Sustainable value creation: From reporting to real impact

Nqobani Mzizi

The last two decades have seen an explosion of corporate reporting. Annual reports, sustainability disclosures, ESG scorecards and integrated reports now fill board packs and investor portals. For many organisations, these reports have become the visible evidence of governance. Yet the question remains: are these documents proof of genuine sustainable value creation, or simply outputs that reassure stakeholders without changing the underlying reality?

King IV reminds us that the purpose of governance is outcomes. Ethical culture, good performance, effective control and legitimacy cannot be delivered through documents alone. Principle 3 emphasises responsible corporate citizenship, and Principle 4 highlights the need for organisations to create value in a sustainable manner.

Reporting is important, but it is only one part of the accountability cycle. True governance requires that boards ensure value is actually created and preserved, and where value is eroded, that this happens responsibly, across the six capitals: financial, manufactured, intellectual, human, social and relationship, and natural.

ISO 37000 echoes this global perspective. It defines governance as the system by which organisations are directed, overseen and held accountable for achieving their purpose, generating positive outcomes and creating sustainable value over the long term. Sustainable value creation is, therefore, not an add-on, but the very reason governance exists. It extends beyond financial returns to include the well-being of people, the protection of natural resources and the trust that underpins legitimacy.

The risk of mistaking reporting for reality is not theoretical. South Africa’s corporate history offers clear lessons.

Tongaat Hulett once produced integrated reports that highlighted commitments to sustainability and good governance. Yet behind these outputs, financial manipulation and weak controls were eroding value. When the truth surfaced, the company lost credibility, its share price collapsed and stakeholders suffered significant harm. This is a stark reminder that reports can be polished, but governance is judged by outcomes. Reporting without real impact becomes an exercise in compliance, not stewardship.

A contrast can be found in organisations like Woolworths, which has embedded sustainability into its strategy and operations. It has been recognised for its Good Business Journey, which integrates environmental, social and governance priorities into decision-making. By focusing on sustainable supply chains, responsible sourcing and measurable social impact, Woolworths demonstrates that reporting can reflect genuine value creation rather than aspirational promises.

This journey has influenced everything from farming practices to packaging choices, showing how sustainability becomes embedded in operations rather than treated as a communications exercise. Its reports, therefore, stand out not because they are glossy, but because they mirror tangible actions that have shifted behaviour within the organisation and across its supply network. The difference lies in whether the board ensures that reports are a mirror of lived practice, not a substitute for it.

The Integrated Reporting <IR> Framework provides a useful lens here. It encourages organisations to show how they create value over time through the six capitals. But its effectiveness depends on whether boards are prepared to govern the underlying practices, not just the disclosures. A report that identifies human capital as material, but fails to address poor employee well-being, is an output disconnected from reality. Sustainable value creation means aligning strategy, operations and culture with the capitals, and using reporting as a tool for accountability, not as an end in itself.

The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) also sharpen the picture. They remind boards that value creation is inseparable from broader societal challenges such as climate change, poverty, inequality and responsible consumption. When companies selectively highlight SDGs in glossy reports without aligning their strategies and metrics, they risk accusations of greenwashing or impact-washing. Boards must therefore insist that SDG commitments are backed by measurable actions and tracked outcomes, not just communications.

What then is the role of the board in advancing sustainable value creation?

First, boards must reframe reporting as a means, not an end. Reports are valuable when they communicate progress, challenges and trade-offs, but they are meaningless if they are disconnected from action.

Second, boards must integrate sustainability into strategy. This means placing long-term value at the centre of decision-making, even when it requires trade-offs with short-term gains.

Third, boards must strengthen oversight of impact metrics. It is not enough to measure how many reports were published; directors must track whether carbon emissions decreased, communities benefited, employees thrived or supply chains became more resilient.

Finally, boards must ensure that culture supports sustainable value. Without values-driven behaviour inside the organisation, sustainability commitments risk remaining words on paper.

Investors and stakeholders are increasingly alert to this distinction. ESG funds and ratings now influence capital allocation, yet they too are increasingly scrutinised for overstating impact. Civil society, regulators and courts are beginning to challenge companies that make bold claims in sustainability reports without credible evidence of delivery. Boards that rely on ratings or external validation without internal accountability expose themselves to reputational and financial risk. Stakeholders are asking harder questions: what difference do you actually make, beyond what you report?

Sustainable value creation is not an abstract aspiration. It is the work of governance itself. It calls for boards to move beyond producing reports to ensuring that those reports reflect real, measurable and lasting impact. It is about aligning purpose, strategy and performance with the needs of stakeholders and the limits of the planet.

The challenge is not to abandon reporting, but to elevate it. Reporting must be part of a governance cycle that begins with purpose, translates into strategy, is executed in operations, and is finally disclosed with honesty and integrity. In this way, reporting becomes a mirror of stewardship, not a mask for shortcomings.

So, boards must ask themselves:

• Do our reports reflect reality, or are they aspirational documents that mask gaps in practice?
• How do we ensure that sustainability commitments in our reports translate into measurable outcomes?
• Are we governing the six capitals with equal seriousness, or defaulting to financial capital as the dominant lens?
• How are we aligning our disclosures with the UN SDGs and ensuring that our impact is more than symbolic?

Because governance will not be remembered for the reports we published, but for the value we created, the trust we built and the legacy we left behind. That is the standard by which history will measure boards, and it is far higher than the metrics contained in a single reporting cycle.

* Nqobani Mzizi is a Professional Accountant (SA), Cert.Dir (IoDSA) and an Academic.

** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.

BUSINESS REPORT