ESG agenda and employer reputation
Where does the conversation about ESG in HR begin: why should candidates even look at this at all
A young specialist, choosing between two offers, rarely opens a company's ESG report — but they read reviews, look at the team composition, and listen to what acquaintances already working inside say. According to NAFI and 'Ingosstrakh' (2024), the order of priorities for young Russians is as follows: social responsibility is important to 93%, corporate governance — to 86%, and ecology — only to 80%. This breaks the stereotype that ESG in candidates' minds is primarily about ecology. People care about how the company treats its people, not how many trees it has planted.
A similar picture is visible from the business side as well: according to a KOD ESG survey, companies themselves consider the direction 'HR, personnel and labor protection' the most relevant (4,18 out of 5), ecology comes in second (4,07), and social programs — in third (4,00). That is, both employers and candidates agree on one thing: the HR agenda is the core of ESG, not an add-on to it.
How to distinguish a real ESG strategy from greenwashing
Greenwashing in HR is recognized not by the attractiveness of the presentation, but by the discrepancy between words and figures. Here are the signs that almost always expose a fake:
- ESG indicators exist in the report, but do not affect bonuses and the evaluation of top managers — the direction is formally present, but nobody is financially responsible for it;
- the report does not pass independent verification — according to the analysis of 560 ESG reports of Russian companies, only about 30% are confirmed by a third party, the rest are self-assessment without external verification;
- social projects exist separately from the company's mission and are presented to employees as a one-time PR campaign, not as part of their work;
- the job vacancies and the career website mention inclusivity and care, while reviews on hh.ru and Glassdoor speak of reworkings, toxic managers, and formal HR procedures;
- there is not a single figure regarding reduced turnover, eNPS growth, or retention — only qualitative formulations such as 'we care'.
The real strategy is revealed in reverse: it has a measurable link to business indicators. A case in point — AO «Uzbekneftegas»: over four years, social expenditures increased by 3,05 times, while staff turnover dropped from 14% to 7,3%. The correlation coefficient between these indicators approaches -0,95 — this is not a coincidence, but a direct dependency that can be calculated and presented to investors and candidates.
Why employee reviews hit the HR brand harder than criticism from competitors
A competitor can say anything about you — this is perceived as market competition, and candidates make a discount for bias. An ex-employee's review is perceived differently: they are a witness who has no obvious incentive to lie. When a career website says 'a culture of care and equality', but in the reviews section ten people write about burnout and lack of feedback from management — the gap is read by candidates as deception, not as an isolated case.
Zoomers read this gap especially quickly: for them, it's not the declaration about diversity in social networks that matters, but whether there are actually women and representatives of different groups in management positions, whether the feedback mechanism works, whether the company responds to negative reviews or just deletes them. One discrepancy between promise and practice reduces trust more than ten negative posts from external critics — because the source is considered insider.
Is the ESG agenda built into the management evaluation system, or is it still just decoration
A honest answer for the Russian market — for the most part, it's decoration. The KOD ESG figures confirm this directly:
| Indicator | Share of companies |
|---|---|
| Include ESG indicators in management effectiveness evaluation | 31% |
| Evaluate the financial efficiency of ESG projects | 26,7% |
| ESG reports with independent verification | ~30% |
While two-thirds of companies do not link ESG to managers' KPIs and do not consider project economics, the agenda remains a set of top-down initiatives that are easily cut at the first budget reduction. Exceptions show how this can be done differently: at Sber, the volunteer corps exceeds 40 thousand people, and environmental campaigns attract up to 80 thousand participants, with participation embedded in corporate culture rather than imposed by directive. At PSC, social projects are consciously integrated into the bank's mission — precisely to ensure that employee involvement does not appear like a checkbox obligation in reports.
Are candidates ready to actually choose ESG reputation over a higher salary?
Yes, but not always and not at any cost. According to a study by NAFI and 'Ingosstrakh', 49% of young Russians are ready to choose a socially responsible employer instead of a higher salary — that is almost half, and the figure is too large to ignore when planning an offer. But this choice works under specific conditions:
- when the salary difference is not critical for the candidate's basic needs — the choice in favor of reputation is made more readily at medium and senior salary levels, rather than when choosing between 'survive' and 'not survive';
- when the candidate has an alternative with similar conditions — ESG becomes a decisive factor precisely when comparing close offers in terms of pay;
- when reputation is confirmed not only by advertising, but by reviews from real employees and public data — an untrusted statement about social responsibility does not work as an argument.
Internal communication: foundation or top-level ornament
This is the foundation, and without it, external ESG communication is doomed to look unconvincing. The external employer brand is not built by the marketing department, but by what employees themselves tell about the company — in conversations with friends, in reviews on hh.ru, and in social media posts. If employees within the company treat ESG initiatives as an obligatory burden imposed from above without explanation, they will transmit this feeling outwardly regardless of what is written in the press release.
A practical checklist for an HR leader who wants to check whether the ESG agenda is embedded in management, rather than hanging in the air:
- Are ESG indicators linked to bonuses for at least some of the executives — not just the HR director;
- Is the economic effect of social programs at least approximately assessed, in terms of turnover dynamics or eNPS;
- Does the reporting undergo external verification or is it based only on self-assessment;
- Do the texts in job postings and the career page match the content of recent employee reviews;
- Do employees participate in social and ecological projects voluntarily, or is it a mandatory assignment with compulsory attendance.
If at least half of the items answer 'no', the company's ESG strategy currently exists for investors and reporting, but not for the people who daily decide whether to stay at the company or leave.
Where does the conversation about ESG in HR begin: why should candidates even look at this at all
A young specialist, choosing between two offers, rarely opens a company's ESG report — but they read reviews, look at the team composition, and listen to what acquaintances already working inside say. According to NAFI and 'Ingosstrakh' (2024), the order of priorities for young Russians is as follows: social responsibility is important to 93%, corporate governance — to 86%, and ecology — only to 80%. This breaks the stereotype that ESG in candidates' minds is primarily about ecology. People care about how the company treats its people, not how many trees it has planted.
A similar picture is visible from the business side as well: according to a KOD ESG survey, companies themselves consider the direction 'HR, personnel and labor protection' the most relevant (4,18 out of 5), ecology comes in second (4,07), and social programs — in third (4,00). That is, both employers and candidates agree on one thing: the HR agenda is the core of ESG, not an add-on to it.
How to distinguish a real ESG strategy from greenwashing
Greenwashing in HR is recognized not by the attractiveness of the presentation, but by the discrepancy between words and figures. Here are the signs that almost always expose a fake:
- ESG indicators exist in the report, but do not affect bonuses and the evaluation of top managers — the direction is formally present, but nobody is financially responsible for it;
- the report does not pass independent verification — according to the analysis of 560 ESG reports of Russian companies, only about 30% are confirmed by a third party, the rest are self-assessment without external verification;
- social projects exist separately from the company's mission and are presented to employees as a one-time PR campaign, not as part of their work;
- the job vacancies and the career website mention inclusivity and care, while reviews on hh.ru and Glassdoor speak of reworkings, toxic managers, and formal HR procedures;
- there is not a single figure regarding reduced turnover, eNPS growth, or retention — only qualitative formulations such as 'we care'.
The real strategy is revealed in reverse: it has a measurable link to business indicators. A case in point — AO «Uzbekneftegas»: over four years, social expenditures increased by 3,05 times, while staff turnover dropped from 14% to 7,3%. The correlation coefficient between these indicators approaches -0,95 — this is not a coincidence, but a direct dependency that can be calculated and presented to investors and candidates.
Why employee reviews hit the HR brand harder than criticism from competitors
A competitor can say anything about you — this is perceived as market competition, and candidates make a discount for bias. An ex-employee's review is perceived differently: they are a witness who has no obvious incentive to lie. When a career website says 'a culture of care and equality', but in the reviews section ten people write about burnout and lack of feedback from management — the gap is read by candidates as deception, not as an isolated case.
Zoomers read this gap especially quickly: for them, it's not the declaration about diversity in social networks that matters, but whether there are actually women and representatives of different groups in management positions, whether the feedback mechanism works, whether the company responds to negative reviews or just deletes them. One discrepancy between promise and practice reduces trust more than ten negative posts from external critics — because the source is considered insider.
Is the ESG agenda built into the management evaluation system, or is it still just decoration
A honest answer for the Russian market — for the most part, it's decoration. The KOD ESG figures confirm this directly:
| Indicator | Share of companies |
|---|---|
| Include ESG indicators in management effectiveness evaluation | 31% |
| Evaluate the financial efficiency of ESG projects | 26,7% |
| ESG reports with independent verification | ~30% |
While two-thirds of companies do not link ESG to managers' KPIs and do not consider project economics, the agenda remains a set of top-down initiatives that are easily cut at the first budget reduction. Exceptions show how this can be done differently: at Sber, the volunteer corps exceeds 40 thousand people, and environmental campaigns attract up to 80 thousand participants, with participation embedded in corporate culture rather than imposed by directive. At PSC, social projects are consciously integrated into the bank's mission — precisely to ensure that employee involvement does not appear like a checkbox obligation in reports.
Are candidates ready to actually choose ESG reputation over a higher salary?
Yes, but not always and not at any cost. According to a study by NAFI and 'Ingosstrakh', 49% of young Russians are ready to choose a socially responsible employer instead of a higher salary — that is almost half, and the figure is too large to ignore when planning an offer. But this choice works under specific conditions:
- when the salary difference is not critical for the candidate's basic needs — the choice in favor of reputation is made more readily at medium and senior salary levels, rather than when choosing between 'survive' and 'not survive';
- when the candidate has an alternative with similar conditions — ESG becomes a decisive factor precisely when comparing close offers in terms of pay;
- when reputation is confirmed not only by advertising, but by reviews from real employees and public data — an untrusted statement about social responsibility does not work as an argument.
Internal communication: foundation or top-level ornament
This is the foundation, and without it, external ESG communication is doomed to look unconvincing. The external employer brand is not built by the marketing department, but by what employees themselves tell about the company — in conversations with friends, in reviews on hh.ru, and in social media posts. If employees within the company treat ESG initiatives as an obligatory burden imposed from above without explanation, they will transmit this feeling outwardly regardless of what is written in the press release.
A practical checklist for an HR leader who wants to check whether the ESG agenda is embedded in management, rather than hanging in the air:
- Are ESG indicators linked to bonuses for at least some of the executives — not just the HR director;
- Is the economic effect of social programs at least approximately assessed, in terms of turnover dynamics or eNPS;
- Does the reporting undergo external verification or is it based only on self-assessment;
- Do the texts in job postings and the career page match the content of recent employee reviews;
- Do employees participate in social and ecological projects voluntarily, or is it a mandatory assignment with compulsory attendance.
If at least half of the items answer 'no', the company's ESG strategy currently exists for investors and reporting, but not for the people who daily decide whether to stay at the company or leave.
Recent articles
MegaFon, BMW, VTB and more 240+ companies. See how it looks in the showcase reel:
Our branding agency is approached to order:
Branding agency services
