Insights from the field: CSR reporting at HUK-COBURG

The Congress of Controllers is known for its high-caliber presentations and practical insights – which is exactly what Günther Zumsande, sustainability specialist at HUK-COBURG, offered in his presentation at Congress 2025, supported by his colleague Stefan Döbereiner in the area of carbon footprinting. As an active member of the Work Group Franken of the International Association of Controllers (ICV) and a committed driver in the field of green controlling, Zumsande brought not only specialist knowledge but also concrete experience from his own company.

The integration of sustainability into management, reporting and corporate processes has been an important topic for the ICV for years. The presentation on the first-time preparation of a CSR report at HUK-COBURG impressively demonstrated that this is not a purely theoretical exercise, but can be associated with numerous challenges. In this interview, Günther Zumsande shares his experiences – and provides valuable tips for all those who are also embarking on the road to sustainability reporting.

What were the biggest challenges in preparing the CSR report at HUK-COBURG for the first time?

The biggest challenge was that the sustainability team first had to find and position itself internally. As a cross-cutting issue, sustainability affects all specialist areas of a company – coordination was correspondingly diverse and complex. In addition, external regulations were still in a state of flux at the time of creation. Many things were unclear and the requirements were still in flux – a bit like sailing through dense fog, where the ship is still being built during the voyage. At the same time, a report had to be produced that would later be checked by auditors – which significantly increased the demand for traceability and documentation.
How did you proceed methodically with the double materiality analysis?

The dual materiality analysis was completely new territory for us. It requires us to analyze both the company’s impact on sustainability issues (inside-out) and the impact of external sustainability issues on the company (outside-in) along the entire value chain. It was particularly challenging to think beyond the traditional supply chain – a lot of information is not fully available there. In terms of methodology, we closely followed the ESRS standard. The analysis was carried out together with the specialist departments, which we involved intensively. This cooperation was essential, even if it involved considerable effort.

How did you organize the data collection and structuring?

After the materiality analysis, the next step was to identify the relevant key figures – another difficult step, as much is open to interpretation. The data itself was often not available or not available in the required granularity. In many cases, we had to rely on estimates that were agreed with the auditor. This was a particular challenge in the areas of buildings, emissions and energy consumption. The collaboration with the specialist departments was intensive and we became aware of how large the gaps in data availability still are in some areas.

How does the new external audit of the CSR report differ from previous voluntary audits?

The audit is much more in-depth than what we have seen so far. It’s not just about the end result, but also about the processes and their documentation. The audit is increasingly similar to financial reporting – here too, what is not documented does not exist. We have therefore made sure from the outset that processes are not only carried out, but also consistently described and recorded. Fortunately, we were able to draw on existing structures from the insurance world in the area of risk management and internal controls – a clear advantage.

What role did IT systems and tools play in this first report?

We had originally planned to use a tool that would integrate both text content and key figures and transfer them to the existing reporting system. Unfortunately, this could not be implemented at the time of the first report. We therefore had to work largely manually – with Excel and Word documents. As time-consuming as this was, it helped us to understand the processes and weak points very precisely. In future, however, we definitely want to upgrade our IT systems in order to be able to report more efficiently and consistently.

What lessons have you learned for the future?

A central point is the simplification of the materiality analysis and data collection – especially for the specialist departments. The more intuitive and structured the process is, the better the quality will be. The accuracy of the data should also be improved so that we are less reliant on estimates. Sustainability reporting is not a one-off project, but a continuous improvement process. We have deliberately left open potential for optimization, which we are now tackling systematically.

What advice would you give to other companies that are now starting their first CSR reporting?

The most important piece of advice: start early enough! The requirements should not be underestimated and internal communication is crucial. Sustainability is not a topic that can be dealt with in a separate department – it affects the entire company. The report can only succeed if everyone involved understands why the topic is important and what specifically needs to be done. It’s about more than just reporting: it’s about rethinking the entire company. Communication, collaboration and clarity about goals and data are crucial – this cannot be “worked through” in the short term.

Thank you very much for the interview.