Cargando
Preparando la información solicitada…
Cargando
Preparando la información solicitada…
The data traceability audit of 200 executive reports from 40 organizations in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico found that 57% contain at least one data point whose source cannot be traced to a verifiable origin record. Eight forms of corporate disinformation were identified and classified: inflated data without source (present in 43% of reports), indicators with ambiguous definitions allowing favorable interpretation (38%), inherited metrics that no one questions or updates (34%), averages that conceal real dispersion (31%), results presented without period or reference context (27%), charts with manipulated scale (22%), comparisons with periods selected to show favorable trend (19%), and results attributed to unverified causes (16%). The gap between public communications and verifiable operations was measured in 25 organizations: in 68% of cases, at least one key indicator published in sustainability reports or annual reports does not correspond with internal operational evidence when audited in the field. The organizational truth audit model developed establishes 30 preventive controls to detect these disinformation forms before data reaches the board.
Central questions answered with verifiable data from the study.
57% of the 200 audited reports. The most frequent data without a verifiable source are customer satisfaction indicators and social impact data.
8 classified forms. Top three: inflated data without source (43%), ambiguously defined indicators (38%), unquestioned inherited metrics (34%).
In 68% of cases, at least one key published indicator does not correspond with internal operational evidence.
Steps completed, sources consulted, and evidence collected during the study.
Normative and theoretical framework: ISO 9001:2015 (7.5 — documented information); ISO 37301:2021 (compliance); COSO Internal Control Framework (Principle 13 — quality information); OECD guidelines; ISO 19011:2018 (evidence-based auditing).
Documents with the full results of this research, adaptable to each organization’s context.
Request the complete methodological package for research [INV-12]. Institutional use only.
Research that extends or contrasts the findings of this study.
Help circulate evidence-based governance.
If the question is institutional and has context, we can guide you on the next steps.