10 CSRD tips from our experience

Taking a first look at the requirements of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS)—or their revised version, the ESRS Simplified—can certainly raise a sustainability manager’s pulse. The CSRD is challenging, no question, but that’s hardly a reason to panic! Here are 10 CSRD tips to help you as you tackle Europe’s reporting obligation for the first time.

CSRD tip 1: Take a closer look at the ESRS reporting standard

To understand the scope and requirements that the CSRD places on your sustainability report, it’s important to have at least a rough overview of the framework, the ESRS. Don’t worry, you don’t have to read and understand every single data point to do so. The best place to start is by reviewing how an ESRS report is structured. If you’d like to learn more about the revised ESRS, you’ll find everything you need to know in our article on the ESRS Simplified. And if you do want to dig deeper, you can download all ESRS standards in their original version on EFRAG’s website.

CSRD tip 2: Build the resources and know-how for your CSRD project

The CSRD is a major undertaking, not a one-off project. A single sustainability manager often isn’t enough. When preparing your report, you’ll work in close coordination with HR, IT, Finance, Procurement, Risk Management, and other departments. Foster strong, efficient collaboration and take a realistic look at the to-dos: What resources do we need for implementation? Are additional skills or training necessary? Do we need to hire someone? And if it comes down to a lack of know-how: the VERSO Academy is sure to offer the right training for you. Regular courses and workshops also sharpen awareness of sustainability throughout the organization. Bring other departments on board and keep everyone involved informed about the latest requirements.

CSRD tip 3: Plan the process in detail

Several steps in CSRD reporting require a great deal of time, a lot of coordination with internal stakeholders, or both. That’s why it’s essential to keep your process realistic and forward-looking. Be sure to factor in buffer time, too—and feel free to plan a little generously. Keep the following milestones in mind:

• When do we want to publish the report?
• Are there any time constraints we need to consider (vacations, other projects)?
• When will we write the report?
• Who needs to be brought into the process, and when?
• When will we collect the data?
• When will we carry out the double materiality assessment?
• When do we need to start?

Well-defined, proven workflows lead to faster data collection and reduce the risk of errors. Regularly reviewing and adjusting these processes ensures they hold up even as requirements increase. So those who invest early in clean processes can meet their regulatory obligations far more efficiently and quickly over the long term.

You also need to be aware: data collection in particular is a real time drain. People often underestimate how long it takes to gather the essential information. Don’t forget that for many departments in your company, your request comes on top of their actual day-to-day work. And with business partners and suppliers, you should also allow some time for their responses.

One more tip on this: calculate your deadline “from back to front”! First, determine when the sustainability report should be published—in the case of the CSRD, alongside the management report. From there, work backward through the individual steps—drafting the text, collecting the data, and conducting the double materiality assessment—until you reach the starting point. Add a little buffer for each task, and you’ll know the latest possible date to begin.

CSRD tip 4: The double materiality assessment, the cornerstone of your CSRD report

The foundation of a CSRD report is the double materiality assessment. Materiality assessments have been around for a while, but the principle of double materiality—used to identify the sustainability topics relevant for reporting—only became mandatory with the CSRD. For this, the ESRS prescribe a specific process that must be documented. Here it pays to ask yourself some critical questions: How do we stand in terms of knowledge and capacity for the materiality assessment? Can we manage it in-house, or do we need external help?

The double materiality assessment forms the basis for your data collection, your CSRD sustainability report, and your ESG management. That’s why it deserves special attention. Mistakes can lead to missing or inaccurate data. A substantive assessment, on the other hand, guides you purposefully through the reporting process.

Our experience shows that bringing in external consultants is definitely helpful—if only to draw on their experience when evaluating and selecting topics. Whatever you decide, we’ve outlined the process for the assessment here. You’ll also find a good overview of the methodology in EFRAG’s Implementation Guidance and in the supporting documents from the DNK (German Sustainability Code). Our AI-powered software solution offers valuable support for the double materiality assessment as well, saving you time in the process.

CSRD tip 5: Optimize data collection with digital tools

You’ll need lots and lots of data for your CSRD-compliant sustainability report. That quickly raises the question: How do we collect the data? Set up a process that’s as seamless as possible. And then: Where do we collect the data? Yes, it could be an Excel list — but experience shows those quickly become unwieldy. You’ll find yourself scrolling back and forth between individual data points for ages. It’s a nerve-wracking exercise you’d be wise to avoid. Our recommendation: use a sustainability software instead.

Software-supported reporting is easier, more effective, and more data-driven. And we’re not just saying this from our own experience — EFRAG points it out as well.

Digital tools, especially those with AI support, help you standardize processes and ensure that all material data is captured and processed correctly.

CSRD tip 6: Identify data sources and assign responsibilities

Reporting is teamwork: implementing the CSRD calls on a wide range of areas across the company, not just sustainability managers. Identify your contacts within the teams early on, bring them on board, and clarify responsibilities. We’ve summarized which teams are involved in the CSRD, why, and how in a graphic.

When it comes to data collection in particular, it’s not only important to know which information the CSRD requires, but also who—or which department—can provide it. So build out your processes and communication channels and define clear responsibilities. This creates clarity, avoids delays, and ensures that data collection runs efficiently and smoothly in the future as well.

In the VERSO ESG Hub, for example, you can assign responsibilities for each topic. Every year, when data collection starts up again, each person in charge can enter their data directly into the tool.

CSRD tip 7: Use a gap analysis to identify and close data gaps

Has your company already published a sustainability report? Is it based on a standard such as GRI or the DNK? Then you already have a solid foundation to compare against the CSRD requirements.

Conduct a gap analysis and find out which data you reported in previous years, whether it aligns with the ESRS formulas, and which data is still missing. This tells you which processes already exist and which data collection efforts still need to be established or adjusted.

That said, you can also carry out a gap analysis without a prior report. In that case, you start by reviewing which data you already have available, and then determine where there’s still room for improvement.

CSRD tip 8: Check your data for reliability

High data quality is the key to a CSRD-compliant sustainability report. That’s why it’s important to set up internal control systems that work similarly to those used in financial reporting. These controls ensure that your ESG data is accurate, complete, and reliable. Data quality plays a central role especially with a view to the external assurance required under the CSRD.

To ensure high data quality, you should prepare thoroughly and read the disclosures in the standards carefully. There you’ll find the Application Requirements (AR), which provide detailed instructions. They specify how certain information must be disclosed or measured.

CSRD tip 9: Take a strategic view of sustainability

The CSRD actively asks for a sustainability strategy—you need a policy for each individual material sustainability matter. Beyond that, you must show how sustainability is embedded in your corporate strategy.

So don’t get lost in the reporting tunnel: think of sustainability as part of your corporate strategy from the very beginning, and plan the appropriate resources for it. Not only your CSRD report, but also the future viability of your company, will thank you for it!

CSRD tip 10: Learn from mistakes and from other reports

Many companies have already published a CSRD report. You can learn from them and get a sense of what your own report might look like. That said, every company is so unique that you can’t follow any one of these reports step by step. Each report did different things well.

But here’s a spoiler: the CSRD report will likely sit closer to the financial report than most previous reporting under GRI or the DNK. There’s currently a lot of discussion about which direction sustainability reporting will take.

Now to your own report: your first report doesn’t have to be perfect either—you need to understand and accept that. To start with, it’s about establishing efficient data collection under the CSRD and setting up new processes or improving existing ones. Don’t try to force in descriptions of concepts and measures you haven’t yet introduced. Instead, set yourself a target for when you intend to publish the corresponding data, and communicate that openly in your report.

Dos & don’ts for your CSRD report

Dos:

• Structure your sustainability reporting clearly:
  define clear responsibilities for reporting processes, data delivery, review, communication, and so on—much like in financial reporting.
• Involve internal and external experts:
  run workshops and interviews to gather well-founded input, especially for your material topics.
• Communicate the scope, goal, and purpose of the report both internally and externally:
  a shared understanding of the CSRD reporting obligation promotes consistent data quality and a coherent, readable report.

Don’ts:

• Avoid aggregating your data too heavily:
  if you summarize data, processes, and descriptions too broadly or briefly, relevant information can get lost.
• No purely subjective assessments:
  greenwashing is a thing of the past—the CSRD demands evidence for your claims. Always back up qualitative information with data-based proof.
• Don’t report superfluous data points:
  avoid including more data points than necessary, as this can distract from the information that matters.

The Simplified ESRS

The ESRS (European Sustainability Reporting Standards) are set to become simpler, but not less important. With the planned Simplified ESRS, also referred to as Amended ESRS or ESRS Set 2, the focus is shifting: away from maximum detail and toward sustainability reporting that presents material topics more clearly, more consistently, and in a more practical way. For companies, this raises not only the question of what will be removed in the future. More importantly, it is about what will actually matter in reporting going forward.

The planned changes are linked to the EU’s Omnibus initiative. The aim is to streamline sustainability reporting requirements under the CSRD (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) without abandoning the core logic of the ESRS. For companies, this means fewer mandatory disclosures, but still a clear focus on material information, transparent disclosures, and a robust presentation of their sustainability topics.

At a glance: What the Simplified ESRS mean for you now

Already deep into ESRS? → Map existing data points to the Simplified ESRS instead of starting from scratch.

Just getting started? → Clarify early whether VSME, Simplified ESRS, or another reporting framework is a better fit, then set up data collection directly along that logic.

No longer in scope? → Assess which form of voluntary reporting makes strategic sense.

Still have time until 2028? → Use the additional time to align materiality, data architecture, and responsibilities cleanly with the Simplified ESRS.

Where do the Simplified ESRS currently stand and what can be expected next?

The Simplified ESRS have not yet been formally adopted. So far, EFRAG’s technical recommendation to the European Commission is available. The final version of future ESRS Set 2 still needs to be adopted by the Commission as a delegated act.

Since the EU plans to adopt EFRAG’s draft as it stands, the direction is already clear: fewer data points, fewer redundancies, greater focus on material information, and more principles-based reporting.

For companies, the draft status is therefore not a reason to wait. Those who understand the logic behind the Simplified ESRS now can already begin aligning reporting processes more effectively toward relevance, coherence, and practical data use.

What is new?

Focus on material information

Going forward, only material data points are expected to be disclosed. The goal is a sustainability report that is clearer and less driven by formally checking off every single requirement wherever possible.

Significantly fewer data points

According to EFRAG, mandatory data points are expected to be reduced by around 61 percent. At the same time, voluntary disclosures will be removed. So this is not just about less volume, but also about stronger focus on what is truly relevant for users and decision-making.

Shorter and more understandable standards

The standards are expected to be streamlined. Redundant content will be cut back, and overlaps between ESRS 2 and the topical standards will be reduced. This is intended to improve readability and make application easier in practice.

More principles-based narrative reporting

Key governance topics such as SBM-3, IRO-1, as well as Policies, Actions and Targets will be brought together more strongly. At the same time, presentation is expected to become more flexible. As a result, the report should function less like a checklist and more like a coherent overall picture.

Less burden around value chain data

Going forward, there will no longer be an explicit preference for primary data. Estimates and secondary data are also expected to be allowed where robust primary data is unavailable or can only be obtained with disproportionate effort.

Simplified materiality assessment and clearer disclosure logic

Disclosure logic is also becoming more focused. Companies should be better able to distinguish between material and non-material information. This also affects the question of which mandatory disclosures are actually required and where narrative context matters more than completeness for its own sake.

What stays the same?

Despite the simplification, the core logic of the ESRS remains in place. ESRS Set 1 is not being reinvented, but rather condensed, focused, and further developed in the form of the Simplified ESRS. The double materiality assessment (DMA) also remains a central starting point for reporting. The following three points will continue to be central in the new Set 2:

Double materiality remains mandatory.

Companies must therefore continue to systematically assess which sustainability topics are material, both from an impact perspective and a financial perspective. What is new is mainly that application is intended to become more practical: EFRAG refers to clearer guidance, less documentation effort, and stronger focus on truly decision-useful information.

The 12 topical standards remain structurally in place.

The Simplified ESRS continue to build on the same architecture: ESRS 1 and ESRS 2, along with the familiar environmental, social, and governance standards, remain in place. For companies, this means existing structures, responsibilities, and mapping logic can generally continue to be used, while the depth and volume of required disclosures will be reduced in many places.

The objective remains a transparent presentation of material sustainability topics.

Even with simplified requirements, companies are not expected to simply check off data points, but to explain clearly which material topics they have identified and how they manage them. EFRAG emphasizes stronger focus on relevance, Fair Presentation, and reporting that is less purely compliance-driven. Companies therefore still need to provide an internally coherent story around their material topics.

Fair Presentation: Why the report should be less checklist and more overall picture

A central point in ESRS Set 2 is that it does not just shorten individual requirements, but also shifts the logic behind reporting. This is especially visible in the principle of Fair Presentation.

What does Fair Presentation mean?

A report should not merely appear formally complete. It should provide a coherent, balanced, and understandable overall picture of a company’s material sustainability topics.

In other words, it is no longer enough to simply work through individual Disclosure Requirements. What matters is whether the report as a whole makes it understandable

• which topics are material
• why they are material
• how the company is addressing them

What changes in practice as a result?

With the Simplified ESRS, three things move more strongly into focus:

• Relevance instead of maximum detail
• Coherence instead of isolated individual disclosures
• Clarity instead of overloaded reports

Fair Presentation therefore describes quite precisely what good reporting will increasingly be measured against in the future: not just the quantity of information, but its explanatory value.

Undue Cost or Effort: More pragmatism in data collection

The Undue Cost or Effort principle is intended to reduce the burden on companies wherever data can only be collected with disproportionate effort.

Where is the practical relief?

This is especially relevant for data that is hard to obtain, for example in the value chain or where information cannot be gathered reliably in the short term.

Going forward, there is expected to be more flexibility for:

• estimates
• secondary data
• a more pragmatic approach to data gaps

This is a noticeable relief, especially for companies that are still building reliable ESG data structures.

What does this not mean?

Undue Cost or Effort is not a free pass to simply leave out information.

Companies therefore cannot rely on this principle in a blanket way by saying that data collection is difficult or expensive. What remains decisive is that assumptions, methods, and approaches are transparent and understandable.

What matters here:

• Decisions should be justifiable
• Estimates should be plausible
• Data gaps should be contextualized, not hidden
• the report should still provide a robust overall picture despite simplification

This principle therefore stands for a more realistic approach to data collection. The focus is not on perfection at any cost, but on an approach that remains practical while still being transparent.

Fewer data points, but not automatically lower expectations

Reducing data points is a clear form of relief. According to EFRAG, mandatory data points that must be disclosed when material are expected to decrease by around 61 percent. At the same time, voluntary disclosures will be removed.

What has been reduced in concrete terms?

The simplification mainly affects the volume of disclosures that companies previously had to collect, document, and prepare consistently in addition to core requirements. At the same time, the standards as a whole are expected to become shorter, clearer, and more principles-based. This comes with fewer overlaps, more flexibility in narrative disclosures, and a simplified materiality assessment.

But a reduction of around 61 percent does not mean that sustainability reporting will automatically become 61 percent easier. And it does not mean that companies will only need to prepare a heavily shortened report.

Even with fewer mandatory disclosures, the central task remains the same: companies must transparently explain in the ESG report which topics are material, which information is relevant in that context, and how this results in a coherent report.

What does this mean for companies?

The effort therefore shifts in part:

• away from pure data collection
• toward prioritization, contextualization, and clear presentation

The real simplification, then, is not that everything becomes easy. It is that the focus becomes clearer.

VSME or Simplified ESRS: Decision support for mid-sized companies

With the Simplified ESRS, the question becomes more relevant which framework makes sense for companies that are currently not subject to reporting requirements or want to report voluntarily. VSME is not automatically the better choice simply because it is leaner. What matters is what the reporting is intended to achieve: a pragmatic starting point or voluntary reporting with stronger alignment to ESRS logic.

Answer the following questions for yourself. The more often you answer “yes” to a statement, the more likely the respective standard is a good fit.

VSME is more suitable if …

• You want to start voluntary reporting with the lowest possible effort.
• You need a pragmatic framework without immediately having to work deeply into ESRS systematics.
• Your reporting is primarily intended to provide an initial overview and is not yet meant to reflect all strategic management questions.
• You are still at an early stage when it comes to data, processes, and responsibilities.
• You first want to establish a solid foundation before expanding reporting and management further.

The Simplified ESRS are more suitable if …

• You want voluntary reporting that is already closer to future ESRS logic.
• You want to use sustainability not only for documentation, but also more actively for management and strategic purposes.
• You are already working with a double materiality assessment or plan to do so.
• Your sustainability information also needs to be robust and compatible with expectations from banks, business partners, or more complex customer requirements.
• You want to build reporting today that is more robust and future-proof in the long term.

As a rule of thumb

If you mainly want to get started simply and with minimal use of resources, VSME is usually the more suitable entry point.
If you want to report voluntarily in a more structured way, with greater compatibility and closer alignment to the ESRS, there are stronger arguments in favor of the Simplified ESRS.

* This information is summarized editorial content and should not be construed as legal advice. VERSO accepts no liability.