How Firms ‘Speak’ Social: Disclosure Posture as a Stable Strategic Communication Construct in ESG Reporting

Why do firms subject to identical ESG reporting requirements nevertheless ‘speak’ the Social pillar in different ways? Some foreground numerical indicators; others rely on narrative accounts of policies, systems and stakeholder engagement. This variation in disclosure form, rather than in disclosure coverage, motivates this exploratory study. Existing ESG disclosure research has largely examined disclosure extent, topic coverage, assurance and performance alignment, leaving less understood how communicative form becomes structured and persistent. We introduce disclosure posture, defined as a firm's organisationally embedded balance between quantitative and qualitative Social disclosures. Using a small‐sample longitudinal mixed‐methods design for theory building, we analyse Social disclosures from five HKEX‐listed firms across 28 firm‐year observations between 2018 and 2024. HKEX‐mandated Social KPIs are classified as quantitative or qualitative, allowing firm‐year posture scores to be constructed independently of disclosure volume. The analysis provides preliminary construct validation through transparent KPI classification, coding protocols, sensitivity checks and descriptive persistence diagnostics. Three exploratory findings emerge. First, firms display relatively stable, firm‐specific disclosure postures over time, suggesting that disclosure form may reflect reporting routines rather than annual formatting choices. Second, posture varies across sectors in ways consistent with KPI relevance, risk exposure, stakeholder environments and auditability constraints. Third, COVID‐19 intensified Social disclosure without producing sustained posture reversal. The study reframes Social ESG reporting as a strategic communication choice and offers a reproducible, theory‐generating lens for examining comparability challenges that persist under harmonised reporting regimes.