Instead of treating ESG as a subjective measure of corporate virtue, view it as a risk management framework. Its true value lies in identifying and quantifying material risks—like poor labor relations—that function as off-balance sheet liabilities, ultimately impacting a company's cash flows or discount rate.
Just as the 1929 stock market crash revealed the need for standardized profit reporting (GAAP), today's social and environmental crises necessitate standardized impact reporting. This creates the transparency required for investors, consumers, and employees to make informed decisions and for markets to function efficiently.
To counter political backlash against ESG, Mars' CEO reframes sustainability as a fundamental business imperative. For a food company reliant on agriculture, climate change directly threatens crop viability and affordability. This makes environmental action a matter of operational resilience and risk management, completely separate from political debate.
The 20th-century view of shareholder primacy is flawed. By focusing first on creating wins for all stakeholders—customers, employees, suppliers, and society—companies build a sustainable, beloved enterprise that paradoxically delivers superior returns to shareholders in the long run.
Go beyond analyzing the founding team by treating the entire employee base as a key asset. By measuring metrics like employee retention rates, hiring velocity, and geographical or role-based growth, investors can build a quantitative picture of a company's health and culture, providing a powerful comparative tool.
Leaders often conflate seeing a risk with understanding it. In 2020, officials saw COVID-19 but didn't understand its airborne spread. Conversely, society understands the risk of drunk driving but fails to see it most of the time. Truly managing risk requires addressing both visibility and comprehension.
Citing a Harvard Business School study of 1,800 companies, Sir Ronald Cohen reveals the staggering scale of negative externalities. A third of these firms (600) cause environmental damage equivalent to a quarter or more of their profits, while 250 create more damage than they make in profit, highlighting the financial materiality of impact.
The current movement towards impact-focused business is not just a trend but a fundamental economic succession. Just as the tech revolution reshaped global industries, the impact revolution is now establishing a new paradigm where companies are valued on their ability to create both profit and positive contributions to society and the planet.
Impact data isn't just a niche metric for investors. Sir Ronald Cohen reframes it as a basic human right. He argues that every employee, consumer, and investor has a right to transparent, standardized information about the good and harm a company creates, moving the conversation from finance to ethics.
Investment research suggests the significant performance signal in governance isn't achieving a perfect score, but rather avoiding companies in the worst decile. The key is to steer clear of clear red flags—like misaligned boards or poor capital allocation—as this is where underperformance is most clearly correlated.
To ensure accountability for societal impact, Mars directly links 40% of its CEO's compensation to non-financial metrics, including sustainability goals. This structure challenges the conventional, finance-only incentive models prevalent in public companies and hardwires long-term purpose into executive performance.