Supporting In-House Teams to Deliver Board-Ready Sustainability Outputs
A large organisation was required to produce sustainability disclosures for senior stakeholders, including inputs aligned to TCFD and IFRS requirements. While the organisation had strong internal commitment to sustainability, limited internal capacity and competing priorities meant that the quality and clarity of reporting was becoming a concern.
Working in a senior consultancy role, we provided targeted support to in-house teams to improve the structure, readability and credibility of sustainability reporting, ensuring outputs were suitable for board-level review and external scrutiny.
The challenge
Sustainability reporting often fails not because of a lack of activity, but because complex information is presented in a way that makes it difficult for non-specialist audiences to interpret.
In this case, the key challenges included:
- Sustainability reporting that was technically detailed but difficult to read.
- A lack of clear narrative linking sustainability risks, opportunities, and strategy.
- Pressure on in-house consultants who were struggling to balance delivery with quality.
- Concern that senior stakeholders would lack confidence in the final outputs
There was a clear need for senior assurance and practical intervention to ensure the reporting was both accurate and decision-useful.
Our approach
Our support focused on improving governance, structure, and clarity, rather than simply editing content.
1. Quality review and issue identification
We undertook a structured review of draft sustainability outputs to identify where reporting was falling short. This included assessing:
- Overall structure and flow.
- Clarity of language and accessibility for board-level readers.
- Alignment with TCFD and IFRS sustainability reporting expectations.
- Gaps between technical analysis and strategic narrative.
This allowed us to pinpoint where targeted support would have the greatest impact.
2. Restructuring for board-ready sustainability reporting
Based on the review, we proposed a revised report structure designed to:
- Clearly separate context, risk, opportunity and response.
- Present sustainability information in a logical, decision-focused sequence.
- Reduce repetition and unnecessary technical detail.
- Improve signposting for readers.
This restructuring helped transform the report from a technical document into a board-ready sustainability output.
3. Targeted rewriting and narrative development
Where required, we provided direct writing support, including a complete rewrite of the executive summary.
The revised narrative:
- Clearly articulated sustainability risks and opportunities.
- Linked climate and sustainability issues to organisational strategy.
- Used concise, plain English without oversimplifying complex topics.
- Highlighted key messages for senior decision-makers.
This ensured that the most important content was immediately accessible to board members and executives.
4. Supporting in-house capability and confidence
Alongside improving the immediate outputs, we worked with the in-house team to explain the rationale behind the changes.
This included:
- Explaining what senior stakeholders typically look for in sustainability reporting.
- Sharing practical guidance on writing for board-level audiences.
- Providing reassurance and support where teams were under pressure.
This approach helped build confidence within the organisation and reduced the likelihood of similar issues arising in future reporting cycles.
The outcome
The intervention resulted in:
- Clear, concise, and board-ready sustainability reporting.
- Improved alignment with TCFD and IFRS sustainability expectations.
- Increased confidence from senior stakeholders reviewing the outputs.
- Reduced delivery risk for the in-house sustainability team.
- A more robust governance approach to sustainability reporting.
The revised report was better suited to its audience and supported more effective discussion at senior levels.
Why this matters
Sustainability reporting plays a critical role in how organisations understand and respond to climate-related risks and opportunities. Even strong technical analysis can fail to have impact if it is not presented clearly and credibly.
This example demonstrates the value of:
- Senior sustainability assurance.
- Structuring reports around decision-making, not just disclosure.
- Supporting in-house teams rather than replacing them.
- Treating reporting quality as a governance issue, not an editorial one.
These principles help ensure sustainability reporting builds confidence rather than creating uncertainty.
This example is drawn from the Changing Footprint team’s experience in previous roles.