GRI 202: Market Presence 2016 · Topic Standard · Cross-sectoral
Disclosure GRI 202-2
Proportion of senior management hired from the local community
Practical guidance for preparing this disclosure. Use this card to identify datapoints, verify claims and organise supporting evidence. For exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Open official GRI source
↗ Share
Reviewed by
Dr Ross Kurinko · GRI Certified Trainer
To prepare this disclosure
5 datapoints ↓
5 claims to verify ↓
5 evidence areas ↓
3 report examples ↓
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain how much of its senior management comes from the local community around its operations. In practice, it is about showing the share of senior leaders who were recruited locally, rather than brought in from elsewhere, and making clear what you mean by “local community” for the purposes of the report.
The practical focus is on the scope of the figure: whether it covers the whole organisation or only certain sites, countries or business units, and whether the same approach is used consistently. Readers should be able to see if local hiring at senior level is concentrated in a few locations or spread across operations, and understand any limits in the data or definition used.
* This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Before you start
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Preparation
Key datapoints to prepare
| Datapoint | What to capture | Evidence hint | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Key operating sites | List the locations the organisation treats as its main operating sites, using the same basis applied in reporting so the set is complete and consistent. | Group structure or site register, management reporting pack, and the internal basis used to decide which sites count. | Operations / Finance |
| Local senior hires | Capture the share of senior managers who were recruited from the local community, using the agreed local-community and senior-manager definitions for the period reported. | HRIS, recruitment records, and the working paper that maps each senior manager to local-community status. | HR / People Analytics |
| Senior manager definition | Set out the organisation’s working definition of who counts as senior management for this metric, including the roles or level used to classify people. | HR policy, organisation chart, job architecture, and the internal calculation note used for the disclosure. | HR / Reward |
| Local area definition | State the geographic area the organisation uses to decide whether a person is local for this measure, in the form used in the calculation. | Policy note, recruitment geography rules, and any map or postcode list used to apply the local-area test. | HR / Recruitment |
| Major site definition | Explain the rule used to decide which operating sites are treated as significant, including any threshold or business test applied. | Disclosure methodology note, site portfolio list, and the internal criteria paper used to identify significant sites. | Operations / Finance |
Show GRI 202-2 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
- Use the source’s own meaning for who counts as senior management.
- Use the source’s own meaning for which sites count as significant places of operation.
- Use the source’s own meaning for what counts as local in a place-based sense.
- Work out the share of senior managers who were recruited from the nearby community.
- Use the source’s own meaning for significant places of operation.
LRA working checklist - paraphrased; see official source
How to prepare
- Set the reporting boundary first. List the sites you will treat as material for this disclosure, and make sure the same set is used consistently when you gather the local hiring figure and the related explanations.
- Agree what counts as the management group in scope. Write down the business definition you are using for that level of staff so the percentage is calculated against the right population.
- Fix the meaning of local for this report. State the geographic area you will use to decide whether a manager is from the surrounding community, and apply that rule consistently.
- Collect the underlying records before you calculate anything. Pull together the site list, the headcount or HR evidence needed for the percentage, and the internal notes that support each definition you plan to disclose.
- Prepare the disclosure in two parts: the number and the explanations. Report the percentage of managers recruited from the local community, then add the wording you used for the management group, the local area, and the sites covered.
- Check the final draft against the source material and your working papers. Confirm that every required item is present, that any exclusions or scope changes are explained, and that the published wording matches the evidence you hold.
Request local-hire senior leadership data
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What share of our senior leadership in key operating sites comes from the surrounding community, and how do we define the terms used in that calculation?
Use your organisation’s own people and location terms first, then map them to the reporting label. For example, if you say ‘leadership team’, ‘site director group’, ‘home-grown hires’, or ‘local catchment’, keep those internal terms in the request and only translate them afterwards. Check the source material before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the data for the disclosure about the proportion of senior management hired from the local community.
Why it fails: It uses framework language only, so the owner has to guess what population, sites, definitions, and source records are needed. It also does not ask for the underlying definitions or the calculation basis, so the result may be unusable for review.
Better request
Please send the people data for our major operating sites for [period]: the sites included, the senior leadership roles counted, how you define ‘local’, how you define the senior group, the source file/system, the counts of local-community hires and total senior leaders, and the percentage. Please use your own internal terms first, then map them for the reporting pack, and note any exclusions or exceptions.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for senior leadership local-hire data for [reporting period] Hi [name], I’m preparing a sustainability reporting data pack and need your help with the people data for [reporting period]. Please could you share the figures and definitions for the senior roles in our major operating sites, using the organisation’s own terms where possible. Specifically, please provide: - the list of significant operating sites included in scope; - the definition you use for senior leadership / senior management; - the definition you use for local community / local area; - the definition you use for significant operating sites; - the number of senior leaders hired from the local community; - the total number of senior leaders in scope; - the resulting percentage; - the source system or file used; - any exclusions, assumptions, or exceptions. If helpful, you can return this in the table format below. Please adapt this to your organisation’s language and check the source material before sign-off. Thanks, [preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you send over the senior leadership local-hire figures for [period] for our main operating sites? Please include your own definitions for the senior group, what counts as local, the sites in scope, the source used, and the percentage plus the underlying counts. A simple table is fine. Please adapt to your organisation’s language and check the source material before sign-off. धन्यवाद / Thanks, [preparer name]
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. A group with several plants and a central head office wants to understand whether plant leadership is drawn from nearby labour markets.
Adapted request. Please provide the local-hire figures for plant leadership at our significant sites for [period]. Use our site names, our definition of plant leadership, and our rule for what counts as local to each plant. Include the site list, the count of local-community hires in senior roles, the total senior roles in scope, the percentage, the source report, and any exclusions.
Example response. Site A: 3 local-community hires out of 10 senior roles = 30%; Site B: 2 out of 8 = 25%; Head office excluded from scope under our site rule. Definitions and source file attached.
Retail / Consumer
Context. A retailer with regional distribution centres and flagship stores wants to assess whether store and regional managers are recruited from nearby communities.
Adapted request. Please share the data for regional managers and site leaders in our major stores and distribution centres for [period]. Use the business terms you already use for those roles, explain how you define local for each region, and provide the counts, percentage, source system, and any exceptions.
Example response. Scope: 12 flagship stores and 4 distribution centres. Senior roles in scope: 52. Hires from local community: 19. Percentage: 36.5%. Local defined as home address within 30 miles of site. Source: HRIS extract dated [date].
The full request pack — response form, data table, evidence metadata and sign-off — is in the Download Centre.
Draft your disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
State how you defined senior management, what you mean by local, and which operations you treated as significant for this disclosure.
Context note
Explain what the local-hiring percentage says about the organisation’s approach to recruiting senior leaders from nearby communities at the operations you included.
Fluctuation statement
If the figure moved materially, describe whether the change came from a different site mix, a revised local-area definition, changes in the senior leadership group, or shifts in recruitment patterns.
Content index entry
GRI 202-2 Proportion of senior management hired from the local community — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Professional preparation tools and forms for GRI 202-2. Each download includes a concise “How to use” guide.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| I used the group of sites we treat as material to the report, and I can show how that list was agreed and kept up to date. | The assurer may find the site list was chosen informally, changed late, or excludes a material site without a documented reason. | Approved site-selection criteria; the final site list used for the figure; management sign-off or review notes; any exclusions and the rationale for them; version history showing when the list was frozen. |
| I calculated the coverage figure from the local hires in the relevant management population, using the same population definition throughout the reporting period. | The assurer may question whether the denominator is consistent, whether some managers were wrongly included or excluded, or whether the calculation was done on a different basis from the narrative. | Population extract for the management group used in the calculation; headcount or HR records; calculation workbook with formulas; reconciliation to the source population; review evidence showing the method was checked before publication. |
| I applied our internal meaning of the management level in question, and that definition was the one used when the data was gathered and reviewed. | The assurer may challenge whether the definition was clear, stable, and applied consistently across sites or business units. | Written definition or policy note; organisational chart or role-mapping guidance; evidence that the same definition was used in the data request, calculation, and final disclosure; approval or review records. |
| I used our agreed boundary for what counts as local, and the same boundary was used for all locations included in the figure. | The assurer may probe whether the local-area test was too broad, too narrow, or applied differently by site, which could distort the percentage. | Documented geographic rule for local status; maps, postcode lists, or distance criteria where relevant; source records showing employee home location or local status; checks confirming the rule was applied consistently. |
| I relied on our internal rule for which sites are treated as material, and I can show why each included location met that rule. | The assurer may ask whether the material-site rule was defined in advance, applied consistently, and supported by evidence for each included site. | Documented materiality or significance rule for sites; site-by-site assessment; supporting operational data used to decide inclusion; review notes or approval showing the final set was checked before release. |
Evidence pack to prepare
- The governing policy or written commitment behind this disclosure
- A methodology / definition note setting out how the disclosure was scoped and prepared
- Source-system exports the figures or facts were drawn from
- The internal approval / sign-off record for the disclosure before publication
- Minutes or records evidencing the relevant engagement or consultation
Common reporting gaps
- A percentage is stated without the underlying counts (numerator and denominator).
- The denominator — what the figure is a share of — is not explained.
- Partial scope is reported as if it were complete coverage.
- One-off activities are counted as if they were ongoing programmes.
- Boundary or period changes that move the figure are not flagged.
- Exclusions from the reported scope are not listed or explained.
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
- Wrong data owner
The request goes to HR or a site lead who does not hold the hiring and location records, so the team cannot trace the figure back to the source system.
- Using framework language too early
People ask for the metric in reporting jargon instead of the organisation’s own job and location terms, which leads to mismatched extracts and confusion over what to pull.
- Scope not pinned down
The team never agrees which operating sites count, so one person includes every office while another only uses major sites and the result cannot be reconciled.
- Period basis mixed up
One source is taken from the current month while another uses a year-end snapshot, so the numerator and denominator do not refer to the same time point.
- Counting basis not aligned
Headcount, full-time equivalent and vacancy-based records are blended together, which makes the percentage impossible to calculate on one consistent basis.
- Source labels stripped out
When data is copied into a working file, the original site names, role codes and file references are lost, so no one can trace where each number came from.
- Populations merged incorrectly
Senior leaders from different business units or countries are pooled even though they should be kept separate for the chosen location definition, which distorts the local share.
- Evidence trail incomplete
The file has the final numbers but not the supporting notes, definitions and approval history, so reviewers cannot see how the figure was built or signed off.
Where judgement is often needed
- Set the site list before calculating the share
Decide which operating sites count as significant, keep that basis consistent across the period, and explain any additions or removals from takeovers, sales, closures or reclassifications.
- Use one local-area rule and say where it changes
Where countries or sites use different ideas of what counts as local, choose a clear geographic rule for each place, apply it consistently, and disclose the rule used.
- Define the management group in a way that matches your structure
State which roles sit in the senior leadership pool for the calculation, especially where titles differ by country or business unit, and explain any exclusions at the edge of the group.
- Decide how to treat people who sit partly inside the scope
Make a documented call on cases such as interim appointees, secondees, shared-service leaders or acting roles, and explain whether they are included in the headcount.
- Fix the timing point for both the people count and the local test
Use one cut-off date or period-end basis for the numerator and denominator, and disclose if hiring date, contract start date or another timing rule drives the result.
- Choose measured data first and explain any estimate
Where direct records are incomplete, use the best available internal evidence or a clearly described estimate, and say which figures were measured and which were approximated.
- Round in a way that does not distort the percentage
Apply one rounding rule consistently, check that the rounded result still reflects the underlying counts, and note the rule if small populations make the percentage volatile.
- Aggregate enough to protect personal data
If the local-origin test could identify individuals in small teams or single-site leadership groups, combine data to a safer level and explain the aggregation approach used.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Food manufacturing · synthetic · written by LRA
This example shows how a reporter can explain which sites are treated as the most material, define the management group being measured, and state the local area used for the calculation, alongside the share of that group drawn from nearby communities.
Synthetic example only. We report on our main production sites and distribution hubs, which we treat as the places where our operations are most material because they account for most of our workforce and output. In this example, our senior leadership group is defined as the executive team and site directors, and 72% of them are recruited from the local labour market; here, “local” means the same county or a neighbouring county within roughly 50 miles of the site.
Logistics and warehousing · synthetic · written by LRA
This example demonstrates a different way to describe the sites that matter most, the management population included in the measure, and the local geography used for recruitment, with a consistent percentage calculation.
Synthetic example only. Our material locations are the two regional hubs that together handle the majority of our storage and dispatch activity, so we focus this disclosure on those sites. For this illustration, we define senior management as the country leadership team and depot managers, and we treat “local” as the same metropolitan area or an adjacent district within about 30 kilometres; 9 of the 12 people in that group are from that area, which is 75%.
Draft output & visualisation ideas
How to turn the collected data into a draft disclosure. Suggested visuals and a GRI content-index line generated from this disclosure's datapoints.
Suggested visuals
- Local hiring share in senior roles — bar: The proportion of senior leaders recruited from the surrounding community, using the reporter’s chosen definition of senior leadership and local area.
- How the local area is defined — table: The geographic boundary used for the term 'local', alongside any site or region notes needed to apply it consistently.
- Which operations are treated as significant — table: The locations included in the reporting scope because they are considered important operations, with the basis for that judgement.
- Senior leadership and local recruitment by site — stacked bar: For each significant operation, the split between senior managers hired locally and those hired from elsewhere.
- Local hiring rate across key sites — bar: A site-by-site comparison of the percentage of senior management recruited from the local community at each significant operation.
From a number to a disclosure
What separates a figure from a disclosure.
Basic
At our main sites, 42% of our top managers were recruited locally.
Better
Across our significant operating sites, 42% of our top managers were recruited from nearby communities, using our internal definition of senior leaders and our local-area boundary.
Best
Across all significant operating sites this year, 42% of our top managers came from nearby communities, based on our internal definitions of senior leaders, local area and significant site, and the share was unchanged because we kept filling roles through local talent pipelines.
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. The confidence label shows how closely each match maps to GRI 202-2 — these are report practice, not exact disclosure examples.
| Company | Sector · Country | Year | Match | Page | Report | Assurance | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
Firstsource Solutions Limited | Professional Services · India | 2025 | Partial | p. 92 →p. 214 →p. 232 → | ESG Report FY 2024-25 → | BSI | ||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Firstsource Solutions Limited’s reportWhat the report shows Firstsource Solutions Limited’s ESG Report FY 2024-25 provides specific data on the percentage of senior management members hired from the local community, with figures detailed on page 92. However, there is no clear narrative or methodology explaining this data, as narrative items related to methodology or further explanation are either not found or unclear. Additionally, other aspects of local community impact and procurement practices are mentioned in the report (pages 215 and 232), but these do not provide quotable evidence directly related to the disclosure in question.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Qisda Corporation | Technology Hardware and Equipment · Taiwan | 2024 | Partial | p. 229 →p. 230 →p. 150 → | QISDA ESG Report 2024 → | EY | ||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Qisda Corporation’s reportWhat the report shows Qisda Corporation’s 2024 ESG Report includes a clear statement that the material issues identified in 2024 remain unchanged from 2023, with impacts categorized as economic, environmental, and human rights related (p.25). The report also provides a specific percentage value regarding the proportion of senior management hired from the local community, indicating attention to local employment practices (p.230). However, there is no quotable evidence found for certain narrative items, including methodology or detailed narrative explanations for some disclosure elements, leaving parts of the disclosure unclear or missing.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd. | Home Building · Japan | 2025 | Exact | p. 530 →p. 50 →p. 537 → | Sustainability Report 2025 → | EY; BSI | ||||||||||||||||||
Evidence in Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd.’s reportWhat the report shows Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd.'s Sustainability Report 2025 includes data on diversity and equal opportunity, specifically reporting on the diversity of governance bodies and employees as well as the ratio of basic salary and remuneration of women to men (p.535). The report also provides percentages related to senior management hired from the local community (p.530) and the ratio of female senior managers in both non-consolidated and subsidiary companies in Japan (p.56). However, there is no available information on narrative item (c), and the methodology or narrative for item (d) remains unclear.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Check your understanding
A group has three major sites: a head office, a manufacturing plant and a distribution hub. The reporting team has counted local hires among the site leaders, but has not yet agreed which sites are large enough to include.What should the preparer settle before calculating the percentage for this disclosure?
Model answer. First, decide which operating sites count as significant for this report, and keep that scope documented. The percentage should then be based only on senior leaders at those included sites, using the organisation’s own definitions for both the leadership group and what counts as local.
Why this matters. The calculation depends on a clearly defined set of important sites, not every place the organisation operates.
A company has 20 people in its senior leadership pool across the included sites. Twelve were recruited from the surrounding area, but the HR team uses a broad regional definition of local while the sustainability team is thinking only of the town where each site sits.How should the preparer handle the local-community test before reporting the percentage?
Model answer. The team should choose one geographical boundary for local and apply it consistently to the whole figure. If 12 of 20 leaders meet that boundary, the reported share is 60%, but only if that local definition is the one the organisation has documented and used throughout.
Why this matters. A single, documented geography for ‘local’ is needed so the percentage is comparable and not selectively framed.
At one plant, the site director and two department heads are included in the organisation’s leadership count, but the payroll system also lists several supervisors as managers. The reporting lead is unsure whether to include those supervisors in the numerator and denominator.What decision must be made about the leadership group before the percentage is worked out?
Model answer. The preparer needs to fix the organisation’s own definition of senior management before counting anyone. Only people who fall within that defined leadership group should be used in the calculation, so the numerator and denominator match the same scope.
Why this matters. The leadership category must be defined in advance and applied consistently to both parts of the calculation.
A multinational has operations in five countries, but only two are large enough to be treated as significant for this disclosure. In one of those countries, local hiring data for senior leaders is available; in the other, the team has only overall headcount and no breakdown by place of origin.What should the preparer do when the local-hire data is incomplete for one included site?
Model answer. The team should not finalise the percentage until it can evidence the local-hire split for the included sites, because the figure is meant to cover the significant locations chosen for the report. If the data cannot be supported, the organisation should first improve the underlying records and keep the definitions for significant sites, senior management and local clearly stated.
Why this matters. The disclosure needs supportable data for the sites in scope, together with clear definitions for each key term.
Analyse this disclosure across real reports
See how companies actually report GRI 202-2 — drawn from their own published reports, with the exact pages, and an LRA AI-assistant that works through it with you. Available to LRA Community members and to students throughout their platform access.
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
Related & explore
Questions this page answers
For GRI 202-2 Market Presence, what data do I need to gather before I start drafting the disclosure?
The page says to prepare five datapoints: key operating sites, local senior hires, a definition of senior manager, a definition of local area, and a definition of major site. Use those as your starting checklist before you draft anything. ↑ section
How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
Use it as a practical workflow to move from scoping and definitions to data collection, evidence gathering and drafting. It is designed to help you prepare the disclosure in a structured way rather than starting from a blank page. ↑ section
Who should own the GRI 202-2 Market Presence data in practice?
The page is aimed at sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with the person or team that can confirm the underlying people and site data and provide evidence. The key is to assign clear responsibility for each datapoint and for the evidence pack. ↑ section
What should I include in the evidence pack for GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
The page includes an assurance-ready evidence pack with five items, so you should assemble the supporting documents and records that back up the datapoints and claims you report. The aim is to make the disclosure easy to trace and verify during review. ↑ section
What assurance claims do I need to verify for GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
The page lists five assurance claims to check, each with a claim, risk and evidence prompt. Use those claims to test whether your draft is supported and whether the evidence pack is complete enough for assurance. ↑ section
What are the common mistakes to avoid when reporting GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
The page highlights common reporting gaps and mistakes so you can spot issues before sign-off. In practice, that means checking your definitions, scope, and supporting evidence are consistent with the data you are using. ↑ section
How do I turn the GRI 202-2 Market Presence data into a draft disclosure?
The page provides draft-output support, including visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a GRI content-index line. Use those to turn your prepared data into a clear draft that is easier for reviewers to follow. ↑ section
Can I use the synthetic example disclosure on the GRI 202-2 Market Presence page as a template?
Yes, as a drafting aid only. The example is synthetic and internally consistent, so it is useful for seeing how the disclosure might look, but you should replace it with your own company data and evidence. ↑ section
What does the workbook download help me do for GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is there to help you organise the preparation and assurance steps. It is a practical tool for collecting the datapoints, tracking evidence and shaping a draft. ↑ section
How should I use the printable Library Card PDF for GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
The printable Library Card is a quick-reference version of the page content. It is useful if you want a compact checklist for preparation, evidence gathering and review without working through the full page each time. ↑ section
Does the page give me a real-company example of GRI 202-2 Market Presence reporting?
Yes. The 'From company reports' table links to real published reports at the pages where the topic is disclosed, so you can see how others have approached the topic in practice. ↑ section
More questions this page can help with
- What are the five datapoints to prepare for GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
- How do I define 'senior manager' for the GRI 202-2 Market Presence workbook?
- How do I define 'local area' for GRI 202-2 Market Presence in my company data?
- How do I define 'major site' for GRI 202-2 Market Presence before collecting data?
- What evidence should I keep for local senior hires in GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
- What should I check before I finalise the GRI 202-2 Market Presence narrative?
- How do I use the GRI 202-2 Market Presence content-index line in a report draft?
- What do the visualisation ideas on the GRI 202-2 Market Presence page help me show?
- How do I use the assurance claims table to test my GRI 202-2 Market Presence data?
- What is included in the GRI 202-2 Market Presence evidence pack checklist?
- Where can I find published company examples for GRI 202-2 Market Presence?
- How do I use the GRI 202-2 Market Presence page to prepare an assurance-ready draft?
✓ LRA AI Assistant · human-in-the-loop
Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure
Get a practical answer for your reporting context. Your first answer is free — create a free account to continue the conversation.
Try
Sources, status and disclaimer
This LRA assistance tool is designed for educational and internal data-collection purposes. It is not an official interpretation of the GRI Standards, IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards or EU CSRD/ESRS requirements. When applying these frameworks in professional practice, users should consult and double-check the official standards, guidance and applicable regulatory sources.
