Stakeholder Engagement|Materiality
Materiality Analysis Process
Winbond adopts the Global Sustainability Standards Board’s universal standard GRI 3: Material Topics (GRI 3: Material Topics 2021) to conduct materiality analysis. Winbond defines its material topic assessment principles as: “Highly concerned by stakeholders, significant impact on company operations, and prioritized in Winbond’s sustainability management goals.” To align with the spirit of material topic management, similar topics are consolidated, resulting in nine key material topics.
Winbond reviews material topics and related items annually to track trends and changes in long-term goals. We maintain transparent and open communication with stakeholders to ensure smooth dialogue and stay informed about sustainability issues of concern.

Identifying Material Topics
Winbond identifies material topics based on the following principles: “High concern from stakeholders,” “Significant impact on company operations,” and “Priority in corporate sustainability development.”
| Aspect | Sustainability Issue | Assessment Principles | Material Topic | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High Stakeholder Concern | Significant Impact on Operations | Priority in Sustainability Goals | |||
Governance (G) | Integrity Management and Corporate Governance | Integrity Management and Corporate Governance | |||
| Regulatory Compliance | |||||
| Risk Management | Risk Management | ||||
| Information Security and Personal Data Protection | |||||
| Supply Chain Management | |||||
| Research and Innovation | Research and Innovation | ||||
| Productivity and Business Performance | Productivity and Business Performance | ||||
| Customer Relationship Management | Green Products | ||||
Environment (E) | Green Products and Services | ||||
| Energy and Greenhouse Gas Management | Energy and Greenhouse Gas Management | ||||
| Climate-related Risks and Opportunities | (Risk Management) | ||||
| Waste Management | |||||
| Water Resource Management | Water Resource Management | ||||
| Air Pollution Control | |||||
| Biodiversity | |||||
Social (S) | Compensation, Benefits, and Employee Care | Talent Management | |||
| Talent Recruitment and Development | |||||
| Human Rights and Equality | |||||
| Labor Relations | |||||
| Occupational Safety and Health | |||||
| Social Engagement | |||||
Material issue for external stakeholders
| Material issue for external stakeholders | Risk Management | Energy and Greenhouse Gas Management |
|---|---|---|
| Business activity coverage | >50% of business activity | >50% of business activity |
| External stakeholder(s) / impact area(s) evaluated | Positive Impact: The Company implements an enterprise risk management framework covering operational, supply chain, information security, and climate-related risks. Effective risk identification and mitigation enhance business continuity, protect customer interests, ensure stable supply chain operations, and strengthen stakeholder confidence in long-term business resilience. Negative Impact: Insufficient risk management may result in operational disruption, cyber security incidents, supply chain interruptions, financial losses, and regulatory non-compliance. Such events could negatively affect customers, suppliers, communities, and other stakeholders through service interruptions or information security breaches. | Positive Impact: The Company improves energy efficiency, promotes greenhouse gas reduction initiatives, and gradually increases renewable energy usage. These actions contribute to climate change mitigation, reduce environmental impacts across operations, and create long-term value for customers, investors, and society. Negative Impact: Inefficient energy consumption and excessive greenhouse gas emissions may contribute to climate change, increase regulatory and carbon-related costs, and negatively affect communities and ecosystems through higher environmental impacts and resource consumption. |
| Output Metric | Promotion of sustainable due diligence and guidance among suppliers | Decrease in Energy Consumption per Unit of Product |
| Impact Valuation | Suppliers' governance performance associated with operations | Reduced climate impact from operations |
| Impact Metric | Number of cases where suppliers were penalized by the government | Avoided GHG emissions (tCO2e) |
Materiality Analysis Results
Winbond conducts materiality analysis to identify issues that significantly impact operations and to address stakeholders’ concerns and expectations regarding ESG topics. We prioritize areas where Winbond can create the greatest positive impact.
For more details, please refer to the “Materiality Analysis Report” and the “Leading Forward” section in the latest annual Sustainability Report under “Key Issues and Stakeholder Engagement Practices.”

Potential Risks and Mitigation Measures for Material Topics
In today’s rapidly changing global environment, businesses face diverse and complex challenges. To ensure sustainable development and operational stability, Winbond identifies risks and plans mitigation measures for material topics of concern to stakeholders. We strive to enhance organizational resilience, strengthen compliance awareness, drive technological innovation, and respond to customer and societal expectations for sustainability.
| Material Topic | Potential Risks | Risk Mitigation and Response |
|---|---|---|
| Integrity Management and Corporate Governance |
|
|
| Risk Management |
|
|
| Research and Innovation |
|
|
| Productivity and Business Performance |
|
|
| Green Products |
|
|
| Energy and Greenhouse Gas Management |
|
|
| Water Resource Management |
|
|
| Talent Management |
|
|
Stakeholder Communication and Outcomes
Winbond refers to the AA1000 SES Stakeholder Engagement Standard (2015) and its five principles: Dependency, Responsibility, Influence, Tension/Concern, and Diverse Perspectives, to identify and rank the level of relationship with stakeholders.
In 2025, Winbond Group’s senior management completed a total of 44 stakeholder identification and assessment questionnaires. Each category of stakeholders was scored based on its level of influence (on a scale of 1 to 5). The assessment results were then ranked in descending order of influence.