Outcome Statements and Sub-Themes
The ADS ESG Pathway is not built on checklists or box-ticking exercises. Instead, it is founded on outcome-based assessment — a method that defines what good ESG performance looks like in practice. Each question in the framework is derived from a clearly articulated outcome statement. These statements guide organisations toward tangible, measurable progress — from foundational efforts to advanced sustainability leadership.
What Are Outcome Statements?
Outcome statements are short narratives that describe what effective ESG practices look like when embedded in an organisation. They are:
Anchored to specific ESG themes (e.g., Corporate GHG Emissions, Energy Efficiency, Waste Management)
Calibrated to a 4-point maturity scale (0 = Not Considered, 3 = Optimised)
Expressed in plain English while grounded in operational and governance realities
Designed for comparability across organisations of different sizes and sectors
Each outcome serves as the anchor for one or more assessment questions. These questions assess the presence, implementation, and maturity of capabilities, policies, roles, and data systems aligned to that outcome.
Example from Bronze Level:
Theme: Corporate GHG Emissions
Outcome Statement (L1.1): “The organisation measures and reduces its corporate emissions.”
This theme explores how an organisation manages its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — including measurement, governance roles, employee capability, and emissions reduction strategy. It encompasses core GRI disclosures (e.g. GRI 305: Emissions) and is informed by SASB’s sector-specific metrics (e.g. Scope 1 and 2 emissions, energy mix).
Sample Questions Derived from L1.1:
Is annual GHG emissions reporting conducted?
Is there an established role for an Emissions Officer?
Are staff literate in GHG monitoring and reporting?
Is there a comprehensive emissions reduction plan?
Is there a dedicated emissions reduction taskforce?
Maturity Guidance for “Is annual GHG reporting conducted?”
0 – Not Considered
No GHG reporting or reduction strategy is in place. No emissions officer or training.
1 – Defined
Emissions reporting is under consideration. Plans are being discussed.
2 – Managed
Reporting and basic governance are implemented. Staff are trained. A reduction plan exists.
3 – Optimised
Reporting is embedded and regularly reviewed. Data informs ongoing improvements. Roles and strategy have been stable for 2+ years.
This outcome statement and associated questions help an organisation determine not just whether they are engaging in ESG reporting — but how systematically and effectively it is being done.
What Are Sub-Themes?
Sub-themes exist where broader ESG themes encompass multiple complex areas. They ensure clarity, precision, and actionable feedback within assessments. For example:
Environmental Theme: Resource Efficiency Broken into:
Carbon / Emissions
Energy Efficiency
Waste Management
Water Use
Governance Theme: ESG Integration Broken into:
Policy Development
Reporting & Data
Training & Role Definition
Sub-themes allow organisations to focus their improvements and ensure that no key area of performance is masked within broader averages.
Using Outcome Statements in Assessments
Outcome statements are the foundation of the maturity model and define the intent of each assessment area. Organisations are expected to:
Read the Outcome Statement Carefully Understand what good looks like — conceptually and operationally.
Use the Associated Questions These break the outcome into measurable elements (e.g. policy, training, data, governance).
Review the Maturity Guidance Identify the level that most closely matches your current practice.
Assign a Score Based on Evidence Use documentation, processes, or roles to justify your score.
⚠️ If you’re unsure about your level, always aim conservatively. The moderation process supports fair calibration.
Progression Across Bronze, Silver, and Gold
The ESG Pathway follows a three-tiered progression model:
Bronze: Foundational Capabilities
Focuses on internal systems, role clarity, planning, and basic implementation.
Typical questions ask if a practice is in place (e.g. Do you have a GHG reporting process? Have you trained staff on emissions?).
Outcome statements reflect core ESG behaviours that any responsible organisation should be embedding.
Silver: Operational Integration and Engagement
Moves beyond internal readiness to embedding ESG across operations and decision-making.
Introduces concepts like lifecycle thinking, stakeholder engagement, and ESG-linked investment.
Example progression for GHG emissions:
Are emissions used in investment decisions?
Are value chain emissions (Scope 3) being mapped?
Is emissions data being disclosed externally in recognised formats (e.g. CDP, GRI)?
Gold: Supply Chain and Ecosystem Maturity
Focuses on ESG leadership beyond the organisational boundary.
Encourages supply chain alignment, circularity, collaboration, and disclosure.
Example progression for waste:
Are suppliers required to meet waste standards?
Are product lifecycles being redesigned to reduce environmental impact?
Is ESG performance used in supplier selection?
Each stage raises expectations in both depth (e.g. data sophistication, integration) and breadth (e.g. cross-departmental, external influence).
Why Outcome-Based Assessment?
This model provides several benefits:
Transparency: Each question links to a clearly defined outcome.
Benchmarking: Allows like-for-like comparison across organisations.
Improvement-Focused: Encourages structured ESG development with achievable next steps.
Global Alignment: Outcome statements are shaped by global frameworks including:
GRI Standards – e.g. GRI 305 (Emissions), GRI 302 (Energy), GRI 403 (H&S), GRI 406–412 (Labour & Rights)
SASB – Sector-specific KPIs that align with material risks and opportunities.
TCFD and ISSB principles – Reflected in higher-tier questions, especially Gold.
Last updated
Was this helpful?