Best practice in financial accounting is a two-person, “four-eyes” review. Sustainability teams should do the same.
But there is one area where human expertise will be key in producing accurate sustainability data: The monthly review and approval process.
Financial accounting works with the monthly cash transactions, and to avoid fraud, two separate people — four-eyes — are involved in the monthly close of the financial ledger. And in addition to fraud prevention, this practice increases data quality. However the data was prepared, if it is not right, there is a harsh glare of a spotlighted error.
And note that an outlier might not be an error. Perhaps expenses increased 30%, far more than expected, but the rise can be attributed to sharply higher fuel costs. Reviewers have this context at their fingertips — through direct knowledge or a bit of research — and can easily make a note about the underlying rationale for change. And then, with all entries reconciled (error identified and fixed, or notes entered), the reviewer can approve the data.
While the first reviewer is looking at a data report, the second reviewer looks at the data in context. This is often done in a reporting or planning software system. For example, do fuel expenses align with the budget forecast? Are materials expenses in line with revenues? The second reviewer knows that the first reviewer has chased down details and closed the reconciliations. The key value brought by the second reviewer is experience, context and a sense of whether the data is ready for immediate use.
As sustainability teams take on more business tasks, such as identifying energy savings, managing budgets for carbon reductions and participating in annual strategic planning, both finance and sustainability teams gain increased confidence in sustainability data from the structured monthly review. And as sustainability audit standards move towards reasonable assurance — which are very similar to financial audits — the four-eyes review meets those demanding standards, reducing audit time and expense.
GLYNT.AI’s experience is that this very human step of a four-eyes review saves time, reduces errors and increases data confidence. In a world of AI and automation, humans play a unique role to make sure it’s done right.
