01 Chapter

What we have gathered so far.

For Straumann Group

Streamlining sustainability reporting.
An initial framework.

A focused 3-day on-site workshop to map Straumann's CSRD reporting workflows, identify the highest-leverage automation opportunities across them, and build a working prototype of one on the third day. Designed jointly with Sustainability, Finance, Operations and IT/Data.

It lives at studio-8.dev/atelier/straumann, shared only with the people you choose to forward it to.

What follows are notes from our exchanges to date. These are observations rather than conclusions, and we welcome corrections on anything we may have misread.

Index · 6 chapters
What Straumann is doing

CSRD reporting at group scale.

Sustainability reporting under CSRD pulls together inputs from Sustainability, Finance, Operations, IT/Data and Communications, across a global organisation. The output is a regulated artefact, and the work behind it is fundamentally cross-functional.

Where the work tends to get heavy

Data collection, consolidation, validation.

Inputs sit across multiple internal systems and business units. Consolidation and reconciliation often remain manual. Validation depends on coordination between Sustainability and Finance. Narrative drafting and audit-readiness formatting absorb significant team effort.

Why "AI projects" often fall short

They start with the technology.

Many AI initiatives begin with experimentation rather than operational workflows. A practical operational lens, focused on how teams actually work and where the friction sits, usually surfaces more leverage than a pilot scoped in isolation from the people doing the job.

How we'd propose to start

A focused 3-day workshop. On-site.

Not a transformation programme. A cross-functional working session that maps current workflows, prioritises opportunities, and ends in a tangible prototype rather than slides. Designed for low overhead and concrete output.

02 Chapter

Operational, not theoretical.

Sustainability reporting is operational work before it is a technology question. The workshop is designed around four principles that keep that distinction in view.

Principle 01

Operational first.

Start with how the team actually reports today. Map the lifecycle end-to-end before evaluating any tool, model or vendor.

Principle 02

Cross-functional from day one.

Sustainability, Finance, Operations, IT/Data and Compliance in the same room. Reporting friction usually sits at the seams between teams, not inside any one of them.

Principle 03

Build, do not just discuss.

Day 3 produces a working prototype on a focused slice of the workflow. Tangibility tends to unlock better decisions about what to do next than a recommendation deck would.

Principle 04

Aligned with reporting governance.

Auditability, traceability and double-materiality scope are non-negotiable. Any automation has to strengthen those properties, not erode them.

In practice, this means starting from concrete reporting workflows, surfacing implementation constraints early, validating selected concepts through hands-on prototyping, and aligning stakeholders around operational priorities, ownership, feasibility and governance. The goal is a clear, implementable view of where AI can realistically reduce manual workload and reporting risk, before any broader investment is made.

03 Chapter

Three days. On-site. Cross-functional.

The workshop is designed for a focused group of around 8 to 15 core participants drawn from Sustainability, Finance, Operations, IT/Data and Compliance, with additional stakeholders joining specific sessions where relevant.

Day 01

Discover and diagnose.

Understanding the operational landscape before proposing anything.

  • Alignment on objectives, CSRD scope and shared definition of success.
  • Current process mapping: data collection, validation, consolidation, publishing.
  • Pain point deep dive in functional groups, ranked by time and risk.
  • Opportunity framing across simplification, automation and AI augmentation.

Output. Visual end-to-end process map, bottleneck inventory, structured opportunity backlog.

Day 02

Design and define.

Translating opportunities into concrete use cases and a prototype scope.

  • Future-state workflow design: clearer ownership, standardised data flows, less manual handling.
  • AI and automation ideation, focused on concrete reporting workflows.
  • Prioritisation across impact, feasibility and time to implement.
  • Definition of one prototype scope, success criteria and data plan for Day 3.

Output. Target operating model for reporting, prioritised roadmap, agreed prototype scope.

Day 03

Build the prototype.

A focused proof-of-concept sprint on the slice agreed the day before.

  • Collaborative build on one workflow slice, with selected stakeholders.
  • Iteration on workflow logic, assumptions and outputs throughout the day.
  • End-of-day walkthrough of the working prototype, with the wider group.
  • Observations on technical feasibility, governance and adoption considerations.

Output. A tangible working prototype, walkthrough documentation, recommended next-phase considerations.

04 Illustrative

A working sketch.

One example of what a Day-3 prototype could look like: a conversational copilot that traces CSRD data points back to their source systems, surfaces what is validated and what is not, and helps draft the narrative around the numbers.

The specific shape would be defined during the workshop itself.

This is a concept sketch. The actual prototype scope, design and behaviour would emerge from Day 1 and Day 2 of the workshop.

05 Chapter

Two scopes, depending on appetite.

The first is the workshop on its own, ending with the Day-3 prototype and post-workshop synthesis. The second extends that work into prototype refinement and an implementation roadmap, suitable when the intent is to move from exploration into an early operational pilot.

Option A

Workshop & PoC sprint.

CHF 25,000 – 35,000

excl. VAT · final figure depends on participant count and pre-work scope

Includes
  • Pre-workshop discovery and stakeholder alignment.
  • 3-day on-site workshop facilitation.
  • Operational workflow mapping and pain-point analysis.
  • Sustainability reporting deep-dive across Days 1 and 2.
  • Rapid prototype sprint on Day 3.
  • Post-workshop synthesis and deliverables documentation.

Suitable when the priority is clarity and direction, before committing to a broader investment.

Option B · Extended

Workshop, refinement & roadmap.

CHF 45,000 – 80,000

excl. VAT · final figure depends on refinement depth and roadmap scope

Includes everything in Option A, plus
  • Prototype refinement over several weeks after the workshop.
  • Stakeholder feedback iterations on the refined prototype.
  • Expanded technical validation against real reporting data.
  • Implementation roadmap and architecture recommendations.
  • Governance and adoption considerations.
  • Limited follow-up support through the early pilot phase.

Suitable when the workshop is intended as the start of an operational pilot, not the end of the conversation.

A note on pricing. The ranges above reflect typical scopes for engagements of this kind. The final figure would be agreed during pre-workshop alignment, once participant count, pre-work depth and prototype ambition are clear. Pricing is in CHF, excludes VAT, and excludes travel costs for the on-site days.

06 Chapter

The systems already in place.

The starting principle is interoperability. Anything explored or prototyped would interlink with the systems Straumann's reporting teams already use, rather than replacing or duplicating them.

SAP S/4HANA Sustainability platform Reporting tooling Microsoft 365 / Teams SharePoint Power BI Internal data warehouses Supplier portals Audit collaboration tools

The specific systems in scope, their owners and the integration approach would be mapped together during pre-workshop alignment, rather than assumed in advance. Nothing new to procure for the workshop itself.

07 Closing · Continuing the conversation

Continuing the conversation.

This document is an initial framework rather than a fixed scope. We would welcome the opportunity to refine it together, based on Straumann's priorities, reporting calendar, and the operational realities of the teams who would take part.

Step 01

Comments and reactions.

Reactions on the framing, the day-by-day shape and the two paths forward. Corrections on anything we may have misread about the current reporting workflow.

Step 02

A working alignment call.

A short call with the sponsor and one or two reporting leads to align on priorities, attendees and reporting calendar before locking dates.

Step 03

Pre-workshop discovery.

A lightweight discovery phase to tailor the workshop. Stakeholder interviews, current-state review, dataset and governance scoping. Then workshop dates confirmed.

Reply to Studio 8