Unpacking ESG Controversies: A Proposed Integrated Framework of Organizational Frictions and Fallout From a Systematic Literature Review

ABSTRACT Research on ESG controversies has expanded rapidly, but findings remain fragmented and lack a unifying perspective. This study conducts a PRISMA‐guided, framework‐based systematic review of 68 empirical articles published between 2018 and 2025 (May) to synthesize the main determinants and consequences of ESG controversies. Using the theories, contexts, and methods—antecedents, decisions, and outcomes (TCM–ADO) framework and drawing on contingency and open systems theory, we develop an integrated framework that explains how controversies emerge and evolve. Incorporating evidence from 28 determinants, 3 mediators, 24 moderators, and 31 consequences, the analysis identifies 3 recurring organizational frictions—performance–compliance gaps, governance–responsibility mismatches, and context–exposure vulnerabilities—that trigger reputational, operational, and systemic outcomes. The review provides a consolidated, theory‐informed synthesis and an integrative framework that organizes scattered evidence, highlights future research directions, and offers practical insights for managers, investors, and policymakers seeking to understand and mitigate controversy risks.