Consideration of the mix of skills and other attributes on the board, how any gaps are likely to be filled, and what is being done to equip the board with the requisite skills to deliver future strategy
• Evidence that diversity is reported in its widest sense

Nominations are not taken for this award.

This award gets under the bonnet of company auditing, looking at how audit committees go about their work, how companies handle their external auditors, and how the provision of non-audit services is managed. Shortlisted companies will have published reports offering quality discussion on all aspects of the audit.

Judges look for reports that provide detailed insight into how the board satisfies itself on auditor independence, and oversees the delivery a high-quality audit for shareholders. Judges also consider the extent to which the report presents the significance of the audit function to shareholders.

Evidence considered by the judges will include:

• A view on audit rotation, and an explanation of why this was or was not appropriate
• How the audit committee satisfied itself about the external auditor’s independence, and how relations are managed
• Confirmation that the audit committee challenged the external auditor on its work in the areas that drive audit quality
• Discussion of how the audit committee obtained comfort that the approach taken by management to specific issues was appropriate, and how it assured itself that the annual report was fair, balanced and understandable
• The work carried out to inform the board’s view that the company is a going concern, and inputs to the board’s viability statement

Nominations are not taken for this award.

This award is given to reports that recognise that good risk management is not a static thing; it responds to internal and external pressures, and is inextricably linked to strategy. Nominated reports will give a meaningful description of the business and the risks it faces, and show why each risk is incurred and how the board committees in particular are playing their part in managing them.

Judges look for reports that provide meaningful discussion of the risks arising out of its strategy and operations, detailed description of the process of risk governance within the organisation, and how the effectiveness of this is tested. Judges are particularly interested in reports that offer great insight into the issues facing the business and give confidence that risk is well managed.

The judging criteria include:

• How the report demonstrates that risk management is integral to strategy and operations
• How the report shows that risks are managed appropriately, and that risk management is dynamic
• A description of what the risk or audit committee did during the year, how remuneration is used as a risk management tool, and how unintended consequences are minimised
• Where applicable, a description of how controls have been improved, and of how risks that have grown in importance are being managed

Nominations are not taken for this award.

This award is divided into two categories: FTSE 100 and FTSE 250. Although the size of the companies may differ, the clarity of the reports and the insight they give into the workings of the company and the board will not. Nominees may hail from different parts of the corporate community, but each will tell the company’s story vividly, honestly and in their own unique way. No material will be omitted, and the temptation to use boilerplate comprehensively avoided.

The judges are looking for reports that maintain the same high standard of commentary throughout. They are interested in reports that describe the business with thorough and relevant information, and that have a clear and logical flow. Winning reports offer real insight into the workings of the company at its highest levels.

Evidence considered by the judges will include:

• Clear and relevant links made between strategy, risk, KPIs, sustainability and remuneration
• The level of insight provided into how the board works, including how it manages risk, its approach to diversity (including gender), and attempted engagement with shareholders
• Whether the report is an interesting and enjoyable read, and easy to comprehend
• Whether the report truly sets the tone from the top and accurately describes the board’s work in providing leadership and oversight
• Whether the report provides an honest ‘warts and all’ appraisal of the year, with no material omitted
• Whether the report makes intelligent and helpful use of photos and graphics, and judicious use of case studies

Nominations are not taken for this award.

This award is divided into two categories: FTSE 100 and FTSE 250. Although the size of the companies may differ, the clarity of the reports and the insight they give into the workings of the company and the board will not. Nominees may hail from different parts of the corporate community, but each will tell the company’s story vividly, honestly and in their own unique way. Nothing material will be omitted, and the temptation to use boilerplate comprehensively avoided.

The judges are looking for reports that maintain the same high standard of commentary throughout. They are interested in reports that describe the business with thorough and relevant information, and that have a clear and logical flow. Winning reports offer real insight into the workings of the company at its highest levels.

Evidence considered by the judges will include:

• Clear and relevant links made between strategy, risk, KPIs, sustainability and remuneration
• The level of insight provided into how the board works, including how it manages risk, its approach to diversity (including gender), and attempted engagement with shareholders
• Whether the report is an interesting and enjoyable read, and easy to comprehend
• Whether the report truly sets the tone from the top and accurately describes the board’s work in providing leadership and oversight
• Whether the report provides an honest ‘warts and all’ appraisal of the year, with nothing material omitted
• Whether the report makes intelligent and helpful use of photos and graphics, and judicious use of case studies

Nominations are not taken for this award.