From Pollution Control to Corporate Philosophy
Traditionally, we've approached sustainability as a skill. We've invested in building frameworks, teaching metrics, and issuing certifications, all in the belief that with enough technical knowledge, we can navigate our way out of our global predicament. But what if we've been looking at it all wrong? What if sustainability is not primarily a skill to be learned, but an attitude to be cultivated? What if it's an intrinsic way of seeing risk, opportunity, and responsibility, without which all the technical skills in the world are merely tools for more sophisticated greenwashing?
Yogendra Saxena's life’s work, spanning thirty-five years across the entire ecosystem of sustainability, is not just a history of the environmental movement in India but a robust data set. His career, spanning policymaking and academia to heavy industry and C-suite leadership, has shaped a profound and challenging thesis: all effective, lasting, and sustainable action stems not from what a leader knows, but from how a leader thinks. His journey provides a compelling and logical deduction that attitude is the necessary precondition for any skill to have meaning. It is the operating system upon which all successful programs are run.
The Genesis of an Attitude
To understand the primacy of attitude over skill, one must look at the evidence. The most powerful exhibit is Yogendra’s early work in the 1990s, helping to set up greenfield projects for Ambuja Cement. At a time when sustainability was, in his words, viewed as something "very narrow and specific as pollution control," his approach was already holistic. He was not merely following a rulebook since a comprehensive one did not yet exist. Instead, he was operating from a foundational attitude. “I was conscious of its impacts on the local communities as well as biodiversity,” he stated, “and was determined to do things the right way.”
This determination led him to pioneer the use of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) studies for these projects. This was, he notes, a "relatively new concept for corporates at that time." The logical deduction is simple: if the skill was not yet mainstream, his actions could not have been driven by a learned corporate competence. They were driven by a pre-existing attitude of responsibility.
Yogendra's implementation of circular economy principles decades before the term became appealing is a testament to his pioneering spirit. He initiated the use of waste fly ash from thermal power plants as a key input in cement manufacturing. "These circular principles were not understood at the time but are talked about now," he says. This is not the action of a man following a trend. It is the action of a pioneer whose innate attitude of seeing waste as a resource allowed him to innovate far ahead of the established skillset of his era.
A Four-Sided Perspective
An attitude, like any muscle, is strengthened through use and exposure to resistance. Yogendra’s career provided the perfect apparatus for developing a uniquely resilient and empathetic worldview. He has seen the complex system of sustainability from all "four sides of the table."
As a regulator with the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), he understood the challenges of enforcement and compliance. As an international advisor with the UNDP in Jamaica, he understood the global policy perspective. As a corporate leader at Tata and Ambuja, he understood the operational and financial realities of the industry. Through his extensive community engagement, he gained a deeper understanding of the concerns of the people most affected by industrial activity.
This multi-faceted experience did not just give him four different sets of skills. It forged a singular attitude: one of systemic empathy. It gave him the ability to anticipate the interests and concerns of every stakeholder in a negotiation, not as an academic exercise, but as a lived reality. This, he explained, "proved to be pivotal in efforts to bring these diverse groups together and formulate strategies that prioritized and addressed their interests and concerns." An attitude of holistic understanding, driven by empathy, is a prerequisite for creating a strategy that is durable enough to survive contact with the real world.
"Sustainability is not a skill, but an attitude."
Attitude as a Corporate Operating System
The ultimate test of his philosophy came during his tenure as Group Chief Sustainability Officer at Tata Power. The challenge in such a vast and complex organization, he explained, was not a lack of knowledge or resources. The difficulty was not in the "what" but in the "how." "Embedding sustainability was not challenging," he clarified, "but ensuring the integration of sustainable practices across the Tata Group from governance to decision-making was a challenge."
This is a critical distinction. He was not trying to teach a new skill; he was trying to install a new attitude across an entire corporate culture. His method was not to issue edicts or create more frameworks. It was to engage the "entire executive management and foster a sense of responsibility." This is the core of his thesis in action. He knows that sustainability concepts only become practical actions when the leaders of a company adopt the attitude of personal and collective responsibility. Without that attitudinal shift at the highest levels of governance, any sustainability program is doomed to be a siloed, ineffective department. The attitude of the leadership is the operating system for the entire company, and it's your responsibility to ensure it's in place.
The Attitude of a Mature Report
Nowhere is the difference between skill and attitude more visible than in corporate sustainability reporting. The world is awash in glossy reports, a product of a highly developed skillset in data collection and graphic design. Yet, Yogendra offers a sharp critique of the process. "Many corporations work backward," he says. "They want to report and spend a lot of time thinking about what to put into the report. This leads to greenwashing."
This "working backward" is the hallmark of a skill-based, compliance-driven mindset. The goal is to produce the artifact, the report, that satisfies the rules. However, a mature organization, one operating with a genuine attitude of accountability, moves forward. For them, the report is not the goal. For them, it is a consequence of their actions. “A mature report,” he argues, “must be able to showcase the various building blocks of their sustainability efforts (the ‘what,’ ‘how,’ and ‘when’ of their strategy)... In crude but accurate words. It is about walking the talk.”
The logical deduction is that the report itself is a diagnostic tool for assessing a company's underlying attitude. A shallow, data-only report reveals a compliance attitude. A comprehensive, strategic report that demonstrates risk mitigated and value generated reveals an attitude of proactive leadership.
"In crude but accurate words. It is about walking the talk."
The Ecology of Personal Attitude
The final and most compelling mark of Yogendra's philosophy is how it manifests in his own life. An attitude is not a professional cloak one wears from nine to five. If it is real, it is absolute. His work with schoolchildren on the "Me and My Swachh Bharat" (Clean India) campaign is not just about teaching them skills like waste segregation; it is also about instilling in them a sense of pride in their country. It teaches about instilling an attitude of personal responsibility for their surroundings.
His advice on adopting "eco-friendly, sustainable, and scalable ways" of worship is a profound example. He does not ask people to abandon their faith (the skill of ritual). He asks them to examine the attitude behind it, suggesting that offering compost to a potted plant at home can be as holy as offering items into a river.
But the most potent piece of evidence is his personal decision regarding awards. "When I was young, I used to enjoy collecting these plaques and trophies," he admits. "But now I refuse to collect these in advance as they create pollution during the manufacturing and disposal stage." He has interrogated his actions and found them wanting. The ego-driven desire for the symbol of achievement (the skill of winning awards) has been superseded by a deeply held attitude of environmental responsibility.
Conclusion: The Essential Foundation
Yogendra Saxena’s career provides a powerful, evidence-based argument that demands our attention. It suggests that the global sustainability movement, in its rush to create standards, frameworks, and professional certifications, may be focusing too much on building the technical skills of the house while neglecting the attitudinal foundation upon which it must be built.
His life’s work proves that attitude, one of innate responsibility, systemic empathy, and a determination to "do things the right way", is a prime mover. It is what allows a leader to innovate ahead of the curve, to unite disparate stakeholders, to embed change in a complex culture, and to live a life of integrity. The skills are necessary, but they are only tools. The attitude is the hand that wields them. The great challenge for the next generation of leaders is therefore not simply to learn more, but to become more. For as Yogendra has shown, what a leader does is merely a reflection of who they are.
What I learned from Dr. Yogendra Saxena
-
Sustainability is not a technical skill to be acquired. It is a foundational attitude of responsibility that must be cultivated first.
-
A leader’s genuine attitude is most clearly revealed in their personal actions, like the willingness to forego an award for environmental reasons.
-
A holistic perspective, gained from understanding the "four sides of the table" (regulators, corporates, labor, communities), is essential for creating durable strategies.
-
The practice of "working backward" from a desire to produce a report is a primary cause of corporate greenwashing. Authentic action must precede reporting.
-
Early education, such as the "Me and My Swachh Bharat" campaign, focuses on personal responsibility and builds the necessary attitudinal foundation for a future sustainable society.
The Drive for Sustainability
In the fight for a better world, we recognize that passion is not just a weapon, but our greatest asset. It is the fuel for late nights, the shield against cynicism, and the engine of every great cause. We celebrate the passionate advocate, the fiery activist, the leader whose emotional conviction inspires legions. This celebrated virtue, while a double-edged sword, is the very essence of our work in sustainability. It is what drives us to push through bureaucratic inertia and corporate indifference, and it is what transforms our work from a job into a vocation.
This is the uncomfortable, yet vital, paradox that emerged from my conversation with Ashwini Mavinkurve. Her career is a rare tapestry woven through the core sectors of the economy: from the outside-in view of Big Four consulting to the on-the-ground reality of automotive manufacturing, the leveraged impact of finance, and now, to a P&L leadership role. This journey has not made her cynical. It has made her something far more valuable: a pragmatist. Her experience has led her to a conclusion that is as sharp as it is unsettling. The sustainability movement’s greatest asset, its passion, can often be its most significant strategic liability.
The Price of Survival
Before dissecting the problem, we must acknowledge the premise. Passion is essential. Ashwini is the first to admit this. In a field where progress is measured in years, not quarters, and where setbacks are frequent, pure logic is insufficient fuel. “You can only survive the really discouraging times when you’re really passionate about space,” she states. Sustainability, for a long time, has been seen as a “good thing to do,” and more recently, a “mandatory thing to get done.” Neither of these motivations provides the resilience needed to push through bureaucratic inertia or corporate indifference.
Passion is what transforms the work from a job into a vocation. It is the internal motivation required to endure a marathon, especially when, as she notes, many companies start their journey for external reasons. These are myriad as pressure from buyers, investors, or regulators. A weak internal “why” ensures that at the first sign of a challenge, the entire initiative “all crumbles.” Passion, then, is the necessary psychological infrastructure for a long-term campaign. It is the price of survival. But survival is not the same as victory, and this is where the paradox begins.
"When we get too passionate, I think we lose our ability to reason with people with opposing views, we alienate them even more."
The Black-and-White Blinder
The danger arises when passion metastasizes into dogma. “There is this one very specific approach that a lot of sustainability professionals have,” Ashwini observes, “is looking at things in black and white always. It’s either all or nothing.” This binary worldview, while emotionally satisfying, is strategically catastrophic. It replaces the nuanced, complex grey of reality with a simplistic battle of good versus evil. By acknowledging this, we can empower ourselves to adopt a more nuanced approach, one that is not only emotionally satisfying but also strategically effective.
The immediate casualty of this mindset is the ability to persuade. Passion, she argues, is intertwined with emotion. When a conversation becomes too emotionally charged, we lose our capacity for reason. If a professional is confronted with a dissenting view, such as “climate change is not real,” the passionate response is often offense. This emotional reaction immediately shuts down the possibility of dialogue.
Her point is devastatingly logical. “Climate change is real,” she says, “we know it because it’s proven with facts… It’s not a sentiment, it’s not an emotion. We have science backing it.” Therefore, to argue it with emotion is to use the wrong tool for the job. The task is not to win a moral victory but to achieve a logical conversion. By getting offended, “we alienate them even more, and then in that bargain we lose out on a lot of potential converts to the so-called sustainability agenda.” The passionate advocate, in their certainty, creates a fortress so impenetrable that no one new can get in.
The Unwinnable War of Purity
This black-and-white thinking leads to a second strategic failure: rejecting incremental progress. The purist demands perfection, and in a world of imperfect systems and actors, this translates into a state of perpetual opposition. Ashwini referenced the industry controversy surrounding the fast-fashion brand Shein's approval of its emissions reduction targets by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). The immediate reaction from many passionate advocates was to condemn both Shein for its business model and SBTi for engaging with them.
Ashwini’s perspective is that of a cool-headed strategist. “I don’t back Shein,” she clarifies, acknowledging their unsustainable model. Her concern is with the logic of the response. “Because we are so married to our idea of right and wrong, and black and white, we may be losing out on the progress that these companies will be making.” Her argument is pragmatic: “Shein will continue to exist. So either it’ll exist sustainably or unsustainably.” By attacking any step toward accountability, however small, the passionate purist creates a disincentive for any "bad" actor to improve. If any progress is met with condemnation, why would any imperfect company even try? "Any progress is progress," she insists. The war for purity is unwinnable; the campaign for incremental improvement is the only one that can yield results in the real world.
"Take away everything else from a sustainable professional, and keep their ability to communicate. They will still be able to deliver value."
The Mangrove and the Message
If raw, unfiltered passion is a strategic liability, what is the alternative? The solution is not to discard passion, but to discipline it. It must be channeled into a more effective tool: storytelling grounded in hopeful logic. “Every time I do a presentation, or every time I write an article,” Ashwini explains, “I try to bring in a real-life example of consequences of impact and end it on a note where there is hope.”
This is not a call for naive optimism but a communication strategy. Constant talk of doomsday scenarios, she notes, paralyzes the audience. Hope, conversely, empowers them. The key is that the hope must be rooted in fact, not sentiment. She tells the story of the Pichavaram mangrove forests in southern India. When a tsunami struck the region, surrounding villages were destroyed, but the one village sheltered by the dense mangroves was saved. “The people in that village didn’t even realize that tsunamis surrounded them,” she recounts.
This is the perfect story. It is emotionally resonant, but its power comes from a demonstrable fact: a healthy ecosystem provided a life-saving service. It does not preach; it demonstrates. It generates hope not through platitudes, but through evidence. This is the synthesis that resolves the paradox. It combines the motivational energy of passion with the persuasive power of dispassionate, logical proof.
This synthesis is the core of Ashwini’s expertise. Her journey through consulting, manufacturing, and finance has given her a unique fluency in the languages of different corporate tribes. She knows that to achieve buy-in, one must speak to talent retention with HR, attract capital to management, and discuss cost efficiency with procurement. This requires a cool-headed, strategic approach to communication. As she concludes, “Take away everything else from a sustainable professional, and keep their ability to communicate. They will still be able to deliver value.”
Her message is clear. The effective sustainability leader is not an emotional warrior demanding unconditional surrender. They are a multilingual diplomat, a strategist who understands that progress is a game of conversion, not conquest. They harness their passion to survive the marathon, but they win it with logic, evidence, and the compelling, hopeful story of a mangrove forest standing firm against the tide.
What I Learned From Ashwini Mavinkurve
-
Passion is a necessary fuel for the sustainability marathon, providing the resilience to endure setbacks. However, when undisciplined, it becomes a strategic liability.
-
A rigid, "black and white" worldview is strategically ineffective, as it alienates potential allies and leads to the rejection of pragmatic, incremental progress.
-
To embed sustainability within an organization, one must abandon a universal pitch and instead speak the specific language of each department: cost for procurement, talent for HR, and capital for management.
-
Effective sustainability communication avoids paralyzing an audience with fear. It strategically uses stories of hope that are grounded in factual evidence to inspire action.
-
A corporate sustainability journey motivated purely by external pressure is brittle. True resilience comes from a strong internal motivation, a clear understanding of what is material, and having the right experts leading the charge.
Four Pillars of Financial Judgment
In a world of complex balance sheets and disguised risks, is the most powerful financial tool not a calculator, but a moral compass with a detective’s eye? This is the central question that emerged from my encounter with a man I shall call The Guardian. With a career spanning over four decades, five banks, and numerous corporate directorships, he has navigated the highest echelons of finance, not with reckless ambition but with the quiet, unyielding force of his principles. His experience provides a blueprint for a methodology of perception, a way of seeing that penetrates deception and reveals truth.
Our conversation began not with numbers or transactions. I had asked him for the common thread that linked every station of his long career. His answer was immediate and absolute. “A human being of any worth actually stands on four pillars,” he began with formal precision, “and those pillars are honesty, integrity, truth, and trust.”
Every one of these words felt full of conviction. To him, they are operational directives. Honesty is the discipline of fulfilling your duty. Integrity is doing your “work when nobody is watching.” Trust is the reputation earned through the consistent practice of the first two. And truth, the ultimate outcome, is the recognition of a person’s fundamental character. He has relied on these pillars since 1979, across every sector, from energy to fashion. But principles, however noble, are inert without a method of application. As he spoke, it became clear that his method is that of a forensic investigator, applying a sharp, analytical eye to every facet of business.
The Hunt for Hidden Truths
Nowhere is this sharp eye more apparent than in his work in forensic auditing. The term may sound dry, but in his telling, it becomes a series of detective vignettes. He was trained, he told me, in London, Manila, and Ahmedabad to see what others do not, because in a balance sheet, “what they disclose is less than what they hide.”
He recounted a visit to a company manufacturing motorcycle parts. The investigation began at the factory gate. “At the gate itself, I had a doubt about the corporate governance and the greed of the management,” he recalled. The reason was simple: he spoke to the security guards. He discovered that they were signing acknowledgments for four salaries, although only two guards were employed. The first anomaly was found before even stepping inside.
His forensic gaze continued. He spotted a truck leaving laden with scrap, but a quick inspection revealed two bags of fresh raw material hidden beneath. The scheme was simple: steal company property and sell it back to the company. He then consulted the fixed assets register. The balance sheet listed sixteen lathe machines; he could only count twelve. The other four, he was told, were installed at a relative’s factory. It was a clear case of using bank-funded assets for personal enrichment. “A forensic auditor,” he explained, “should have an eye which others can’t see, you know, which others do not have. You have to see slightly differently.” This is the essence of his method: a relentless cross-referencing of the documented reality with the physical reality, a hunt for the inconsistencies where fraud resides.
"A forensic auditor should have an eye that others can't see, you know, which others do not have. You have to see slightly differently."
The Illogic of Inefficiency
The Guardian’s forensic eye is not merely a tool for catching criminals; it is a lens for identifying systemic waste. As an independent director on various corporate boards, he acts as a “watchdog,” viewing the company from a helicopter perspective, detached from the day-to-day proceedings. His role is to spot the illogical patterns that become normalized over time and to ensure that the company's operations are efficient and ethical.
He offered a stunningly clear example. A company with seven manufacturing plants spread across India received an order for five different types of smart meters to be delivered to Hyderabad. The logistics manager dispatched five separate, half-empty trucks, one from each of the relevant states. The cost was astronomical. This is a classic example of an illogical pattern in business operations that a forensic eye can identify. The Guardian’s analysis was swift and brutal. “I said, your person who is doing this is friendly with the transport operators. He’s not friendly with the company.” The solution was simple logic: consolidate the shipment into a single truck. The result? “In one year, we saved them millions of rupees.”
He applied the same logic to the company’s electricity consumption. Lights were burning all night on empty shop floors. “I said, you put sensors. If you are entering the shop floor, the light should switch on. If you are not on the shop floor, the light should switch off.” This intervention, he admitted, “initially cost some money,” but the result was that the electricity bills were cut in half. His eye for inefficiency is as sharp as his eye for fraud.
"I said, your person who is doing this is friendly with the transport operators. He's not friendly with the company."
A Study in Systemic Integrity
Perhaps the most formative experience for The Guardian’s forensic worldview was his five-year posting in Frankfurt, Germany. There, he had the opportunity to apply his observational skills to an entire business culture. The story of his €650 million loan to Siemens AG is a masterclass in contrasting ethics.
Anticipating the elaborate gratitude common in Indian business culture, he was instead met with stark, respectful professionalism. He was sent a precise train schedule and instructions to pay for his own discounted hotel room and breakfast. “They were so clear that it is a job which I have done,” he realised. “I have not done any obligation to them.”
His forensic eye observed a system where integrity was automated. At the Siemens factory gate, a machine chemically tests incoming raw materials. If the quality matched the order, the gate opened. If not, the entire truck was rejected. “This ethical way of non-involvement of human beings who can be influenced,” he noted, was the secret to Siemens’ quality.
The final lesson came during the signing. He presented a 136-page legal document. The German Director of Finance simply smiled, pushed it back with his pen, and said, “Sir, we are a Green company. We do not deal in written documents. I want soft copies only.” Ultimately, Siemens refused to sign anything more than a two-page promissory note. Their logic was absolute: their word and their intention to repay were the true collateral. As The Guardian concluded, “they wanted money, but they wanted money which they wanted to repay with respect with interest.” It was a system built on his fourth pillar: Trust.
Pricing the Priceless: Climate and Character
How does this forensic eye apply to the complex, modern challenges of sustainability? The Guardian’s answer is to assess the risks that others ignore. Traditional bankers, he explained, are focused on credit risk, market risk, and liquidity risk. But the most dangerous variable is the one they do not price. “The real risk that out of every thirteen accounts is going bad today is the climate risk.”
He painted a visceral picture of the California wildfires, of a famous actor’s Oscar lying half-burnt in the rubble of her mansion. The loss was not just personal; it was financial. “Citibank has lost the maximum money,” he stated, “because, while doing the credit analysis, they did not take into account the climate risk.” For sixty years, the fire risk in that region was known, yet the lending continued, blind to the obvious environmental threat.
His forensic analysis extends from the climate to the character of the loan applicant. Before approving funds, he conducts his due diligence. Does the promoter pay taxes on time? Does he discriminate between genders in wages? Is there a proper toilet facility in the factory? Is he taking care of the environment? This assessment of character, of a person’s adherence to their own small-scale social and governance responsibilities, is the best predictor of their long-term viability and integrity.
The Guardian’s career is a testament to a single, powerful idea. Integrity is not a passive virtue. It is an active, investigative process. It requires a forensic eye, a willingness to see beyond the surface, and the courage to act on what one finds. His parting advice to the next generation encapsulates this entire philosophy into a simple, repeatable mantra: “Check, recheck, cross-check.” It is the creed of the detective, the auditor, and the responsible leader. Through his stories and his unwavering principles, he has provided a masterclass, teaching us not just about finance but about the discipline of seeing things as they truly are.
_edited.jpg)
"The real risk wherein out of every thirteen accounts today going bad is the climate risk. It is a risk which is coming out of nature."
What I learned from Hagovind Sachdev
-
True integrity is not a passive state of being; it is an active and rigorous methodology of investigation, a "forensic eye" applied to all aspects of life and business.
-
A company's financial health and its ethical character are inextricably linked. The most accurate due diligence, therefore, must assess a leader's treatment of their employees and community, not just their balance sheet.
-
The most incredible inefficiencies and risks are often hidden in plain sight, normalized by routine, and overlooked by those inside the system. A detached, "helicopter" perspective is essential to identify and correct them.
-
While business practices may differ dramatically across cultures, the foundational pillars of Honesty, Integrity, Truth, and Trust are universal constants for long-term, sustainable success.
-
The simple mantra, "Check, recheck, cross-check," is a robust algorithm for mitigating risk and ensuring diligence in any complex system.
The Human Variable in ESG
Is it possible to quantify a sustainable future? We are captivated by the allure of data, frameworks, and ratings. We encounter an elegant, logical algorithm that can steer corporate behemoths toward ecological and social responsibility. We build the machine, feed it information, and expect a better world to emerge from the output. However, in my encounter with Diya, a Sustainability Strategist who has spent over a decade dismantling and rebuilding this very machine, a more profound and challenging question arose: Can we truly measure our way to salvation, or must we first assess the humanity of those operating the machine?
My conversation with Diya, a veteran of every layer of the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) discipline, from the granular data trenches of finance to the strategic heights of consulting, was not a simple interview. It was an exercise in logical disassembly. She speaks with the earned precision of someone who has dedicated her career to this space, an experience she equates to being worth “two PhDs.” Her journey reveals a fundamental truth that the corporate world is only beginning to grasp: the ESG algorithm, for all its complexity, is critically flawed. And the solution is not a more sophisticated code, but a more sophisticated operator. This emphasis on the human element in the ESG framework empowers each individual in the corporate world to play a crucial role in shaping a sustainable future.
The Flawed Logic of the Machine
Before one can build, one must understand the weaknesses of the existing foundation. I began by probing the area where the entire ESG structure originates: the data. What, I asked, are the most significant misconceptions surrounding it?
Diya’s analysis was immediate and incisive. "Unlike financial data, which is more standardized, ESG data has always been challenging," she began, identifying the core problem. "Mostly because ESG data lacks granularity... it doesn't provide specific information." This creates an immediate obstacle to effective decision-making. Worse still, the data often reflects the past, rather than predicting the future. "Most of ESG data is backward-looking," she stated. "How a company fared in the last three to four years, what the future could look like, probably is a kind of dampener there."
The machine, it appears, is driving using only the rearview mirror. This fundamental flaw fuels the misconceptions she has spent years battling. The first is that ESG is merely a “passing trend and a marketing exercise,” a perception that is often aided by corporate greenwashing. The second, more insidious misconception, is that a focus on ESG necessitates “lower returns.” On this point, her rebuttal is armed with evidence. She countered, "On the contrary... companies with high ESG ratings... have often demonstrated strong financial performance."
The issue, then, is not the intent of ESG but its instrumentation. A system built on incomplete, historical data is bound to produce imperfect outcomes and invite skepticism. It becomes clear that if the algorithm itself is inherently limited, relying on it alone is a strategic dead end. A more complex approach is required.
"The major issue is that most of ESG data is backward-looking rather than where the data is today."
Rewriting the Strategy: The Pursuit of 360-Degree Value
If the initial code is insufficient, the logical next step is to expand it. When I asked Diya about the architecture of a successful ESG strategy, she moved beyond simple metrics to a far more holistic concept. A successful strategy, in her experience, is one "that generates 360-degree value for a company."
This is not a minor software patch; it is a complete rewrite of the operating system. As a 'Sustainability Risk & Compliance, Solution Advisor,' she explained that the work involves helping clients advance their environmental, social, and governance goals by connecting sustainability to their business transformations. This 360-degree view integrates disparate elements, such as business ethics, human rights, and community values, into a single, coherent strategy. It rejects short-term thinking for a panoramic perspective, considering all aspects of the business and its impact on society and the environment.
This expanded algorithm produces tangible, multi-faceted results. Diya laid them out with systematic clarity: risk mitigation and cost avoidance, preventing fines from climate taxes or lawsuits; enhanced compliance and control through more reliable data; better financing, with access to beneficial lending rates; and operational efficiency, particularly for logistics-heavy companies tackling their complex Scope 3 emissions.
Ultimately, the strategy has a direct impact on the bottom line by driving revenue growth. How? By building loyalty with a new generation of discerning consumers. "Customers, these days, are very woke," Diya noted. "They want to buy things that are sustainable, which don't damage the planet, especially Gen Zs." This is not simple idealism but a pragmatic recognition of a market shift. A company that demonstrates genuine sustainability can build trust, price its products better, and enter previously inaccessible markets. This is the ESG machine operating at its peak efficiency. ESG becomes a complex, multi-variable algorithm designed to optimize for a whole spectrum of value. Yet, even this superior machine is useless without a competent operator.
"A successful ESG strategy, in my opinion, is something that generates 360-degree value for a company."
The Operator: Beyond the Algorithm
A strategy, no matter how brilliant, is an inert document. It is the people who implement it who give it life. It was here that my inquiry pivoted from the systemic to the human. If one were to assemble the perfect team to run this complex 360-degree strategy, what are the essential parameters?
Her answer departed entirely from the language of corporate skill sets and entered the realm of human character. 'The foremost trait I look for is empathy,' she said, 'followed by humor and an entrepreneurial spirit.' This is a remarkable set of criteria. Not technical expertise, not financial modeling skills, but empathy and humor. She values empathy because it enables her team to understand the social and environmental implications of their decisions and to connect with the stakeholders affected by those decisions. It suggests she is not looking for cogs for the machine, but for people with the humanity to understand its purpose and the wit to handle its inevitable frustrations.
She values intellectual curiosity above narrow specialization. She is interested in a candidate who "can talk about subjects other than the position that they're applying for" and is unafraid to "ask me a direct question and also expect a straightforward answer." She wants someone who will challenge her, even if they think she is wrong. Her search for employees is rather a search for intellectual peers.
This philosophy is born from her journey from mentee to mentor. She recognizes that the mindset of a Millennial like herself differs from that of the Gen Z professionals she now guides. Her approach is to create a "personalized and collaborative relationship" where she listens more than she talks. She encourages them to trust their judgment, to "speak up if you think that you have a good idea, even if you are in a room which is full of senior leaders." She is not programming them to follow instructions; she is empowering them to think independently. The ideal operator can debug the system because they were never fully assimilated by it.
"The foremost trait I look for is empathy, followed by humor and an entrepreneurial spirit."
The Source Code: Personal Intelligence and the Power of Narrative
What is the foundation for this empathy, this humor, this courage? If these are the outputs, what is the underlying source code? Diya’s answer is perhaps the most profound insight of our encounter. The source code is not found in a university curriculum, but in the cultivation of what she terms "personal intelligence" and the power of a "unique personal narrative."
She repeatedly referenced a book that has become a cornerstone of her philosophy, College: Pathways of Possibility by Dr. Saikat Majumdar. She quoted a passage that she uses in all her guest lectures: "A unique personal narrative has great persuasive power... because it provides a concise yet vivid abstract of the candidate's personal journey." The ability to craft one's own story and understand and articulate one's path is a critical skill.
This connects directly to her bias towards hiring people who read. This is not a mere hobby; it is a technology for developing the very empathy she seeks. Through her work with Juhu Reads, Bombay's first silent reading community, she aims to help people "stimulate their humanity by moving between characters in a book" and ultimately "make the world a more human place." Reading literature is an exercise in inhabiting other consciousnesses, the ultimate training for empathy.
The final piece of the puzzle fell into place when she quoted another passage from Majumdar’s book, which serves as the unifying theory for her entire approach: "A productive relationship between multiple sets of intelligences is crucial in the higher echelons of business and leadership. Different combinations of linguistic, personal, logical, mathematical, existential, and spiritual intelligences shape success in different positions."
Here is the final answer. The ultimate ESG expert is not a specialist. They are a generalist of intelligence, a polymath of perspectives. They combine the logical-mathematical mind required to analyze the data with the linguistic and personal intelligence needed to craft a narrative, lead with empathy, and inspire a team.
Our conversation revealed a clear, logical progression. It began with a flawed algorithm that relied on backward-looking data. The solution was a more holistic, 360-degree strategy. But that strategy, in turn, requires a new kind of operator. This operator is defined not by their CV, but by their character. And the source code for that character is a cultivated, multi-faceted personal intelligence, fired by narrative, literature, and empathy.
Diya’s stated legacy is to leave the world "a more sustainable place... a more humane world." Speaking to her, this is not a platitude. It is the direct, logical conclusion of her life's work. She has seen the machine and understands its limits. She knows that to save the planet, we don't need a better algorithm. We need better humans running it.
What I learned from Diya Sengupta
-
The most sophisticated ESG data algorithm is fundamentally handicapped if it only looks backward; true strategic insight requires forward-looking human judgment.
-
The decisive variable in any ESG strategy is not the framework but the character of the people implementing it. Empathy and intellectual curiosity are hard assets, not soft skills.
-
A "personal narrative" is a critical leadership tool. The ability to understand and articulate one's journey is a prerequisite for guiding a collective one.
-
Pragmatic, short-term actions, particularly from smaller, agile companies, are currently generating more tangible progress than the lofty, long-term pledges of global institutions.
-
The most valuable professionals are not specialists in a single discipline but generalists of intelligence, capable of integrating logical, personal, and linguistic faculties to solve complex problems.
A Foundation Forged in Solving Complex Challenges
The world chants the mantra of 'E-S-G.' The acronym has become a global shorthand for corporate responsibility, an organizing principle for investment, and a looming mandate for boards everywhere. But what if the sequence is wrong? What if the very order of the letters creates a flawed roadmap that leads to superficial compliance rather than profound change? What if, by obsessing over Environmental metrics before securing the foundations of Governance, we are building our sustainable future on sand?
This is the radical and deeply logical proposition put forth by Anuj Bhatia. With a career spanning more than two decades in the social sector, working with every level of society from village heads in Africa to bureaucrats in the Ministry of Textiles, he is not a typical corporate strategist. He is a systems thinker whose expertise comes from observing human behavior in complex environments. His conclusion, born from years of watching well-intentioned initiatives fail, is that the current ESG model is often engineered for failure. His proposed solution is not a minor tweak, but a fundamental re-sequencing: a shift from ESG to GSE. It is an argument that not only challenges the status quo but also inspires hope for a more effective and sustainable future. It deserves the full attention of any serious leader.
The Flaw in the Code: Why an 'E-First' Approach Fails
The conventional approach often prioritizes the 'E' for Environment. A company, facing pressure, will set emissions targets, pursue green certifications, or invest in a high-profile environmental project. Yet these efforts frequently stall or remain isolated. Why? Because, as Anuj argues, this approach ignores the reality of corporate power structures. "I, as an ESG head, is one person," he explains. A single executive cannot possibly ensure traceability across a vast supply chain or implement energy-saving measures in factories they do not run.
This is the flaw in the code. The 'E' is an outcome that depends on the coordinated action of the entire organization. But without the authority and alignment of the leadership, the ESG head is powerless. "The governance thought process has to change," Anuj insists. When it does not, sustainability becomes what he calls "book-oriented." It exists in reports and certifications, but not in reality. He gives the sharp example of a company that is fully compliant with fire safety regulations on paper. The extinguishers are present and inspected. The mock drill is completed. "But when real fire happens," he notes, "90% of people don't know how to utilize it." The compliance is perfect, but the outcome is failure. This is the fate of any 'E' initiative that is not supported by a robust internal system.
"I told them, one of my lessons is... you should make it as GSE, not ESG."
The Prime Mover: Establishing Governance (G)
Anuj’s proposed revolution begins with a simple reordering. Before all else, secure the 'G' for Governance. "Governance has to get convinced, first," he states. This means the work of sustainability does not start on the factory floor; it starts in the boardroom. It is the process of achieving genuine buy-in from the highest levels of leadership.
This requires reframing the entire conversation. For the board, sustainability cannot be presented as a mere cost or a compliance burden. It must be positioned as an "investment" in the company's long-term resilience and value. This is the critical first step: changing the leadership’s thought process. Once the board and the C-suite are truly convinced, once they share the "willingness... to really go for a change," a powerful new dynamic is unlocked. The sustainability agenda is no longer the responsibility of a single, siloed department. It becomes the official, driving policy of the entire organization, armed with the necessary authority and resources to succeed.
"We have to make the governance strong, the willingness of these corporations to really go for a change, and then things will start."
The Human System: Aligning the Social (S)
With the 'G' firmly in place, the next logical step in Anuj's framework is to align the 'S' for Social. It is a crucial distinction that the "Social" in GSE is not primarily about external philanthropic projects. It is about the internal social system of the company itself. It is about the people. "Whatever you do in the environment, people are responsible," Anuj says. "You change people or people change things change."
A committed leadership can set the direction, but it is the people throughout the organization who must execute the plan. This requires a deep understanding of human behavior and motivation. It is here that Anuj’s background in the social sector provides a unique advantage. He advocates for a process of authentic engagement built on listening and participation. His framework is to first "unlearn" his own assumptions, to go in with an "empty head and empty heart," and to listen to the perspectives of the mid-management and front-line employees.
By creating a participatory process, he aligns the human system with the governance vision. The people who will be responsible for implementing the changes are not just passive recipients of a top-down mandate, but active owners of the strategy. This approach values their insights and contributions, making them feel integral to the process and the success of the GSE model.
The Logical Outcome: Effective Environmental (E) Action
Only when Governance is committed and the Social fabric is aligned can the 'E' for Environment be addressed effectively. In the GSE model, the environmental outcome is not the starting point of a compliance exercise; it is the natural and logical fruit of a well-ordered system.
The complex challenges of reducing emissions, ensuring supply chain traceability, or managing water resources can now be met. Why? Because the CEO has made it a priority (G), and the procurement, logistics, and operations teams are engaged and empowered to execute the plan (S). The system is now engineered for success. Without this proper sequence, Anuj argues, the current ESG model often ends up "deteriorating this not constructing, because everything is getting so measured" without any real change happening on the ground.
Anuj's GSE framework is a profound and pragmatic challenge to the conventional wisdom. It argues that to build a sustainable enterprise, you must first engineer the power structure, then align the human systems, and only then will you achieve meaningful environmental results. It is a lesson in logic, a reminder that in any complex system, the order of operations is everything.
What I learned from Anuj Kumar Bhatia
-
The conventional "E-S-G" sequence is often operationally flawed; lasting environmental change is an outcome of a well-ordered system, not its starting point.
-
The primacy of Governance ("G") is a strategic necessity. Without genuine, top-level leadership commitment, any sustainability initiative lacks the authority and resources to succeed.
-
The "Social" pillar in a corporate context is not just about external philanthropy, but about the internal alignment of the entire human system to execute the leadership's vision.
-
"Book-oriented" sustainability is a dangerous illusion. A certificate of compliance is meaningless if the people within the system are not trained and empowered to act effectively.
-
To truly understand and change a system, one must first be willing to "unlearn" pre-existing assumptions and listen with an "empty head and empty heart."
The Anatomy of ESG Facts
We are inundated with corporate sustainability claims. We encounter assertions of carbon neutrality, circular economies, and ethical supply chains regularly. These claims are the bedrock of the ESG movement, influencing investment decisions and public perception. But what exactly is a corporate fact? What is its structure? What is the painstaking, often challenging, process needed to convert a company’s polished assertion into a verified, reliable data point?
My conversation with Antony Thaikkadan, an ESG assurance auditor at KPMG, was a journey into this very process. He is not a high-level storyteller or a crafter of grand strategy; he is a practitioner on the front lines, a specialist in the science of verification. His work is to build the bridge between a company's promise and its performance. Speaking with him, I learned that this bridge is not built with rhetoric, but with a precise and demanding architecture of evidence, replication, and accountability. To understand the future of sustainability, we must first understand the anatomy of the facts it is built on.
The Initial Inquiry: Deconstructing the Narrative
The process of assurance does not begin with a hunt for flaws, but with a demand for clarity. Before any data is exchanged, a framework of expectations is established. Antony is clear that the scope is the first pillar. Does the client require assurance for their entire sustainability report or only for a limited number of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)? This initial scoping establishes the terms of engagement and fees, providing a practical foundation that eliminates ambiguity from the outset.
Once engaged, the first step is a strategic act of reversal. The auditors do not impose their view; they ask the client to explain their own. “Basically, we are telling them only to explain to us everything,” Antony says. For a new client, this means a thorough examination of their core business. For any client, it means explaining, in detail, how each KPI is defined and calculated within their own systems.
This is a subtle but crucial part of the process. It forces the company to articulate its own logic. As Antony’s team listens, they are not passively accepting the information. They are deconstructing the narrative, identifying areas of ambiguity or potential weakness. This leads to the first intervention: a formal list of clarifying questions. “If it’s not cleared,” he explains, “we will basically send some questions to them and we’ll ask them. We’ll tell them these areas. It’s not clear to us.” The foundation of a verified fact is not an assumption, but a clearly defined and mutually understood claim.
"Simply, we will not rely on the source data they are sharing... we need clear-cut evidence on how this source data has come."
The Demand for Proof: The Mandate for Evidence
Once a claim is clearly defined, the next stage begins: the unwavering demand for proof. This is where the courtesy of the initial inquiry gives way to the rigor of the audit. Antony’s stance on this is resolute. “We will ask for evidence for each and every point they mention in their data,” he states. This is the core principle that distinguishes assurance from mere consulting.
The verification process operates on two distinct levels. First, the auditors examine the source data itself. If a company provides a spreadsheet calculating its emissions, that spreadsheet is the first piece of evidence. But the process does not stop there. The second, more critical level is to demand proof for the origin of that source data. “Simply, we will not rely on the source data they are sharing,” Antony insists. “We need clear-cut evidence on how this source data has come.” This includes invoices for fuel purchases, meter readings for electricity consumption, and receipts for third-party waste disposal. Every number must have a verifiable origin story.
This extends beyond quantitative data. If a real estate company claims to have implemented water-saving initiatives across its buildings, the assurance team requires more than a statement. “They will first send… the photographs of that one,” Antony explains. But photographs can be misleading. The next step is empirical verification. “We will randomly select three or four sites, and we’ll do the client visit to those sites, and we’ll see whether there is any real water… projects are going on there.” The claim must survive contact with reality.
The Crucible of Re-performance: The Scientific Method in Practice
The final and most decisive stage in the anatomy of a fact is the crucible of re-performance. It is not sufficient to see the evidence and check the client’s math. The auditor must be able to independently replicate the result. “We will re-perform all the procedures they had performed according to the international ESG standards,” Antony says.
This is the scientific method applied to corporate accounting. It is a fundamental rejection of trust in favor of verification. The auditor takes the verified source data such as the fuel invoices, the electricity bills, and uses the same agreed-upon standards to recalculate the KPI from scratch. The goal is to see if they arrive at the same number as the client.
This is often the moment of most tremendous tension. “If it’s any big difference,” Antony states, “we will tell them. We can’t give assurance on this point. You have to make changes accordingly.” This is the auditor’s ultimate leverage. The power to grant or withhold the assurance letter, which serves as the official stamp of verification that stakeholders and regulators demand, fosters accountability. The company cannot simply stand by its number; it must correct it to reflect the verifiable reality. This process of discussion and recalculation can take a month or more, a rigorous back-and-forth until the data is sound.
Only when a claim has been clearly defined, its evidence exhaustively checked, and its result independently replicated can it be considered a verified fact. Only then will KPMG issue its assurance letter.
This meticulous process reveals that a fact is not a simple thing. It is the result of an architecture designed to withstand skepticism. Speaking with Antony, I came to understand that the work of an ESG auditor is one of the most critical functions in the entire sustainability ecosystem. They are not the ones making the bold promises or designing the innovative solutions. They are the ones who ensure the whole structure is built on solid ground. In a world of noise, they are the quiet, methodical architects of credibility itself.
"What all procedures they had performed, we will re-perform that one according to the international ESG standards... and we'll see whether the value they have got and what the value we have got is the same."
What I learned from Antony Thaikkadan
-
The credibility of the entire ESG field rests not on promises, but on the methodical, often unglamorous, process of verification.
-
A corporate sustainability claim has no inherent value until it survives a multi-stage interrogation: a clear definition, a demand for primary evidence, and finally, independent replication.
-
Effective auditing is powered by disciplined skepticism. It is the refusal to accept any data point at face value and the insistence on tracing it back to its verifiable origin.
-
The transition from research to consulting is a transition from passive analysis to active responsibility, where the stakes are defined by client timelines, budgets, and the weight of a professional assurance.
-
In a field of constant regulatory change, intellectual humility, the open admission of "limited knowledge" and the need for continuous learning, is a prerequisite for maintaining professional excellence.
Our Interviewees on the Record.
Amplify Your Impact:
Experience Albert's NoSmalltalk
Albert's NoSmalltalk session was exceptionally impactful. The refreshingly no-nonsense, heart-to-heart talk authentically brought out ColoredCow's story of building a tech ecosystem in the Indian hills. His approach ensures natural conversations, capturing your true narrative. I believe this helps amplify impact. Highly recommend sharing your story with Albert to inspire others!