Credibility and trust are central goals of corporate social responsibility communication. Sustainability reports are considered to be the most important persuasive communication medium, although the role of visual argumentation has not yet been researched.
Can you give us a brief insight into the development process?
In the agency where I worked as a designer right after my studies, I came into contact with the sustainability report medium for the first time. When I dealt intensively with this medium again as part of my later self-employment, I began to ask myself why these reports are actually designed the way they are. I have never let go of this question about the “language” of sustainability reports. So I got to the bottom of it with the help of further developed questions as part of my doctoral thesis. As a graduate designer (FH), it was a big hurdle for me to even find supervision and to be admitted to a doctorate, but that's another topic...
Can you briefly and concisely describe which design tools in sustainability reports are convincing?
This cannot be generalized, as a credible effect depends on various factors, such as the appropriateness of the report, possible conflicts of objectives, the character of the company, the situation of the company at the time the report was prepared, etc. In general, I was able to find various visual ETHOS strategies that are used in sustainability reports, such as the presentation of an inviting character. This character can be a testimonial, but it can also be created using design.
What can be said in general is that it is always about creating a state of balance between visual-rhetorical strategies. When a report argues in a balanced way on a visual level and is thus perceived, it is convincing and creates trust. An unbalanced report that, for example, only argues at logo level, i.e. purely with the help of data and facts, would weaken the ethos of the visually constructed corporate character. But even a design that is too self-promotional on the ethos and pathos level throws the balance out of balance. And even the purely positive presentation of sustainable activities is logically less convincing than a balanced presentation with negative developments.
Which visual language is convincing?
Of course, photos that show real employees, products, premises, etc. of the company look more credible. The credibility of the photos can also be strengthened by captions that contain further supposedly verifiable information about the corresponding photo, such as name, function, position, location and time, etc. Stock aesthetic photos, especially when used saliently, also weaken the ethos of visually constructed corporate character in sustainability reports.
Which typography do you like to use?
I attributed the effect of typography on the content pages in the sustainability reports I examined to the three rhetorical appeals: logos, ethos and pathos. The typography in the LOGOS area is factually neutral, orderly and is characterized by low contrast. ETHOS typography, on the other hand, appears characteristic, reputable, professional and independent, and that in the area of pathos can be described as contrasting and emotional. It is hardly surprising that the typography of most reports can be classified both in the logos sector and in the area of the intersection of logos and ethos. Only four reports use contrasting and emotional typographical design on their content pages.
How convincing are lists of awards, initiatives, etc.
The listing of prizes, awards, initiatives, etc. is an ethos strategy of persuasion. This allows companies to have their sustainable activities certified by independent third parties or authorities and thus strengthen the credibility of the report and thus also their credible corporate character. The certificate from auditors also serves to dispel the possible mistrust of the recipients of the content of the reports.
What does the sustainability report of the future look like?
The future certainly lies in integrated reporting, i.e. that financial and reporting on sustainability issues are combined and, as it were, merged in one report. There are also more and more reports in the form of reporting websites. These online reports have the advantage of being able to integrate other media such as videos or audio and offer further options for visual argumentation.
My great hope is that large companies (possibly due to political pressure) will also join the common good economy and draw up a balance sheet for the common good. This type of reporting is significantly more ambitious than sustainability reporting and could pave the way to a post-growth economy.
