The “Head of Sustainability” Trap: Why Misleading Job Titles Are Holding the Sector Back

Tom Rodford, Founder & CEO, Rodford & Partners

Note: The views expressed on these pages are the opinions of their respective author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of UKSIF.

This website should not be taken as financial or investment advice or seen as an endorsement or recommendation of any particular company, investment or individual. While we have sought to ensure information on this site is correct, we do not accept liability for any errors.

The “Head of Sustainability” Trap: Why Misleading Job Titles Are Holding the Sector Back

Tom Rodford, Founder & CEO, Rodford & Partners

Most roles advertised as “Head of Sustainability” are, in fact, missing a vital word at the end—often something like Reporting, Compliance, or Disclosure.

This may appear to be a minor detail, but it reflects a broader and increasingly problematic trend within the sustainable finance and corporate responsibility sector. Many of today’s senior sustainability appointments are centred on regulatory reporting, ESG disclosures, and compliance work. Yet, the titles used to advertise these positions suggest a strategic remit, with responsibilities that span innovation, stakeholder engagement, and business transformation.

This disconnect is causing growing confusion and frustration for both employers and candidates.

The Challenge of Inconsistent Job Definitions
The sustainability profession has expanded rapidly over the past decade. However, that growth has not been accompanied by consistent standards in how roles are defined or titled. A “Head of Sustainability” at one organisation may lead a cross-functional, commercially integrated strategy, reporting directly to the Chief Executive Officer. In contrast, the same title elsewhere may denote a role focused almost entirely on non-financial reporting, completing disclosure frameworks, and liaising with investor relations.

This lack of clarity is not simply a linguistic issue; it has a tangible impact on recruitment outcomes. Employers struggle to attract candidates with the right blend of skills, while jobseekers are often surprised to find the substance of the role diverges significantly from the advertised responsibilities.

Employers Must Be Clear About What They Need
Part of the problem lies in how employers draft job descriptions. Many include an extensive list of responsibilities that encompass reporting, stakeholder engagement, materiality assessments, strategy development, and internal transformation — all within a single role. This may reflect ambitious sustainability goals, but it often lacks realism, especially if the function is under-resourced or isolated from core decision-making.

In several instances, clients have informed us that they avoided using the word “reporting” in the job title, fearing it might deter strong applicants. While understandable, this approach creates a false expectation and undermines the recruitment process. If a role is primarily focused on reporting and compliance, this should be made clear in the title and the accompanying description. Misleading language only increases the likelihood of a poor fit, contributing to higher turnover and lost momentum on sustainability objectives.

What Candidates Should Be Asking
In the absence of consistent job titles and structures, candidates must take a proactive role in understanding the true scope of any opportunity. During the interview process, it is advisable to ask questions such as:
• What proportion of the role is dedicated to reporting and disclosure activities?
• Is there an existing sustainability strategy in place, or is the expectation that the appointee will create one?
• Does this role sit within a central function or alongside operational and commercial teams?
• How is sustainability governed at Board or Executive level?
These questions will help candidates manage their own expectations and ensure they step into roles aligned with their experience and aspirations. Furthermore, such conversations often prompt employers to clarify their own thinking, which can only be beneficial for both parties.

Tailoring Your CV to Fit a Fragmented Market
Given the wide variation in sustainability roles and responsibilities, candidates should take particular care to tailor their curriculum vitae to each position. Job titles alone no longer provide an adequate summary of professional experience. It is therefore essential to communicate clearly whether one’s experience lies primarily in regulatory compliance, strategic development, stakeholder engagement, or another domain.

Candidates should articulate not only what they have done, but also the context in which they have done it. For example:
• Were sustainability decisions made in collaboration with procurement, finance, or product development?
• Did the role involve external engagement with investors, regulators, or customers?
• Was the focus on implementation, reporting, or long-term transformation?
Precision in describing one’s background can make all the difference when job functions are not standardised across the industry.

Towards Greater Transparency and Better Outcomes
It is time to move towards greater clarity and honesty in sustainability recruitment. This does not mean rigid standardisation—organisations will always need flexibility to define roles according to their structure and ambition. However, it does mean being transparent about the true nature of a role, both in title and description.

Employers must ask themselves: Is this truly a strategic position, or one grounded in compliance? Do we require a visionary leader or a technical specialist? Are we prepared to invest in implementation, or are we primarily focused on disclosure?

Candidates, likewise, should feel empowered to interrogate roles thoroughly, seek clarity where needed, and ensure that their own experience is being presented in a way that reflects the evolving—yet still fragmented—landscape of the sustainability profession.

By closing the gap between expectation and reality, we can not only improve hiring outcomes but also build a more robust, well-resourced, and effective sustainability function across sectors.

Note: The views expressed on these pages are the opinions of their respective author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of UKSIF.

This website should not be taken as financial or investment advice or seen as an endorsement or recommendation of any particular company, investment or individual. While we have sought to ensure information on this site is correct, we do not accept liability for any errors.