How do you become sustainable, compliant, and competitive—at the same time? In the second panel discussion at The Future of Responsible Business, four hands-on experts shared what it takes to navigate that balancing act. Intire co-hosted the event, bringing together business leaders, Members of the European Parliament, and sustainability experts.

Different perspectives, same reality

The second panel at The Future of Responsible Business event brought together a scale-up founder, a multinational asset manager, a social due diligence specialist, and a sustainability strategist. Different perspectives, same reality: if we want real change, we need to stop seeing reporting as a goal—and start treating it as a tool for transformation.

The different perspectives led to a lively dialogue with each other and the participants. A wide range of topics were discussed, such as compliance versus impact, legislation versus value, the global landscape, the importance of the supply chain and the risks of over oversimplification.

Compliance vs. impact: a false trade-off

The panel opened with a clear message: yes, compliance matters—but not if it comes at the cost of real impact.

“We’ve calculated the carbon footprint of a peppercorn,” said Sofia Marrone, Lead Consultant at Intire. “It made me wonder whether we have lost focus on the things that can make a significant difference. Why not focus on the high-emitting sectors or products first?”

“The goal is action, not reporting,” said Gerard de Leede, CTO and co-founder at solar panel manufacturer Solarge. “We build our product in the Netherlands. We pay fair wages. Meanwhile, Chinese competitors can sell below cost—partly because of forced labor. That’s not a level playing field.”

Sofia added that recent policy shifts risk sending companies in the wrong direction. “We’re limiting the value chain just to make reporting simpler. But this means that we will be left with high-level analyses which cannot serve as actionable roadmaps anymore. We need to engage the supply chain – not avoid it.”

For Jeroen Nijhoff, Corporate Sustainability Officer at Robeco, the situation is complex. “We’re both a company that reports and an investor that uses sustainability data to make decisions. If reporting becomes fragmented or too high-level, it loses value. The information needs to be reliable, and sector-specific guidance is needed to ensure clarity and consistency.”

Don’t wait—start mapping your values

“A lot of companies adopt a wait-and-see approach to sustainability legislation currently under negotiation in the EU,” noted Social Due Diligence Expert Andreea Holwerda from VORA Consulting. “However, the risks will persist, and the legal obligations and responsibilities under applicable EU legislation and other jurisdictions worldwide frameworks will not diminish, especially around labour rights and child labour. Given the commitments companies have undertaken pursuant to the UNGPs and OECD Guidelines, undertakings must conduct comprehensive assessment of their operational context, identify the most human rights salient risks and establish their due diligence framework accordingly.”

Legislation alone isn’t the solution

The panel also addressed the risk of over-relying on regulation. “The CSRD and related legislation are important,” said Jeroen, “but at the company level, data alone doesn’t always tell you the full story. Context matters. Companies need the opportunity to provide this context, so their reporting becomes more meaningful.”

Andreea agreed: “If legislation is reduced to a mere compliance checklist, companies will implement measures that fail to address systemic issues and root causes, resulting in ineffective remediation and purely reactive actions. Undertakings must be given a clear purpose for their human rights’ due diligence process – analogous to training for a marathon. While implementation presents significant challenges, a strategic approach renders these obligations achievable and ensures meaningful impact on rights holders.”

Sofia urged policymakers to resist oversimplification. “This is a systemic shift, which requires a systemic solution. There are opportunities to make it easier which we should explore. Harmonized, and more in-depth guidance helps companies take the right steps—instead of getting lost in translation.”

Beyond Europe: a shifting global landscape

One clear takeaway: even if Europe pulls back, the rest of the world won’t stand still. “Other countries are raising tariffs on Chinese solar panels,” said Gerard. “It’s the only way to stop unfair competition. We need Europe to act just as fiercely.”

Jeroen added that the investment world is watching closely. “The CSRD won’t mean much unless it helps us understand where companies truly stand. We need depth, relevance, and comparability.”

Andreea wrapped up with a simple but powerful truth: “While there are no shortcuts to achieving meaningful compliance, undertakings can adopt strategic and efficient approaches. To effectively prevent human and environmental harm, companies must conduct comprehensive supply chain mapping and salient risk assessment. Reporting serves its intended purpose when it accurately reflects the reality within the company’s operations and value chain.”

The final word: don’t simplify the wrong things

Sofia closed the session with a clear message for companies and policymakers alike. “Instead of making things simpler, let’s focus on making the directives and regulations easier to navigate. There’s a big difference. If we simplify too much, the entire exercise is reduced to reporting only. But if we support companies with the right tools, structure and language, they’ll move forward and start achieving positive impact.”