Domain G · Area G-CA2 · Disclosure development, substantiation and consistency
G.6Draft entity-specific, balanced and decision-useful disclosures
Working Draft version 1.1
Purpose and scope
This unit covers the capability to draft clear, concise, accurate and entity-specific sustainability disclosures from approved outlines, evidence and analysis. It includes terminology, fact and status discipline; balanced treatment of positive and negative information; distinction among policy, commitment, action, output, outcome and impact; explanation of performance and context; and retention of sources, judgement and review traceability.
Applied competency statement
Can draft clear, entity-specific, balanced and decision-useful sustainability disclosures that accurately distinguish facts, policies, commitments, actions, performance, outcomes, impacts and limitations and remain traceable to approved evidence.
Boundary and escalation
This unit drafts reporting information and does not replace management, legal, finance, technical or subject-matter approval. G.7 owns claim substantiation, G.9 uncertainty and sensitive information and D.2 and G.5 own architecture and outlines. Copyright, legal, market-sensitive and specialist wording requires qualified review.
Key quality risks
Boilerplate or copied peer language; legal or standard text reproduced without applying it to the entity; vague adjectives and promotional tone; policies, training or expenditure described as outcomes; commitments described as implemented actions; minor positive initiatives used to offset material adverse information; inconsistent definitions or time horizons; unsupported causal claims; passive language obscuring responsibility; excessive detail hiding the answer; and edits that remove limitations or evidence links for readability.
G.6-K01
Understands how business model, scope, locations, material matters, governance, actions, performance and evidence make disclosure specific to the organisation.
Knowledge Type: Entity-specific drafting · Normative Weight: Core
G.6-K02
Understands fact, estimate, allegation, finding, policy, commitment, plan, action, control, output, outcome, impact, target, forecast and opinion and the importance of correct status.
Knowledge Type: Information status · Normative Weight: Core
G.6-K03
Understands favourable and adverse information, prominence, omission, framing, aggregation, qualifiers, plain language and the avoidance of promotional or defensive tone.
Knowledge Type: Balanced and neutral presentation · Normative Weight: Core
G.6-K04
Understands relevance, concision, context, explanation of change, comparability, connectivity, disaggregation and what intended users need to understand the matter.
Knowledge Type: Decision usefulness · Normative Weight: Core
G.6-K05
Understands controlled definitions, consistent naming, active and precise language, units, time horizons, references, readability and the limits of standard or peer wording.
Knowledge Type: Terminology and style · Normative Weight: Core
G.6-K06
Understands source citation, drafting rationale, judgement, reviewer comments, legal and specialist review, version control and the relationship to claims and evidence.
Knowledge Type: Source and review discipline · Normative Weight: Core
G.6-S01
Convert an approved disclosure outline, evidence and analysis into a complete first draft that answers the reporting question.
Skill Type: Core applied capability · Observable Output or Result: Entity-specific draft disclosure
G.6-S02
Use precise terms and distinguish policies, commitments, actions, outputs, outcomes, impacts, estimates and future information.
Skill Type: Status and terminology control · Observable Output or Result: Terminology and status review
G.6-S03
Present material positive and negative information proportionately, explain drivers and context and remove irrelevant or promotional content.
Skill Type: Balance and decision-usefulness · Observable Output or Result: Balanced-drafting review
G.6-S04
Link material statements to sources and record drafting choices, aggregation, qualification and professional judgement.
Skill Type: Source and judgement documentation · Observable Output or Result: Drafting rationale, source and judgement matrix
G.6-S05
Address technical, owner, legal, specialist and editorial comments without weakening evidence, balance or meaning and maintain the final rationale.
Skill Type: Review and revision · Observable Output or Result: Technical, terminology and editorial review record
G.6-B01
Does not use tone, structure, omission or selective examples to create a more favourable impression than the evidence supports.
Behaviour Type: Truthful and balanced drafting · Non-compensable Requirement: No
G.6-B02
Does not describe intentions as actions, activities as outcomes or management views as established facts.
Behaviour Type: Status precision · Non-compensable Requirement: No
G.6-B03
Does not improve readability by removing material qualifications, uncertainty or evidence limitations without authorised resolution.
Behaviour Type: Source fidelity · Non-compensable Requirement: No
Typical tasks · 4
G.6-T01
Review the approved outline, reporting question, evidence, analysis, terminology, owners and limitations.
Primary Output Link: G.6-O01
G.6-T02
Draft the disclosure using entity-specific facts, correct information status, balanced performance and clear narrative sequence.
Primary Output Link: G.6-O01
G.6-T03
Complete the source and judgement matrix and perform terminology, balance, concision and decision-usefulness review.
Primary Output Link: G.6-O02
G.6-T04
Coordinate technical, owner, legal, specialist and editorial review and retain changes, unresolved issues and approval.
Primary Output Link: G.6-O03
Level 1 · Foundation
G.6-L1-01
Can draft a defined disclosure from an approved outline and evidence pack and complete specified source and terminology checks.
Indicator Dimension: Task execution
G.6-L1-02
Can identify obvious boilerplate, promotional, status, source or balance problems and escalate sensitive or specialist wording.
Indicator Dimension: Quality, judgement and accountability
Level 2 · Practitioner
G.6-L2-01
Can independently draft and revise a moderately complex disclosure integrating narrative, metrics, performance, actions and limitations.
Indicator Dimension: Task execution
G.6-L2-02
Can resolve routine wording, status and balance issues and explain drafting judgements and review changes to owners and reviewers.
Indicator Dimension: Quality, judgement and accountability
Level 3 · Advanced Practitioner
G.6-L3-01
Can design or critically review enterprise controlled-drafting methodologies across complex topics, groups, languages and reporting channels.
Indicator Dimension: Method design and review
G.6-L3-02
Can challenge promotional or evasive drafting, resolve significant editorial tensions, coordinate the resolution of legal and technical issues with qualified reviewers, design and advise on organisation-wide standards for evidence-linked and balanced disclosure.
Indicator Dimension: Leadership and governance
Illustrative evidence · 6
G.6-E01
Entity-specific draft disclosure linked to the approved outline and evidence.
Evidence Type: Work product
G.6-E02
Drafting rationale, source and judgement matrix.
Evidence Type: Work product
G.6-E03
Technical, terminology and editorial review record.
Evidence Type: Work product
G.6-E04
Version, source, comment, revision and approval trail.
Evidence Type: Process evidence
G.6-E05
Documented owner, legal, communications, specialist, quality or management review and the practitioner's response.
Evidence Type: Review evidence
G.6-E06
Observed drafting or defence of a contested disclosure passage.
Evidence Type: Observed performance
Assessment · 3
G.6-A-L1
Controlled-drafting exercise, terminology review and situational judgement
Entity specificity; factual and status accuracy; balance; source linkage and escalation.
G.6-A-L2
Integrated disclosure-writing case and professional memorandum
Narrative completeness; status and terminology; balance and decision usefulness; evidence and reviewability.
G.6-A-L3
Complex drafting-governance case, portfolio and oral defence
Method design; evidence and status discipline; challenge of greenwashing through language; governance communication and oral defence.
| From | To | Type | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| B.5 | G.6 | Strong linkage | Environmental disclosure must preserve location, uncertainty and evidence limitations and avoid unsupported claims. |
| B.6 | G.6 | Strong linkage | Social disclosure must be balanced, respectful, disaggregated and transparent about allegations, findings and outcomes. |
| B.7 | G.6 | Strong linkage | Conduct disclosures require balanced, entity-specific drafting and correct distinction between policy, control, incident and outcome. |
| G.1 | G.6 | Feeds into | Validated analytical conclusions support balanced entity-specific disclosure drafting. |
| G.5 | G.6 | Feeds into | Detailed outlines and drafting briefs guide controlled entity-specific writing. |
| G.6 | G.5 | Prerequisite | Controlled drafting should follow the approved disclosure outline and narrative logic. |
| G.6 | F.3 | Evidence and traceability linkage | Material statements and conclusions should not exceed the available evidence. |
| G.6 | G.7 | Disclosure, claims and publication linkage | Draft wording should be assessed for explicit and implied sustainability claims. |
| G.6 | G.8 | Disclosure, claims and publication linkage | Draft narrative should reconcile to metrics, methods and other channels. |
| G.6 | G.9 | Disclosure, claims and publication linkage | Estimates, uncertainty, limitations and sensitive information should be incorporated accurately. |
| I.5 | G.6 | Disclosure, claims and publication linkage | AI-assisted drafting requires entity-specific human revision, balance and source traceability. |
| Role | Target level | Relevance | Evidence expectation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate Sustainability Reporting Practitioner | Practitioner | Required? | A case or work sample demonstrating independent performance, documented judgement and a reviewable professional output. |
| Sustainability Reporting Manager or Lead | Advanced Practitioner | Role-defining? | A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating method design, challenge and governance capability. |
| Sustainability Reporting Adviser or Consultant | Advanced Practitioner | Role-defining? | A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating method design, challenge and governance capability. |
| Sustainability Data, Systems and Controls Specialist | Foundation | Supporting? | A supervised or defined work sample showing correct application, traceability and recognition of escalation needs. |
| Assurance Readiness and Reporting Quality Specialist | Advanced Practitioner | Role-defining? | A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating method design, challenge and governance capability. |
| Investor, Capital Markets and Ratings Disclosure Specialist | Advanced Practitioner | Role-defining? | A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating method design, challenge and governance capability. |