- within Corporate/Commercial Law topic(s)
- in United States
- with readers working within the Accounting & Consultancy, Retail & Leisure and Law Firm industries
- within Corporate/Commercial Law, Family and Matrimonial and Compliance topic(s)
For decades, promoters preparing for initial public offerings focused on financial metrics, operational scale, and market positioning. The implicit understanding was simple: deliver strong earnings growth, maintain clean audits, and manage stakeholder relationships. The rest would fall into place.
That calculus has fundamentally changed. Today's capital markets—particularly in India where regulatory evolution is accelerating—evaluate companies through a lens that extends far beyond financial performance. Environmental, Social, and Governance considerations, collectively known as ESG, have moved from voluntary disclosure to regulatory requirement to investment prerequisite.
More critically for promoters, ESG scrutiny has become deeply personal. Exchanges, institutional investors, and rating agencies no longer look solely at company-level policies and disclosures. They examine promoter behavior, governance history, related party transaction patterns, and the cultural DNA that promoters embed in their organisations. The question isn't just "Does your company have ESG policies?" It's "Do you, as a promoter, embody ESG principles in how you've built and governed this business?"
This shift reflects a maturation in market thinking. Investors recognise that ESG isn't a compliance department's responsibility—it's a manifestation of promoter values, priorities, and long-term thinking. Companies don't develop strong governance cultures by accident. They develop them because promoters insist on it, model it, and build systems that reinforce it even when it's commercially inconvenient.
The New SEBI Framework: ESG as Listing Prerequisite
The Securities and Exchange Board of India has progressively strengthened ESG disclosure requirements, particularly through the Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report framework applicable to the top 1,000 listed companies by market capitalization. For companies approaching IPO, these requirements represent both regulatory obligation and market expectation that must be addressed before listing, not after.
SEBI's approach reflects global regulatory trends while acknowledging India's unique market characteristics. The framework requires detailed disclosure across environmental impact, social practices including labor standards and community engagement, and governance structures including board composition and ethics frameworks. Critically, these aren't checkbox exercises—exchanges and investors scrutinize the substance behind disclosures.
For promoters, the practical implication is straightforward: ESG readiness must begin years before you contemplate filing a draft red herring prospectus. The infrastructure, policies, data collection systems, and cultural practices that enable credible ESG disclosure take time to implement and demonstrate track record. You cannot manufacture ESG credibility in the six to twelve months before listing.
How Promoter Behavior Cascades Through Organizations
Promoters set organizational tone in ways both obvious and subtle. The governance choices you make in building your business—how you structure related party transactions, whether you prioritize board independence, how you respond to whistleblower complaints, whether you maintain arms-length dealings with group companies—create precedents that cascade through your organization.
Consider related party transactions, a particular focus of exchange scrutiny in Indian markets. Companies with complex group structures or significant promoter-related dealings face intensive questioning during IPO due diligence. The issue isn't whether such transactions exist—they're common in Indian corporate structures—but whether they're conducted transparently, priced appropriately, and governed through proper approvals and disclosures.
Promoters who treat related party transactions casually, negotiating favorable terms for group companies or using corporate resources for personal benefit, embed this culture throughout their organizations. Management teams observe and replicate these patterns. When the company approaches IPO, these practices become documented liabilities that must be unwound, explained, or defended—often at significant cost to valuation and listing timeline.
Board independence offers another revealing example. Many promoters approaching IPO have historically maintained boards dominated by family members, long-time associates, or individuals unlikely to challenge management decisions. From a governance perspective, this creates obvious concerns about oversight, accountability, and minority shareholder protection.
Investors evaluate board composition as a proxy for promoter mindset. A board that includes genuinely independent directors with relevant expertise and track record of independent judgment signals that promoters welcome accountability and value diverse perspectives. A board that appears designed to rubber-stamp promoter decisions signals the opposite—and investors price this governance risk into their valuations accordingly.
The handling of whistleblower complaints and internal investigations reveals promoter commitment to governance culture with particular clarity. Companies that maintain robust whistleblower mechanisms, conduct thorough investigations, and take appropriate action demonstrate that governance isn't merely policy documentation—it's lived practice. Companies where complaints are discouraged, investigations are superficial, or consequences are selectively applied signal that governance commitments are performative rather than genuine.
The Three ESG BlindSpots Most Promoters Miss
Promoters preparing for IPO often misunderstand what ESG scrutiny actually entails. Three blind spots appear repeatedly in our experience advising companies through listing processes.
First, social responsibility is not corporate social responsibility programs. Many promoters believe that funding schools, sponsoring community events, or making charitable donations satisfies the "social" component of ESG. These activities are positive, but they're not what investors mean by social responsibility.
Social ESG encompasses labor practices including fair wages and working conditions, diversity and inclusion across your workforce and leadership, data privacy and cybersecurity protections for customers and employees, supply chain labor standards, and stakeholder engagement mechanisms. These aren't peripheral activities—they're core business practices that affect operations, reputation, and legal risk.
For technology companies particularly, data privacy and cybersecurity have moved from IT concerns to board-level ESG issues. Investors want to understand what data you collect, how you protect it, whether you've experienced breaches, and how you govern data usage. Companies that treat these as technical rather than strategic issues face increasing scrutiny and valuation pressure.
Second, governance is not a checklist—it's organizational culture. Many companies approach governance by implementing policies that satisfy regulatory requirements: codes of conduct, conflict of interest policies, related party transaction frameworks, whistleblower mechanisms. These policies are necessary, but they're not sufficient.
Investors distinguish between companies that have governance policies and companies that have governance cultures. The difference lies in implementation, enforcement, and consequences. Do your policies actually govern behavior, or do they gather dust in compliance manuals? When violations occur, are they addressed promptly and consistently regardless of seniority? Do employees believe they can raise concerns without retaliation?
Governance culture is ultimately a function of promoter behavior. If promoters circumvent policies they've established, manage selectively enforce standards, or tolerate violations by senior management, the organization learns that formal policies are performative rather than binding. This cultural reality becomes evident during due diligence, through employee interviews, stakeholder conversations, and operational reviews.
Third, greenwashing is a reputational risk, not a communications tactic. As ESG disclosure requirements have expanded, some companies treat environmental commitments as marketing opportunities rather than operational realities. They announce ambitious carbon neutrality targets without credible reduction plans, tout sustainability initiatives that represent marginal improvements, or selectively disclose favorable environmental metrics while obscuring less favorable ones.
Investors and rating agencies have become adept at identifying greenwashing. They examine whether environmental commitments are supported by capital expenditure, operational changes, and measurable progress. They compare company disclosures against industry benchmarks and third-party assessments. They evaluate whether environmental governance includes board oversight, management incentives, and accountability mechanisms.
Companies caught greenwashing face dual risks: regulatory scrutiny from authorities increasingly focused on misleading ESG claims, and market skepticism that extends beyond environmental issues to question management credibility more broadly. The reputational damage from exposed greenwashing often exceeds any short-term marketing benefit from exaggerated claims.
A Promoter's ESG Playbook for IPO Readiness
Building genuine ESG infrastructure requires systematic effort across multiple dimensions. Based on our experience advising companies through listing processes, several elements consistently emerge as critical.
Policy infrastructure represents the foundation. Companies need documented policies across key ESG domains: environmental management systems that track and reduce environmental impact, labor policies covering wages, working conditions, and workplace safety, diversity and inclusion frameworks that address hiring, advancement, and pay equity, data privacy and cybersecurity governance, supplier codes of conduct and monitoring mechanisms, and whistleblower protection and investigation procedures.
These policies must be more than documentation—they require implementation systems, training programs, monitoring mechanisms, and enforcement procedures. Investors evaluate policy effectiveness through operational evidence, not just document review.
Board structures need systematic strengthening. Building board independence and ESG expertise takes time and deliberate effort. Companies should identify genuinely independent directors with relevant industry expertise and governance experience at least two years before contemplating IPO. They should establish board committees—audit, nomination and remuneration, stakeholder relationship—with appropriate independent representation and documented charters. They should implement ESG board oversight through dedicated committees or integrated risk management frameworks.
Strong boards don't emerge overnight. Directors need time to understand your business, develop working relationships, and demonstrate independence through their oversight activities. Investors distinguish between boards recently constituted for listing purposes and boards with established track records of effective governance.
Internal audit and assurance systems provide credibility. ESG disclosures carry greater weight when supported by internal audit processes and external assurance. Companies should implement ESG data collection and reporting systems that enable accurate, timely disclosure. They should conduct regular internal audits of ESG policies and practices, with findings reported to the board. They should consider third-party ESG ratings and assessments that provide external validation of disclosures and practices.
External assurance of ESG disclosures, while not yet mandatory for most Indian companies, increasingly represents market expectation. Companies that obtain external assurance demonstrate confidence in their disclosures and commitment to transparency that investors value.
Stakeholder communication builds pre-listing credibility. Companies with strong ESG practices should communicate them systematically to key stakeholders before listing. This includes regular stakeholder engagement with employees, customers, suppliers, and community members regarding ESG priorities and performance. It includes transparent disclosure of ESG metrics, targets, and progress through sustainability reports and website disclosures. It includes proactive communication with potential investors about ESG strengths and improvement priorities.
Companies that wait until IPO marketing to discuss ESG face skepticism about whether their practices are genuine or recently manufactured for listing purposes. Companies with established track records of ESG communication and stakeholder engagement carry greater credibility.
Beyond Compliance: ESG as Valuation Driver
The most sophisticated promoters recognize that strong ESG practices aren't merely compliance obligations—they're competitive advantages that drive valuation through multiple channels.
Companies with strong ESG profiles access broader investor bases. Many institutional investors, particularly foreign institutional investors, operate under mandates that limit or exclude investments in companies with poor ESG performance. Companies with weak ESG profiles automatically exclude themselves from consideration by significant pools of capital, reducing demand and depressing valuations.
Strong ESG practices reduce operational and reputational risks that investors price into valuations. Companies with robust labor practices face lower strike risk and turnover costs. Companies with strong environmental management face lower regulatory risk and potential carbon liability. Companies with strong governance face lower fraud risk and expropriation risk. These risk reductions translate directly into higher valuations through lower discount rates.
ESG performance increasingly influences consumer and customer preferences, particularly in B2C sectors and among younger demographics. Companies with strong sustainability credentials and ethical practices capture market share from competitors, driving revenue growth that compounds into valuation premiums.
Perhaps most importantly, strong ESG practices signal long-term thinking that investors value. Promoters who invest in environmental sustainability, workforce development, and governance infrastructure despite short-term costs demonstrate commitment to building enduring businesses rather than optimizing for near-term exits. This long-term orientation attracts patient capital willing to pay premium valuations for sustainable competitive advantages.
The Strategic Imperative
ESG has evolved from voluntary disclosure to regulatory requirement to investment prerequisite. For promoters preparing companies for public markets, the question is no longer whether to prioritize ESG, but whether you'll do so proactively on your timeline, or reactively under pressure from exchanges and investors.
The promoters who recognize this reality early—who embed ESG principles in their governance choices, build systematic infrastructure for ESG management, and demonstrate track records of ESG performance before listing—navigate capital markets more successfully. They access broader investor bases, command premium valuations, and build foundations for long-term success in public markets.
Critically, this isn't about manufacturing ESG credentials for listing purposes. Investors distinguish between genuine ESG commitment and superficial compliance. The differentiator is promoter behavior—whether you've built businesses that reflect ESG principles in their operational DNA, not just their disclosure documents.
For India's capital markets, this shift represents a maturation toward global best practices, but more importantly, it reflects a regulatory outlook that prioritizes overall corporate integrity and institutional accountability, not just technical compliance with securities laws. The regulator's lens is expanding, and promoters who view ESG as a central pillar of responsible enterprise and not just a regulatory hoop to jump through, will be best placed to thrive in this evolving landscape.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.