The decoupling of extra-financial materiality assessment practices : Study of cooperative and shareholder banks

Materiality analyses seek to identify the significant information that needs to be further explored in communications with stakeholders (Beske et al., 2020). Information is considered material if its omission or inaccuracy can affect the economic, social and environmental decisions of users (Edgley, 2014), the link is significant with strategy, risk and long-term value creation (Cerbone et Maroun, 2020 ; Font et al., 2016). Materiality analyses has become a requirement with the adoption of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD 2022/2464/EU). Hence, there should exist an alignment between the areas that are identified as areas where the reporting entity has impact and the content of the extra-financial disclosures. In what manner are the results of a materiality assessment and the entity's extra-financialdisclosures aligned ? To answer that question, we conduct a multiple case study, where we examine the extrafinancial disclosures and their practices within the framework of materiality analyses in a cooperative banking context, the « Banques Populaires » in France. We conduct a review ofmateriality practices through a panel of cooperative and shareholder banks. Our results highlight a typology of three different behaviors. « Decoupled » communication is observed when the companies declare that they are following the process but the evidence are not disclosed or remain laconic. « Discretionary » communication occurs when the banks have undertaken a materiality assessment process, but do not disclose in detail all the methodological aspects and/or do not implement all the steps of the analysis. Finally, « Proactive... but improvable » communication is observed when the banks present detailed methodologies in their reporting, but they remain an opacity testifying of a lack rigor and/or transparency on one or two aspects at most of the method adopted (selection of issues, panel, representativeness, etc.). We analyze our findings in the light of the conceptual framework of Neo-Institutional Theory.