Between Markets and Movements: The Governance Role of ESG Analysts in Institutional Complexity

We study the professional community of ESG analysts and their governance role in maintaining the coherence of a professional logic amid institutional complexity. In case of ESG analysts in responsible investing, their professional logic is subject to pressures from both activist and market logics. We conceptualise mandate slippage – the drift of an occupation’s mandate toward either competing logic – as a threat to the coherence of an occupational mandate and professional jurisdiction. Drawing on extensive interviews and archival data, we show that occupational members rely on a number of governance mechanisms to counteract the slippages and sustain a coherent professional logic: (1) practicing professional neutrality, (2) seeking professional autonomy, (3) acquiring and developing logic-bridging expertise, and (4) engaging with peer networks. Combined, these mechanisms both help sustain the occupation’s mandate and jurisdiction, and guide ESG analysts in reconciling competing logics. This study addresses recent critiques that governance is a critical yet understudied dimension of institutional logics research.