Engaging and Supporting Reporting Entities

Learning Objectives link

By the end of this section, readers will be able to:

• Explain the role of reporting entities in the XBRL ecosystem and how their engagement contributes to regulatory compliance and data quality
• Recognise the key strategies for effectively engaging with reporting entities
• Identify types of resources that can be provided to support reporting entities
• Identify communication channels to maintain a flow of information between regulators and reporting entities
• Clarify the importance of feedback mechanisms
• Manage special situations and technical challenges to maintain compliance
• Foster trust with reporting entities to improve reporting practices

Introduction link

Reporting entities are essential to the success of the XBRL ecosystem, serving as the primary sources of the data regulators need for supervision and analysis. Their involvement is crucial for compliance and informed decision-making. As the landscape of reporting entities varies widely, from large corporations with extensive resources to smaller businesses with limited capabilities, it is vital to implement a comprehensive strategy for effective engagement.

Effective engagement is not limited to ensuring compliance. It also involves raising awareness, providing tailored resources, maintaining open communication, and offering timely support throughout the reporting process. These components are essential in creating a collaborative atmosphere where reporting entities feel empowered and motivated to fulfil their reporting obligations accurately and efficiently. By proactively addressing potential challenges, regulators can smooth the transition to XBRL-based reporting, enhancing data quality, consistency, and compliance.

The following sections outline key strategies to engage with and support reporting entities. They focus on raising awareness, delivering valuable resources, maintaining direct communication, implementing feedback mechanisms, and offering targeted support throughout the reporting process. These strategies aim to build trust and improve reporting practices, ultimately enhancing the efficiency of the XBRL reporting ecosystem.

Raise Awareness link

One of the first steps in engaging reporting entities is ensuring that they are aware of what XBRL is, why it matters, and how it affects their reporting obligations. Many entities, especially smaller ones or those with limited technical capacity, may view digital reporting as a burden unless they see its benefits clearly. For this reason, awareness efforts should begin early and be sustained throughout the reporting lifecycle. To raise early awareness, regulators should actively promote the information through existing communication channels. This could include organising introductory webinars, sending out guidance and newsletters written in simple language, working with various professional accounting organisations, and reaching out to industry groups through targeted roadshows.

Clear, accessible, and strategically timed communication helps create a shared understanding of the goals and mechanics of XBRL-based reporting. Regulators should present not only the technical requirements, but also the broader value of structured data, emphasising how digital reporting enhances data quality, reduces manual errors, and improves transparency for all stakeholders.

Introduce Entities to XBRL’s Benefits link

Many reporting entities are initially introduced to XBRL as a regulatory requirement. However, it is important to present XBRL not merely as a technical obligation, but as a transformative tool that delivers measurable benefits across the entire reporting ecosystem—for regulators, data users, and preparers alike.

To foster stronger engagement and better compliance, reporting entities should be helped to understand that XBRL is an open international standard designed to make business data machine-readable, consistent, and comparable. By replacing manual and unstructured data submissions, often prone to human error, with structured digital reports that can be validated and analysed automatically, XBRL empowers entities to streamline internal processes, improve data quality, and adopt more efficient reporting practices.

The following are direct benefits that preparers can experience when using XBRL. These should be actively highlighted to entities to raise awareness and encourage adoption.

• Improved data quality: Automated validation rules detect inconsistencies or omissions before submission, helping to reduce errors and rejections.

• Greater internal consistency: Because the same data elements are used across reports, organisations can ensure alignment between different filings and reporting periods.

• Stronger monitoring capabilities: High-quality digital data provides opportunities for more effective monitoring of company performance, and benchmarking against industry peers.

• Time and cost efficiency: Whether using basic tools or more advanced systems, XBRL helps reduce the effort involved in report preparation. Structured formats and validation rules guide preparers through the process, minimising the need for repetitive manual entry. Entities with more resources may automate parts of their reporting, while others can still benefit from standardised structures that reduce confusion and rework.

• Fewer back-and-forth interactions with regulators: Well-validated XBRL submissions reduce the need for clarifications, corrections, and follow-up requests.

• Better understanding of regulatory expectations: The taxonomy serves as a guide, explicitly describing what is expected, how it is structured, and how different elements are related.

Beyond easier and more efficient compliance, high-quality digital reporting processes also provides companies with significant opportunities to do more with their own data. This might include more effective monitoring of company performance over time as well as benchmarking against industry peers.

In addition to these operational advantages, XBRL adoption can offer broader benefits that improve how reporting entities, particularly smaller ones, are perceived and evaluated in the market. By reducing information asymmetry and facilitating data access, XBRL increases visibility and comparability, which can help entities gain the trust of investors, lenders, and potential partners. Structured, machine-readable data positions preparers as transparent and professionally managed, enhancing their reputation and opening doors to digital platforms that rely on standardised reporting, and ultimately to wider financing and procurement opportunities.

Ultimately, these broader benefits help level the playing field, allowing smaller entities to compete more effectively, strengthen their market presence, and access opportunities that might otherwise be out of reach.

Introduce the Relevant Taxonomies link

Once reporting entities understand XBRL’s value, they should be introduced to the relevant taxonomy or taxonomies. Taxonomies are the foundation of digital reporting, providing the standardised structure that defines what information must be reported and how.

Rather than presenting the taxonomy as a purely technical document, it should be introduced as a practical tool. When properly explained, a taxonomy serves as a reference map that guides preparers in fulfilling their reporting obligations correctly and consistently.

Entities should be informed about the following key characteristics of the taxonomy to help them understand its structure and apply it effectively:

• Scope and purpose: What kind of information does the taxonomy cover (e.g. financial, prudential, sustainability)? Who is required to use it?

• Entry points or reporting modules: How is the taxonomy structured (e.g. by sector, size, or report type)? Are there different modules or filing profiles?

• Frequency and deadlines: How often should reports be submitted using this taxonomy? Are there different deadlines for different modules?

• Specific concepts and disclosures: Highlight examples of core concepts (e.g. Total Assets, Net Profit) and any sector-specific disclosures.

• Language availability and guidance: In what languages is the taxonomy labelled and documented? Is there accompanying guidance or a preparer’s manual?

• Versioning and maintenance: How often is the taxonomy updated? Are there documented version histories or changelogs?

Compliance Rules link

Taxonomies often include embedded validation rules, such as calculation checks or consistency constraints, that help ensure submitted data is logically coherent and complete. These rules are not arbitrary; they reflect regulatory logic and are often derived from accounting principles, legal thresholds, or supervisory expectations. For example, a rule might require that “Total Assets” equal the sum of its components.

By identifying errors before submission, these built-in validation rules help preparers avoid non-compliance and reduce the need for time-consuming corrections after filing. They are also often incorporated into XBRL software and applied on an ongoing basis throughout report preparation, helping reporting entities avoid errors from the outset. Validation checks improve efficiency for both reporting entities and regulators, ensuring that the data received is more accurate and easier to analyse.

Violations of validation rules may trigger warnings or block submission altogether, depending on the severity of the issue. It is important for preparers to understand how different types of rules behave, so they can prioritise corrections and avoid unnecessary delays.

Validation rules are also subject to change. When a taxonomy is updated, the rules may be revised or expanded. Preparers should therefore be aware that taxonomies are dynamic, and where necessary ensure that their reporting software is using the most recent version of the taxonomy to ensure compliance with current requirements.

These aspects of validation rules, including their purpose, types, implications for compliance, and potential updates, should be clearly communicated to preparers to ensure they can use the taxonomy effectively and avoid common pitfalls.

How to Generate XBRL Reports link

Generating an XBRL report may seem unfamiliar at first, but the process becomes manageable with clear guidance and the right tools. The goal is to translate business or regulatory information into a structured digital format that aligns with the taxonomy provided by the regulator.

While technical details are handled by reporting tools or systems, preparers should understand the high-level steps involved:

• Review the reporting requirements: Understand what information must be reported and the applicable reporting period.

• Use available tools or templates: Whether through commercial software or templates provided by the regulator, most tools are designed to guide users through the creation of XBRL reports without needing deep technical knowledge.

• Enter or map the data: The relevant information—such as figures, dates, or classifications—is entered or linked to predefined categories based on the taxonomy.

• Validate the report: Before submission, the report is checked automatically to ensure completeness and compliance with expected formats and logic rules. Most tools flag any issues and suggest corrections.

• Prepare for submission: Once validated, the file is ready to be submitted through the regulator’s designated platform, accompanied by any additional information the process requires.

Throughout this process, preparers are not expected to build reports from scratch. Instead, their role is to ensure that the information is accurate, complete, and aligned with the reporting guidance. With adequate support, generating XBRL reports can become a routine, a routine, straightforward task.

While preparers focus on the quality of the information they provide, regulators are responsible for creating a favourable environment for XBRL adoption. This includes supporting the availability of tools, either directly or through ecosystem development, and ensuring that the process is feasible for all types of entities, regardless of their size or technical capacity.

Read more about helping small reporting entities in this section.

Read more about developing a software provider ecosystem in this section.

Common Errors and Their Prevention link

Mistakes can happen during the preparation of any report, especially when transitioning to a new format. However, most XBRL errors are easy to prevent once preparers are aware of what to look out for and how to use the available tools effectively.

Rather than treating errors as technical failures, they should be seen as opportunities to strengthen internal reporting processes and ensure greater alignment with regulatory expectations.

Some of the most frequent issues include:

• Missing or incomplete data: Sometimes required information is accidentally omitted or left blank. This often happens when required fields are overlooked or misunderstood. A careful review before submission helps catch these omissions.

• Incorrect reporting periods or entity details: A report might mistakenly refer to the wrong period, or fail to clearly identify the reporting entity. Reviewing this information early can prevent delays.

• Using an outdated taxonomy version: Submitting a report that refers to a previous version of the taxonomy may cause incompatibility. It is important to always check that the correct version is selected when generating the report.

• Validation warnings ignored or misunderstood: Understanding what warnings and error messages mean, and when they must be corrected, is essential.

Publishing a user-friendly guide that explains common messages, their meaning, and suggested actions can help preparers navigate validations with greater confidence. Whenever possible, tools should display messages in plain language and link them to relevant documentation. Still, even with preparation and tools, mistakes can occur, especially during early adoption. To support continuous improvement, regulators should actively monitor submissions, collect anonymised error statistics, and regularly update their guidance materials. Highlighting new or frequent issues through bulletins, FAQs, or training sessions helps prevent recurrence and strengthens overall reporting quality.

By treating mistakes as learning opportunities and providing practical, well-targeted support, regulators can foster a constructive environment in which both new and experienced preparers feel empowered to improve over time.

Provide Supporting Resources link

Once entities are aware of their reporting obligations and the role of XBRL, their ability to comply effectively depends on the quality and accessibility of the resources available. Providing the right materials at the right time both flattens the learning curve for preparers and helps build trust and confidence in the process.

In addition to supporting the ‘how’, materials should briefly reinforce why the information is being requested and how it connects to broader regulatory goals. This helps preparers appreciate the purpose of structured reporting and encourages higher engagement.

Support resources should be organised and presented in a way that matches the needs and experience levels of different preparers, whether new to digital reporting or already familiar with the basics.

Taxonomy Guides link

To use a taxonomy effectively, preparers need clear documentation that translates technical elements into practical instructions. Useful guides include:

• Preparer’s guide: A document written for non-technical users that explains how to read and apply the taxonomy in real reporting scenarios. It usually includes filing instructions, key concepts, and common questions.

• Taxonomy architecture overview: A more technical document that outlines the taxonomy’s structure, including its modules, hierarchies, and how different entry points relate to reporting scopes.

• Sample XBRL reports: Well-formed examples of completed reports (in actual XBRL format or rendered versions), showing how typical facts are reported and how validations apply.

Tutorial Videos link

Short video tutorials are one of the most effective tools for building engagement, especially for visual learners or first-time users. Videos can demonstrate:

• How to explore the taxonomy when preparing reports: Guidance on how to identify the relevant concepts, navigate the taxonomy structure, understand embedded validation rules, and recognise common reporting pitfalls.

• How to navigate the regulator’s submission platform: Walkthrough of steps such as uploading a report, reviewing validation messages, making corrections, and confirming successful filing.

These videos should be concise, focused, and available on-demand from a central resource hub.

Exceptional Reporting Scenarios link

Not all reporting entities will follow a standard path every time. Occasionally, situations require specific instructions to ensure that reporting obligations can still be met appropriately. These scenarios also present valuable opportunities to build trust and engagement, especially when entities feel supported in non-routine circumstances.

The following are examples of situations that may arise and could be useful to consider when designing support materials. These may not apply in every jurisdiction or taxonomy, and they do not represent an exhaustive list. Regulators are encouraged to identify any exceptional scenarios relevant to their environment and address them proactively as part of their engagement strategy.

• Filing corrections after submission or reporting beyond the established deadline
• Submitting zero-activity or dormant reports when no operations were conducted during the reporting period
• Encountering technical issues during submission (e.g. system downtime or file corruption)
• Transitioning from one taxonomy version to another during a live cycle

Clearly documenting how to address these cases, either in dedicated guidance or through FAQs (see below), can reduce uncertainty, improve timely resolution, and demonstrate a responsive and supportive regulatory environment.

Communication Channels link

Open and responsive communication is essential for building trust with reporting entities. It reinforces the idea that the regulator is not simply enforcing rules but actively supporting compliance and collaboration. Establishing permanent and accessible communication channels also reduces uncertainty and prevents small issues from escalating into systemic problems.

Handling Preparer Enquiries link

Reporting entities should have clear, reliable pathways to submit questions, receive assistance, and share feedback. These mechanisms should be visible, easy to use, and consistently monitored. Common channels include:

• Centralised support email accounts: Managed by dedicated teams to receive and respond to queries.
• Phone support lines: Available during working hours for urgent or complex cases.
• Specialised online chats or ticketing systems: Offering faster response times and easier tracking of previous conversations.
• Surveys and feedback forms: Periodically used to gather insights into user experience and areas for improvement.

Providing estimated response times and publishing a basic protocol for how enquiries are handled can increase confidence in the system.

Proactive Regulator Communications link

Communication should not be limited to responding to queries. Regulators should also push timely, targeted information to reporting entities to prevent confusion and reinforce key milestones. Topics may include:

• Upcoming reporting deadlines and filing windows.
• Clarifications to or changes in reporting requirements.
• Announcements about training sessions, webinars, or system updates.
• Planned system maintenance or temporary service interruptions.
• Individual status notifications for submitted reports (e.g. accepted, rejected, pending review).

Ideally, messages should be sent through multiple channels, such as email, platform alerts, and newsletters, to ensure reach and visibility.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) link

Well-designed FAQs are one of the most effective and scalable ways to support reporting entities. They empower users to resolve doubts independently, reinforce consistency in how information is interpreted, and reduce the volume of support requests that require direct attention.

FAQs should not be treated as static documents. Instead, they must evolve continuously based on recurring questions received through helpdesks, training sessions, and direct feedback from preparers.

To maximise their usefulness:

• Organise questions thematically: For example, group them under categories such as Getting Started, Understanding the Taxonomy, Using the Reporting System, Validations, Submission Status, and Corrections.

• Keep answers clear and concise: Use plain language and avoid unnecessary technical detail unless the topic specifically requires it.

• Enrich with visuals or links: When helpful, include screenshots, short videos, or links to relevant guides and system interfaces.

• Make them searchable: FAQs should be easy to navigate, ideally through a web-based interface with filters or keyword search.

Common Topics to Include: link

• Conceptual questions:

  • “What is a taxonomy?”,
  • “Do I need to report if there is no activity during the period?”

• Procedural questions:

  • “How do I confirm that my report was received?”,
  • “Can I update a report after submission?”

• Technical questions:

  • “What does this validation error mean?”,
  • “How do I select the correct taxonomy version?”

A FAQs section that is regularly updated and tailored to the preparer’s experience helps solve citical problems. More broadly, it builds confidence and supports a smoother reporting experience for all involved.

Incorporating Feedback from Data Users link

Engagement doesn’t stop at the preparer-regulator interface. Increasingly, users of XBRL data, such as analysts, supervisory teams, or even the general public, may identify issues or inconsistencies in published reports.

Regulators may establish internal processes to:

• Collect and analyse this external feedback (e.g. “This dashboard shows errors in Company A’s filing”).

• Assess whether the issue is due to preparer error, taxonomy misinterpretation, or system behaviour.

• Communicate back to the preparer when appropriate, providing guidance on how to improve future reports or, when necessary, revise past filings.

By acting as a connector between preparers and data users, the regulator helps ensure that the XBRL ecosystem functions both as a data collection tool and as a reliable source of public value.

Feedback and System Improvements link

One of the most effective ways to strengthen an XBRL reporting system is to listen to those who use it. Reporting entities interact directly with taxonomies, platforms, and validation rules, often under pressure to meet deadlines. Their experiences, questions, and suggestions can highlight opportunities for improvement that are not always visible from a supervisory perspective.

Creating mechanisms to collect and act on feedback not only improves technical quality, it sends a strong signal that the regulator values participation and is committed to making the system more usable and efficient for all parties.

Continuous Improvement Through Real-World Experience link

Each reporting cycle offers insights. By analysing submitted reports, common error patterns, and recurring support queries, regulators can:

• Detect concepts that are frequently misunderstood or misused
• Identify validation rules that may be too strict or not sufficiently explained
• Recognise documentation gaps or ambiguous instructions
• Understand practical obstacles faced by preparers with different levels of capacity

These observations should be documented and used as input for future updates of the taxonomy, reporting guidelines, or system behaviour.

Formal Feedback Channels link

Beyond passive observation, it is important to actively collect feedback from reporting entities and internal users of the system. This can be done through:

• Post-reporting surveys that ask preparers about their experience
• Feedback forms embedded in the reporting platform
• Focus groups or working sessions with selected preparers
• Channels for software vendors to report integration issues or suggestions

Engaging both large and small entities ensures that improvements reflect the diversity of users.

Refining Documentation and System Behaviour link

Feedback should lead to visible change. Improvements may include:

• Clarifying how to report certain concepts or use specific dimensions
• Adjusting validation rules to avoid unnecessary blocking errors
• Updating FAQs or guides with clearer examples
• Enhancing the user interface or workflows of the reporting system

Sharing a summary of the changes made in response to feedback builds trust and encourages further collaboration. It also reinforces the message that the reporting system is not static, but evolving based on real user needs.

Support for Reporting Entities at Key Stages link

Engagement is most effective when it is timed to meet the preparer’s needs. Rather than offering support only when problems arise, regulators can provide targeted assistance at specific moments throughout the reporting cycle. These key stages represent opportunities to clarify expectations, prevent errors, and reinforce trust in the process.

When Publishing New Taxonomies or Versions link

Introducing a new taxonomy, or updating an existing one, is a critical moment in the reporting cycle. Preparers need time and guidance to understand the changes and adjust their internal processes or tools accordingly.

Support at this stage may include:

• Clear release notes summarising what has changed and why
• Webinars or walkthroughs that explain updates in plain language
• Early access to documentation and sample files
• Communication of the effective date and whether the update is optional or mandatory

Before and During the Submission Period link

As the reporting window opens, preparers may need reminders and assistance. Support during this phase helps prevent last-minute errors and promotes timely compliance.

Recommended actions include:

• Sending deadline reminders and filing instructions
• Publishing checklists or quick-start guides
• Offering extended helpdesk hours closer to the deadline
• Monitoring system performance and communicating any technical issues in real time

After Submission Confirmation and Closure link

Once a report has been submitted, preparers value clarity about whether their obligations have been fulfilled and what comes next.

Support at this stage can include:

• Immediate confirmation of successful submission and validation status
• Notifications about acceptance, rejection, or follow-up needed
• Guidance on how to correct or resubmit if necessary
• Information about when the report becomes public (if applicable) or when further interaction may occur

Providing this type of closure reassures preparers that their responsibilities were correctly completed and reduces unnecessary queries after the deadline.

Summary link

Engaging and supporting reporting entities is a strategic investment in the long-term success of the XBRL ecosystem. When preparers understand the value of digital reporting, feel supported throughout the process, and are given clear, timely guidance, they are more likely to produce accurate, timely, and high-quality data.

A well-supported preparer community leads to more reliable reporting, smoother supervision, and greater public confidence in the information disclosed. Regulators that prioritise engagement are not only helping entities comply; they are building a culture of shared responsibility and continuous improvement.