Next Steps: Defining the GMI Framework

GMI looks to include stakeholders who offer progressive, collaborative and actionable approaches to professionalization of the monitoring activity. As part of this professionalization effort, it will be necessary to make intermittent steps such as 1) recognizing current standards and equivalences, 2) identifying gaps in individuals, organizations, and standards, and 3) to make improvements and develop the platform to accomplish our ultimate goal to create a professional requirement and a credible oversight body.

Below we have identified some potential next steps to creating a framework and we welcome feedback and suggestions:

Individual Monitor Competencies

• Compile and create a matrix of standards discussions (e.g. GSCP, UNGC, Social Auditor Survey, FFC, EICC, Better Work, etc.)
• Review existing training bodies
  • Training components vs. above compiled standards
  • Training bodies’ capacity for training auditors vs. demand for that training based on number of audits (with a range for potential reductions)
  • Training costs based on new information vs. duplicated information
• Create a system which assigns a “capabilities level” based on the current experience and existing training of auditors
• Define GMI requirements of experience and training and increases in requirements for the next 5 years.
• Determine and publish gaps of existing training to meet demands of GMI requirements and Goals
• Create a timeline for improvement needs for training and capacity issues to meet auditor training. 
• Define GMI oversight communication process to individuals which are accused of bribery issues.

Service Provider Competencies

• Review existing organizational requirements (e.g. SAI, WRAP, FLA, IALI, etc.)
  • Ethical Systems Requirements
  • Service Provider Improvement Process/Timeline
• External Complaint and Improvement Mechanism
• Industry Benchmarks of service provider systems and systems gaps
• Public reporting of improvements across the industry

Scope of Monitoring

• Review existing Collaboration and common tool groups (e.g. FFC, FLA, BSR, GSCP, EICC, etc.)
• Review Audit Day hour analysis per tool and protocol
• Industry Benchmark of report tool components and audit protocols and significance of such components and protocols to finding more accurate information

Techinical Requirements
The format and techical and compatibility requirements of this platform and the role of GMI oversight has yet to be determined.
GMI has only done preliminary investigations into the types of data platforms which are being used. No decision will be made until we determine what information GMI will house versus other entities.