Transparency about Trade-offs

Blog

Businesses don’t exist in a vacuum.

Their activities draw on finite planetary resources, while also creating financial value and products or services that improve quality of life. This dual reality means no organization can realistically claim perfect management of all its negative impacts, and signaling otherwise weakens credibility.

Stakeholders increasingly value open communication about "dilemmas". Many business decisions involve balancing continuity with the responsibility to reduce significant social and environmental impacts. Even for organizations that aren’t profit-driven, financial stability and its operations are two of the strongest tools for a business to contribute to a healthier planet. With a subpar financial performance, there is no capacity to invest in mitigation, innovation, or long-term impact.

The widespread adoption of Double Materiality Assessment has supported companies in mapping out their impacts (including the uncomfortable ones) on society and the planet. While the quality of disclosures varies widely, the shift toward transparent reporting is unmistakable.

One example that stood out to us is Patagonia progress report 2025. What makes it noteworthy is not perfection, but clarity about trade-offs: acknowledging when environmental goals conflict with operational needs, explaining why certain impacts persist, and being transparent about the choices behind them. This type of disclosure sets a higher bar, and shows that transparent communication is not a weakness, but a form of leadership.

At TOSCA, we support organisations and executives in Navigating dilemmas with credibility. If you want to strengthen your sustainability disclosure and its credibility, get in touch.