Managing risk to deliver strategic objectives

Approach to risk management

Risk management is the responsibility of the Board and is a key factor in the delivery of the Group’s strategic objectives. The Board establishes the culture of effective risk management and is responsible for maintaining appropriate systems and controls.


The Board sets the risk appetite and determines the policies and procedures that are put in place to mitigate exposure to risks. The Board plays a central role in the Group’s risk review process, which covers emerging risks and incorporates scenario planning and detailed stress testing.

Our process

There is a formal ongoing process to identify, assess and analyse risks, and those of a potentially significant nature are included in the Group Risk Register.

The Group Risk Register is updated by the full Executive Management team at least every six months and the overall process is the subject of regular review by the Board. Risks are recorded with a full analysis, and risk owners are nominated who have authority and responsibility for assessing and managing the risk. KPMG, as the Group’s Internal Auditor, regularly attends the risk review meetings. The process continues to be a robust mechanism for monitoring and controlling the Group’s principal risks, and for challenging the potential impact of new emerging risks. All risks are aligned with the Group’s strategic objectives, each risk is analysed in terms of likelihood and impact to the business and the determination of a “gross risk score” enables risk exposure to be prioritised. The Marley business has historically utilised a similar risk management process, and this has been mapped across and embedded in the Marshalls risk management process.

The Group seeks to mitigate exposure to all forms of strategic, financial and operational risk, both external and internal. The effectiveness of key mitigating controls is continually monitored, and such controls are subject to internal audit and periodic testing in order to provide independent verification where this is deemed appropriate. The effectiveness and impact of key controls are evaluated and this is used to determine a “net risk score“ for each risk. The process is used to develop detailed action plans that are used to manage, or respond to, the risks, and these are monitored and reviewed on a regular basis by the Group’s Audit Committee.

The Group has a formal framework for the ongoing assessment of operational, financial and IT-based controls. The overriding objective is to gain assurance that the control framework is complete and that the individual controls are operating effectively. Additional independent verification checking of key controls and reconciliations is undertaken on a rolling basis. Such testing includes key controls over access to, and changing permissions on, base data and metadata


The board
determines the Group’s approach to risk, its policies and the procedures that are put in place to mitigate exposure to risk.
The audit committee
Has delegated responsibility from the Board to oversee risk management and internal controls;
Reviews the effectiveness of the Group’s risk management and internal control procedures; and
Monitors the effectiveness of the internal audit function and the independence of the external audit.
Executive directors
Are responsible for the effective maintenance of the Group’s Risk Register;
Oversee the management of risk;
Monitor risk mitigation and controls; and
Monitor the effective implementation of action plans.
Internal audit
Independently review the effectiveness of internal control procedures;
Report on effectiveness of management actions; and
Provide assurance to the Audit Committee.
Operational managers
Are responsible for identification of operational and strategic risks;
Are responsible for ownership and control of specific risks; and
Are responsible for establishing and managing the implementation of appropriate action plans.
Are responsible for the impact of controls (net basis).

Viability Statement

After considering the principal risks on pages 69 to 75, the Directors have assessed the prospects of the Group over a longer period than the period of at least twelve months required by the “going concern“ basis of accounting. The Directors consider that the Group’s risk management process satisfies the requirements of provision 31 of the UK Corporate Governance Code.

The Board considers annually, and on a rolling basis, a strategic plan, which is assessed with reference to the Group’s current position and prospects, the strategic objectives and the operation of the procedures and policies to manage the principal risks that might threaten the business model, future performance and target capital structure. In making this assessment, the Board considers emerging risks and longer-term risks and opportunities.

The aim is to ensure that the business model is continually reviewed to ensure it is sustainable over the long term. Security, flexibility and efficiency continue to be the guiding principles that underpin the Group’s capital structure objectives. The Group’s funding strategy is to ensure that headroom remains at comfortable levels under all planning scenarios.

For the purposes of the Viability Statement, the Board continues to believe that three years is an appropriate period of assessment as this aligns with the current planning horizon. Although our central forecasting models cover a 5-year period, it remains the case that there is less visibility beyond three years. The Construction Products Association’s forecasts currently go out to 2024. This remains compatible with the five-year Strategy and the longerterm objectives for our strategic growth pillars over a five-year period. The Group’s financial forecast includes an integrated model that incorporates the income statement, balance sheet and cash flow projections.

The detailed stress testing reflects the principal risks that could impact the Group and could conceivably threaten the Group’s ability to continue operating as a going concern. The assessment concluded that the deteriorating macro-economic environment is the key risk for this purpose and, in response to this, two scenarios have been run, namely a “reasonable worst-case scenario” and a “reverse stress test.”

The reasonable worst-case scenario comprises a significant stress test sensitivity run against the base case model. This sensitivity reflects a scenario that is worse than the assumptions in the CPA’s lower scenario from the 2022/2023 Winter forecast. This scenario results in a reduction in Group revenue of 9 per cent in 2023 and 12 per cent in 2024 against the base case forecast. In total this reflects a reduction in revenue of £178 million over the two years. A contribution “drop-through” rate has been applied based on the operational gearing of each business unit. Under the downside model, net debt reduces to £234 million by the end of 2023, and bank covenants are still comfortably met. The net effect of reduced operating profit and increased interest is mitigated by reduced tax and dividend cash flows. Gearing reduces to 34.7 per cent at the end of 2023, and there remains comfortable headroom against bank facilities and bank covenants are still comfortably met with the net debt to EBITDA covenant peaking at 1.9 in December 2023. In this scenario, we would have £27 million headroom against EBITDA and £96 million against net debt.

In practice, such a downside scenario would see the Group instigate certain mitigation measures. These might include significant reductions in fixed overheads, lower capital expenditure and actions to further reduce capacity, for example reducing shifts, production lines and potentially mothballing or closing sites.

The reverse stress test scenario aims to identify a deeper downside trading position that would give rise to a covenant breach. Against the base budget revenue reductions of 18 per cent would be required across 2023 and 2024 (all other things remaining unchanged) to increase the pre-IFRS 16 netdebt: adjusted EBITDA covenant to 3 times at 31 December 2023. This scenario equates to just under twice the reduction in revenue (in percentage terms) assumed in the CPA’s lower scenario from the 2022 Winter forecast.

This reverse stress test scenario reduces revenue by approximately £300 million over 2023 and 2024. Under this scenario, gearing peaks at 41 per cent at the end of 2023. There remains reasonable headroom against bank facilities, but the net debt: EBITDA bank covenant marginally breaches 3 times at 31 December 2023. The model assumes no further cash mitigation (e.g. reduced capital expenditure). Dividends have been reduced in line with the two times cover policy but the Board would retain the ability to further reduce or cancel dividends in order to maintain liquidity.

In undertaking its review, the Board has considered the appropriateness of any key assumptions, taking into account the external environments and the Group’s strategy and risks. Based on this assessment, and taking account of the Group’s principal risks and uncertainties, the Directors confirm that they have a reasonable expectation that the Group will be able to continue in operation and meet its liabilities as they fall due for the next three years.

The reverse stress test scenario provides an indication of the scale of downturn that could be absorbed by the Group without taking action to reduce cash flows on capex and dividends or undertake more severe restructuring. The analysis provides the required evidence that the Directors’ assessment that the going concern assumption remains appropriate and supports a positive conclusion for the longer-term Viability Statement.

Principal risks and uncertainties

The Directors have undertaken a robust, systematic assessment of the Group’s emerging and principal risks. These have been considered within the timeframe of three years, which aligns with our Viability Statement. The risk process has increasingly allocated greater focus on emerging risks and risk outlook. The reporting includes more detailed assessments of proximity (how far away in time the risk will occur) and velocity (the time that elapses between an event occurring and the point at which the effects are felt).

Strategic Objectives

  • Shareholder valueShareholder value
  • Sustainable profitabilitySustainable profitability
  • Relationahip buildingRelationship building
  • Organic expansionOrganic expansion
  • Brand developmentBrand development
  • Effective capital structure & control frameworkEffective capital structure & control framework

Macro-economic & political

Nature of risk

The Group is dependent on the level of activity in its end markets. Accordingly, it is susceptible to economic downturn, the impact of Government policy, volatility in UK and world markets and supply chain and labour market issues. During 2022, higher interest rates and significant cost inflation (particularly in relation to energy costs) have created a cost of living crisis for large elements of the UK population. This uncertainty has impacted market sentiment and this has been exacerbated by the increasing impact of wider geo-political factors (including the conflict in Ukraine) and the impact of unprecedented levels of Government borrowing.

Potential impact
The potential longer-term impact of macro-economic uncertainty and continued cost inflation and higher interest rates could reduce consumer confidence and demand and lead to lower activity levels. This could have an adverse effect on the Group’s financial results. There continues to be volatility in world markets and global economic uncertainty continues to be a risk. A continuation of high interest rates and inflation could lead to disrupted markets over a more extended period.
Key risk indicators
  • Government policy failing to contain inflation.
  • An escalation of the war in Ukraine and other increased global uncertainty. 
  • Reductions in consumer confidence and order pipeline. 
  • Further COVID-19 uncertainty and the emergence of new virus variants.
Mitigating factors
• The Group closely monitors trends and lead indicators, invests in market research and is an active member of the CPA.
• The Group benefits from the diversity of its business and end markets. The acquisition of Marley has significantly increased diversification and made the Group more resilient.
• The proactive development of the product range also continues to offer protection.
• The Group undertakes scenario planning to support improved business resilience.
• The Group continues to focus on those market areas where growth prospects are greatest.
• Focus on innovation, new product development and the ESG driven opportunities to drive competitive advantage.
Change in risk in the year
Increase in risk
The UK Government’s stated objective is to support construction and significant investment support for infrastructure and housing is expected over the medium term however, the short-term outlook for construction has weakened. The economic slowdown has resulted in a loss of business and consumer confidence in 2022, leading to delays in investment decisions.
• Regular scenario planning to assess various market risks and disruptive events.
• Strategic reviews focusing on business resilience and diversification.
• Increase operational efficiency and maintain flexibility in the manufacturing network.

Human Rights

Nature of risk

Mandatory human rights disclosure from 2022 and increased focus on modern slavery and diversity reporting. Lack of visibility of human rights within the supply chain.

The continuing requirement to identify risk across the whole supply chain and the need to maintain reliable and consistent internal systems, processes and procedures.

A summary of more specific social risks is included in the Sustainability section on pages [•] and [•].

Potential impact

Risk that stakeholders could reduce support if the Group failed to address issues around modern slavery and diversity appropriately.

Key risk indicators

• Negative feedback from stakeholders – loss of business and investment.
•  Inadequate data to support systems and procedures.
• Increase in general level of disclosure required and administrative

Mitigating factors
•The Group utilises experienced, specialist staff to support the Group’s focus in this area and the development of a comprehensive strategy.
• Regular internal cross-functional meetings to discuss progress, issues and focus areas.
• Specific supply chain human rights training for entire procurement team.
• Introduction of Safecall overseas.
• Annual analysis of sourcing country risk.
• Strategic partnerships with external agencies – UNGC framework.
• Focus on ethical sourcing processes with BES 6001 and ISO 20400.
• Working groups established in all focus areas.
Change in risk in the year

No change in risk

Significantly heightened focus from stakeholders, Government, customers and investors and increased operational and reporting requirements.


• Develop strategic partnerships. These include the UN Global Compact (“UNGC”) together with UK and overseas governments, NGOs and industry groups.
• Increase focus on the development of the Group’s comprehensive strategy.
• Develop robust IT platform for data collection and analysis

Cyber security risks

Nature of risk

Fast growing and indiscriminate risk of cyber attack. Inadequate controls and procedures over the protection of intellectual property, sensitive employee information and market influencing data. The failure to improve controls against cyber security risk quickly enough, given the rapid pace of change and the continuing threat of ransomware and denial of service attacks and new cyber threats. IT is increasingly integrated into all business processes.

Potential impact

Operational disruption and financial loss. The Group’s industrial network is becoming more IT dependent and the risk is one of data loss causing financial and reputational risk

Key risk indicators
  • Emergence of new cyber security risks.
  • Increased examples of data loss and security breaches in the wider market.
Mitigating factors
• Use of IT security policies.
• Regular cyber security risk audits undertaken by specialists and the use of mitigation controls and other recommended procedure updates. Annual penetration tests are undertaken on external facing systems and during 2022 cyber internal audits were undertaken by KPMG in respect of the Group’s cyber controls in relation to both Marshalls and Marley. The Group’s “cyber maturity assessment” score has continued to increase.
• Restriction of sensitive data to selected senior and experienced employees who are used to handling such data.
• Appropriate tools and training procedures are in place to protect sensitive data when stored and transmitted between parties (e.g. encryption of hard drives, restricted USB devices, secure data transmission mechanisms and third party security audits).
• A continuous programme of awareness campaigns and training for staff.
Change in risk in the year
No change in risk
Cyber risk has increased after the COVID-19 pandemic and remains a high profile area. We are witnessing more incidents, especially in the construction industry, and increasingly in relation to ransomware. The cyber control environment in Marley is not as mature as that in Marshalls and is an area of focus. Considerable focus continues to be given to promoting awareness of IT security policies. The perception is that the risk of data loss through new (or as yet unseen) security threats continues to increase.
• Constant review and ongoing challenge to procedures – use of external experts.
• Continue to develop cyber risk strategy.
• Improve our cyber security response plans and identify and rectify any gaps.
• Alignment of controls in Marley

Security of raw materials

Nature of risk

Globally, the impact of the ongoing Ukrainian conflict and general energy supply continues to impact material availability and has resulted in significant cost inflation. There continues to be market capacity stresses for sand, cement and other raw materials. Longer term there is a risk of “carbon taxation.”

Potential impact

Cost inflation could lead to customer dissatisfaction and reduce demand and margins.

Key risk indicators
• Temporary shortages and cost inflation, impacting materials and labour.
• Decreases in labour availability and skills shortages
Mitigating factors
  • The Group benefits from the diversity of its business and end markets.
  • The acquisition of Marley has increased diversification and created additional procurement opportunities.
  • Maintaining adequate, but not excessive, stocks.
  • Continued development of our own haulage fleet.
  • Collaboration with all EU-based tier one and tier two suppliers to ensure any supply risks are minimised.
  • The digitalisation of the supply chain through the implementation of a best-in-class Supply Relationship Management System.
  • The Group focuses on its supplier relationships, flexible contracts and long-term supply agreements, the use of hedging instruments and the use of flexible freight forwarding options.
  • The Group utilises sales pricing and purchasing policies designed to mitigate the risks.
  • Consideration of alternative technologies, including the reduction of cement content.
Change in risk in the year

Reduced risk
Weakening demand has led to reduced availability issues, although cost inflation has continued. The risk of temporary shortages is mitigated by proactive supply chain management and the use of alternative suppliers. Priorities
• Increase productivity and manufacturing efficiency.
• Continue to develop supply chain strategies to reduce risk.

Impact of weather events

Nature of risk

Increasingly unpredictable weather conditions and extreme weather events. Increased incidence of flooding and droughts across the country. The longer-term implications of climate change give rise to the transition risk of now addressing the challenges quickly enough.

Potential impact

Disruption to supply chain and operations that might reduce short-term activity levels. Operational difficulties at manufacturing sites due to flooding and droughts. Financial risk caused by adverse impact on margins and cash flows as well as sales and production volumes.

Key risk indicators

​• Prolonged periods of bad weather (e.g. snow, ice and floods) which make ground working difficult or impossible.
• Changing public perceptions of the longer-term implications of climate change.

Mitigating factors
• Diversity of the business.
• The Group utilises centralised specialist functions to support mitigation plans and the management of relationships on commercial contracts.
• Climate change risk analysis in place.
• Commitment to water harvesting and recycling schemes.
• The development of resilience strategies for climate change is a key element of the Group’s Climate Change Policy.
• The development of the Group’s Water Management business and the continuing focus on new product development.
Change in risk in the year

No change in risk

Weather conditions continue to be closely monitored but are beyond the Group’s control. Significant increase in public awareness of climate change.


• Continue to develop resilience strategies.
• Development of Civils and Drainage business

Climate change

Nature of risk
Increasing focus on ESG and the heightened awareness of the environmental challenge, with increased operational and reporting requirements, hardening targets and greater scrutiny by investor and stakeholder groups. The acquisition of Marley may impact our publicly stated ESG commitment of being net zero by 2030. Risk of allocating insufficient resource and investment to support the sciencebased targets and other environmental protocols. A summary of more specific environmental risks is included in the Sustainability section.
Potential impact
Risk that investors and customers could reduce support if the Group failed to improve performance against targets or did not report appropriately. Risk of customers switching products away from those with a higher carbon footprint. Cost impact of the “Environmental Protocol,” and mitigation programmes could lead to increasingly expensive processes.
Key risk indicators
  • Negative feedback from stakeholders – loss of business and investment.
  • Failure to meet internal targets.
Mitigating factors
The Group utilises experienced, specialist staff to support the Group’s focus in this area.
• An ESG Steering Committee with Executive and Board level representation.
• Specialist third parties including the Carbon Trust and Verisk Maplecroft 
• Climate risk analysis.
• Agreed carbon reduction plan and a set of KPIs established.
• The Group is committed to the Science Based Targets initiative and a new Group plan is now being developed to include the impact of the Marley business.
• Working groups established in all focus areas and controls being progressively embedded across the business.
Change in risk in the year
No change in risk
Significantly heightened focus from stakeholders, Government, customers and investors. Increased expectation of clarity over financial impact of strategic plans and transition risk. TCFD disclosure requirements.
• Integration of Marley into the Group’s ESG policies and procedures.
• Re-work “net zero” timeline to include Marley – in conjunction with the Carbon Trust.
• Ongoing assessment of climate change and risks for production, facilities, products and distribution.
• Develop comprehensive strategy covering targets, products and business processes.
• Review of opportunities to improve ESG reporting.

Threat from new technologies & new business models

Nature of risk

Reduction in demand for traditional products. Risk of new competitors and new substitute products appearing although this risk is set against a challenging 2023 outlook. Failure to react to market developments, including digital and technological advances.

Potential impact

The increased competition could reduce volumes and margins on traditional products. Increased costs and production capacity tied up in redundant technologies. Despite significant additional focus made by the Group in this area in recent years, there remains a risk that a new third party could use emerging digital technology to enter the market and transition more quickly and effectively.

Key risk indicators
  • Less demand for traditional products and routes to market.
  • Emergence of new competitors and new digital business models.
  • More widespread availability of artificial intelligence technology
Mitigating factors
• Good market intelligence and ongoing monitoring of competitive threats.
• Flexible business strategy able to embrace new technologies.
• Significant focus on research and development and new products.
• Development of the Group’s e-commerce platform and digital strategy.
Change in risk in the year

Reduced risk

The ongoing diversification of the business, the continued development of the Marshalls brand and the focus on new products and greater manufacturing efficiency continue to mitigate the risk. The pace of digital change in the market continues to increase although this is balanced by a challenging outlook.

• Collaboration with universities to develop new products and processes.
• Increase pace of digital change and technological solutions (e.g. Dropship).
• Focus on cost reduction and projects that improve business flexibility and agility.

Corporate, legal & regulatory

Nature of risk

Inadvertent failure to comply with elements of a significantly increased governance, legislative and regulatory business environment. The Group may be adversely affected by an unexpected reputational event, e.g. an issue in its supply chain or due to a health and safety incident.

Potential impact

Significant increases in the penalty regime across all areas of business (e.g. health and safety, competition law, the Bribery Act and GDPR) could lead to significant fines and / or prosecution in the event of a breach.

A health and safety or environmental incident could lead to a disruption to production and the supply of products for customers. Such incidents could lead to prosecutions, increased costs and have a negative impact on the Group’s reputation.

Key risk indicators
  • Increased regulatory and compliance requirements.
  • Integration requirements for new acquisitions.
  • Significant increases in the penalty regime for environmental incidents.
Mitigating factors
  • Centralised legal and other specialist functions, the use of specialist advisers and ongoing monitoring and training.
  • The Group has a formal Group sustainability strategy focusing on impact reduction.
  • The Group employs compliance procedures, policies, ISO standards and independent audit processes which seek to ensure that local, national and international regulatory and compliance procedures are fully complied with.
  • The Group uses professional specialists covering carbon reduction, water management and biodiversity.
Change in risk in the year

No change in risk

The significant increase in governance requirements and regulation continues to require additional management focus and robust compliance procedures within all areas of the business.


• Continue to renew all compliance processes and control effectiveness.

• Develop stress tests and crisis planning procedures.

Competitor activity

Nature of risk

The Group has a number of existing competitors which compete on range, price, quality and service. Potential new low cost competitors may be attracted into the market although the 2023 outlook is challenging. In addition, cost inflation and higher energy costs are now impacting all suppliers and consumers.

Competitive risk increases if we fail to maintain high levels of customer service.

Potential impact

Increased competition could reduce volumes and margins on manufactured and traded products.

Reputational damage if the Group loses competitive advantage.

Key risk indicators
  • Threat from new low-cost competitors and new technologies.
  • Less demand for traditional products and the increased emergence of new digital business models and product solutions
Mitigating factors

• The Group has unique selling points that differentiate the Marshalls branded offer.
• The Group focuses on quality, service, reliability and ethical standards that differentiate Marshalls from competitor products.
• The Group has a continuing focus on new product development.
• The continued development of the Group’s digital strategy and its focus for customers and all stakeholders.
• Restructuring programme implemented in Q4 2022 will reduce cost base by approximately £10 million

Change in risk in the year

Increased risk

The impact of cost inflation potentially changes competitive pressure in certain areas.


• New product development.
• Research into green technologies.
• Review marketing and communications.
• Continue to review all elements of customer service, including the continuing development of KPIs

Project delivery

Nature of risk

Ineffective management of major development projects, from initial scoping to final delivery and benefits management, due to constraints that might impact the Group’s ability to absorb change. During 2022 such projects included the integration of Marley, the construction of the dual block plant at St. Ives and the successful implementation of a restructuring programme, which has included the mothballing of the Sandy manufacturing site

Potential impact

The extent and complexity of projects may cause delays and inefficiency. Potential failure to realise expected benefits from strategic business projects. Reputational damage, service underdelivery and staff retention risks.

Key risk indicators
  • Delays to project delivery.
  • Inefficiencies in resource utilisation.
Mitigating factors
  • Robust and standardised project appraisal process.
  • Change management framework and process in place.
  • Programmes are continually reviewed with strong governance and executive oversight, including project specific steering committees where appropriate.
Change in risk in the year

No change in risk

Although the underlying risk continues, effective control and the ongoing development of an appropriate management framework continue to mitigate the risk.


• Develop strategies to manage growth.
• Ongoing reviews of acquisition strategy and the business model.

Health and safety

Nature of risk

Unexpected health and safety incident, possibly caused by human error or the actions of a subcontractor. Additional risks introduced in relation to the acquisition of Marley. Ongoing risks in relation to COVID-19 and the need to maintain safe working environments. Ongoing welfare and mental health of employees

Potential impact
Risk of harm to all stakeholders, including on-site employees and subcontractors. Negative impact of working from home for certain employees. Significant increases in penalty regime could lead to significant fines and prosecution. A major incident could lead to a disruption to production and a negative impact on the Group’s reputation.
Key risk indicators
  • Integration requirements for new acquisitions.
  • Significant increases in the penalty regime.
Mitigating factors
• Centralised specialist functions and clear policies in place.
• Detailed central review of Marley health and safety risks, controls, systems and procedures.
• Regular communication and support for employees, including those working from home. Mental health first aiders.
• Group-wide health and safety strategy.
• Ongoing monitoring, training and health and safety audits.
• Introduction of a digital management system for enhanced data collection and analysis.
• All senior managers receive the Marshalls Health and Safety and Environmental stage 3 training.
Change in risk in the year

No change in risk

Health and safety continues to be a high profile risk area. Continuing risks arising from COVID-19, including mental health and employee welfare. Development in risk profiling procedures leading to improved root cause analysis.


• Ensure health and safety embedded in the “day‑to-day” culture.
• Improve reporting structures.
• Full integration of Marley into the Group’s health and safety and employee wellbeing protocols.

People Risks

Nature of risk
Availability of labour – with risks around core skills, demographics, capability and changing working patterns. This has become a key differentiator in the market. The “War for Talent” has increased with skill shortages in certain areas. Ongoing risks and requirements concerned with training, development and succession planning. Implications of technological change and automation.
Potential impact
Inability to recruit people with required skills, calibre and potential.
Risk of reduced skills and inadequate training potentially leading to reduced productivity and efficiency.

Companies are changing their “employment position” and creating a more competitive landscape.

Implications for employee health and wellbeing and overall workforce morale.

Potential risk to the Marshalls brand.
Key risk indicators

• Skill shortages and lack of diversity within the workforce.
• Increased stress levels within workforce leading to employee absenteeism.
• Increased levels of staff turnover.

Mitigating factors
• Focused human resources department with experienced staff and specialist skills.
• Group People and Organisational Plan.
• Strong employee and trade union relationships.
• Strong communication channels and employee feedback through the “Employee Voice Group”.
• Regular feedback questionnaires supported by a third party provider.
• Independent “Safecall” employee helpline.
• Ongoing focus on training, apprenticeships and staff development and leadership potential
Change in risk in the year

No change in risk

Increasingly competitive labour market.

The emergence of challenges for employees caused by new working requirements, health and safety regulations and operational working practices. These include issues that could give rise to heightened employee wellbeing issues and risks to mental health.

• Develop retention and recruitment strategies.
• Effective marketing and communications.
• Focus on succession planning, internal development and diversification in the leadership teams.
• Integration of Marley into all of the Group’s “People” strategies, policies and procedures

Live Chat