Regulators aren’t the lone audience for data that substantiates progress on sustainability. Investors demand it, too—and they have high standards for the visibility and trustworthiness of the information you share.
Now they have a new arena in which trust matters immensely: sustainability. Investors now view sustainability information as part of the due diligence process, and environmental, social, and governance data combine with financial data to make that process whole in their eyes. For companies and their CFOs, this creates a challenge: how to make sustainability data as transparent and trustworthy as investors demand.
And their demands are acute. New research conducted jointly by Deloitte and The Fletcher School at Tufts University found that 80 percent of US institutional investors use sustainability information when they make investment decisions. If the data weighs so heavily in high-stakes investment decisions,1 it follows that the trustworthiness of that data is paramount. This is consistent with enterprise-wide mandates to build “trust equity”—the amount of trust an organization has accumulated with its stakeholders over time. Note that the definition focuses on the trust accumulated by doing—not only saying. Organizational trust, or its lack, can create or erode value,2 through correlating trust with customer loyalty, employee engagement, and financial results.
What’s the takeaway? Because investment runs on data, today’s sustainability mandate goes beyond doing; it’s the showing that builds trust as well. Having reliable, transparent, trustworthy sustainability data is not only a matter for regulatory reporting but also a key to demonstrating value—as well as a lever for creating it. In one study, trustworthy companies outperformed other businesses by up to 400 percent.3 Conversely, if an organization’s sustainability data is opaque, ill-substantiated, or poorly communicated, there’s a risk that trust may erode. If that happens, it may not reflect a lack of faith in the organization’s reporting but may instead indicate how important sustainability is to the organization’s performance, transitional risk posture, and ability to deliver returns.
That puts sustainability data in the same elevated category as other critical data a company provides to regulators, auditors, analysts, and investors. And that puts it squarely in the CFO’s area of responsibility. The data that backs up a company’s sustainability commitments should be audited, assured, and presented in a clear, consistent way.
Trustworthy sustainability data is important for CFOs in part because sustainability has become an important component in financial statements, and in part because gathering and verifying the required data requires the organization to make a significant investment in measurement and reporting capabilities.
The Deloitte-Fletcher research has found that global institutional investors are most likely to trust either their own in-house data systems or corporate disclosures that are audited or assured. Surveyed institutional investors lack trust in the unaudited information a company self-reports and is the least used data. The same research found that sustainability investing is important to US institutional investors, and 83% have sustainability policies in place.4
There’s one place where the comparison to other data falls short. In many financial and other compliance areas, CFOs are managing data in accordance with well-established regulatory and reporting standards. In the sustainability arena, regulations around the world are still evolving. Yet the investor demand for trust and clarity is happening right now. Once regulations are in place, the consistency and standardization they provide may clarify the landscape. But in the meantime, investors are relying on what companies decide to report.
While the clarity of available data lags, organizations may be tempted to engage in what has been termed “greenhushing”—holding back on some information, perhaps because it’s difficult to provide with precision. The reasoning? Better to say nothing than to be found in error or to fall short of commitments. Yet this can have unforeseen competitive consequences because some rating agencies publish comparative lead tables that put different companies’ sustainability information side by side. No reporting organization or data point exists in a vacuum, and if someone shows progress where you report nothing, the reputational impact can be immediate.
The resolve to evolve sustainability data and trust is like sustainability itself—easy to declare and difficult to execute. In the Deloitte 2023 CxO Sustainability Report, executives across industries ranked the “difficulty of measuring environmental impact” as the most frequently cited obstacle in their sustainability efforts. In addition, many large organizations continue to aggregate sustainability data on spreadsheets, which makes it difficult to trace individual pieces of information—for example, at the asset or facility level—back to their sources.
When sustainability data or its lineage is missing or incomplete, that isn’t by itself “untrustworthy”—but it doesn’t contribute to trust either. These grey areas are among the most difficult to navigate.
One way to address that concern is with a deliberate focus on Sustainability Data Management. By pairing physical sustainability measures with data management that includes broad collection, third-party integration, supplier tracking, and other measures, it becomes easier to establish granular visibility into sustainability performance and satisfy stakeholder demands.
Remember that there is more to achieve with sound sustainability data than the positive of building new trust and value. There are also negatives to overcome. When you work to justify the return on sustainability investments, part of your audience includes people who may doubt the entire exercise.
Sustainability isn’t a new concern, but today’s environment is more nuanced. Amid heightened expectations—and the need to dispel misgivings about “greenwashing”—it's no longer enough just to “check the box” in a way that might have sufficed only a few years ago. Investors want more confidence, and that comes from you—in the form of sound data that’s full, coherent, audited, assured, and available. Remember that they are in the middle of the trust environment: Investors need to trust what you tell them because they need to earn the trust of their own stakeholders in turn. Your data becomes their data. Trust gained or lost travels up and down the value chain.
If sustainability were a “yes or no” question for CFOs, there would likely be little difficulty getting to “yes.” But every concern, however critical, exists among a real-world mixture of competing demands on an executive’s attention. With all the other pressures they face, some CFOs may find sustainability near the bottom of today’s to-do lists. Others may be taking a deliberate wait-and-see approach while their counterparts pressure-test the new reality. While they cede the field to first-movers, they are continuing to treat sustainability as a matter of liability management and not value creation.
But the views Deloitte’s research found among investors is real, and real-time: Our respondents aren’t in wait-and-see mode. They want trustworthy sustainability data now, which turns up the pressure on CFOs to make it a priority. CFOs who wait out the competition, or wait for regulation to clarify, may miss investor and value-creation opportunities in the near term.
No change, however vital, happens instantly. As CFOs, finance teams, and organizations feel their way forward in meeting these demands, they are likely to progress through stages of maturity and action. Meeting extant needs can help them survive. Embarking on meaningful change can help them to drive forward. And organizations that set themselves apart through effective and innovative measures can unleash their ability to thrive. Let’s look at what may distinguish each of those stages.