Sustainability information is not the final product

Most organisations have become better at collecting sustainability data.

They measure emissions, workforce indicators, resource use, supply-chain performance, human rights concerns and exposure to environmental and social change. They publish reports, complete questionnaires and respond to regulatory requirements.

This work is necessary. But it is not sufficient.

A sustainability report may show that a significant impact or risk exists. It does not automatically tell the board, chief executive, chief financial officer, procurement director or operations team what decision must be taken.

That is where the mandate of the sustainability professional must expand.

The objective should not be to place more information in front of senior decision-makers. It should be to help them make better decisions.

From reporting function to decision-making function

The sustainability function should become an internal decision-support capability.

Its responsibility is to connect:

Impact and risk evidence → business implications → strategic choices → accountable decisions → measurable outcomes

This requires sustainability professionals to move beyond describing what is happening and answer five practical questions:

1. Where in the value chain is the issue occurring?
2. Why is it significant for people, the environment or the business?
3. Which operational, commercial or strategic decision does it affect?
4. What credible options are available to management?
5. Who has the authority and resources to act?

Without this translation, materiality assessments can become sophisticated inventories rather than instruments of management.

The standards provide the evidence base

The major sustainability reporting frameworks already point organisations towards decision-relevant information.

The GRI Standards help organisations identify and report their most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, including human rights impacts. It also acts as an umbrella framework as it addresses every aspect of sustainability and all stakeholders (not just the investor).

The European Sustainability Reporting Standards, or ESRS, require companies to identify material impacts, risks and opportunities using double materiality. ESRS also asks organisations to consider where these matters are concentrated within the business model, their own operations and the upstream and downstream value chain.

IFRS S1, issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board, focuses on sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably affect cash flows, access to finance or the cost of capital over the short, medium or long term.

These frameworks approach materiality from different but complementary perspectives:

• GRI Standards: What significant impacts does the organisation have on people, the environment and the economy?
• ESRS and Double Materiality: How does the organisation affect society and the environment, and how do sustainability matters affect the organisation?
• ISSB Standards: Which sustainability-related risks and opportunities could affect enterprise prospects and investor decisions?

They provide the basis for reliable analysis. The sustainability professional must turn that analysis into a management agenda.

The value-chain decision matrix

A useful decision matrix should map every significant impact, risk and opportunity against the part of the value chain where it arises.

The matrix should not be treated as another disclosure schedule. It should be used in investment committees, strategy reviews, procurement decisions, product-development processes and operational planning.

How do you put together a value chain decision making matrix? Join the FBRH GRI Reporting Programme:

From Understanding to Implementation – Complete 4 courses and the GRI Certification exam to become a GRI Certified Sustainability Professional and learn how to turn sustainability reporting into strategic decision-making.

What makes an issue decision-ready?

A material issue becomes decision-ready when management can see:

1. The location

Where does the impact, risk or opportunity arise?

This may be within the company’s own operations, but it may also sit several tiers upstream, during customer use or at the end of a product’s life.

2. The significance

How severe or financially material is the issue?

For impacts, the organisation should consider factors such as scale, scope, irremediability and likelihood. For risks and opportunities, it should consider the potential effect on revenue, costs, assets, liabilities, financing, reputation and strategic resilience.

3. The transmission mechanism

How could the sustainability matter affect the business?

For example:

• water scarcity may restrict production;
• poor labour conditions may interrupt supply;
• product inefficiency may weaken customer demand;
• ecosystem degradation may reduce raw-material availability;
• stronger workforce practices may improve productivity and retention;
• circular design may reduce input costs and create new revenue streams.

4. The available choices

Senior leaders need options, not just warnings.

The sustainability professional should distinguish between choices such as:

• avoid the activity;
• reduce or redesign the impact;
• change the supplier, location, material or process;
• collaborate with business partners;
• invest in adaptation or resilience;
• develop a new product or service;
• accept and monitor the exposure; or
• exit the relevant market or activity.

5. The decision owner

Sustainability issues rarely belong solely to the sustainability department.

The owner may be the CFO, COO, procurement director, chief risk officer, product director, human resources director or business-unit leader.

The sustainability function should provide analysis, challenge and coordination. Operational executives must own the decisions and outcomes.

Questions senior decision-makers should be asking

Questions about value-chain configuration

• How can we reconfigure the value chain to create better value for the business, stakeholders and the planet?
• Which stages of the value chain contain our most severe impacts and most material financial exposures?
• Are we sourcing from the right suppliers, regions and production systems?
• Which impacts could be reduced through changes in product design rather than downstream remediation?
• Where are we transferring costs or risks to workers, communities, customers or ecosystems?
• Which activities should we develop internally, influence through partnerships or discontinue?

Questions about strategy and capital allocation

• Which sustainability risks could materially affect revenue, operating costs, assets, access to finance or cost of capital?
• Does our current capital-allocation process reflect these exposures?
• Which investments can simultaneously reduce negative impacts, improve resilience and strengthen commercial performance?
• Which assets, technologies or business models could become less viable?
• What opportunities could arise from solving a material stakeholder or environmental problem?
• What is the cost of acting now compared with the cost of delay?

Questions about products and markets

• Does the product create more value during its lifecycle than the social and environmental costs it generates?
• Can we redesign the product to use fewer scarce resources, last longer or deliver better customer outcomes?
• Are changing regulations, stakeholder expectations or physical conditions likely to alter demand?
• Could repair, reuse, remanufacturing or service-based models create new revenue?
• Which customer needs are emerging as sustainability conditions change?

Questions about suppliers and business relationships

• Do purchasing practices contribute to the impacts identified in our supply chain?
• Are our price, lead-time and contract requirements consistent with responsible supplier performance?
• Which suppliers require development, collaboration, closer oversight or replacement?
• Where do we lack sufficient visibility beyond tier-one suppliers?
• Could long-term commercial agreements unlock investment in lower-impact production?

Questions about governance and accountability

• Who is accountable for each significant impact, risk and opportunity?
• Which decisions require board approval, and which belong to executive or operational management?
• Are incentives aligned with the outcomes the organisation says it wants?
• What information must management receive before approving a major investment, acquisition, supplier or product?
• How will we know whether an intervention has changed the underlying impact or merely improved the reported indicator?

A materiality assessment should produce a decision agenda

A double materiality assessment should not conclude with a list of material topics.

It should produce:

• a map of significant impacts, risks and opportunities;
• a clear view of where they occur across the value chain;
• an explanation of their strategic and financial relevance;
• a set of decisions requiring management attention;
• named decision owners;
• timescales and resource requirements;
• performance indicators; and
• escalation thresholds for the executive team and board.

The final output should resemble a portfolio of strategic decisions, not a reporting index.

The sustainability professional’s new mandate

The mandate can be stated clearly:

Identify the organisation’s significant impacts, risks and opportunities; translate them into their consequences for stakeholders, enterprise value and resilience; and present senior decision-makers with clear choices across the value chain.

This does not weaken the importance of reporting or compliance.

Reliable reporting remains essential. It establishes discipline, transparency, comparability and accountability. Assurance strengthens confidence in the information and the systems that produce it.

But reporting should be the visible output of a deeper management process. It should show the consequences of decisions already embedded in strategy, governance, capital allocation and operations.

From material information to material action

Sustainability creates value when it changes a real decision.

That decision may involve:

• redesigning a product;
• altering a procurement specification;
• changing a supplier relationship;
• reallocating capital;
• protecting a vulnerable workforce;
• strengthening an asset against physical risk;
• entering a new market;
• withdrawing from a damaging activity; or
• changing how value is distributed across the value chain.

The sustainability professional should therefore be assessed not only on the quality of the organisation’s disclosures, but also on whether material sustainability evidence reaches the right decision-maker at the right time and changes the quality of the decision.

From insight to implementation

SustainCase case studies and analysis can help organisations understand how sustainability impacts, risks and opportunities influence business models and value chains.

If you want to apply this in practice, FBRH’s GRI and ESRS courses and webinars can help teams build the technical competence required to identify material matters, connect them to management decisions and establish credible reporting processes. The FBRH independent assurance services can then test whether the underlying systems, evidence and disclosures are sufficiently robust.

The objective is not more sustainability information.

It is better governed, better evidenced and better executed business decisions.

Professional call to action

Review your latest materiality assessment and ask one question:

For every significant impact, risk and opportunity, have we identified the specific decision that a senior leader must take?

Where the answer is no, the sustainability process is not yet complete.

Simon Pitsillides
Simon Pitsillides is a board adviser specialising in sustainability governance, corporate reporting, strategy and stakeholder value creation. He supports boards and senior executives in strengthening governance, enhancing decision-making and integrating sustainability into long-term business strategy.
Simon is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Marketing (FCIM), a Fellow of the Institute of Sustainability and Environmental Professionals (FISEP), a Chartered Marketer, and holds an MBA in Marketing. He is also a GRI and ISEP Certified Trainer.
As Founder of FBRH Consultants and publisher of SustainCase, Simon combines strategic, commercial and governance expertise with extensive international experience in sustainability reporting, assurance readiness and value creation. He has worked with multinational organisations, financial institutions and public sector bodies across Europe, the Middle East and beyond.
Simon is recognised for helping boards move beyond compliance by using decision-useful sustainability information to strengthen strategy, manage risk, build stakeholder confidence and create long-term value for business, stakeholders and the planet. 

https://www.linkedin.com/in/simon-pitsillides

References

Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (COSO and WBCSD) (2018) Enterprise risk management: Applying enterprise risk management to environmental, social and governance-related risks. Geneva: World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Available at: https://www.wbcsd.org/resources/applying-enterprise-risk-management-to-environmental-social-and-governance-related-risks/ (Accessed: 29 July 2026).

Eccles, R.G., Ioannou, I. and Serafeim, G. (2014) ‘The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance’, Management Science, 60(11), pp. 2835–2857. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2014.1984.

European Commission (2023) Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 of 31 July 2023 supplementing Directive 2013/34/EU as regards sustainability reporting standards. Official Journal of the European Union, 22 December. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/2772/oj/eng (Accessed: 29 July 2026).

Global Reporting Initiative (2021a) GRI 1: Foundation 2021. Amsterdam: Global Reporting Initiative. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/publications/documents/english/gri-1-foundation-2021/ (Accessed: 29 July 2026).

Global Reporting Initiative (2021b) GRI 3: Material Topics 2021. Amsterdam: Global Reporting Initiative. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/publications/documents/english/gri-3-material-topics-2021/ (Accessed: 29 July 2026).

IFRS Foundation (2023) IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information. London: IFRS Foundation. Available at: https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ifrs-s1-general-requirements/ (Accessed: 29 July 2026).

International Organization for Standardization (2010) ISO 26000:2010 Guidance on social responsibility. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

International Organization for Standardization (2018) ISO 31000:2018 Risk management—Guidelines. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

Khan, M., Serafeim, G. and Yoon, A. (2016) ‘Corporate sustainability: First evidence on materiality’, The Accounting Review, 91(6), pp. 1697–1724. doi: 10.2308/accr-51383.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2018) OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/15f5f4b3-en.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2023) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/81f92357-en.

United Nations (2011) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. New York and Geneva: United Nations. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf (Accessed: 29 July 2026).

The post Are some Sustainability Teams Missing the Point? Reporting Is Not the Outcome. appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

Simon Pitsillides, SustainCase Editor, discusses with Tim Mohin, CEO of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the ways in which the vast majority of companies which are the backbone of the world economy, can be mobilized to take real action. How they can be encouraged to #takePositiveAction and #bePositiveChange to effectively address this and many other important sustainability issues our world is facing today. By specifically identifying their most important impacts (materiality) and then proceeding to measuring, managing and changing, companies can become, with their positive contribution, part of a positive chain reaction that is changing our world.

Simon Pitsillides: The SustainCase Clean Air campaign in the UK is aimed at the companies who are responsible for approximately 90% of global economic activity (small and medium-sized enterprises). Our main target is that they use GRI 305: Emissions to drive pollution out of business supply chains, either through compulsory reporting (we have started a petition to the UK Government and Parliament) or through self-regulation. In essence, our goal is that the majority of companies take ownership and not only reduce their emissions, but also put pressure on their supply chains in a positive way, by choosing suppliers who produce little or no emissions. What are your thoughts regarding this target and the Clean Air campaign?

Tim Mohin: I am always happy when I see these types of grass roots efforts to encourage businesses to be more accountable for the impacts they are having on the economy, the environment and society. Clean air is such an important issue. It affects everyone. We know from experience that when we create transparency around impacts, businesses start making improvements. And you are right to note how important it is that companies work with their suppliers, since impacts are not limited to the four walls of the business.

GRI Standard 305 Emissions is an excellent tool for businesses of all sizes to measure, manage and communicate their Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions of greenhouse gases, ozone-depleting substances, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides and other significant air emissions. The GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards give organizations the flexibility to report just on their emissions (or any of the other topics) without producing an entire sustainability report.

Pitsillides: On a global scale, a key target of the SustainCase Clean Air campaign is to begin a conversation to make the measuring & public reporting of emissions by small and medium-sized enterprises compulsory, worldwide. This conversation, could help “accelerate change” (I am borrowing a phrase from the interview you kindly gave us in 2017). What are your thoughts on this?

Mohin: In principle I would like to see all businesses taking responsibility for their sustainability impacts, but I also know that many SMEs don’t have the resources to do sustainability reporting in the same way that Fortune 500 companies report. Again, this is why, under the GRI Standards, we created the option for a company to report on specific information without creating an entire report. At GRI, we know that getting more SMEs to begin disclosing information on their sustainability performance is the next big step we need to take in the transparency movement. We are also currently conducting research to assess what kind of policy and regulatory environment would be best, in terms of stimulating more reporting by SMEs.

Pitsillides: Does GRI provide additional support for companies who want to report their emissions using GRI 305: Emissions?

Mohin: Yes we do. With generous support from the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs SECO, we are currently working in select developing countries (Colombia, Ghana, Indonesia, Peru, South Africa and Vietnam) to stimulate more reporting by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Through the “Competitive Business Program,” we are helping SMEs begin reaping the many benefits of sustainability reporting, which will allow them to improve their business prospects and make positive contributions to their local society and economy. This effort includes GRI 305 disclosures as well as other key sustainability information.

Because many SMEs do not have the resources to put a sustainability management team in place, we have developed the GRI Digital Reporting Platform, a tool that makes reporting easier for SMEs. Using the Digital Reporting Platform, suppliers can digitally share the specific sustainability information that their customers want. The digital report that’s produced is in a format that allows companies in an SME’s value chain can aggregate and use for their own reporting. After we have completed the pilot phase in these six countries, we plan to make the GRI Digital Reporting platform available worldwide.      

Pitsillides: Which is, in your view, the business case for reporting emissions? How will a small and medium-sized enterprise benefit from reporting this information and not see it as just a compliance requirement?

Mohin: I strongly believe that most business owners want to make positive contributions to their local communities and environment. Still, most SMEs do not report on their sustainability impacts because they either lack knowledge of the benefits they can gain from the practice or they believe that the process of reporting is too costly. So a large part of the work we do here at GRI is demonstrating to SMEs that they can benefit from sustainability reporting. When we look at companies reducing emissions, the business case is actually quite clear. Most of the emissions within a business’ control are associated with costs such as heating or cooling office buildings or fuel for vehicles or electricity used for running equipment. As such, a reduction in emissions is usually coupled with a reduction in those costs. That’s a tangible benefit to a company’s bottom-line.

Pitsillides: Do you believe that emissions should be considered a de facto material issue for all companies, given the urgency of the problem with air pollution as stated by the UN? Should, for example, financial institutions re-examine the boundary of this important material issue? In simple terms, should financial institutions not just report the emissions they are responsible for, but also carry out environmental assessments of clients and clients projects? In addition, should they find ways to support companies that are taking responsible action with clean energy and possibly reduce support for companies that are not doing so?

Mohin: I believe that looking at longer term risk, like climate change, is part of the fiduciary duty of financial institutions. That is why the information disclosed in GRI-reports is important for investors. Savvy investors, including financial institutions, should understand how the companies in which they are invested are performing in terms of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues. I would like to see all investors using ESG data to inform decision making, so that we can move financial capital towards companies and projects that are making positive contributions to the world. This is particularly important if we want to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Trillions of dollars in investment capital are necessary in order to make the achievement of the SDGs a reality, but currently there is a disconnect, between the sustainability data that companies publish and the information that investors need for decision making. To help close this gap, GRI is working together with the UN Global Compact and the Principles for Responsible Investment on “Investor-relevant Business reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals.” This document will provide a brief overview of why investors are increasingly demanding SDG-related performance data, help corporate practitioners better understand who the relevant actors are within the investor community and include recommendations on how to present SDG-related information so that it resonates with an investor audience.

Pitsillides: Are there other issues that could be considered as material for a majority of companies, so as to meet global sustainability goals much sooner and accelerate change?

Mohin: Materiality assessments are very much determined by the context within which a specific business operates. This context is definitely informed by the particular industry or sector of the economy within which a company operates, but each business is unique. That said, the SDGs are the global framework for understanding how the world needs to change in order to create the conditions for sustainable development. All companies and their stakeholders should use the SDGs as a framework to guide their activities.

Pitsillides: Are small and medium-sized enterprises taking advantage of the flexibility the GRI Standards offer to disclose the most relevant information (materiality)? Are they taking action on what matters, where it matters for their business? Have they begun to report?

Mohin: We know that SMEs account for a significant portion of global economic activity and also create a large amount of sustainability impacts. But when we look into the GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database, a repository of over 46,000 sustainability reports, we see that a mere ten percent of them are from SMEs. With the GRI Standards, we are providing SMEs (and other businesses) the option to report on specific sustainability information by using as little as one GRI Standard, or a part thereof, without producing an entire sustainability report. So we hope to see the number of SMEs that disclose information on their sustainability impacts increase in the years to come.

Pitsillides: Thank you very much Mr Mohin.

The post Interview with Mr Tim Mohin, GRI Chief Executive – SustainCase Clean Air Campaign appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

Before you register for the GRI ESRS exam or invest in training, understand what the certification actually tests, what success requires, and where most candidates go wrong.

As interest in ESRS certification grows, many sustainability and ESG professionals assume that:

“If I understand ESRS, I’ll be fine.”

In practice, this assumption often leads to:

• under-preparation
• exam stress
• costly retakes
• and misplaced confidence

This article explains the what and why.
Practical implementation is a separate step.

The GRI ESRS Certification Briefing was created to close this gap.

Produced by FBRH Consultants, a GRI Certified Training Partner, this briefing distils what professionals most need to understand before they commit to the certification process.

What You’ll Gain from This Briefing This PDF briefing helps you understand:

• What the GRI ESRS certification actually signals professionally
• How the certification pathway works at a high level
• What the exam is designed to test (and what it is not)
• Why preparation method matters more than time spent
• What successful candidates consistently do differently

This is not exam coaching and not promotional material.
It is a clarity document designed to help you make informed decisions.

Who This Briefing Is For

This briefing is relevant if you are:

• Responsible for ESRS or CSRD reporting
• Advising organisations on sustainability or ESG
• Preparing for assurance, audit, or compliance roles
• Considering ESRS certification as a career signal

Download the GRI ESRS Certification Briefing (PDF)

The post GRI ESRS Certification Briefing: What the certification involves – how to prepare effectively appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

As organisations across Europe prepare for ESRS reporting under the CSRD, many assume the challenge is technical: understanding standards, datapoints, and disclosure requirements.

A practical PDF guide outlining the most common ESRS reporting mistakes under CSRD — and how organisations can avoid them.

In practice, the biggest ESRS failures rarely come from missing knowledge.
They come from how organisations approach ESRS in the first place.

Based on our work with sustainability, ESG, and compliance teams, we consistently see the same structural mistakes — mistakes that quietly increase workload, create assurance risk, and lead to costly rework later on.

Below are some of the most common ESRS pitfalls organisations fall into — often with the best intentions.

1. Treating ESRS as “just another report”

A common starting point is to treat ESRS like a traditional sustainability report: gather information, draft disclosures, and aim to produce a document.

The problem?
ESRS is not a document exercise — it is a system.

Without a repeatable process that links governance, data, controls, and documentation, disclosures quickly become inconsistent and difficult to defend under assurance.

Many organisations only realise this when auditors start asking how decisions were made — not just what was reported.

2. Starting with the standards instead of double materiality

ESRS standards are detailed and extensive. It’s tempting to start by working through datapoints and requirements one by one.

This almost always leads to:

• overreporting
• wasted effort
• unclear sustainability messages

A defensible ESRS report does not start with the standards.
It starts with double materiality, properly planned and documented.

When materiality is weak, everything downstream becomes harder.

This article explains the what and why.
Practical implementation is a separate step.

3. Weak or informal stakeholder engagement

Stakeholder engagement is sometimes treated as a box-ticking exercise — a survey here, a workshop there.

Under ESRS, this is risky.

If engagement lacks structure, purpose, and documentation, materiality decisions become difficult to defend. Assurance teams look closely at how stakeholder input influenced outcomes — not whether engagement happened at all.

4. Overreporting to “be safe”

One of the most damaging ESRS instincts is the idea that “more disclosure is safer disclosure”.

In reality, overreporting:

• obscures what is truly material
• increases audit burden
• weakens clarity for users of the report

ESRS rewards focus, not volume. Achieving that focus requires planning — not last-minute filtering.

Feeling overwhelmed? That’s normal.

Most professionals reading this are not trying to become sustainability experts.
They simply want to:

• avoid mistakes
• meet expectations
• build something they won’t have to redo next year

That’s exactly how SustainCase is designed.

If any of these sound like you, start here:

 I’m new and don’t know where to begin
 I need to report, but only proportionately
 I’m under time pressure
 I want to do this once and do it properly

How to Begin Sustainability Reporting — Safely

A short, practical orientation used by professionals before they commit time or budget.

5. Making key judgments without an audit trail

Every ESRS report involves judgment calls:

• scope decisions
• prioritisation
• assumptions

When these judgments are not clearly documented, organisations expose themselves to assurance findings and credibility issues — even if the final disclosures look reasonable on the surface.

6. Leaving data and systems to the end

Many teams draft ESRS disclosures first and only later realise that:

• data owners are unclear
• systems don’t support requirements
• controls are missing

This creates stress, rework, and compliance risk — often late in the reporting cycle.

The common thread behind all these mistakes

Across all of these issues, one pattern stands out:

Lack of structured planning.

Without planning, ESRS becomes reactive.
With planning, ESRS becomes manageable, defensible, and strategically useful.

Planning is what connects:

• materiality
• stakeholder engagement
• data collection
• documentation
• assurance readiness
• digital reporting

And yet, it’s the part most organisations underestimate.

Want the full list of ESRS mistakes — and how to avoid them?

We’ve put together a concise, practical guide that outlines:

• the top ESRS mistakes organisations make
• why they happen
• what to do differently to avoid rework, confusion, and assurance risk

A practical PDF guide outlining the most common ESRS reporting mistakes under CSRD — and how organisations can avoid them.

The guide is designed for sustainability, ESG, compliance, audit, and reporting professionals who want a clear, structured approach to ESRS — without guesswork.

Download the free PDF: Top ESRS Mistakes to Avoid

Why we created this guide

ESRS does not fail because organisations don’t care.
It fails when complexity isn’t matched with structure.

The goal of this guide is not to overwhelm — but to help teams recognise early warning signs and approach ESRS more confidently and responsibly.

The post ESRS Reporting: Why Most Organisations Get It Wrong (Without Realising It) appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

The GRI Professional Certification Programme seeks to help sustainability professionals strengthen their skills, knowledge, and expertise when applying the GRI Standards for sustainability reporting. Professionals need to complete a series of certified courses which cover the fundamentals of GRI reporting, in preparation for GRI’s final certification exam. After completing all courses, they are qualified to take the GRI Certification Exam.

The certification exam and the title GRI Certified Sustainability Professional will enable sustainability professionals to demonstrate that they completed certified training and possess the unique skills and expertise of a GRI Certified Sustainability Professional, so as to address growing sustainability compliance challenges. Their name will also appear on the GRI website.

This article explains the what and why.
Practical implementation is a separate step.

What you need to study

• GRI 1: Foundation 2021
• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 introduces the purpose and system of the GRI Standards, explaining key sustainability reporting concepts. GRI 1 also sets out the requirements and reporting principles organizations will have to observe to report in accordance with the GRI Standards.

• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021
• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that organizations will use to provide information on, among others, their reporting practices, policies, strategy, governance, and stakeholder engagement. This information provides a context for comprehending an organization’s environmental, social and other impacts.

• GRI 3: Material Topics 2021
• GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance to organizations on determining their material topics, also explaining how to use GRI’s Sector Standards. Material topics relate to an organization’s most important impacts on the environment, economy, and people, together with impacts on their human rights. Additionally, GRI 3 includes disclosures for organizations to report how they manage their material topics.

In addition to GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3, professionals are also advised to study:

• Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework
• These Guiding Principles provide an authoritative global standard to prevent and address the risk of negative human rights impacts linked to business operations, based on three pillars: protect, respect and remedy.

Feeling overwhelmed? That’s normal.

Most professionals reading this are not trying to become sustainability experts.
They simply want to:

• avoid mistakes
• meet expectations
• build something they won’t have to redo next year

That’s exactly how SustainCase is designed.

If any of these sound like you, start here:

 I’m new and don’t know where to begin
 I need to report, but only proportionately
 I’m under time pressure
 I want to do this once and do it properly

How to Begin Sustainability Reporting — Safely

A short, practical orientation used by professionals before they commit time or budget.

Key facts about the GRI Certification Exam

• The price of the exam is €250. GRI Community Members are entitled to a 25% discount.
• Candidates will have to answer 40 multiple choice questions in 60 minutes
• The passing score for the GRI Certification Exam is 75%
• Once purchasing the exam, candidates can start right away or take the exam within one year

• Candidates not passing the certification exam or whose exam attempt is judged as inadmissible may retake the exam, but will need to purchase it again

• After passing the exam, candidates receive a certificate of achievement from GRI, awarding them the status of ‘GRI Certified Sustainability Professional’

Prepare for success! GRI Certification Mock Exam (Self paced)

Developed by FBRH Consultants, an experienced GRI Global Certified Training Partner, the FBRH Mock Exam is your strategic gateway to succeed in the GRI Certification exam. Our proven methodology, developed over years of experience, empowers you to succeed through our carefully developed mock exam. Continuously securing 95%+, this mock exam helps you ensure you are well-equipped to surpass the 75% GRI Exam requirement. Three sets of questions modelled on the GRI exam. Take the exam as many times as you wish.

Link to FREE SAMPLE

Link to FULL version (£15) – three sets of questions.

NEW: If you’ve followed one of our GRI learning paths, you can now test your knowledge with a matching mock exam — designed to reflect exactly what you studied.

Learning Path A → Mock Exam A
– Reporting with the GRI Standards
– Reporting on Human Rights with the GRI Standards
– Navigating the GRI Sector Standards
– Transparency for Tomorrow: Decoding the Sustainability Reporting Landscape (2025)

Learning Path B → Mock Exam B
– Reporting with the GRI Standards
– Reporting on Human Rights with the GRI Standards
– Integrating the SDGs into your reporting process

Each mock exam is currently 50% off (£15) and includes a free 10-question sample, so you can try before committing.
No pressure. No charge upfront.
Just a smart way to check if you’re ready for the real thing.

What happens next (if you want this to work):

1. Get oriented
2. Decide scope
3. Build once, not twice
4. Grow capability over time

SustainCase exists to support that journey — proportionately.

References:

1) https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-financial-markets/company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/corporate-sustainability-reporting_en

2) https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/standards-development/universal-standards/

3) https://www.globalreporting.org/reporting-support/gri-academy/

4) https://www.globalreporting.org/media/f4qlxr53/gri-standards-exam-policy.pdf

5) https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/5628

6) https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/2

78% of the world’s 250 largest companies report in accordance with the GRI Standards

SustainCase was primarily created to demonstrate, through case studies, the importance of dealing with a company’s most important impacts in a structured way, with use of the GRI Standards. To show how today’s best-run companies are achieving economic, social and environmental success – and how you can too.

Research by well-recognised institutions is clearly proving that responsible companies can look to the future with optimism.

7 GRI sustainability disclosures get you started

Any size business can start taking sustainability action

GRI, ISEP, CPD Certified Sustainability courses (2-5 days): Live Online or Classroom  (venue: London School of Economics)

• Exclusive FBRH template to begin reporting from day one
• Identify your most important impacts on the Environment, Economy and People
• Formulate in group exercises your plan for action. Begin taking solid, focused, all-round sustainability action ASAP. 
• Benchmarking methodology to set you on a path of continuous improvement

See upcoming training dates.

The post How to prepare for the GRI Certification Exam: Becoming a GRI Certified Sustainability Professional appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

The post FREE Workshop: Complete Today These 5 GRI Disclosures to Kickstart Your ESG/ Sustainability Journey appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

Revolutionising Access to Certified Sustainability Training

The GRI Certified Training Partner Directory is designed to meet the needs of a global audience. It features an intuitive interface that enables users to locate training partners by region, ensuring that organizations can connect with certified trainers regardless of their geographical location. The directory also includes a dedicated column showcasing the year each organization became a GRI Certified Training Partner, allowing users to assess the experience and longevity of their chosen partner.

FBRH Consultants proudly became one of the first GRI Certified Training Partners in 2015. Over the years, we have consistently set the benchmark for quality training, having delivered sustainability reporting education to some of the world’s largest and most influential companies. Our expertise is reflected in the 200+ glowing reviews from participants who have benefitted from our comprehensive, actionable training sessions.

What Our Participants Say

Our commitment to delivering impactful, practical training is best reflected in the feedback we receive from participants:

• “You can know nothing about GRI Standards, and in 2 days, you will be ready to advise clients or run a reporting project for your company.” — Laurence Cox, Salterbaxter, an MSL Company
• “Thanks for two excellent days of learning how to create a first-class GRI Standard Sustainability Report.” — Anette Brøto Nereng, Head of ESG Reporting & Assurance, KPMG Norway
• “Pleased to share that as of today I am a GRI Certified Sustainability Professional. Great course, thank you for the insights and unique learning path.” — Ting Chaung Ho, S&P Global
• “This course provided a great learning outcome! I now feel well prepared to assist my clients in sustainability reporting.”  — Mari Ziesler Andenæs, BDO Norway
• “Having completed the courses, I feel well equipped to take on the challenge. The course is really well organised and facilitated with good learning materials, practical exercises and excellent discussions.”— Bonnie Griffiths, PwC Belgium
• ““A big thank you for last week’s training. All my training objectives were met.” Johanna Tähtinen, World Business Council for Sustainable Development
• “I highly recommend the class. Not only did I learn how to report on sustainability, but I also got a comprehensive view of how sustainability can be part of a company’s strategy.” — Malgorzata Slawinska, FRONTEX
• “I started this 5-day journey with very little knowledge or idea of how to tackle our company reporting. Having completed the courses, I feel well equipped to take on the challenge. The fact that Simon is available for follow-up questions and advice is an added bonus!” — Anna Cook, CERN HSE Communications

FBRH’s Step-by-Step Approach: Ensuring Actionable Results

At FBRH, our training programs go beyond theory. We deliver a practical, step-by-step plan that equips participants with the tools they need to take immediate action. Our approach ensures that no one leaves our courses without a clear understanding of how to start and complete their sustainability report effectively. This commitment to actionable learning has cemented our reputation as a trusted leader in GRI-certified sustainability training.

Why Choose FBRH for GRI Certified Sustainability Training?

• Experience and Longevity: As one of the first GRI Certified Training Partners, FBRH has consistently delivered top-tier training that aligns with global best practices.
• Global Reach: We cater to a diverse audience with options for both classroom and remote real-time training, making our expertise accessible to participants worldwide.
• Proven Impact: Our 200+ reviews attest to the success of our programs in empowering organizations to produce meaningful sustainability reports.
• Unique Support: FBRH’s training programs are designed to help participants address the unique challenges they face. We focus on conducting materiality assessments throughout the value chain, forming a solid foundation for sustainability and empowering organizations to make informed decisions and shape their sustainability strategy.
• GRI Certified Sustainability professional: At FBRH, we are among a select group of GRI partners licensed to operate globally. Uniquely, FBRH is the only GRI Certified Training Partner that provides a mock exam, empowering participants to excel in the GRI Certification exam.

The Importance of the GRI Certified Training Partner Directory

For organizations embarking on their sustainability journey, finding the right training partner is crucial. The GRI Certified Training Partner Directory simplifies this process by providing a centralised resource that highlights certified partners’ capabilities and credentials. Users can:

• Easily identify partners offering tailored training solutions in their region.
• Select training options that fit their needs, whether in-person or remote.
• Assess the experience of training partners based on their certification date.

This directory is a testament to the commitment of GRI and its partners, like FBRH, to advancing global sustainability practices.

Join FBRH on Your Sustainability Journey

As one of the pioneering GRI Certified Training Partners, FBRH invites you to leverage our expertise and proven methodologies to kickstart or enhance your sustainability reporting efforts. Explore the GRI Certified Training Partner Directory today to find the right partner for your needs, and take the first step towards meaningful, impactful sustainability practices.

For more information on FBRH’s training programs, visit our website or contact us directly. Together, we can build a sustainable future.

The post FBRH: Empowering Sustainability Reporting Through the Global Directory of Certified Training Partners appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

1) A list of a sector’s most significant impacts is clearly defined in the public interest through a transparent, multi-stakeholder approach (academia, business, experts, governments etc.) which includes a period of public comment.

2) Organisations are required to either show how they are taking action related to these significant impacts, or provide the reason why they consider (a significant impact) not applicable for them (depends on their value chain position). This level of transparency is an extremely powerful driver for change.

Sustainability game-changer?

A GRI Education Sector Standard will therefore help organisations focus their efforts on their significant impacts as these have been clearly defined through this robust multi-stakeholder and transparent GRI process in which Universities take part.

Combined efforts by the education sector can be a sustainability game-changer.

78% of the world’s 250 largest companies report in accordance with the GRI Standards

SustainCase was primarily created to demonstrate, through case studies, the importance of dealing with a company’s most important impacts in a structured way, with use of the GRI Standards. To show how today’s best-run companies are achieving economic, social and environmental success – and how you can too.

Research by well-recognised institutions is clearly proving that responsible companies can look to the future with optimism.

7 GRI sustainability disclosures get you started

Any size business can start taking sustainability action

GRI, ISEP, CPD Certified Sustainability courses (2-5 days): Live Online or Classroom  (venue: London School of Economics)

• Exclusive FBRH template to begin reporting from day one
• Identify your most important impacts on the Environment, Economy and People
• Formulate in group exercises your plan for action. Begin taking solid, focused, all-round sustainability action ASAP. 
• Benchmarking methodology to set you on a path of continuous improvement

See upcoming training dates.

The post Why an Education Sector GRI Standard is a necessity appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

Your responsibly prepared GRI Sustainability report becomes a valuable source of information and a reference for your company to demonstrate that it is already taking action through a methodical and structured approach – and that it does not leave anything to chance. 

Communication in the digital age

Good communication is evermore important in the digital age we live in. Information is instantly and freely accessible throughout the globe and this applies to companies, too: people are able to instantly access information about your company’s policies, the impact of its activity, its reputation, with or without your consent. Whether you are aware of it or not, conversations could be taking place about your company and people take action and make choices based on what information they have available.

a) Can your company instantly demonstrate by pointing to actions it is taking that it has already identified its most important impacts?

b) Can your company show what it is specifically doing to minimise its most important negative impacts and increase its positive impacts?

Being proactive is key

Responsible sustainability reporting acts like a radar for companies by enabling them to be proactive, foresee risks and take action before situations spiral out of control. The well-recognised GRI Standards for sustainability reporting are an important tool used globally to instil trust in people in our ever-connected world where there is increasing concern about climate change and the protection of our fragile environment.

Build trust with key stakeholders for business success

Equally important is that with the GRI Standards, your company gets to build trust and deal responsibly and conscientiously with its impacts on its key stakeholders (clients, suppliers, shareholders, local communities, NGOs or local government). By building trust your company creates loyalty and long-term commitment to its services and brands.

Learn how to prepare a 1st Class GRI Standards Sustainability Report

By preparing a 1st Class GRI Standards Sustainability report you demonstrate that you do not leave anything to chance. You demonstrate to key stakeholders for business success (for example: investors, top-talent, clients, business partners, local community) that your have a plan of action. How will you benefit from the transition to the sustainable (green economy) and that you are better prepared than your competitors.

Communicating with purpose

Communicating with purpose is the way forward and it needs to be based on the solid foundation of an all-round sustainability report, to avoid being accused of greenwashing, SDGs-washing or SDGs-cherry picking. The GRI Standards provide this foundation. They are the only complete set of sustainability standards, recommended by the UN Global Compact and used by 80% of the world’s largest 250 companies.

78% of the world’s 250 largest companies report in accordance with the GRI Standards

SustainCase was primarily created to demonstrate, through case studies, the importance of dealing with a company’s most important impacts in a structured way, with use of the GRI Standards. To show how today’s best-run companies are achieving economic, social and environmental success – and how you can too.

Research by well-recognised institutions is clearly proving that responsible companies can look to the future with optimism.

7 GRI sustainability disclosures get you started

Any size business can start taking sustainability action

GRI, ISEP, CPD Certified Sustainability courses (2-5 days): Live Online or Classroom  (venue: London School of Economics)

• Exclusive FBRH template to begin reporting from day one
• Identify your most important impacts on the Environment, Economy and People
• Formulate in group exercises your plan for action. Begin taking solid, focused, all-round sustainability action ASAP. 
• Benchmarking methodology to set you on a path of continuous improvement

See upcoming training dates.

The post 1st class GRI Standards Sustainability Reporting appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.

The post Determining material topics: 4-step process (GRI-3 material topics standard) appeared first on SustainCase - Sustainability Magazine.