The sustainability report : challenges and regulatory obligations
The CSRD directive: what is changing for businesses
The CSRD directive, adopted by the European Union in 2022, marks a clear break with the former NFRD directive. Where the latter concerned about 11,000 businesses, the CSRD extends the scope to nearly 50,000 European companies. According to the European Commission, the objective is clear: to improve quality, comparability and reliability sustainability information published by companies
In concrete terms, CSRD and ESG more generally require:
- one standardized reporting framework via the ESRS (European Sustainability Reporting Standards),
- one double materiality mandatory (impacts of the company on society and the environment, but also financial risks related to ESG issues),
- one auditability reinforced by published data,
- one integration of the sustainability report in the management report.
The realization of the sustainability report thus becomes a structuring, transversal and strategic exercise. It is no longer a communication document, but a genuine tool for managing global performance.
ESRS standards: a complex but structuring framework
The ESRS constitute the technical base of the CSRD. They cover all ESG pillars :
- Environment (climate, pollution, water, biodiversity, resources),
- Social (employees, value chain, territories, consumers),
- Governance (ethics, internal control, risk management).
Each standard imposes specific requirements for indicators, policies, goals, and action plans. La Preparation of an ESG report compliant with ESRS therefore requires:
- multi-source data collection,
- strong internal coordination,
- rigorous documentation of the methods,
- an ability to demonstrate the coherence between strategy, actions and results.
This complexity explains why many businesses consider outsourcing as a reassuring solution. But it also highlights why internal control is becoming a key issue.
The risks of non-compliance
Non-compliance with CSRD requirements exposes businesses to several risks:
- Regulatory risk, with potential sanctions defined at the national level,
- Reputational risk, in case of reporting deemed incomplete or not very credible,
- Operational risk, linked to inefficient collection processes,
- Strategic risk, if ESG data cannot be used to manage performance.
According to Baker Tilly, preparing for the CSRD audit requires strong foresight of processes, governance and reporting tools. These risks directly question the mode of organization chosen for the Preparation of the sustainability report.
Outsourcing the production of your sustainability report: advantages and limitations
Consulting firms : external expertise and strategic support
Outsourcing the production of your sustainability report consists in entrusting all or part of the process to an external service provider: CSR consulting firm, audit firm, or independent ESG expert. This approach presents undeniable advantages, especially in the early phases of CSRD compliance.
Among the benefits frequently mentioned :
- Immediate access to advanced expertise, in particular on ESRS and double materiality,
- Apparent time savings for internal teams, which are often already in demand,
- External credibility effect, in particular with respect to auditors and stakeholders,
- Benchmarked vision, resulting from the multi-client experience of firms.
According to Footbridge Impact, many companies have historically chosen this path to structure their CSR approach and secure their first deliverables.
In financial terms, costs vary greatly depending on the scope and size of the company. Some sectoral studies evoke ranges ranging from several tens of thousands of euros to more than 150,000 euros for comprehensive CSRD support, depending on the complexity and the level of outsourcing (sources, firms and field feedback).
The limits of outsourcing
Despite its advantages, the outsourcing of sustainability report has structural limitations, which are often underestimated in the short term but very visible over 3 to 5 years.
1. Recurring addiction
Each reporting exercise requires the resumption of external support, with recurring costs and a strong dependence on consultants.
2. A loss of internal knowledge
Methodologies, arbitrations and reasoning often remain in the hands of the service provider. The company then struggles to capitalize on the experience acquired.
3. Significant cumulative costs
Over several years, continuous outsourcing represents an investment that is much greater than an increase in equipped internal skills.
4. A lack of agility
Any regulatory, strategic or organizational change requires a new external arbitration, slowing down decision cycles.
According to Sustainable Switzerland, outsourcing can hinder internal ownership of sustainability issues, which are essential for real transformation.
When outsourcing makes sense
It would be simplistic to completely reject outsourcing. In some contexts, it remains relevant:
- First year of CSRD compliance, to frame the approach,
- Very small structures, without dedicated internal resources,
- Occasional needs, such as a double materiality analysis or a blank audit.
So the challenge is not to choose vs outsourcing, but to understand its limits when it becomes the norm rather than a transitory lever.
Internalizing your ESG report : towards strategic autonomy
Faced with the structural limitations of outsourcing, more and more organizations are considering another path: internalize the realization of their sustainability report. This approach is not simply about “doing it yourself”, but about integrating ESG reporting as a internal strategic process, in the same way as finance or management control.
The benefits of internalization
1. Process and data control
Internalize the sustainability report allows above all to Regaining control over ESG data. In a CSRD context, this mastery becomes critical. Environmental, social and governance indicators are no longer isolated numbers: they are interconnected with operations, strategy, risks, and financial performance.
By internalizing :
- data is collected as close as possible to the sources,
- the methodological hypotheses are documented and understood,
- traceability is strengthened, facilitating audits.
This control significantly reduces the risk of non-compliance and improves the quality of ESG report over the long term.
2. Development of sustainable internal skills
One of the major benefits of internalization is Raising the skills of teams. As employees adopt ESRS standards, double materiality or value chain logic, sustainability ceases to be a peripheral subject to become a management lever.
This internal capitalization allows:
- one better transversality between CSR, finance, purchasing, HR and operations,
- one increased capacity to respond to stakeholder requests,
- one finer integration of ESG issues into the global strategy.
3. Substantial savings in the medium term
While internalization may seem expensive at the beginning (time, training, structuring), it becomes economically advantageous over a horizon of 3 to 5 years. Unlike outsourcing, the costs are not repeated the same every year.
Initial investments are transformed into:
- reduction in consulting fees,
- reduction in going back and forth with service providers,
- better operational efficiency.
4. Agility and continuous improvement
Finally, internalize the Preparation of the sustainability report offers valuable agility. Teams can adjust indicators, enrich analyses, and change reporting over time, without depending on external schedules or budgets.
This agility is essential in a regulatory framework that is still evolving, where the ESRs themselves are called upon to refine themselves.
The challenges of traditional internalization
Despite its numerous advantages, the “raw” internalization of ESG report is not without difficulties. To ignore them would be to underestimate the real complexity of the exercise.
1. A demanding learning curve
ESRS standards are technical, detailed, and sometimes complex to interpret. Without support or tools, internal teams can quickly find themselves in difficulty, especially on:
- double materiality,
- the coherence between indicators and the narrative,
- the structuring of the report according to CSRD requirements.
2. An investment in time and resources
Internalizing means mobilizing internal resources over time. However, CSR or ESG managers are often already in demand on many operational topics. Without an adapted solution, there is a real risk of transforming reporting into heavy administrative burden.
3. Methodological risks
Without a structural framework, internalization can lead to:
- errors in interpreting the ESRS,
- incomplete or poorly documented indicators
- a difficulty in meeting audit requirements.
These risks explain why some companies are hesitant to take the plunge of autonomy, despite a clear desire to take back control.
The hybrid solution : equipping yourself with a platform like Regensy
It is precisely in order to overcome this binary opposition (externalize or internalize) that a Third way : equipped autonomy. It consists in internalizing the Preparation of the sustainability report, while relying on a SaaS platform designed to structure, secure and accelerate the process.
How does Regensy empower without sacrificing expertise ?
Developed by Symalean, Regensy was thought of as a CSRD reporting management tool, and not as a simple data collection software.
Its key principles are based on:
1. Intelligent automation of data collection
Regensy centralizes ESG data from multiple internal sources, reducing:
- scattered Excel files,
- the risks of manual errors,
- the loss of information between services.
This automation frees up time for analysis and decision making.
2. Integrated ESRS compliance
The platform natively integrates the requirements of the ESRS:
- structuring the indicators,
- logic of double materiality,
- alignment with CSRD obligations.
The company no longer has to “translate” regulations: they are guided step by step through the Achievement of sustainability report.
3. Support and skills development
Unlike traditional outsourcing, the support associated with Regensy Aim at theprogressive autonomy teams. Training, best practices and expert support make it possible to secure the first exercises while developing internal skills.
4. A long-term economic alternative
Without giving unsourced figures, numerous field reports show that a CSR management solution makes it possible to significantly reduce cumulative costs compared to full annual outsourcing, while improving the quality of ESG report.
Feedback and practical cases
Businesses that choose this hybrid path often share similar profiles:
- ETI and large SMEs subject to the CSRD,
- small but committed CSR teams,
- strong desire to structure a sustainable approach over several years.
The feedback highlights:
- one controlled implementation time,
- better ownership of ESG issues,
- one Progressive ROI, both financial and organizational.
The criteria for choosing a CSR management solution
Before equipping yourself, several criteria must be analyzed:
Essential checklist:
- integrated CSRD and ESRS compliance,
- multi-source collection capacity,
- traceability and auditability of data,
- expert support and support,
- scalability of the platform.
Key questions to ask editors:
- How does the solution facilitate the development of internal skills ?
- What level of autonomy after 2 or 3 exercises ?
- How are regulatory changes managed ?
In this reading grid, Regensy is positioned as a tool designed to make you autonomous, not as a substitute for in-house expertise.
Decision support : outsource, internalize or equip yourself ?
Synthetic comparative table
Simplified decision tree
- CSRD first year with no resources → One-time outsourcing
- Long-term vision + internal resources → Autonomy equipped
- Recurring and strategic reporting → Platform like Regensy
Key questions to ask
- Do you want to be permanently dependent on a service provider?
- Is the sustainability report a strategic tool or a regulatory deliverable?
- Do your teams need to become more proficient in ESG?
Conclusion
The dilemma between outsourcing or internalizing the Preparation of the sustainability report does not require a single response. But a clear trend is emerging: in the CSRD era, ESG reporting is becoming a strategic asset which benefits from being controlled internally.
Outsourcing can play a triggering or initial security role. However, over the long term, thetooled autonomy appears to be the most balanced path, combining regulatory compliance, cost control and increasing competence.
Solutions like Regensy allow precisely this transition: take back control of your ESG report, without sacrificing expertise or methodological rigor.
👉 Discover Regensy free for 30 days or request a demonstration, means engaging your organization towards managed, controlled sustainability and fully integrated into corporate strategy.
FAQ - Sustainability Report and CSRD
1. Is it mandatory to internalize your sustainability report ?
No CSRD does not impose the mode of organization, but requires compliance, traceability and auditability.
2. Can a consulting firm and CSR reporting software be combined ?
Yes. Many businesses use a firm to start up and then empower themselves with a tool.
3. Does software replace a CSR expert?
No It structures and secures work, but expertise remains human.
4. How long does it take to become independent ?
Generally 1 to 2 exercises with adapted support.
5. Is the ESG report set to change ?
Yes. ESRS and stakeholder expectations will change, which is why an agile solution is important.
