Fingrid’s strategic targets and indicators
= the set target was achieved / exceeded
= close to the set target
= below the set target level, but still a good result
= below the set target, but result close to that of previous years
= result clearly below the set target
Our target in 2016 |
How did we do? |
What are our targets in 2017? |
UN Sustainable Development Goals |
|
CUSTOMERS AND SOCIETY | ||||
Impact of disturbances on the national economy and customers |
Economic disadvantage of disturbances in the transmission grid to customers less than EUR 3.5 million. |
The economic disadvantage was EUR 3.1 million. |
Calculation method changed due to regulation, target less than EUR 7.5 million; EUR 3.5 million acc. to the previous method. |
![]()
|
Customers trust in Fingrid |
Target grade in the customer survey 3.7 (scale 1–5). |
The achieved grade was 4.0. |
Trust KPI in the customer survey 4.0. |
![]()
|
Tariff level |
ENTSO-E Overview of Transmission Tariffs in Europe: top three in the benchmark group of 16 countries. |
Fingrid ranked 4th. |
Target unchanged. |
![]() |
FINANCES | ||||
Credit rating |
To maintain Fingrids credit rating at least at the A- level. |
Fingrids credit rating improved during 2016. |
Target unchanged. |
![]()
|
Dividend payout capacity |
Dividend income in line with shareholders targets. |
Dividend income in line with shareholders targets was achieved. |
Target unchanged. |
![]()
|
Cost-effectiveness |
To maintain the current solid cost-effectiveness and to continuously improve productivity. |
Good cost-effectiveness was maintained. |
Target unchanged. |
![]()
|
INTERNAL PROCESSES | ||||
Implementation of capital investments |
Implementation of the capital investment programme concerning the transmission grid to support the Finnish climate and energy strategy: investment projects on schedule and within budget. |
The capex projects proceeded on schedule and within budget. |
Target unchanged. |
|
Promoting the electricity market |
The key electricity market development projects and services developed were realised as planned. |
The projects were implemented mostly on schedule, and the key services met the quality standards. |
The grade for developing the electricity market in the customer survey was 3.8. |
![]()
|
Timing of outages in the transmission connections with Sweden to decrease the impact on the electricity market. Target: > 56%. |
![]() |
|||
Procurement chain |
No significant deviations or problems in contractor obligation or employment relationship matters. |
No significant deviations or problems in contractor obligation or employment relationship matters. |
Target unchanged. |
|
Occupational safety |
LTIF less than 5 by the end of 2018 (both Fingrid personnel and service providers). |
LTIF was 8. |
Target unchanged. |
![]() |
Land use and environment |
No significant environment-related deviations. |
One major environment-related deviation occurred. |
Target unchanged. |
|
General grade of ‘good’ in landowner surveys. |
The general grade for the three completed transmission line projects was around 4, i.e. ‘good’. |
Target unchanged. |
|
|
Efficiency in maintenance and physical asset management |
Top three in international benchmark studies (ITOMS, ITAMS). |
Placed in the top three. |
Target unchanged. |
|
Operational efficiency |
Top three in international operational benchmark studies. |
Very close to placing in the top three. |
System security: System Average Interruption Duration Index in connection points less than 3 minutes. |
|
Sufficiency of the system reserves at least 99.99%. |
|
|||
PERSONNEL AND EXPERTISE | ||||
Workplace atmosphere |
Top grade in the personnel survey. |
The best grade was achieved. |
Target unchanged. |
|
Leadership |
Great Place to Work Finland survey, general series: Among the top 10 (survey every two years). |
No survey in 2016. |
Target unchanged. |
|
Responsible operating methods |
100% of Fingrid’s personnel has passed the Code of Conduct online training. |
96% of Fingrid’s personnel has passed the Code of Conduct online training. |
Grade ‘good’ for responsible operating methods in the personnel survey. |
|