As Global Head of Research & Leadership Advisory at JRG Partners, I spend much of my time on exactly this question, and the conventional wisdom around it is only half right. ESG has become a politicized acronym that obscures a simpler, durable truth about leadership. Strip away the label and the substance remains valuable. Hiring leaders who build durable, well-governed companies that consider their broader impact is sound business, whatever you call it, and the substance behind the acronym matters more than the contested term.
Key Takeaways
- ESG has become a politicized acronym that obscures its underlying substance.
- The substance, durable, well-governed, responsibly-run companies, remains valuable.
- Hiring leaders who build durable companies is sound business, whatever the label.
- These leaders consider long-term sustainability, governance, and broader impact.
- Focusing on the substance, not the contested acronym, is what matters.
The Acronym Obscures the Substance
ESG, environmental, social, and governance, has become a politically charged acronym, attracting both fervent advocacy and fervent opposition, and the controversy over the label obscures a simpler underlying substance. Stripped of the acronym and its politics, the substance is about building durable, well-governed companies that consider their long-term sustainability and broader impact, which is simply sound business and leadership. Focusing on this substance, rather than the contested acronym, cuts through the politicization to what actually matters for building lasting companies.
What the Substance Actually Is
Behind the acronym is a set of sound leadership qualities: building companies for the long term rather than short-term extraction, governing well, managing the risks and relationships that affect durability, and considering the company’s broader impact on the stakeholders and environment it depends on. These are not ideological positions but practical elements of building a company that endures. Leaders who embody them build more durable, resilient companies, whatever one calls the underlying orientation. The substance is durability and sound stewardship, not a political program.
Hiring for Durability
Hiring leaders who build durable, well-governed, responsibly-run companies is sound business regardless of the label. These leaders take a long-term view, govern with integrity, manage the risks and relationships that affect the company’s endurance, and consider the broader impact that increasingly affects reputation, talent, customers, and resilience. Assessing candidates for this orientation, whether one calls it ESG, sustainability, stewardship, or simply good long-term leadership, identifies leaders who build companies that last. The hiring value is in the substance, not the terminology.
Beyond the Political Frame
Framing this hiring choice around the politicized acronym invites unproductive controversy; framing it around the substance, durable, well-governed companies, keeps the focus on business value. Whatever one’s view of the ESG label and the debates around it, the underlying orientation toward building lasting, well-governed, responsibly-run companies is broadly recognized as sound. Leaders and boards can pursue the substance, hiring for durability and sound stewardship, without adopting or rejecting a contested acronym, focusing on the business value rather than the political frame.
The Enduring Value of the Substance
The acronym may rise and fall with political fashion, but the substance, building durable, well-governed companies that consider their broader impact, is enduringly valuable, because it is about building companies that last. Leaders who embody this orientation build more resilient, better-governed, longer-lasting companies, which is what most owners and boards ultimately want. Focusing on this enduring substance, and hiring leaders who deliver it, is sound business that outlasts the controversy over the label, which is why the substance matters more than the acronym.
What This Looks Like in Practice
In practice, hiring for the substance behind ESG means assessing candidates for whether they build durable, well-governed, responsibly-run companies: whether they take a long-term view, govern with integrity, manage the risks and relationships that affect endurance, and consider the broader impact that affects reputation, talent, and resilience. The board and company focus on this substance, durability and sound stewardship, rather than on adopting or rejecting a contested acronym, identifying leaders who build companies that last, which is sound business whatever one calls it.
The Mistake Employers Keep Making
The mistake is letting the politicized ESG acronym, and the controversy around it, obscure the sound underlying substance, or framing the hiring choice around the contested label in a way that invites unproductive controversy rather than focusing on business value. The fix is to focus on the substance, hiring leaders who build durable, well-governed, responsibly-run companies, whatever one calls it, keeping the focus on the enduring business value rather than the political frame.
The Bottom Line
Behind the politicized ESG acronym is a durable truth, that hiring leaders who build well-governed, responsibly-run companies considering their broader impact is sound business, and focusing on that substance, durability and stewardship, rather than on the contested label, is what actually matters for building companies that last. The difference between employers who get this right and those who don’t is rarely resources; it is discipline, clarity, and the willingness to act on what they already know.
Related Reading
For employers going deeper, see Hiring Humble Leaders, Exit-Ready Leadership, Governance for Growth.
Frequently Asked Questions
- Q: What does ‘ESG without the acronym’ mean?
- A: Focusing on the sound substance behind ESG, building durable, well-governed, responsibly-run companies, rather than on the politicized acronym itself.
- Q: What is the substance behind ESG?
- A: Building companies for the long term, governing well, managing the risks and relationships affecting durability, and considering broader impact, sound leadership, not a political program.
- Q: Is hiring for this substance sound business?
- A: Yes; leaders who build durable, well-governed, responsibly-run companies build more resilient, longer-lasting companies, which is what most owners and boards want.
- Q: Why focus on substance rather than the acronym?
- A: Because the acronym is politically charged and controversial, while the underlying orientation toward durability and sound stewardship is broadly recognized as sound business.
- Q: How do you hire for this?
- A: By assessing whether candidates take a long-term view, govern with integrity, and consider the broader impact that affects a company’s endurance, whatever one calls it.
![](https://www.jrgpartners.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/tanya-gallardo.jpeg")
Tanya Gallardo
Managing Director, Executive Search & AI Talent Strategy
Tanya Gallardo is the Managing Director of Executive Search & AI Talent Strategy at JRG Partners, leading C-suite and Board engagements across key growth sectors including Technology, Financial Services, and Manufacturing.
With over 18 years of experience specializing in disruptive technology leadership, Tanya is recognized as a leading authority on talent architecture for future-focused executive roles, such as the Chief AI Officer (CAIO) and Chief Digital Officer (CDO). Her expertise lies in accurately assessing the cultural fit and technical depth required to ensure a high return on investment (ROI) for critical leadership appointments.
Prior to her role at JRG Partners, Tanya held senior roles directing global talent acquisition strategies at a major publicly-traded technology firm, advising on organizational design and succession planning for emerging executive functions. She is a recognized speaker and contributor to industry events, sharing data-driven insights on executive compensation, leadership development, and the measurable business impact of C-suite talent.
