Home

By Paul Eastwood, Managing Partner of Argon & Co As pressure builds around climate action and ESG performance, organisations are feeling the heat. Regulators, investors, customers, and employees are demanding more transparency, faster progress, and deeper commitments. And in a world increasingly flooded with ESG frameworks, standards, and compliance checklists, the instinctive response can be to launch a flurry of initiatives across carbon, diversity, packaging, and human rights. To launch long lists of actions to meet multiple compliance requirements, satisfy different stakeholder groups, follow perceived best practices… But trying to do everything at once rarely delivers the desired impact. This is especially the case for mid-sized organisations, which often lack the dedicated ESG teams or specialised systems to manage the growing volume of expectations. Instead of improved ESG outcomes, doing too much can often lead to fragmented efforts, limited return on investment, and internal fatigue. Teams become overburdened. Leadership loses visibility. The pace of progress slows. Accountability is diluted. And so, even if it may feel counterintuitive, there’s actually a growing case for doing less when it comes to ESG, in order to gain more. Because by narrowing focus to the ESG areas that matter most, organisations can align sustainability with business priorities and deliver outcomes that are clear, credible, and lasting. This is often both more manageable, and also more effective. So how exactly can organisations identify a smaller set of high-impact areas in which to direct ESG efforts that align with business relevance, operational capability, and stakeholder value?  What moves the needle, matters The trick is to remember that not all ESG initiatives are created equal. The Pareto Principle – the idea that 20 percent of efforts drive 80 percent of results – dictates that a handful of well-chosen actions can deliver the lion’s share of impact. This […]