Journalists take aim at
poor IR web usability
By IR Web Report Staff
Poor ease-of-use
of web-based company disclosures has come under
scrutiny in recent articles by prominent financial
columnists.
In a
column featured in the mass-circulation
newspaper USA Today, Associated
Press national business columnist Bruce Meyerson
says the SEC should address the poor usability
of online disclosures as it ponders making the
Web the default medium for corporate reporting.
"With the government prodding investors
to adopt the Internet as their primary source
for key documents such as annual reports and
proxy statements, it's time for regulators and
companies to make finding and reading online
information reports more user friendly,"
he writes.
"Untamed thicket
of confusion and clunky web design"
Meyerson criticizes the poor usability
of the SEC's EDGAR database, saying the search
functionality is inadequate, filings use unfriendly
labels instead of commonly understood terms,
and filings lack navigation support even though
many run to over 100 pages.
|
|
| AP
national business columnist Bruce Meyerson
called on regulators and firms to improve
usability of web disclosures. |
On company websites, he singles out the practice
of companies providing PDF
Blobs as being problematic and calls companies'
IR websites "an untamed thicket of confusion
and clunky Web design."
Meyerson, who consulted IR Web Report
for his column, points to IBM
as a company that is doing the right things
by its shareholders. He concludes by saying
that investors could be left worse off
if the Securities and Exchange Commission adopts
web-based reports as the default approach for
delivery.
Financial Times columnist
says "investors deserve better"
Last month, Financial Times columnist
David Bowen also took aim at online investor
communication practices. He said IR departments
apparently "don't quite know what they
are doing" when it comes to communicating
online.
He was especially blunt about chemical giant
DuPont
saying "its investor relations director
does not have any regard for the web, and probably
doesn't understand it."
Such unprecedented public criticism signals
just how bad the situation on investor relations
websites has become. Investor relations departments
have neglected effective web disclosure to the
point where it is discussed in the mainstream
media.
IR profession credibility
at stake
We have been saying for the past five years
that IR departments need to gain the necessary
knowledge and skills to effectively manage their
web-based communications. Now the poor state
of online IR practices poses a threat to the
credibility of the profession.
Except for our services and isolated industry
initiatives — such as the IR
Best Practice Awards program run by the
UK's IR Society — there has been little
movement to do anything.
The problem is particularly acute in North
America. During the time that we have witnessed
the biggest communications change in modern
times, the investor relations community in North
America has largely been uninterested. The
standard model has been to outsource the IR
website and forget about it.
There are many in the IR profession who see
online communication as a menial, tactical concern
far beneath their station. They are focused
on serving management and the 20 to 50 investors
who can actually move their company's share
price.
But they may well have made a strategic and
costly error. By some estimates, if the SEC's
E-proxy proposal is adopted companies will save
almost $1 billion per year.
But the rule looks to be in jeopardy, in part
because companies haven't shown they deserve
it, or even that they want it.
Related: Response
to SEC’s E-Proxy shows issuers really don’t
care
Read our