Insights from the study “More Than Reporting” of the Bertelsmann Stiftung
Recently, the Bertelsmann Stiftung published a new study on sustainability reporting, named “More Than Reporting: How Sustainability Reporting Creates Value for Companies”. As the current EU’s Omnibus process has scaled back sustainability disclosure requirements, a significant number of organizations are now exempt from reporting obligations, while others face fewer mandatory disclosure requirements. In this context, the report addresses a central issue: whether sustainability reporting – especially when not legally required – is worthwile doing and if so, under what conditions.
The study conducted a review of existing academic and practice-oriented research as well as twelve qualitative interviews with corporate representatives. Its findings show that “the added value of sustainability reporting does not lie in the report itself, but rather in the organizational changes initiated through the reporting process and in the targeted use of data within and beyond the company”.
In the following, we will present some findings in more detail and draw learnings for organizations.
Reporting professionalizes and formalizes processes
One central finding of the study is that value creation stems from internal changes of processes triggered by the reporting. In fact, sustainability reporting acts as a professionalization and formalization mechanism: topics that were previously managed informally, become measurable, reviewable, and actionable. More specifically, reporting forces companies to
- clarify roles and responsibilities,
- define KPIs and ownership,
- build data governance structures and
- integrate sustainability into existing management systems.
DFGE perspective: By forcing companies to formalize roles, KPIs, data structures, and governance, sustainability reporting shifts sustainability from informal practices and individual knowledge to institutionalized management processes. As a result, sustainability evolves from an initiative into a core management discipline.
Reporting strengthens internal learning
The report highlights sustainability reporting as a dynamic learning cycle rather than a static compliance task. Companies learn iteratively
- what data is available – and what is missing,
- which topics are truly material,
- where risks and inefficiencies exist and
- how sustainability KPIs relate to financial and operational performance.
Importantly, learning accelerates through repetition. Annual reporting cycles create continuous improvement pressure, comparability over time as well as management attention at board and executive level.
DFGE perspective: Reporting builds organizational sustainability literacy across Finance, Procurement, Operations, HR, and IT. Through repeated reporting cycles, companies progressively identify data gaps, refine material topics, uncover risks and inefficiencies, and better understand the link between sustainability KPIs and financial and operational performance.
Reporting leads to concrete outcomes and financial value
Both (1) process formalization and (2) internal learning eventually lead to various internal outcomes. Across the interviewed companies, sustainability reporting repeatedly triggered several effects, including:
- Efficiency gains: The professionalization of processes creates transparency that enables companies to optimize both reporting workflows and core business operations—for example by consolidating fragmented data sources, uncovering costly legacy contracts, or identifyinginefficient operating modes in production facilities.
- Improved risk management: It can also contribute to improved strategic steering and more effective risk management by integrating sustainability-related information into these areas.
- Improved access to capital: Sustainability reporting helps establish the data foundations required by capital providers such as banks and investors, thereby supporting companies in meeting increasing ESG-related information demands.
- Customer access and employer attractiveness: Through the transformation processes it initiates, sustainability reporting enables companies to meet growing sustainability requirements from customers. At the same time, it contributes to attracting and retaining talent, as sustainability increasingly resonates with employees – particularly younger professionals entering the organization.
These effects can eventually create financial value for companies by increasing revenues and/or reducing costs.
DFGE perspective: Sustainability reporting often acts as the initial catalyst for operational excellence in sustainability management. It reinforces sustainability efforts by triggering concrete organizational outcomes and financial value, thereby strengthening the motivation to further institutionalize reporting practices. However, as the study shows, the scale of these effects depends on both internal and external influencing factors. Among the most critical external factors is the design of reporting standards: their complexity, methodological clarity, relevance of required content, and interoperability with other (international) standards shape whether companies perceive them as practical and value-adding, or as bureaucratic burdens. Standards that provide consistent guidance and methodological orientation are more likely to stimulate meaningful organizational transformation.
Data availability as a key influencing factor
Another important influencing factor relates to a company’s initial situation and maturity level in sustainability prior to the introduction of reporting requirements. The study shows that companies which had already implemented sustainability-related measures before the “reporting impulse” tend to be more advanced in terms of data availability, process maturity, resources, expertise, and governance structures than those just starting out. As a result, they are better positioned to respond to reporting requirements and to translate them into organizational improvements.
DFGE perspective: A key success factor for effective sustainability reporting is the ability to leverage data that is already available. In practice, reporting frameworks frequently overlap in their data requirements, even if they address different stakeholders and objectives. Companies that exploit synergies between frameworks such as EcoVadis, CDP, ESRS, and GRI benefit most when they build shared internal data and management structures rather than treating each framework as a separate exercise.
For companies with CSRD reports for example, EcoVadis scores tend to improve more rapidly because underlying processes and documentation already exist; and CDP reporting becomes more robust because emissions and risk data are systematically governed. In this sense, EcoVadis and CDP should not be seen as competitors to CSRD but as operational accelerators – provided that a shared and coherent data backbone is in place.
Strategic conclusion for organizations
Sustainability reporting may serve as an internal transformation tool disguised as disclosure. When approached strategically, reporting
- builds organizational capability,
- enables continuous internal learning,
- professionalizes processes and governance,
- reduces long-term reporting and response costs and
- creates synergies across frameworks instead of duplication.
Companies that align CSRD, EcoVadis, CDP, and voluntary standards around one internal management system unlock more value than those treating each framework in isolation. Please feel free to contact us by email at or by phone at 08192-99733-20.
Sources
Bertelsmann Stiftung: “More Than Reporting: How Sustainability Reporting Creates Value for Companies”
