Print and online design

Print and online design
Peter Vetter, Coande/ZHdK, coordination and chair

Peter Vetter
Peter Vetter

Introductory remarks

This year's evaluation was conducted using established criteria, including those applied by the German Designer Club (DDC) and proven procedures.

General comments

The shortlist is identified in the initial selection. The decisive criterion is a rating of over 50 points (satisfactory) in the printed version or online. Four reports concern companies that are no longer included in the smi or did not present a balance sheet for other reasons; they were not evaluated. The shortlist encompassed 100 reports (online and print), which were assessed in detail by all jury members. Only 96 annual reports were included in the ranking. This was because four companies no longer featured in the smi or no longer fulfilled the criteria to be included in the rating.

The jury ascertained that greater efforts had been made in the field of online reporting. This year the online reports of 45 companies (previous year: 17) achieved a rating of over 50 points. A moderate improvement was also discernible in the printed reports, which achieved an average of 85 points (previous year 73).

Movement was apparent in the top placements. No less than nine new companies were included in the overall top 20.

The exchange of Swiss ranking criteria with Germany will facilitate an interesting international comparison next year.

Up-and-coming

Valiant was ranked fourth overall, despite the fact that it did not even make the shortlist last year. Valiant thoroughly restructured its financial reporting, and has refocused the concept and design of the online and print versions. Skilful design, well-structured content, neat and clear tables and diagrams as well as a refreshing visual language characterised the successful profile of the bank, which operates exclusively in Switzerland.

Print reports

The top four places were taken by Kuoni, Implenia, Valora, Helsana and ex aequo Warteck Invest. With the exception of Warteck Invest, all of these were also awarded top ratings last year, although in a different order of precedence. The four top-rated companies continued rigorously to develop their reports at a high level, while Warteck Invest launched a new concept. The reports of Warteck Invest (rated 4), mch Group (rated 7) and Siegfried (rated 8) may be considered strong performers. Their high-quality reports impressed the jury in terms of concept as well as design.

Online reports

The newcomer Valiant, which completely redesigned its financial reporting, went straight to No. 1. Its online presence made excellent use of the medium, in terms of content as well as in a formal sense and not least in terms of user-friendliness. This was considered highly effective. It was followed by Kuoni, Geberit and Clariant, three companies whose brilliant presentations also achieved very high ratings last year. These concepts continued rigorously to be pursued. Implenia was ranked 5th with its very fist interactive online presentation. The shortlist for the design online category included only 57 reports. These were assessed in detail by all jury members. This was because the online versions submitted by the others in the overall sample of 226 companies entailed merely a PDF of the print version. Purely PDF solutions of print versions are not rated or are not included in the consolidated rating (online and print) totalling 40.0 points.

Overall rating

The shifts in print as well online ratings also had an impact on the consolidated evaluation (print and online). Kuoni, Implenia and Geberit confirmed their positions on the 1st to 3rd places. Valiant was ranked 4th for the first time. On the lower ranks, Clariant, Valora, Arbonia, Die Post and Helsana confirmed the positions they achieved last year. Warteck Invest saw a sharp improvement, rising 27 places relative to the previous year to be ranked 10th in the overall rating. In general terms, reports that are included amongst the top 20 are considered to have secured an award. The jury identified new concepts in terms of content and form, along with a qualitative broadening at the top, in addition with the broad field of proven, high-quality reports.