From Fragmented ESG Priorities to Disclosure: The Role of R&D Intensity and Board Characteristics

As Environmental (E), Social (S), and Governance (G) disclosures gain prominence for investors, regulators, and stakeholders, attention must extend beyond disclosure volume to the balance across ESG dimensions. Many firms emphasize one or two pillars over others, producing asymmetries in sustainability communication, which we term ESG dispersion. These imbalances can create confusion for stakeholders and impact investor trust. While prior research focuses largely on board‐level antecedents of aggregate ESG disclosure, the consequences of such internal imbalances remain underexplored. Drawing on signaling, institutional, and resource‐based perspectives, we examine how ESG dispersion is associated with overall ESG disclosure using panel data from S&P 500 firms (2016–2022). We find a U‐shaped relationship: firms with low or high dispersion disclose more, whereas moderate dispersion reduces disclosure intensity. This non‐linearity could be because low dispersion signals uniformity and clarity, while moderate dispersion could create ambiguity and coordination challenges, and high dispersion may motivate firms to strategically highlight key ESG strengths. R&D intensity partially mediates this effect, highlighting the role of internal innovation in translating ESG priorities into disclosure. Governance conditions moderate this association in their own ways: board women representation dampens the relationship, reducing the sensitivity of disclosure intensity to extreme ESG balance or concentration. While CEO duality has no significant impact. These findings carry societal and managerial implications, linking internal ESG alignment and governance to transparency, stakeholder trust, and corporate accountability. Managers should also monitor the alignment between the individual E, S, G pillars, besides the aggregate ESG disclosures, and consider governance structures in this context.