Jan 13, 2026
Jan 13, 2026
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
Sustainable Business
Sustainable Business
In This Article
As political headwinds intensify and corporate priorities shift, Chief Sustainability Officers face a pivotal moment. The question isn't whether the role survives—it's how it evolves.
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
Executive Summary
The Chief Sustainability Officer role is at an inflection point. After explosive growth that saw more CSOs hired in 2021 than in the previous five years combined, sustainability leaders now face mounting pressures: regulatory complexity, political backlash, budget constraints, and fundamental questions about the role's strategic positioning. This analysis examines the forces reshaping CSO mandates and explores four distinct paths forward—drawing on BSR's landmark research, current market data, and emerging best practices—to help organizations and their sustainability leaders navigate this critical juncture.
The Signal: Apple's CSO Exit
In January 2026, Apple announced that Lisa Jackson, one of the most prominent Chief Sustainability Officers in corporate America, would retire—and the company would not name a successor. Jackson's nearly twelve-year tenure, which followed her role as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, transformed Apple's environmental footprint and helped establish the modern CSO archetype. Her responsibilities will be distributed across existing business units.
Apple isn't alone. Over the past eighteen months, Nike, Unilever, and other major corporations have seen sustainability heads depart with responsibilities dispersed rather than replaced. The trend has sparked an uncomfortable question reverberating through boardrooms and sustainability conferences alike: Is the CSO becoming obsolete?
The answer, as with most consequential questions, is more nuanced than either alarm or dismissal would suggest. The CSO role isn't dying, but it is undergoing a fundamental metamorphosis that will reshape how organizations approach sustainability strategy, governance, and execution for years to come.
The Numbers: Understanding the CSO Landscape
Before examining the paths forward, context matters. The CSO population grew from relative obscurity to over 952 CSOs globally by January 2025, according to tracking by Sustainable Tech Partner. The acceleration was dramatic: Strategy& found that 394 CSO appointments occurred in 2020-2021 alone, compared to 414 total from 2011-2019.
This growth reflected genuine demand. BCG's December 2024 analysis found that 52% of S&P 500 and FTSE 100 companies now have a senior sustainability leader within the top two organizational levels—a 10 percentage-point increase in just one year. BoardEx data showed 27% of S&P 500 companies had a CSO as of 2023, up from 19% previously.
But growth has slowed, and the role's center of gravity is shifting. The Weinreb Group's 2025 CSO Report, surveying 215 CSOs, reveals the new landscape:
90% of CSOs spend more time on regulatory compliance than two years ago
60% cite regulation as their biggest challenge—more than budgets or resources
44% identified integrating sustainability into corporate strategy as the most significant change since 2023
31% identified increased politicization as the biggest shift
65% of CSOs are women (an all-time high)
Non-white CSOs have declined from 26% to 20% since 2023
Perhaps most tellingly, the proportion of CSOs reporting to legal teams has more than doubled since 2023. Sustainability is becoming, in many organizations, a compliance function rather than a strategic one.
BSR's Four Archetypes: How CSOs Are Adapting
In October 2024, BSR released groundbreaking research based on 30 in-depth interviews with sustainability executives in North America and Europe. The study identified three distinct archetypes emerging among CSOs navigating the changing environment. Then, following the 2024 U.S. presidential election, BSR conducted follow-up interviews that revealed a fourth archetype taking shape.
Archetype 1: The Integrater
Strategy: Embed sustainability throughout the organization, then step back.
Integraters pursue what might be called "planned obsolescence with purpose." They systematically weave environmental and social considerations into procurement, finance, operations, HR, and product development—building capability across functions while reducing dependence on a centralized sustainability team.
Characteristics:
Deep collaboration with finance, operations, and business unit leaders
Focus on capability-building and knowledge transfer
Gradual reduction of dedicated sustainability staff as functions absorb responsibilities
Success measured by how well sustainability persists without central orchestration
Best suited for: Organizations with mature sustainability programs, strong cross-functional relationships, and executive teams genuinely committed to integration. The approach requires patience and political skill—integration is measured in years, not quarters.
For organizations pursuing this path, embedding sustainability into core business strategy requires careful attention to governance structures and stakeholder alignment.
Archetype 2: The Operator
Strategy: Run sustainability like a business unit with measurable P&L impact.
Operators transform sustainability from a staff function into an operational one. They own budget lines, manage revenue-generating programs (renewable energy installations, circular economy initiatives, sustainable product lines), and demonstrate direct contribution to EBITDA.
Characteristics:
Sustainability initiatives with clear revenue attribution or cost savings
Operating metrics alongside traditional ESG metrics
Commercial acumen as important as environmental expertise
Team structures resembling business units rather than advisory functions
Best suited for: Organizations where sustainability can generate demonstrable financial returns—through operational efficiency, premium products, or new market opportunities. Requires executive support for treating sustainability as profit center rather than cost center.
Archetype 3: The Expert
Strategy: Serve as internal consultant and external voice on specialized knowledge.
Experts become the organization's authoritative source on climate science, regulatory developments, stakeholder expectations, and emerging risks. They advise on strategic decisions without owning operational execution, positioning themselves as essential interpreters of a complex and rapidly evolving landscape.
Characteristics:
Deep technical knowledge in specific domains (climate, biodiversity, human rights, regulatory frameworks)
Credibility with external stakeholders including investors, regulators, and NGOs
Influence through insight rather than authority
Smaller teams with specialized expertise
Best suited for: Organizations in heavily regulated industries, those facing significant stakeholder pressure, or companies where sustainability risks are technically complex. The Expert archetype is particularly relevant in sectors like energy, extractives, chemicals, and financial services.
Organizations navigating CSRD, CSDDD, and evolving regulatory requirements often find the Expert archetype essential for maintaining compliance credibility.
Archetype 4: The Defender-in-Chief
Strategy: Protect existing commitments while adapting to political headwinds.
This fourth archetype emerged from BSR's January 2025 follow-up research conducted after the U.S. presidential election. One CSO described the role as "defender-in-chief, speaking with C-suite executives almost every day" to retain commitments and prevent backsliding.
Characteristics:
Constant internal advocacy to maintain existing programs and targets
Emphasis on business fundamentals: regulation, resilience, and performance
Strategic retreat from visible activism to protect core programs
Focus on EU, UK, and California regulations as anchors for global standards
As one BSR interviewee noted: "We're not looking for bold. We don't want to be a target."
Best suited for: Organizations facing internal skepticism, board-level pressure to reduce ESG commitments, or operating in politically charged sectors. The Defender archetype is inherently transitional—a holding pattern while waiting for conditions to shift.
The Defender-in-Chief faces a delicate balance. As BSR observed, there's genuine concern that "skeptics will use the election as an excuse to reduce resources, investment, and commitment to sustainability." Yet 90% of surveyed CSOs report staying committed to their sustainability work despite political pressures—suggesting resilience beneath the surface adaptation.
The Underlying Debate: Integration or Obsolescence?
Beyond archetypes, a more fundamental tension is reshaping the CSO conversation. At GreenBiz 26 in January, a provocative debate asked: "Is the CSO irrelevant?"
The case for irrelevance:
Critics argue that as sustainability becomes financially and operationally material, the dedicated CSO role loses purpose. The best outcome, in this view, is successful integration—where procurement owns sustainable sourcing, finance owns climate risk, operations owns efficiency, and legal owns compliance. "Influence without authority," these critics contend, "falls short when sustainability becomes everyone's job."
There's also a talent paradox. Many CSOs built careers on climate science, human rights advocacy, and environmental policy—valuable expertise, but often disconnected from P&L management, operational execution, and capital allocation. As sustainability moves from communications to core strategy, the skill sets required may be shifting toward those already embedded in traditional business functions.
The case for essential evolution:
Defenders counter that rising complexity makes an integrative role more essential, not less. Climate risk now intersects with geopolitics, supply chain disruption, AI governance, water security, and biodiversity loss in ways no single function can navigate. Someone needs to see the whole system.
Moreover, as Harvard Business Review noted, the CSO role has already evolved dramatically. Early CSOs were often "stealth PR executives" focused on messaging and reputation. Today's most effective CSOs spearhead genuine integration of material ESG factors into corporate strategy, capital allocation, and risk management.
The resolution may be that both perspectives contain truth. The question isn't whether CSOs matter—it's which type of CSO matters for which organization at which stage of its sustainability journey.
What's Changing: Key Shifts Reshaping the Role
From Impact to Compliance
The Weinreb data tells a clear story: regulatory compliance now dominates CSO workloads. With CSRD in Europe, California's climate disclosure laws, and ISSB standards spreading globally, the volume of required reporting has exploded. One CSO in BSR's research put it bluntly: "We need to give everyone a course on materiality 101."
This shift carries risks. When compliance becomes the primary focus, innovation suffers. Organizations may meet reporting requirements while failing to capture the competitive advantages sustainability can offer—operational efficiency, risk mitigation, talent attraction, and market differentiation.
From Bold to Quiet
"Greenhushing" has emerged as a significant trend. Companies that once trumpeted sustainability achievements now communicate cautiously, if at all. The fear of greenwashing accusations—which have evolved from marketing embarrassments to legal liabilities—combines with political backlash concerns to push sustainability communications underground.
BSR's research found CSOs actively moderating their organizations' public positioning: "We're not looking for bold. We don't want to be a target." While understandable as risk management, this approach may undermine the stakeholder engagement and market signaling that sustainability communications traditionally provided.
From Voluntary to Mandatory
The era of voluntary sustainability initiatives is ending. Science Based Targets initiative now counts over 4,200 companies with approved targets—a 102% increase since 2022. But the motivation has shifted from brand differentiation to regulatory compliance and investor expectations.
This transition has implications for the CSO role. When sustainability was voluntary, CSOs were evangelists and advocates. When it's mandatory, they become compliance officers and risk managers. Different skills, different organizational positioning, different success metrics.
From Messaging to Money
Perhaps most significantly, sustainability conversations have moved from "show me the impact and the money" to simply "show me the money." Deloitte's research found CEOs prioritizing cost management, supply chain resilience, and AI adoption over sustainability messaging.
This isn't necessarily retreat—it may represent maturation. Sustainability initiatives that demonstrate clear financial returns will survive and expand. Those that relied primarily on reputational benefits face harder scrutiny.
The DEI Intersection
One area of particular uncertainty involves the intersection of sustainability and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. BSR's research found CSOs navigating careful pivots: "DEI as DEI will change"—with organizations increasingly reframing programs around "inclusion" and "belonging" rather than explicit diversity targets.
Several CSOs expressed concern about employee protections, including LGBTQ rights, reproductive rights, and immigration—issues that intersect with sustainability's broader definition of stakeholder welfare. The scope of the CSO mandate may be narrowing in practice even as stated commitments remain unchanged.
This retrenchment carries demographic implications. The decline in non-white CSOs from 26% to 20% since 2023 suggests the field may be becoming less diverse at precisely the moment when diverse perspectives on global sustainability challenges are most needed.
Navigating the Crossroads: Strategic Recommendations
For Organizations
1. Define the role before filling it.
The worst outcome is a CSO with unclear mandate, insufficient authority, and misaligned expectations. Organizations should determine which archetype—Integrater, Operator, Expert, or Defender—fits their current stage, industry context, and strategic objectives before making appointments or restructuring.
Building a corporate sustainability strategy requires clarity on governance, accountability, and decision rights.
2. Resource the compliance burden realistically.
Regulatory requirements aren't optional, and they're expanding. Organizations that under-resource compliance risk audit failures, investor concerns, and regulatory penalties. But compliance teams shouldn't be confused with strategy teams—both are necessary, and they require different capabilities.
3. Preserve systems thinking capability.
Whether through a CSO, sustainability committee, or distributed responsibility model, organizations need someone asking how climate intersects with supply chains, how water stress affects operations, how regulatory trajectories will shape strategy. Fragmentation across functions can lose this integrated perspective.
4. Align stakeholder engagement with strategy.
As BSR observed: "None of our sustainability slogans speak to how difficult it is to be middle class in America." Organizations need to reflect on how they communicate sustainability to get away from jargon and connect with stakeholders where they actually are.
For CSOs
1. Leverage compliance to achieve impact.
The regulatory wave isn't just burden—it's opportunity. CSRD, California disclosure requirements, ISSB standards, and CSDDD create structures that can anchor sustainability programs against political or budget pressures. As one CSO noted: "Compliance is my shield."
2. Build commercial credibility.
Whether through the Operator archetype's P&L ownership or the Integrater's cross-functional partnerships, CSOs who demonstrate business value have more durable positions than those relying solely on moral authority or regulatory expertise. Measuring sustainability ROI becomes essential.
3. Prepare for uncertainty through scenarios.
BSR recommends futures thinking and scenario analysis as core CSO competencies. Geopolitics, trade policy, technology disruption, and regulatory shifts create a planning environment where single-point forecasts are increasingly unreliable.
4. Maintain long-term perspective.
As one CSO told BSR: "Sustainability is not a four-year political term. We're here for the long term. Every sustainability person is thinking about 2030 as well as 2040 and 2050."
The Path Forward: Neither Obsolescence Nor Status Quo
The CSO role isn't dying—but the CSO role of 2020 may be. The evangelists and communications-focused sustainability leaders who built the function are giving way to operators, compliance experts, and strategic integrators who can demonstrate financial value while navigating regulatory complexity.
This evolution mirrors what happened in other functions that moved from peripheral to core. Finance evolved from bookkeeping to strategic partnership. IT evolved from back-office support to digital transformation. Sustainability is undergoing similar maturation—with the discomfort that accompanies any such transition.
The organizations and leaders who navigate this crossroads most successfully will be those who:
Recognize the moment for what it is: not the end of corporate sustainability, but a phase transition requiring new approaches
Match organizational needs to role design: choosing the right archetype for their specific context rather than defaulting to inherited models
Balance compliance with innovation: meeting requirements while preserving space for competitive differentiation
Build bridges across stakeholders: connecting sustainability strategy to the concerns of employees, communities, investors, and customers—not just regulators
Maintain long-term commitment: remembering that climate physics and stakeholder expectations don't reset with election cycles
The question asked at GreenBiz—"Is the CSO irrelevant?"—has a clear answer: No. But neither is the CSO role immune to evolution. The leaders and organizations that thrive will be those who embrace this crossroads as an opportunity for strategic renewal rather than a threat to be resisted.
How Council Fire Supports This Transition
At Council Fire, we've spent decades helping organizations navigate exactly these kinds of inflection points—where strategy, stakeholder engagement, and systems thinking must converge to create durable outcomes.
Our approach to sustainability strategy reflects the same principles that effective CSOs employ:
Radical Partnership: We work alongside clients as true partners, co-creating solutions rather than delivering prescriptions. Whether your organization is integrating sustainability across functions, building operational capabilities, or defending existing commitments, we bring collaborative expertise without imposing cookie-cutter frameworks.
Action Over Abstraction: The CSO landscape is saturated with frameworks and reports. We focus on implementation—helping organizations move from strategy to execution, from commitments to outcomes, from compliance requirements to operational integration.
Systems Thinking: Climate, regulation, stakeholders, and business strategy don't exist in silos. We help organizations see connections across these domains, anticipating how changes in one area will ripple through others.
Stakeholder-Centered Planning: As BSR's research makes clear, sustainability programs succeed or fail based on stakeholder engagement. We specialize in bringing diverse voices into strategy development—ensuring that sustainability initiatives connect with the people they're meant to serve.
Whether you're a board evaluating your sustainability governance, a CEO considering CSO structure, or a sustainability leader navigating the crossroads yourself, we're here to help you chart a path forward that fits your organization's unique context and aspirations.
FAQs
Is the CSO role disappearing?
No, but it's evolving. Global CSO numbers continue to grow, and over half of major companies now have senior sustainability leaders. However, the role is shifting from communications and advocacy toward compliance, operational integration, and demonstrated financial value. Some organizations are distributing sustainability responsibilities rather than centralizing them, but this represents evolution rather than elimination.
Which CSO archetype is best?
There's no universal answer—the right archetype depends on your organization's maturity, industry context, regulatory exposure, and strategic objectives. Organizations early in their sustainability journey may need Expert capability. Those with mature programs may benefit from Integrater approaches. Companies where sustainability can generate direct revenue may want Operator models. Organizations facing political headwinds may need Defender-in-Chief skills. Many effective CSOs blend elements of multiple archetypes.
How do regulatory requirements affect CSO strategy?
Regulatory compliance has become the dominant driver of CSO workload, with 90% spending more time on compliance than two years ago. While this creates burden, it also creates opportunity: mandatory requirements provide anchors for sustainability programs that voluntary initiatives couldn't offer. Effective CSOs leverage compliance to achieve impact rather than treating it as mere box-checking.
What skills do CSOs need in 2026?
The skill set is expanding beyond traditional environmental expertise to include: financial acumen and ability to demonstrate ROI; regulatory knowledge across multiple jurisdictions; stakeholder engagement and communication that connects with diverse audiences; systems thinking that links climate, operations, and strategy; change management capability for organizational transformation; and political navigation skills for internal advocacy.
How should boards think about sustainability governance?
Boards should clarify three questions: (1) What level of sustainability ambition does the organization want to pursue? (2) What governance structure—centralized CSO, distributed responsibility, or hybrid—best fits that ambition? (3) How will sustainability performance be measured and reported to the board? The answers will vary by organization, but the questions shouldn't be avoided.
What's the relationship between CSO roles and DEI?
Many organizations have historically linked sustainability and DEI under common leadership or governance structures. Current political pressures are leading some to separate these functions or reframe DEI programs. CSOs should be thoughtful about this intersection, recognizing both the substantive connections between sustainability and social equity and the tactical considerations that may require different positioning.
Additional Resources
Council Fire Guides
External Sources Cited
Published January 2026 | Council Fire
Council Fire is a certified B Corporation and global change agency helping mission-driven organizations turn complexity into clarity, and sustainability into strategy. Learn more about our work →
Latest Articles
©2025
FAQ
FAQ
01
What does a project look like?
02
How is the pricing structure?
03
Are all projects fixed scope?
04
What is the ROI?
05
How do we measure success?
06
What do I need to get started?
07
How easy is it to edit for beginners?
08
Do I need to know how to code?
01
What does a project look like?
02
How is the pricing structure?
03
Are all projects fixed scope?
04
What is the ROI?
05
How do we measure success?
06
What do I need to get started?
07
How easy is it to edit for beginners?
08
Do I need to know how to code?
Jan 13, 2026
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
Sustainable Business
In This Article
As political headwinds intensify and corporate priorities shift, Chief Sustainability Officers face a pivotal moment. The question isn't whether the role survives—it's how it evolves.
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
Executive Summary
The Chief Sustainability Officer role is at an inflection point. After explosive growth that saw more CSOs hired in 2021 than in the previous five years combined, sustainability leaders now face mounting pressures: regulatory complexity, political backlash, budget constraints, and fundamental questions about the role's strategic positioning. This analysis examines the forces reshaping CSO mandates and explores four distinct paths forward—drawing on BSR's landmark research, current market data, and emerging best practices—to help organizations and their sustainability leaders navigate this critical juncture.
The Signal: Apple's CSO Exit
In January 2026, Apple announced that Lisa Jackson, one of the most prominent Chief Sustainability Officers in corporate America, would retire—and the company would not name a successor. Jackson's nearly twelve-year tenure, which followed her role as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, transformed Apple's environmental footprint and helped establish the modern CSO archetype. Her responsibilities will be distributed across existing business units.
Apple isn't alone. Over the past eighteen months, Nike, Unilever, and other major corporations have seen sustainability heads depart with responsibilities dispersed rather than replaced. The trend has sparked an uncomfortable question reverberating through boardrooms and sustainability conferences alike: Is the CSO becoming obsolete?
The answer, as with most consequential questions, is more nuanced than either alarm or dismissal would suggest. The CSO role isn't dying, but it is undergoing a fundamental metamorphosis that will reshape how organizations approach sustainability strategy, governance, and execution for years to come.
The Numbers: Understanding the CSO Landscape
Before examining the paths forward, context matters. The CSO population grew from relative obscurity to over 952 CSOs globally by January 2025, according to tracking by Sustainable Tech Partner. The acceleration was dramatic: Strategy& found that 394 CSO appointments occurred in 2020-2021 alone, compared to 414 total from 2011-2019.
This growth reflected genuine demand. BCG's December 2024 analysis found that 52% of S&P 500 and FTSE 100 companies now have a senior sustainability leader within the top two organizational levels—a 10 percentage-point increase in just one year. BoardEx data showed 27% of S&P 500 companies had a CSO as of 2023, up from 19% previously.
But growth has slowed, and the role's center of gravity is shifting. The Weinreb Group's 2025 CSO Report, surveying 215 CSOs, reveals the new landscape:
90% of CSOs spend more time on regulatory compliance than two years ago
60% cite regulation as their biggest challenge—more than budgets or resources
44% identified integrating sustainability into corporate strategy as the most significant change since 2023
31% identified increased politicization as the biggest shift
65% of CSOs are women (an all-time high)
Non-white CSOs have declined from 26% to 20% since 2023
Perhaps most tellingly, the proportion of CSOs reporting to legal teams has more than doubled since 2023. Sustainability is becoming, in many organizations, a compliance function rather than a strategic one.
BSR's Four Archetypes: How CSOs Are Adapting
In October 2024, BSR released groundbreaking research based on 30 in-depth interviews with sustainability executives in North America and Europe. The study identified three distinct archetypes emerging among CSOs navigating the changing environment. Then, following the 2024 U.S. presidential election, BSR conducted follow-up interviews that revealed a fourth archetype taking shape.
Archetype 1: The Integrater
Strategy: Embed sustainability throughout the organization, then step back.
Integraters pursue what might be called "planned obsolescence with purpose." They systematically weave environmental and social considerations into procurement, finance, operations, HR, and product development—building capability across functions while reducing dependence on a centralized sustainability team.
Characteristics:
Deep collaboration with finance, operations, and business unit leaders
Focus on capability-building and knowledge transfer
Gradual reduction of dedicated sustainability staff as functions absorb responsibilities
Success measured by how well sustainability persists without central orchestration
Best suited for: Organizations with mature sustainability programs, strong cross-functional relationships, and executive teams genuinely committed to integration. The approach requires patience and political skill—integration is measured in years, not quarters.
For organizations pursuing this path, embedding sustainability into core business strategy requires careful attention to governance structures and stakeholder alignment.
Archetype 2: The Operator
Strategy: Run sustainability like a business unit with measurable P&L impact.
Operators transform sustainability from a staff function into an operational one. They own budget lines, manage revenue-generating programs (renewable energy installations, circular economy initiatives, sustainable product lines), and demonstrate direct contribution to EBITDA.
Characteristics:
Sustainability initiatives with clear revenue attribution or cost savings
Operating metrics alongside traditional ESG metrics
Commercial acumen as important as environmental expertise
Team structures resembling business units rather than advisory functions
Best suited for: Organizations where sustainability can generate demonstrable financial returns—through operational efficiency, premium products, or new market opportunities. Requires executive support for treating sustainability as profit center rather than cost center.
Archetype 3: The Expert
Strategy: Serve as internal consultant and external voice on specialized knowledge.
Experts become the organization's authoritative source on climate science, regulatory developments, stakeholder expectations, and emerging risks. They advise on strategic decisions without owning operational execution, positioning themselves as essential interpreters of a complex and rapidly evolving landscape.
Characteristics:
Deep technical knowledge in specific domains (climate, biodiversity, human rights, regulatory frameworks)
Credibility with external stakeholders including investors, regulators, and NGOs
Influence through insight rather than authority
Smaller teams with specialized expertise
Best suited for: Organizations in heavily regulated industries, those facing significant stakeholder pressure, or companies where sustainability risks are technically complex. The Expert archetype is particularly relevant in sectors like energy, extractives, chemicals, and financial services.
Organizations navigating CSRD, CSDDD, and evolving regulatory requirements often find the Expert archetype essential for maintaining compliance credibility.
Archetype 4: The Defender-in-Chief
Strategy: Protect existing commitments while adapting to political headwinds.
This fourth archetype emerged from BSR's January 2025 follow-up research conducted after the U.S. presidential election. One CSO described the role as "defender-in-chief, speaking with C-suite executives almost every day" to retain commitments and prevent backsliding.
Characteristics:
Constant internal advocacy to maintain existing programs and targets
Emphasis on business fundamentals: regulation, resilience, and performance
Strategic retreat from visible activism to protect core programs
Focus on EU, UK, and California regulations as anchors for global standards
As one BSR interviewee noted: "We're not looking for bold. We don't want to be a target."
Best suited for: Organizations facing internal skepticism, board-level pressure to reduce ESG commitments, or operating in politically charged sectors. The Defender archetype is inherently transitional—a holding pattern while waiting for conditions to shift.
The Defender-in-Chief faces a delicate balance. As BSR observed, there's genuine concern that "skeptics will use the election as an excuse to reduce resources, investment, and commitment to sustainability." Yet 90% of surveyed CSOs report staying committed to their sustainability work despite political pressures—suggesting resilience beneath the surface adaptation.
The Underlying Debate: Integration or Obsolescence?
Beyond archetypes, a more fundamental tension is reshaping the CSO conversation. At GreenBiz 26 in January, a provocative debate asked: "Is the CSO irrelevant?"
The case for irrelevance:
Critics argue that as sustainability becomes financially and operationally material, the dedicated CSO role loses purpose. The best outcome, in this view, is successful integration—where procurement owns sustainable sourcing, finance owns climate risk, operations owns efficiency, and legal owns compliance. "Influence without authority," these critics contend, "falls short when sustainability becomes everyone's job."
There's also a talent paradox. Many CSOs built careers on climate science, human rights advocacy, and environmental policy—valuable expertise, but often disconnected from P&L management, operational execution, and capital allocation. As sustainability moves from communications to core strategy, the skill sets required may be shifting toward those already embedded in traditional business functions.
The case for essential evolution:
Defenders counter that rising complexity makes an integrative role more essential, not less. Climate risk now intersects with geopolitics, supply chain disruption, AI governance, water security, and biodiversity loss in ways no single function can navigate. Someone needs to see the whole system.
Moreover, as Harvard Business Review noted, the CSO role has already evolved dramatically. Early CSOs were often "stealth PR executives" focused on messaging and reputation. Today's most effective CSOs spearhead genuine integration of material ESG factors into corporate strategy, capital allocation, and risk management.
The resolution may be that both perspectives contain truth. The question isn't whether CSOs matter—it's which type of CSO matters for which organization at which stage of its sustainability journey.
What's Changing: Key Shifts Reshaping the Role
From Impact to Compliance
The Weinreb data tells a clear story: regulatory compliance now dominates CSO workloads. With CSRD in Europe, California's climate disclosure laws, and ISSB standards spreading globally, the volume of required reporting has exploded. One CSO in BSR's research put it bluntly: "We need to give everyone a course on materiality 101."
This shift carries risks. When compliance becomes the primary focus, innovation suffers. Organizations may meet reporting requirements while failing to capture the competitive advantages sustainability can offer—operational efficiency, risk mitigation, talent attraction, and market differentiation.
From Bold to Quiet
"Greenhushing" has emerged as a significant trend. Companies that once trumpeted sustainability achievements now communicate cautiously, if at all. The fear of greenwashing accusations—which have evolved from marketing embarrassments to legal liabilities—combines with political backlash concerns to push sustainability communications underground.
BSR's research found CSOs actively moderating their organizations' public positioning: "We're not looking for bold. We don't want to be a target." While understandable as risk management, this approach may undermine the stakeholder engagement and market signaling that sustainability communications traditionally provided.
From Voluntary to Mandatory
The era of voluntary sustainability initiatives is ending. Science Based Targets initiative now counts over 4,200 companies with approved targets—a 102% increase since 2022. But the motivation has shifted from brand differentiation to regulatory compliance and investor expectations.
This transition has implications for the CSO role. When sustainability was voluntary, CSOs were evangelists and advocates. When it's mandatory, they become compliance officers and risk managers. Different skills, different organizational positioning, different success metrics.
From Messaging to Money
Perhaps most significantly, sustainability conversations have moved from "show me the impact and the money" to simply "show me the money." Deloitte's research found CEOs prioritizing cost management, supply chain resilience, and AI adoption over sustainability messaging.
This isn't necessarily retreat—it may represent maturation. Sustainability initiatives that demonstrate clear financial returns will survive and expand. Those that relied primarily on reputational benefits face harder scrutiny.
The DEI Intersection
One area of particular uncertainty involves the intersection of sustainability and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. BSR's research found CSOs navigating careful pivots: "DEI as DEI will change"—with organizations increasingly reframing programs around "inclusion" and "belonging" rather than explicit diversity targets.
Several CSOs expressed concern about employee protections, including LGBTQ rights, reproductive rights, and immigration—issues that intersect with sustainability's broader definition of stakeholder welfare. The scope of the CSO mandate may be narrowing in practice even as stated commitments remain unchanged.
This retrenchment carries demographic implications. The decline in non-white CSOs from 26% to 20% since 2023 suggests the field may be becoming less diverse at precisely the moment when diverse perspectives on global sustainability challenges are most needed.
Navigating the Crossroads: Strategic Recommendations
For Organizations
1. Define the role before filling it.
The worst outcome is a CSO with unclear mandate, insufficient authority, and misaligned expectations. Organizations should determine which archetype—Integrater, Operator, Expert, or Defender—fits their current stage, industry context, and strategic objectives before making appointments or restructuring.
Building a corporate sustainability strategy requires clarity on governance, accountability, and decision rights.
2. Resource the compliance burden realistically.
Regulatory requirements aren't optional, and they're expanding. Organizations that under-resource compliance risk audit failures, investor concerns, and regulatory penalties. But compliance teams shouldn't be confused with strategy teams—both are necessary, and they require different capabilities.
3. Preserve systems thinking capability.
Whether through a CSO, sustainability committee, or distributed responsibility model, organizations need someone asking how climate intersects with supply chains, how water stress affects operations, how regulatory trajectories will shape strategy. Fragmentation across functions can lose this integrated perspective.
4. Align stakeholder engagement with strategy.
As BSR observed: "None of our sustainability slogans speak to how difficult it is to be middle class in America." Organizations need to reflect on how they communicate sustainability to get away from jargon and connect with stakeholders where they actually are.
For CSOs
1. Leverage compliance to achieve impact.
The regulatory wave isn't just burden—it's opportunity. CSRD, California disclosure requirements, ISSB standards, and CSDDD create structures that can anchor sustainability programs against political or budget pressures. As one CSO noted: "Compliance is my shield."
2. Build commercial credibility.
Whether through the Operator archetype's P&L ownership or the Integrater's cross-functional partnerships, CSOs who demonstrate business value have more durable positions than those relying solely on moral authority or regulatory expertise. Measuring sustainability ROI becomes essential.
3. Prepare for uncertainty through scenarios.
BSR recommends futures thinking and scenario analysis as core CSO competencies. Geopolitics, trade policy, technology disruption, and regulatory shifts create a planning environment where single-point forecasts are increasingly unreliable.
4. Maintain long-term perspective.
As one CSO told BSR: "Sustainability is not a four-year political term. We're here for the long term. Every sustainability person is thinking about 2030 as well as 2040 and 2050."
The Path Forward: Neither Obsolescence Nor Status Quo
The CSO role isn't dying—but the CSO role of 2020 may be. The evangelists and communications-focused sustainability leaders who built the function are giving way to operators, compliance experts, and strategic integrators who can demonstrate financial value while navigating regulatory complexity.
This evolution mirrors what happened in other functions that moved from peripheral to core. Finance evolved from bookkeeping to strategic partnership. IT evolved from back-office support to digital transformation. Sustainability is undergoing similar maturation—with the discomfort that accompanies any such transition.
The organizations and leaders who navigate this crossroads most successfully will be those who:
Recognize the moment for what it is: not the end of corporate sustainability, but a phase transition requiring new approaches
Match organizational needs to role design: choosing the right archetype for their specific context rather than defaulting to inherited models
Balance compliance with innovation: meeting requirements while preserving space for competitive differentiation
Build bridges across stakeholders: connecting sustainability strategy to the concerns of employees, communities, investors, and customers—not just regulators
Maintain long-term commitment: remembering that climate physics and stakeholder expectations don't reset with election cycles
The question asked at GreenBiz—"Is the CSO irrelevant?"—has a clear answer: No. But neither is the CSO role immune to evolution. The leaders and organizations that thrive will be those who embrace this crossroads as an opportunity for strategic renewal rather than a threat to be resisted.
How Council Fire Supports This Transition
At Council Fire, we've spent decades helping organizations navigate exactly these kinds of inflection points—where strategy, stakeholder engagement, and systems thinking must converge to create durable outcomes.
Our approach to sustainability strategy reflects the same principles that effective CSOs employ:
Radical Partnership: We work alongside clients as true partners, co-creating solutions rather than delivering prescriptions. Whether your organization is integrating sustainability across functions, building operational capabilities, or defending existing commitments, we bring collaborative expertise without imposing cookie-cutter frameworks.
Action Over Abstraction: The CSO landscape is saturated with frameworks and reports. We focus on implementation—helping organizations move from strategy to execution, from commitments to outcomes, from compliance requirements to operational integration.
Systems Thinking: Climate, regulation, stakeholders, and business strategy don't exist in silos. We help organizations see connections across these domains, anticipating how changes in one area will ripple through others.
Stakeholder-Centered Planning: As BSR's research makes clear, sustainability programs succeed or fail based on stakeholder engagement. We specialize in bringing diverse voices into strategy development—ensuring that sustainability initiatives connect with the people they're meant to serve.
Whether you're a board evaluating your sustainability governance, a CEO considering CSO structure, or a sustainability leader navigating the crossroads yourself, we're here to help you chart a path forward that fits your organization's unique context and aspirations.
FAQs
Is the CSO role disappearing?
No, but it's evolving. Global CSO numbers continue to grow, and over half of major companies now have senior sustainability leaders. However, the role is shifting from communications and advocacy toward compliance, operational integration, and demonstrated financial value. Some organizations are distributing sustainability responsibilities rather than centralizing them, but this represents evolution rather than elimination.
Which CSO archetype is best?
There's no universal answer—the right archetype depends on your organization's maturity, industry context, regulatory exposure, and strategic objectives. Organizations early in their sustainability journey may need Expert capability. Those with mature programs may benefit from Integrater approaches. Companies where sustainability can generate direct revenue may want Operator models. Organizations facing political headwinds may need Defender-in-Chief skills. Many effective CSOs blend elements of multiple archetypes.
How do regulatory requirements affect CSO strategy?
Regulatory compliance has become the dominant driver of CSO workload, with 90% spending more time on compliance than two years ago. While this creates burden, it also creates opportunity: mandatory requirements provide anchors for sustainability programs that voluntary initiatives couldn't offer. Effective CSOs leverage compliance to achieve impact rather than treating it as mere box-checking.
What skills do CSOs need in 2026?
The skill set is expanding beyond traditional environmental expertise to include: financial acumen and ability to demonstrate ROI; regulatory knowledge across multiple jurisdictions; stakeholder engagement and communication that connects with diverse audiences; systems thinking that links climate, operations, and strategy; change management capability for organizational transformation; and political navigation skills for internal advocacy.
How should boards think about sustainability governance?
Boards should clarify three questions: (1) What level of sustainability ambition does the organization want to pursue? (2) What governance structure—centralized CSO, distributed responsibility, or hybrid—best fits that ambition? (3) How will sustainability performance be measured and reported to the board? The answers will vary by organization, but the questions shouldn't be avoided.
What's the relationship between CSO roles and DEI?
Many organizations have historically linked sustainability and DEI under common leadership or governance structures. Current political pressures are leading some to separate these functions or reframe DEI programs. CSOs should be thoughtful about this intersection, recognizing both the substantive connections between sustainability and social equity and the tactical considerations that may require different positioning.
Additional Resources
Council Fire Guides
External Sources Cited
Published January 2026 | Council Fire
Council Fire is a certified B Corporation and global change agency helping mission-driven organizations turn complexity into clarity, and sustainability into strategy. Learn more about our work →
FAQ
01
What does a project look like?
02
How is the pricing structure?
03
Are all projects fixed scope?
04
What is the ROI?
05
How do we measure success?
06
What do I need to get started?
07
How easy is it to edit for beginners?
08
Do I need to know how to code?
Jan 13, 2026
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
Sustainable Business
In This Article
As political headwinds intensify and corporate priorities shift, Chief Sustainability Officers face a pivotal moment. The question isn't whether the role survives—it's how it evolves.
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
The CSO at a Crossroads: Four Paths Forward for Sustainability Leaders in 2026
Executive Summary
The Chief Sustainability Officer role is at an inflection point. After explosive growth that saw more CSOs hired in 2021 than in the previous five years combined, sustainability leaders now face mounting pressures: regulatory complexity, political backlash, budget constraints, and fundamental questions about the role's strategic positioning. This analysis examines the forces reshaping CSO mandates and explores four distinct paths forward—drawing on BSR's landmark research, current market data, and emerging best practices—to help organizations and their sustainability leaders navigate this critical juncture.
The Signal: Apple's CSO Exit
In January 2026, Apple announced that Lisa Jackson, one of the most prominent Chief Sustainability Officers in corporate America, would retire—and the company would not name a successor. Jackson's nearly twelve-year tenure, which followed her role as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, transformed Apple's environmental footprint and helped establish the modern CSO archetype. Her responsibilities will be distributed across existing business units.
Apple isn't alone. Over the past eighteen months, Nike, Unilever, and other major corporations have seen sustainability heads depart with responsibilities dispersed rather than replaced. The trend has sparked an uncomfortable question reverberating through boardrooms and sustainability conferences alike: Is the CSO becoming obsolete?
The answer, as with most consequential questions, is more nuanced than either alarm or dismissal would suggest. The CSO role isn't dying, but it is undergoing a fundamental metamorphosis that will reshape how organizations approach sustainability strategy, governance, and execution for years to come.
The Numbers: Understanding the CSO Landscape
Before examining the paths forward, context matters. The CSO population grew from relative obscurity to over 952 CSOs globally by January 2025, according to tracking by Sustainable Tech Partner. The acceleration was dramatic: Strategy& found that 394 CSO appointments occurred in 2020-2021 alone, compared to 414 total from 2011-2019.
This growth reflected genuine demand. BCG's December 2024 analysis found that 52% of S&P 500 and FTSE 100 companies now have a senior sustainability leader within the top two organizational levels—a 10 percentage-point increase in just one year. BoardEx data showed 27% of S&P 500 companies had a CSO as of 2023, up from 19% previously.
But growth has slowed, and the role's center of gravity is shifting. The Weinreb Group's 2025 CSO Report, surveying 215 CSOs, reveals the new landscape:
90% of CSOs spend more time on regulatory compliance than two years ago
60% cite regulation as their biggest challenge—more than budgets or resources
44% identified integrating sustainability into corporate strategy as the most significant change since 2023
31% identified increased politicization as the biggest shift
65% of CSOs are women (an all-time high)
Non-white CSOs have declined from 26% to 20% since 2023
Perhaps most tellingly, the proportion of CSOs reporting to legal teams has more than doubled since 2023. Sustainability is becoming, in many organizations, a compliance function rather than a strategic one.
BSR's Four Archetypes: How CSOs Are Adapting
In October 2024, BSR released groundbreaking research based on 30 in-depth interviews with sustainability executives in North America and Europe. The study identified three distinct archetypes emerging among CSOs navigating the changing environment. Then, following the 2024 U.S. presidential election, BSR conducted follow-up interviews that revealed a fourth archetype taking shape.
Archetype 1: The Integrater
Strategy: Embed sustainability throughout the organization, then step back.
Integraters pursue what might be called "planned obsolescence with purpose." They systematically weave environmental and social considerations into procurement, finance, operations, HR, and product development—building capability across functions while reducing dependence on a centralized sustainability team.
Characteristics:
Deep collaboration with finance, operations, and business unit leaders
Focus on capability-building and knowledge transfer
Gradual reduction of dedicated sustainability staff as functions absorb responsibilities
Success measured by how well sustainability persists without central orchestration
Best suited for: Organizations with mature sustainability programs, strong cross-functional relationships, and executive teams genuinely committed to integration. The approach requires patience and political skill—integration is measured in years, not quarters.
For organizations pursuing this path, embedding sustainability into core business strategy requires careful attention to governance structures and stakeholder alignment.
Archetype 2: The Operator
Strategy: Run sustainability like a business unit with measurable P&L impact.
Operators transform sustainability from a staff function into an operational one. They own budget lines, manage revenue-generating programs (renewable energy installations, circular economy initiatives, sustainable product lines), and demonstrate direct contribution to EBITDA.
Characteristics:
Sustainability initiatives with clear revenue attribution or cost savings
Operating metrics alongside traditional ESG metrics
Commercial acumen as important as environmental expertise
Team structures resembling business units rather than advisory functions
Best suited for: Organizations where sustainability can generate demonstrable financial returns—through operational efficiency, premium products, or new market opportunities. Requires executive support for treating sustainability as profit center rather than cost center.
Archetype 3: The Expert
Strategy: Serve as internal consultant and external voice on specialized knowledge.
Experts become the organization's authoritative source on climate science, regulatory developments, stakeholder expectations, and emerging risks. They advise on strategic decisions without owning operational execution, positioning themselves as essential interpreters of a complex and rapidly evolving landscape.
Characteristics:
Deep technical knowledge in specific domains (climate, biodiversity, human rights, regulatory frameworks)
Credibility with external stakeholders including investors, regulators, and NGOs
Influence through insight rather than authority
Smaller teams with specialized expertise
Best suited for: Organizations in heavily regulated industries, those facing significant stakeholder pressure, or companies where sustainability risks are technically complex. The Expert archetype is particularly relevant in sectors like energy, extractives, chemicals, and financial services.
Organizations navigating CSRD, CSDDD, and evolving regulatory requirements often find the Expert archetype essential for maintaining compliance credibility.
Archetype 4: The Defender-in-Chief
Strategy: Protect existing commitments while adapting to political headwinds.
This fourth archetype emerged from BSR's January 2025 follow-up research conducted after the U.S. presidential election. One CSO described the role as "defender-in-chief, speaking with C-suite executives almost every day" to retain commitments and prevent backsliding.
Characteristics:
Constant internal advocacy to maintain existing programs and targets
Emphasis on business fundamentals: regulation, resilience, and performance
Strategic retreat from visible activism to protect core programs
Focus on EU, UK, and California regulations as anchors for global standards
As one BSR interviewee noted: "We're not looking for bold. We don't want to be a target."
Best suited for: Organizations facing internal skepticism, board-level pressure to reduce ESG commitments, or operating in politically charged sectors. The Defender archetype is inherently transitional—a holding pattern while waiting for conditions to shift.
The Defender-in-Chief faces a delicate balance. As BSR observed, there's genuine concern that "skeptics will use the election as an excuse to reduce resources, investment, and commitment to sustainability." Yet 90% of surveyed CSOs report staying committed to their sustainability work despite political pressures—suggesting resilience beneath the surface adaptation.
The Underlying Debate: Integration or Obsolescence?
Beyond archetypes, a more fundamental tension is reshaping the CSO conversation. At GreenBiz 26 in January, a provocative debate asked: "Is the CSO irrelevant?"
The case for irrelevance:
Critics argue that as sustainability becomes financially and operationally material, the dedicated CSO role loses purpose. The best outcome, in this view, is successful integration—where procurement owns sustainable sourcing, finance owns climate risk, operations owns efficiency, and legal owns compliance. "Influence without authority," these critics contend, "falls short when sustainability becomes everyone's job."
There's also a talent paradox. Many CSOs built careers on climate science, human rights advocacy, and environmental policy—valuable expertise, but often disconnected from P&L management, operational execution, and capital allocation. As sustainability moves from communications to core strategy, the skill sets required may be shifting toward those already embedded in traditional business functions.
The case for essential evolution:
Defenders counter that rising complexity makes an integrative role more essential, not less. Climate risk now intersects with geopolitics, supply chain disruption, AI governance, water security, and biodiversity loss in ways no single function can navigate. Someone needs to see the whole system.
Moreover, as Harvard Business Review noted, the CSO role has already evolved dramatically. Early CSOs were often "stealth PR executives" focused on messaging and reputation. Today's most effective CSOs spearhead genuine integration of material ESG factors into corporate strategy, capital allocation, and risk management.
The resolution may be that both perspectives contain truth. The question isn't whether CSOs matter—it's which type of CSO matters for which organization at which stage of its sustainability journey.
What's Changing: Key Shifts Reshaping the Role
From Impact to Compliance
The Weinreb data tells a clear story: regulatory compliance now dominates CSO workloads. With CSRD in Europe, California's climate disclosure laws, and ISSB standards spreading globally, the volume of required reporting has exploded. One CSO in BSR's research put it bluntly: "We need to give everyone a course on materiality 101."
This shift carries risks. When compliance becomes the primary focus, innovation suffers. Organizations may meet reporting requirements while failing to capture the competitive advantages sustainability can offer—operational efficiency, risk mitigation, talent attraction, and market differentiation.
From Bold to Quiet
"Greenhushing" has emerged as a significant trend. Companies that once trumpeted sustainability achievements now communicate cautiously, if at all. The fear of greenwashing accusations—which have evolved from marketing embarrassments to legal liabilities—combines with political backlash concerns to push sustainability communications underground.
BSR's research found CSOs actively moderating their organizations' public positioning: "We're not looking for bold. We don't want to be a target." While understandable as risk management, this approach may undermine the stakeholder engagement and market signaling that sustainability communications traditionally provided.
From Voluntary to Mandatory
The era of voluntary sustainability initiatives is ending. Science Based Targets initiative now counts over 4,200 companies with approved targets—a 102% increase since 2022. But the motivation has shifted from brand differentiation to regulatory compliance and investor expectations.
This transition has implications for the CSO role. When sustainability was voluntary, CSOs were evangelists and advocates. When it's mandatory, they become compliance officers and risk managers. Different skills, different organizational positioning, different success metrics.
From Messaging to Money
Perhaps most significantly, sustainability conversations have moved from "show me the impact and the money" to simply "show me the money." Deloitte's research found CEOs prioritizing cost management, supply chain resilience, and AI adoption over sustainability messaging.
This isn't necessarily retreat—it may represent maturation. Sustainability initiatives that demonstrate clear financial returns will survive and expand. Those that relied primarily on reputational benefits face harder scrutiny.
The DEI Intersection
One area of particular uncertainty involves the intersection of sustainability and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. BSR's research found CSOs navigating careful pivots: "DEI as DEI will change"—with organizations increasingly reframing programs around "inclusion" and "belonging" rather than explicit diversity targets.
Several CSOs expressed concern about employee protections, including LGBTQ rights, reproductive rights, and immigration—issues that intersect with sustainability's broader definition of stakeholder welfare. The scope of the CSO mandate may be narrowing in practice even as stated commitments remain unchanged.
This retrenchment carries demographic implications. The decline in non-white CSOs from 26% to 20% since 2023 suggests the field may be becoming less diverse at precisely the moment when diverse perspectives on global sustainability challenges are most needed.
Navigating the Crossroads: Strategic Recommendations
For Organizations
1. Define the role before filling it.
The worst outcome is a CSO with unclear mandate, insufficient authority, and misaligned expectations. Organizations should determine which archetype—Integrater, Operator, Expert, or Defender—fits their current stage, industry context, and strategic objectives before making appointments or restructuring.
Building a corporate sustainability strategy requires clarity on governance, accountability, and decision rights.
2. Resource the compliance burden realistically.
Regulatory requirements aren't optional, and they're expanding. Organizations that under-resource compliance risk audit failures, investor concerns, and regulatory penalties. But compliance teams shouldn't be confused with strategy teams—both are necessary, and they require different capabilities.
3. Preserve systems thinking capability.
Whether through a CSO, sustainability committee, or distributed responsibility model, organizations need someone asking how climate intersects with supply chains, how water stress affects operations, how regulatory trajectories will shape strategy. Fragmentation across functions can lose this integrated perspective.
4. Align stakeholder engagement with strategy.
As BSR observed: "None of our sustainability slogans speak to how difficult it is to be middle class in America." Organizations need to reflect on how they communicate sustainability to get away from jargon and connect with stakeholders where they actually are.
For CSOs
1. Leverage compliance to achieve impact.
The regulatory wave isn't just burden—it's opportunity. CSRD, California disclosure requirements, ISSB standards, and CSDDD create structures that can anchor sustainability programs against political or budget pressures. As one CSO noted: "Compliance is my shield."
2. Build commercial credibility.
Whether through the Operator archetype's P&L ownership or the Integrater's cross-functional partnerships, CSOs who demonstrate business value have more durable positions than those relying solely on moral authority or regulatory expertise. Measuring sustainability ROI becomes essential.
3. Prepare for uncertainty through scenarios.
BSR recommends futures thinking and scenario analysis as core CSO competencies. Geopolitics, trade policy, technology disruption, and regulatory shifts create a planning environment where single-point forecasts are increasingly unreliable.
4. Maintain long-term perspective.
As one CSO told BSR: "Sustainability is not a four-year political term. We're here for the long term. Every sustainability person is thinking about 2030 as well as 2040 and 2050."
The Path Forward: Neither Obsolescence Nor Status Quo
The CSO role isn't dying—but the CSO role of 2020 may be. The evangelists and communications-focused sustainability leaders who built the function are giving way to operators, compliance experts, and strategic integrators who can demonstrate financial value while navigating regulatory complexity.
This evolution mirrors what happened in other functions that moved from peripheral to core. Finance evolved from bookkeeping to strategic partnership. IT evolved from back-office support to digital transformation. Sustainability is undergoing similar maturation—with the discomfort that accompanies any such transition.
The organizations and leaders who navigate this crossroads most successfully will be those who:
Recognize the moment for what it is: not the end of corporate sustainability, but a phase transition requiring new approaches
Match organizational needs to role design: choosing the right archetype for their specific context rather than defaulting to inherited models
Balance compliance with innovation: meeting requirements while preserving space for competitive differentiation
Build bridges across stakeholders: connecting sustainability strategy to the concerns of employees, communities, investors, and customers—not just regulators
Maintain long-term commitment: remembering that climate physics and stakeholder expectations don't reset with election cycles
The question asked at GreenBiz—"Is the CSO irrelevant?"—has a clear answer: No. But neither is the CSO role immune to evolution. The leaders and organizations that thrive will be those who embrace this crossroads as an opportunity for strategic renewal rather than a threat to be resisted.
How Council Fire Supports This Transition
At Council Fire, we've spent decades helping organizations navigate exactly these kinds of inflection points—where strategy, stakeholder engagement, and systems thinking must converge to create durable outcomes.
Our approach to sustainability strategy reflects the same principles that effective CSOs employ:
Radical Partnership: We work alongside clients as true partners, co-creating solutions rather than delivering prescriptions. Whether your organization is integrating sustainability across functions, building operational capabilities, or defending existing commitments, we bring collaborative expertise without imposing cookie-cutter frameworks.
Action Over Abstraction: The CSO landscape is saturated with frameworks and reports. We focus on implementation—helping organizations move from strategy to execution, from commitments to outcomes, from compliance requirements to operational integration.
Systems Thinking: Climate, regulation, stakeholders, and business strategy don't exist in silos. We help organizations see connections across these domains, anticipating how changes in one area will ripple through others.
Stakeholder-Centered Planning: As BSR's research makes clear, sustainability programs succeed or fail based on stakeholder engagement. We specialize in bringing diverse voices into strategy development—ensuring that sustainability initiatives connect with the people they're meant to serve.
Whether you're a board evaluating your sustainability governance, a CEO considering CSO structure, or a sustainability leader navigating the crossroads yourself, we're here to help you chart a path forward that fits your organization's unique context and aspirations.
FAQs
Is the CSO role disappearing?
No, but it's evolving. Global CSO numbers continue to grow, and over half of major companies now have senior sustainability leaders. However, the role is shifting from communications and advocacy toward compliance, operational integration, and demonstrated financial value. Some organizations are distributing sustainability responsibilities rather than centralizing them, but this represents evolution rather than elimination.
Which CSO archetype is best?
There's no universal answer—the right archetype depends on your organization's maturity, industry context, regulatory exposure, and strategic objectives. Organizations early in their sustainability journey may need Expert capability. Those with mature programs may benefit from Integrater approaches. Companies where sustainability can generate direct revenue may want Operator models. Organizations facing political headwinds may need Defender-in-Chief skills. Many effective CSOs blend elements of multiple archetypes.
How do regulatory requirements affect CSO strategy?
Regulatory compliance has become the dominant driver of CSO workload, with 90% spending more time on compliance than two years ago. While this creates burden, it also creates opportunity: mandatory requirements provide anchors for sustainability programs that voluntary initiatives couldn't offer. Effective CSOs leverage compliance to achieve impact rather than treating it as mere box-checking.
What skills do CSOs need in 2026?
The skill set is expanding beyond traditional environmental expertise to include: financial acumen and ability to demonstrate ROI; regulatory knowledge across multiple jurisdictions; stakeholder engagement and communication that connects with diverse audiences; systems thinking that links climate, operations, and strategy; change management capability for organizational transformation; and political navigation skills for internal advocacy.
How should boards think about sustainability governance?
Boards should clarify three questions: (1) What level of sustainability ambition does the organization want to pursue? (2) What governance structure—centralized CSO, distributed responsibility, or hybrid—best fits that ambition? (3) How will sustainability performance be measured and reported to the board? The answers will vary by organization, but the questions shouldn't be avoided.
What's the relationship between CSO roles and DEI?
Many organizations have historically linked sustainability and DEI under common leadership or governance structures. Current political pressures are leading some to separate these functions or reframe DEI programs. CSOs should be thoughtful about this intersection, recognizing both the substantive connections between sustainability and social equity and the tactical considerations that may require different positioning.
Additional Resources
Council Fire Guides
External Sources Cited
Published January 2026 | Council Fire
Council Fire is a certified B Corporation and global change agency helping mission-driven organizations turn complexity into clarity, and sustainability into strategy. Learn more about our work →
FAQ
01
What does a project look like?
02
How is the pricing structure?
03
Are all projects fixed scope?
04
What is the ROI?
05
How do we measure success?
06
What do I need to get started?
07
How easy is it to edit for beginners?
08
Do I need to know how to code?