Digitising a process people already trust

Victoria Snelling, LWG Director of Standards and Assurance, describes a partnership with CommonShare to digitise an established assessment process. It is an in-progress implementation account and a positive partner testimonial, not an independent product comparison or completed impact evaluation. LWG is described as a multi-stakeholder scheme formed around environmental harms in leather manufacture.

The original protocols consist of detailed questions in Word and Excel, with requirements implicit in those questions. Four separate protocols are hard to align, changing business activities outgrow fixed categories, and historical records cannot readily support structured analysis. The planned standards update therefore combines explicit published requirements, guidance, training, translation and an online assessment tool. Translation is intended to use AI with human verification. English-language requirements are identified as a participation barrier.

The account explicitly distinguishes complexity inherited accidentally from document history from complexity that preserves the quality of assessment. Previous digitisation attempts reportedly failed when providers could not accommodate the protocol. A flexible product is valued because it can adapt to the process while supporting common architecture. This complicates a generic call to simplify everything: some detail may be essential to credible assessment.

Trust is relational and institutional here: stakeholders trust expertise, familiar procedures and the organisation's history of keeping data promises. Facilities may withhold data if they fear leaks or misuse, especially under difficult market conditions. A technically secure platform supports but does not replace conduct that deserves trust. The speaker's support for CommonShare is a partnership assessment, not evidence that no alternative provider could work.

Environmental improvement claims and estimated production coverage are reported with a notable qualification: LWG cannot yet evidence competing market-share estimates from its data. The new data system is intended to support better analysis and substantiation; the sector's effects have not yet been demonstrated through it. The audience question clarifies that minor future changes should be self-managed, while major revisions may still involve the provider.