Climate Week kicking off in NYC with over 500 individual events spread across the city is emblematic of a problem facing sustainability/ESG practitioners on a daily basis – too much information and much of what is available conflicts with itself. I’ve blogged on this matter in the past (here, here and here) and it remains not only relevant but even more critical as AI is now a major force in the sustainability world and misinformation on every topic spreads through social media.
So who is an ESG professional to believe? Unlike just a few years ago, there are innumerable credible sources of good information so we face an embarrassment of riches of sorts. However, just because the source is credible doesn’t mean it works for your company/purposes.
- Academic studies can be fascinating but methodologies or results can’t always be implemented in reality. Likewise with highly technical information sources and experimental studies. It is best not to get too excited about bringing these to a corporate setting.
- In days gone by, C-suites held major management consulting firms in high regard, but that may be on the decline as evidenced by staff cutbacks over recent years at many of the top-notch firms. These firms are prolific in publishing reports, studies and surveys about ESG/sustainability topics and trends (which again, sometimes conflict with each other). Even so, executives may have biases either for or against certain management consultancies – tainting their opinions about information from those firms.
- Law firms publish a multitude of client alerts and updates on ESG – focused on legal compliance and risk matters and may not be useful beyond those matters.
- IT/AI/tech companies similarly hold sway with executives at the moment, but it is reasonable to question the breadth of their ESG/sustainability expertise and therefore the credibility of information they produce.
- LinkedIn is full of self proclaimed experts and it can be difficult to determine those who truly are versus those who aren’t.
- Controversies in voluntary carbon markets (VCM) and offset providers became very public in the past 24 months, making news in general media and even late night talk shows. Executives, boards and other company leaders are likely to question use of/reliance on information about VCM and offsets.
So what do you do? First off, be aware you don’t have to read or know everything. It isn’t that you don’t have to – it is more like you just can’t. Focus on what is most meaningful and important for your company’s ESG situation. That could be legal risk management, financial accounting for climate risk or use of AI. If you don’t already know, do some research and create a Top 10 list then limit your reading/information consumption to what is on the list. You can always modify and expand that list as needed based on the next tip.
Second, find out what companies/sources your company leaders follow, as well as sources executives hold bias against. To state the obvious – it isn’t a great idea to present a business case, strategy or supporting data using a resource your leadership doesn’t find credible. Once you know your executives’ biases and preferences, use that to guide your own reading and research. To be clear, I am not suggesting putting blinders on to everything else – certainly keep a look out for new developments and trends, but perhaps consider those a lower priority given the constraints on your time and mental health.
Our members can find curated information about all our ESG/sustainability topics by subject area here.
If you aren’t already subscribed to our complimentary ESG blog, sign up here for daily updates delivered right to you.
