Bakgrund: Hållbarhetsrapporten har utvecklats i snabb takt under de senaste åren och börjar få en allt större plats i företagens rapportering. Hållbarhetsrapporten blev reglerad i svensk lag år 2017, men innehållet i rapporten är till stor del frivillig och flexibel. Detta har lett till att rapporten kan utformas på flera olika sätt, med hjälp av olika ramverk som skapats för att underlätta upprättandet. Även med hjälp av ramverk är hållbarhetsrapporten komplex och svår att upprätta. Företag kan ta hjälp av redovisningskonsulter, men även dessa ställs inför utmaningar vid upprättandet. Uppsatsen fördjupar sig i de utmaningar som redovisningskonsulterna ställs inför vid upprättandet och undersöker även vad som motiverar valet av ramverk (GRI/SASB/IIRC).  Syfte: Uppsatsen syftar till att få en förståelse för de utmaningar som redovisningskonsulter upplever vid upprättandet av hållbarhetsrapporter och vad som motiverar valet av ramverk (GRI/SASB/IIRC).  Metod: Uppsatsen genomförs med hjälp av en kvalitativ fallstudie och utgår ifrån en deduktiv ansats. I uppsatsen används de två traditionella teorierna, intressentteorin och den institutionella teorin. Det empiriska materialet har samlats in via nio stycken semistrukturerade intervjuer. Intervjuerna gjordes med redovisningskonsulter från de fem största revisionsbyråerna i Sverige och analyserades sedan med hjälp av en tematisk analys.  Slutsats: Det går att konstatera att det är mycket som sker kring hållbarhetsrapportering för tillfället, vilket är utmanande för redovisningskonsulterna. Det som framkommit genom uppsatsen är att tre av fyra utmaningar som tidigare forskning identifierat fortfarande är aktuella för redovisningskonsulter. Dessa är utbildning, kunskap och lagar. Utöver detta har uppsatsen bidragit med två nya utmaningar för redovisningskonsulter, kunskap hos företag och ambitionsnivå hos kunder. Dessutom har det konstaterats att valet av ramverk påverkas av den imiterande isomorfismen. Uppsatsen har inte kunnat bestyrka att intressenter påverkar redovisningskonsulter varken när det gäller upprättandet av hållbarhetsrapporterna eller valet av ramverk. / Background: The sustainability report has developed rapidly in recent years and has taken a more important place in companies' reporting. The sustainability report was regulated in Swedish law in 2017, but the content is largely volentary and flexible. This has led to the report being designed in different ways, with the help of different frameworks that have been created to support the preparation of the report. Even with the help of the frameworks the sustainability report is still complex and difficult to prepare. Accountants can help companies to prepare the reports, but even the accountants are faced with challenges in preparation of the report. This essay gains an understanding of the challenges that accountants are faced with during the preparation of the report. It also explores what motivates the choice of framework (GRI/SASB/IIRC). Purpose: The purpose of the study is to gain an understanding of the challenges accountants experience in the preparation of sustainability reports and what motivates the choice of framework (GRI/SASB/IIRC). Method: The essay is carried out with the help of a qualitative case study and is based on a deductive approach. The two traditional theories, stakeholder theory and institutional theory, are used in the essay. The empirical material has been collected through nine semi-structured interviews. The interviews were held with accountants who work at one of the five biggest accounting firms in Sweden. The material was analyzed through a thematic analysis.  Conclusion: It can be stated that there is a lot happening with sustainability reporting at the moment, which is a challenge for the accountants. The result from the essay shows that three out of four challenges identified in previous research are still current for accountants. These are education, knowledge and laws. In addition to this, the essay has contributed two new challenges for accountants, companies' knowledge and customers' level of ambition. Further,  it has been found that the choice of framework is influenced by the mimetic isomorphism. The essay has not been able to confirm that stakeholders affect the accountants either when it comes to the preparation of the sustainability reports or the choice of framework.

The present study examines how legitimacy is created in consultants’ translation of the Integrated Reporting (IR) framework in a Swedish context. The aim was to understand which logics from the sociology of worth (SOW) the consultants’ translation of the IR framework will build on in making it a legitimate practice in a Swedish context. The study employed three aspects presented by Patriotta et al. (2011), where actors provide justifications in order to attain legitimacy, to describe the translation process. Boltanski and Thévenot’s SOW was applied to discern what logics that were present and compromised upon in the translation process to make the IR framework a legitimate practice in a Swedish context.  The present study mainly found the logics of fame, industrial and market, but other logics was also found in the process of making a legitimate translation of the IR framework by the consultants. Thus resulting in a broad compromise of logics, generating potentially vague and ambiguous statements of sustainability. If integrated reporting is the future for corporate reporting, then these dominating logics in the translation of the IR framework might set the tone for the sustainability reporting that will be spread by consultants in a Swedish context.

The number of sustainability-related reporting frameworks has been increasing throughout the years, as a response to increasing awareness towards the sustainability-related issues from various stakeholders of companies. At the same time, major sustainability-related reporting frameworks publish more guides to support the business on its Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs) commitment. For the business, it is challenging to use these guides in harmony to obtain the highest benefit for achieving corporate sustainability targets. The thesis aims to provide a structural approach and a robust alignment methodology, which can be repeatedly utilized over time, on how to establish tailor-made alignment guidances for various corporations, by considering their current specific SDGs reporting challenges and stakeholder expectations by harmonizing Global Reporting Initiative’s and Integrated Reporting’s SDGs guides. The thesis conducts a set of research methods such as case study analysis of telecommunication sector companies, semi-structured interviews with sustainability professionals, content analysis of company reports, and secondary data analysis of various stakeholder engagement forums for the SDGs. The thesis concludes that it is possible to construct a structural alignment approach in six steps, which constitutes identifying the underlying reasons of alignment (Step 1), mapping the external and internal stakeholder views (Step 2), defining the specific SDGs challenges of the companies analyzed (Step 3), examining the segments of corporate sustainability according to the current SDGs challenges of the companies analyzed (Step 4), preparing alignment guidance by defining the contributions of the SDGs guides analyzed, over the challenges examined by the segments of corporate sustainability (Step 5), improving the SDGs commitment performance of the companies analyzed, by applying the tailor-made alignment guidance established for the specific needs (Step 6). Furthermore, the thesis finds out that the case study companies can use all the SDGs guides analyzed to varying degrees, yet, especially SDGs Disclosures and the Analysis of Goals and Targets SDGs guides can support the contemporary needs of case study companies, to address their sustainability strategy, inside-out assessment, and sustainability management accounting & control requirements. As underlying research limitations, the thesis focuses on a specified range of case study samples and reporting frameworks. The thesis adds value to the corporate sustainability literature by analyzing the relationship between the same sector companies and SDG guides of sustainability-related reporting frameworks over an alignment approach and methodology established by the thesis.

Background and Problem: Sustainability reporting is a growing interest in today’s organizations and it is essential to report on non-financial matters. Many of the existing frameworks have been criticized for being used only of symbolical reasons which is why the concept of integrated reporting and the <IR> framework have been developed. One of the cornerstones in the <IR> framework is human capital which is one of the most valuable assets in an organization. Traditionally, employee costs have only been treated as an expense and there have been limited disclosures in corporate reports. In the current business world it is instead seen as an investment in human resources. Since previous studies have shown an increase of human capital disclosures when corporate reports become integrated, integrated reporting might be the solution to this problem. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine if there are differences in human capital disclosures between integrated reports and separate annual and sustainability reports in companies listed at OMXS30. Delimitations: This study’s empirical examination is limited to include the companies listed at Stockholm OMX30. Only corporate reports issued for the year 2014 are treated. Methodology: For this study a self-constructed disclosure scoreboard with human capital- related items has been used to collect data from the companies’ corporate reports. Also additional information beyond the pre-determined items has been collected to extend the data collection. Empirical Results and Conclusion: The results show that human capital seems to be a subject that is relatively little reported about. The integrated reporting companies do not disclose more information compared to non-integrated reporting companies. However, the results show that integrated reporting companies seem to have a more future-oriented focus and that the disclosures are more dispersed throughout the reports. It can be concluded that company sector and size do not affect the amount or type of information.