What does your reporting really say?

 

Reporting among FTSE 350 companies is improving, but progress is slow and some are falling far short of the clarity and quality investors, government and regulators want. This risks undermining management teams and confidence in business.

 

As the Department for Business Innovation & Skills' (BIS) consultation on narrative reporting indicates, people are looking for ways to reduce the volume of reporting and make it more insightful and accessible.

 

Our research - Insights or fatigue? - highlights the need for this. In particular, we found that reporting could communicate better about:

  • The effectiveness of governance and risk management
  • How key performance indicators and executive pay is driven by strategic priorities
  • The strength of the business model and key relationships

 

The analysis points to causes such as compliance fatigue, compartmentalised reporting, weak links between strategy and data, and difficulties in assessing the value annual reports can bring.

 

Understanding where reporting is not clear is a good starting point. We have also suggested next steps to be taken by legislators, regulators, managers and boards to help make reporting more effective.

 

Individual benchmarking is available for FTSE 350 companies, contact us for further information.

 

Request hard copies of the survey here

Headline findings - what’s clear and what's not in reporting: 

Area reported What’s clear in reporting What’s not clear
Market context 74% talk about the future 13% explain what it means
Strategy 90% include strategic priorities 12% base reporting on strategy
Risks 75% talk about risks 35% explain risks clearly
Performance 88% explicitly identify KPIs 25% match KPIs to strategy
Sustainability 61% give sustainability KPIs 15% link sustainability to strategy