How to Measure the S in ESG and Turn Social Data Into Action

Last updated: June 2026
Revised to reflect the current CSRD, ESRS, and ESG social reporting context as of June 2026.

Most organizations know they need to report on the “S” in ESG. Fewer are confident they’re measuring the right things.

The social pillar covers how a company manages its impact on people; employee engagement, inclusion, health and safety, working conditions, and community impact. Unlike carbon emissions or board composition, there is no single agreed metric. That makes it the easiest pillar to report on vaguely, and the hardest to report on well.

But the measurement problem is only part of it.

In our experience working with large European organizations, the data usually exists. What’s missing is the connection between that data and the people who can actually do something with it.

That is what this article is about: what to measure, how to collect it, and how to make sure your ESG social data leads somewhere.

What you’ll take away from this article:

• What the “S” in ESG actually covers, and why it’s harder to measure than E or G

• Which ESG social metrics matter most for CSRD-aligned reporting

• Why collecting data is no longer the hard part, and what is
  
  

Why the “S” Is the ESG Pillar That Needs the Most Attention Right Now

In large, multi-country organizations, the challenge is rarely a lack of data. It is consistency. HR needs a reporting setup that works across countries, business units, and leadership levels. Managers need local insights they can understand and act on with their teams. And leadership needs a clear view of whether the organization is moving in the right direction.

The case for measuring the S in ESG is partly about regulation. Companies in scope for CSRD must report according to ESRS, and social topics such as own workforce, working conditions, equal treatment, and social dialogue are all part of that picture.

Following the Omnibus I changes, CSRD scope is limited to companies with more than 1,000 employees and net annual turnover above €450 million. The exact application should always be assessed with legal or sustainability reporting specialists, especially for group structures and national implementation. For more detail, see the European Commission’s CSRD guidance.

But compliance pressure is the floor, not the ceiling.

The harder truth is that most large organizations have already gotten better at listening to their employees. They run engagement surveys. They collect lifecycle feedback. They track well-being, inclusion, and leadership quality. What they haven’t always solved is acting on what they hear.

The same gap appears in ESG social reporting. Data gets collected. It gets analyzed. It gets filed into an annual report. But too often, it never reaches the teams and managers who could actually use it to improve the employee experience.

Vague reporting is becoming a liability.

Good reporting does not only show what has happened. It helps the organization decide what to do next.

Here’s why that matters for your reporting.

How to Measure the "S" in ESG: A Data-driven Approach

The most practical starting point is your existing employee listening setup.

For many organizations, that means the employee engagement survey. When ESG-relevant themes such as inclusion, well-being, psychological safety, leadership quality, and workload are embedded into the survey design, you can measure social performance continuously rather than treating it as a one-off reporting exercise.

That can be supported by other data sources: diversity and inclusion surveys, health and safety data, absence and turnover data, lifecycle surveys from onboarding to exit, pulse surveys, open-text comments, and manager and team-level follow-up data.

Open-text comment analysis can also add important depth. AI-supported analysis can help surface patterns across large volumes of employee feedback, especially when quantitative scores need context.

But here is the part many reporting frameworks miss.

None of that data drives change unless it reaches the people who can act on it.

That means frontline managers, not just executive dashboards.

Employee Engagement Score

Employee engagement is one of the most important social metrics because it shows how people experience work, leadership, and the organization as a whole.

A strong engagement score is not just a number for the annual report. It is a signal of whether employees feel motivated, committed, and able to contribute.

At Ennova, our benchmark database spans more than 25 million data points across 100+ countries. That means organizations can compare their results against a dataset large enough to give meaningful context, not just an average from a small group of similar companies. See how we approach employee engagement measurement.

Diversity and Inclusion Metrics

Representation matters. But representation alone is not enough.

A strong ESG social reporting setup should track diversity across relevant dimensions such as gender, seniority, geography, and role level. But it should also measure inclusion: whether people feel respected, heard, and able to contribute regardless of background.

That distinction matters.

A company can look diverse on paper while still having teams where employees do not feel included. ESG social reporting should help reveal that gap, and help the organization close it. Learn more about Ennova’s approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Health, Safety, and Well-Being Metrics

Incident rates and absence data are important. But they are often lagging indicators. They tell you where problems have already become visible.

Leading indicators are just as important. Employee perceptions of workload, stress, psychological safety, and work-life balance can show where problems are forming before they appear in absence statistics, turnover, or formal cases.

That is where employee listening becomes valuable for ESG. It helps organizations move from documenting problems to identifying risks early. See how Ennova supports employee well-being.

How to Report on ESG Social Metrics That Hold Up to Scrutiny

Good ESG reporting on the “S” does two things.

It satisfies external reporting needs. And it creates internal accountability.

Externally, that means being transparent about direction of travel, not just current performance. Did engagement improve or decline? Are inclusion scores consistent across business units? Are well-being risks concentrated in specific parts of the organization? What actions are being taken?

Internally, the more important question is whether the report changes anything.

Data that reaches executives but never reaches frontline managers rarely drives the team-level action that moves the metrics. The organizations that use ESG social reporting most effectively are those that connect it to their regular employee listening cycle, not just their annual report.

A strong reporting setup should include clear definitions of each metric, consistent measurement over time, benchmarks where relevant, directional context rather than point-in-time scores, commentary on what has changed and why, and clear ownership for follow-up.

That is what makes the difference between ESG reporting that looks good on paper and ESG reporting that helps the organization improve.

The Challenges in ESG Social Reporting and How to Solve Them

Measuring social performance is not straightforward. Here are the five challenges most organizations run into and what actually helps.

1. Social Metrics Are Subjective

Social metrics are often based on employee perception. Engagement, inclusion, fairness, trust, and psychological safety cannot be measured in the same way as emissions or financial results.

That does not make them weak. It just means the measurement design matters.

Use standardized survey questions, consistent scales, qualitative and quantitative data, and verified benchmarks. That gives your social metrics credibility and makes results easier to compare over time.

2. Employees Need to Trust the Process

Employees may hold back if they are unsure whether their responses are confidential or whether their feedback will be used responsibly.

So communicate clearly before the survey goes out, not after.

Explain how anonymity works. Explain who can see what. Explain how the results will be used. And choose a provider with strong data security standards. Ennova holds ISO 27001 and SOC 2 certification and we make that visible to employees as part of the process.

Trust is not a technical detail. It is part of data quality. When people trust the process, they are more likely to participate honestly.

3. There Is No Single Universal Standard

Unlike environmental reporting, social reporting does not have one universal metric that works across every organization. GRI provides a widely used global framework for sustainability reporting. ESRS is the mandatory framework for companies in scope under CSRD.

That means organizations need to translate the frameworks into practical, measurable indicators that fit their business and workforce. For HR, that is the real challenge: connecting reporting requirements with employee data that is already being collected, and making sure it is robust enough to support ESG reporting.

4. One Year of Data Is Not Enough

Social initiatives often take time to show results.

A single year of engagement data tells you where you are. Three years of data tells you whether you’re moving and in which direction.

That shift matters. When you report trend data, the conversation changes from “What is our number?” to “Are we improving?” That is much more useful for leaders, boards, and HR teams. Set short- and long-term goals, track progress consistently, and report trends rather than isolated snapshots.

5. Low Participation Can Weaken the Data

If too few employees participate, the data becomes harder to trust. That is a problem for ESG reporting and for internal action.

Participation improves when employees understand why their feedback matters and what will happen afterward.

So close the loop. Tell employees what was learned. Show what actions are being taken. Give managers the support they need to discuss results with their teams. When people see that feedback leads to action, participation becomes easier to sustain.

That question is harder than it sounds.

What does the “S” in ESG actually look like in Nordic workplaces?

The Pulse of Nordic Workplaces benchmarks employee priorities across engagement, well-being, and inclusion giving you data-backed context for your ESG social reporting.

Download The Pulse of Nordic Workplaces

You’ve Solved the Listening Part. Now Comes the Harder Work.

The organizations that measure the S in ESG most effectively are not necessarily the ones with the most sophisticated reporting frameworks.

They are the ones that connect employee listening to real action.

At the team level. Not just in the boardroom.

Data collected, analyzed, and filed away does not improve engagement scores. It does not reduce attrition. It does not strengthen leadership quality. And it does not create a better employee experience.

Data that reaches managers with context, a clear next step, and the support to follow through can.

That is what distinguishes social reporting from social performance.

The listening part is often solved. The action part is where many organizations still have work to do.