Many companies have created goals to reduce their environmental impact, but in-house counsel are far less optimistic about their organizations’ progress than professionals who specialize in ESG, according to new findings published Wednesday.

A report by international law firm Crowell & Moring found that 78% of the companies it surveyed in July and August have identified and adopted goals for their environmental performance. Forty-nine percent of the in-house counsel surveyed believe their organizations’ goals exceed required compliance. In comparison, nearly 90% of ESG and sustainability professionals reported the same.

The firm did not ask respondents to identify specific regulations they exceeded, said Elizabeth Dawson, counsel in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C., office. However, she added, the firm aimed to “elicit whether [the respondents] were setting goals that exceeded what is required by such regulations as air and water emissions limits, waste-disposal restrictions and recycled-content mandates.” Goals also vary by industry, she said.

The firm polled 225 in-house lawyers and other professionals involved in ESG and compliance matters. The respondents represent a variety of industries, and their organizations are publicly traded, privately held or backed by private equity companies. Ninety-five percent of the respondents work for companies headquartered in the United States, Dawson said.

Respondents cited several motivating factors behind their ESG efforts. First and foremost is optics: 50% of respondents said they believed these efforts could improve their brand image and reputation among customers.

Thirty-four percent of respondents cited a desire to be competitive, while 33% pointed to mounting pressure from shareholders and investors. Less than a quarter of respondents said they were interested in achieving cost efficiencies, managing risk and regulatory compliance, or pressure from state regulators.

Despite their interest in ESG, however, less than half (44%) of respondents said their organizations are measuring their carbon footprints, and less than half of this group measures their Scope 3 emissions—i.e., those resulting from activities that aren’t directly controlled by the organizations, like the use of their products and services, or the extraction and production of the materials they buy. Meanwhile, only 13% of the total respondents are measuring, on an ongoing basis, their environmental impact on ethnically and racially diverse communities.

These are areas that may soon become areas of focus for the Biden administration, which is set to unveil a proposed rule for mandatory climate risk disclosures by early 2022.

Only one-third of respondents said their organizations are measuring sustainability efforts along their supply chains, but nearly six of 10 respondents said they plan to set goals in this area.

“The potential gap that comes between setting environmental performance goals and measuring progress against those goals may not only hinder a company’s efforts, but can expose a company to increased risks from a rising tide of regulatory enforcement and litigation from advocacy groups, consumers, and investors,” the report said.

“Given the intensifying competitive pressure to advance effective ESG programs, such a gap may also cause companies to fall behind their industry peers.”