Imagine a small supplier in Oman winning a large contract, buying materials and hiring staff. Payment then arrives much later than expected. The buyer retains cash for longer while the supplier borrows to keep working. This hypothetical example raises a practical question: whose costs have fallen, and whose have risen?
Business efficiency matters. Lower costs can support investment and make products more affordable. But assessing an improvement requires understanding how it was achieved. A reduction in the resources needed to produce something differs from an arrangement that transfers financing pressure to another business.
This question is timely for Oman. In August 2026, Muscat Stock Exchange executives described a shift in emphasis from whether companies submit environmental, social and governance disclosures to the quality of the information provided. That creates an opportunity to examine whether corporate reporting helps readers understand the consequences of business decisions for affected people.
Oman Investment Authority's Furas platform offers a useful starting point. It gives suppliers early visibility of planned tenders, publishing information three to six months before their official launch. Smaller businesses can use that information to prepare and develop their capacity to compete.
Accounting can help follow those opportunities through to their outcomes. A fuller account would show which small and medium enterprises win contracts, whether invoices are settled within agreed terms and whether participation supports continuing employment. This would connect access to tenders with evidence of the economic benefits that follow.
Existing reporting tools already address parts of this picture. GRI 201 includes information about the economic value a business generates and distributes. It helps readers see the amounts allocated to employee pay, operating costs, government and providers of capital, alongside community investment and the amount retained. These totals provide a starting point, although they cannot show every group's experience.
IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 provide another important perspective. S1 establishes general requirements for sustainability-related financial disclosures, while S2 adds requirements focused on climate-related risks and opportunities. Their purpose is to give investors, lenders and other creditors material information about sustainability matters that could reasonably be expected to affect a company's cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital.
Workers and suppliers can be central to that assessment. Skills shortages, poor employment practices or fragile supplier relationships may create risks to a company's prospects. However, the financial consequences for the company do not provide a complete account of the costs borne by everyone affected. Broader impact reporting helps address that question.
Climate reporting makes this especially timely. GRI 102: Climate Change 2025 becomes effective for reports published from 1 January 2027. It includes disclosures on a just transition, covering matters such as recruitment, terminations, redeployment, employee training and impacts on communities. For organisations applying the relevant disclosures, climate reporting therefore includes evidence about how the transition affects people.
Consider a manufacturer investing in cleaner machinery. New technical positions may emerge while some existing roles disappear. Reporting the number of people trained would be useful, but following their subsequent employment and earnings would show more. New jobs elsewhere in the company would not, by themselves, establish that displaced employees secured suitable work.
The same attention to outcomes should extend to smaller suppliers. Alongside local contract awards, large buyers could disclose payment performance and explain support provided where suppliers must invest to meet new requirements. The timing of payment influences the working capital a supplier needs to carry out a contract. Reporting expectations should also be proportionate, so that collecting information does not impose excessive costs on smaller enterprises.
Accountants can connect these measures to reliable records. Auditors and assurance practitioners can examine the evidence, check definitions and question omissions, including whether workforce figures exclude contractors. Workers and suppliers should help identify which effects deserve attention. Independent assurance can strengthen confidence in specified information, but it does not, by itself, establish that the distribution of gains and burdens is fair.
For Oman, the practical opportunity is to connect corporate performance more closely with outcomes for local businesses and workers. Boards reviewing a proposed efficiency gain could ask who will bear the adjustment costs and what support is budgeted. Subsequent reporting could show whether that support worked. A company reporting a saving should be able to explain what changed for the people and businesses that helped produce it.
Oman Observer is now on the WhatsApp channel. Click here
