It’s hardly news that corporate America is scrubbing references to ESG, DEI, and sustainability in response to political pressure. I’ve been struggling to understand whether these changes are merely a shift in language or a troubling sign of something deeper.
What I hadn’t fully considered were the implications of removing these terms from the job titles of those who lead the work.
That changed during a recent convening of our 2024 class of Aspen Institute Economic Mobility Fellows. We had a lively debate about whether explicit “impact” job titles help or hinder leaders set on driving social impact alongside business value.
Eager to go deeper, I reached out to our 2023 and 2024 Fellows to ask: Is an explicitly named social impact title important to advancing economic mobility inside companies?
Here’s what I learned:
The Case for Impact Titles
Impact Titles Signal Cultural and Market Commitment Several leaders argued that these titles aren’t just labels—they’re signals. Signals of accountability, company values, and corporate culture. “Social impact titles are a signal to the market that you’re invested in the cause,” said one Fellow.
Others highlighted how these signals help to attract and retain employees, commenting that “younger workers seek belonging… if they can’t find it, they’ll look elsewhere.”
Impact Titles Create Accountability and Ownership. Beyond signaling, titles create clarity. When someone is explicitly responsible for the work, it’s more likely to get done—and measured. As one participant put it: “Explicitly assigning responsibility ensures clarity of scope and accountability.” Without that clarity, the work often becomes everyone’s job—and no one’s priority.
Impact Titles Help to Integrate the Work into Strategy. Others argued that dedicated roles help to embed social goals into core business strategy. Without them, impact efforts risk becoming inconsistent or ad hoc. These titles also create space for attention and innovation—something that’s hard to come by in cultures dominated by narrow short-term thinking.
The Case Against Impact Titles
Impact Titles Lead to Marginalization. Other Fellows argued that named roles can unintentionally marginalize the work, relegating it to the realm of nice-to-haves. “It gets cast aside in a bucket of ‘do-good-ism,’” warned one leader.
These Fellows claimed that true impact occurs only when social goals are embedded into everyday business decisions—not siloed in a separate department. “Social impact should be embedded in decision-making throughout the organization.”
Leadership Matters More than Titles. Without executive buy-in, titles mean little. But with it, impact work can thrive regardless of formal naming. Some Fellows maintained that the most impactful programs they’d seen weren’t led by someone with a social impact title—they were championed by CEOs, CHROs, or other leaders who made it a priority.
Impact Titles Can Undermine Shared Responsibility. Designating one team or person to an impact function may suggest others are off the hook, especially in large organizations. One Fellow argued that naming a role might inadvertently discourage shared responsibility. “It communicates the work is only the responsibility of that role.”
The Work Still Gets Done Without Titles And finally, several reminded me: The work can get done without the title. Or, as one person put it, “The work is bigger than me—call me a janitor, I don’t care.”
So where does that leave us (me)?
I’ve always imagined that explicit impact and sustainability roles would eventually disappear—not because the work ends, but because it has become fully integrated into business-as-usual.
At my most optimistic, I can see how this moment of push-back will expedite that outcome. Sustainability and social impact efforts will have to be grounded in the business case to survive. That’s a good thing.
But I worry that we have been forced us to take the cake out of the oven too early. In the face of economic, cultural, and political pressure, many companies have erased the language of impact before the foundation was fully set, leaving the work more vulnerable than ever. Without the explicit attention afforded by impact titles, I worry these name changes will effectively curtail the work.
I welcome other perspectives and experiences – especially from those whose job titles have recently been changed. Are the changes to job titles as serious a concern as I fear – or do we have reason to believe that these changes create real opportunity for progress?
This blog post was originally published on LinkedIn. Follow Eli Malinsky for more insights on business and society.