5 Sustainability Organization Models by McKinsey: Which One Fits Your Company?
1
6
0
As sustainability climbs higher on the corporate agenda, one critical question keeps emerging:“How should we organize for sustainability to make it truly impactful?”
McKinsey & Company has identified five common sustainability organization models, each with its own strengths and challenges. These structures offer valuable insights for businesses navigating how to embed sustainability across their operations. Whether you’re just getting started or are refining your ESG strategy, understanding these models can help you build a structure that supports both performance and purpose.
Let’s explore each model briefly—with advantages, potential downsides, and when it works best.
1. Centralized Model
What it is: A dedicated sustainability or ESG team oversees all sustainability-related activities. Strategy and execution are led from a central unit.
Pros:
Ensures consistency and strategic alignment
Simplifies regulatory compliance and reporting
Efficient resource allocation
Cons:
Risk of being disconnected from business units
May slow down decision-making and execution
Best for:Organizations new to sustainability or looking to establish a strong foundational strategy.
2. Decentralized Model
What it is: Each department or function manages its own sustainability initiatives independently, with minimal central coordination.
Pros:
Faster execution at the local level
Tailored solutions that align with operational realities
Cons:
Lack of alignment across departments
Difficult to standardize reporting and performance tracking
Best for:Smaller, agile companies or those with a culture of decentralized decision-making.
3. Matrix Model
What it is: Combines a central sustainability team with sustainability champions or leads embedded across business units. Strategy is co-created and co-executed.
Pros:
Balances strategic direction with on-the-ground action
Encourages collaboration and cross-functional ownership
Scalable across geographies and functions
Cons:
Can be complex to manage and coordinate
Risk of unclear roles or accountability
Best for:Mid-to-large organizations with growing sustainability maturity.
4. Business-Unit Led Model
What it is: Sustainability is led within individual business units, tailored to their specific sector, customers, and operations.
Pros:
High relevance and ownership within each business
Allows for deep industry-specific focus
Cons:
May lead to fragmentation and inconsistency
Harder to implement a unified sustainability vision
Best for:Conglomerates or diversified companies operating across multiple sectors.
5. Hybrid Model
What it is: A flexible mix of centralized and decentralized approaches. Some elements are led centrally (e.g., reporting, policy), while others are owned by business units.
Pros:
Adapts to evolving needs and capabilities
Offers strategic control with operational flexibility
Encourages innovation while maintaining oversight
Cons:
Requires strong communication and governance
Can be confusing without clear roles and processes
Best for:Organizations in transition, scaling up ESG efforts, or aiming for long-term transformation.
Final Thoughts: One Size Doesn’t Fit All
The ideal sustainability structure depends on where your company stands today—its size, sector, maturity, and ambition. A centralized model might work well to build early momentum, while a matrix or hybrid model often suits companies ready to scale their impact.
What matters most is cross-functional collaboration, clear accountability, and leadership buy-in. As sustainability moves from the sidelines to the core of business strategy, choosing the right structure is not just a matter of efficiency—but a driver of real impact.
