When I first started this arbitrariness more than two decades agoSustainability is barely registered in the discussions of the meeting room. Rules such as the Weee Directive in 2005 were one of the first to make environmental responsibility in the IT industry.
We will move today, and the picture cannot be more. Almost every supplier now represents “green.” This progress is welcome – but he also created confusion, noise and, in many cases, frankly.
Studies show that up to 90% of technological firms participate in some form of exaggerated environmental marketing. For IT directors who are instructed to reduce emissions and reports on ESG efficiency, the separation of facts from fiction has become a critical leadership skill.
Detection of red flags
Signs of green washing is often easy to notice as soon as you know where to seeThe field suppliers who rely on vague promises – “environmentally friendly” or “green in design” – without data support, should cause concern. Thus, there should be carbon icons built on displacements, and not on real abbreviations.
Selective reporting is another red flag: the celebration of progress in one line of products or geography, while ignoring a large area. Chet-free promises without short-term stages are equally problematic.
And in the disposal of assets, I saw how suppliers contribute to grinding the hard drive as stable, ignoring the embodied carbon spent in loss in destroyed assets. Others apply for a “zero landfill”, quietly exporting residual waste abroad. All these are examples when marketing is ahead of a measurable effect.
Ask the correct evidence
The best way to overcome the hype is to demand confirmed evidence. The genuine suppliers will comply with the recognized standards – and IT directors should know which of them matters.
For carbon data, look for short -term and pure goals confirmed by the Targets (SBTI) scientific initiative, with greenhouse gases prepared by greenhouse gases (GG). The highest strip is a third-party warranty of ISO 14064-3, which checks the reliability of the data.
Energy claims deserve the same audit. The promise of “100% renewable electricity” should be supported by long -term agreements on the purchase of electricity, and not just annual certificates.
When it comes to hardware, reliable indicators include life cycle estimates in accordance with ISO 14040/44, environmental product announcements (EPDS) and independent certificates, such as Epeat or TCO, which measure the repairs, processing and use of materials.
And for ITAD, in particular, do not agree to general processing statements. Partners who deserve confidence will provide certificates at the level of re -use, repair or destruction at the re -use level, which gives you the expected audit regulators.
Independent verification is crucial
In the report on the sustainable development of the highest bar is an independent check. For example, Assaurance reports carried out in accordance with ISO 14064-3 are designed to check the reliability of carbon data, and will indicate whether the auditor’s opinion is “limited” or “reasonable”.
IT directors should ask who completed the guarantee, what data was covered and how wide the scale of the scale were. While relatively several ITAD suppliers are currently going so far, these frames are a useful standard for separating genuine commitment from marketing claims.
For organizations with international operations, the director can also consider wider frames. Standards such as E-Stwards and R2V3 are widely used in North America, while Ecovadis ratings, CDP disclosure and TCFD alignment provide consistency on global supply chains.
Creation of internal competence
Even the strongest frames will not help if the buyer organization lacks the opportunity to interview them. The procurement and lawyers should be trained in the green claims code and how to interpret the security statements. The main claims of the supplier should be considered by interfunctional panels, which include him, finances and sustainability.
Directors should also consider the possibility of creating a simple section with an assessment to evaluate proposals, concluding a contract for transparency with audit rights and fines for distorting the presentation, as well as piloting suppliers, they promise small projects before concluding long -term transactions.
First of all, investments in the capabilities of carbon data in the organization allow IT liders to compare the productivity of suppliers a year a year, instead of applying for a nominal value.
Responsibility for leadership
Sustainability in technology is no longer a cosmetic indicator of quality, which forms correspondence, reputation and long-term value. IT director are on the front line of this shift.
Every time you insist on evidence, and not on adjectives, you raise the bar for the industry. False claims flourish when the check is weak. Treat the disclosure of information about the environment with the same severity as financial: check, guarantee and bring responsibility suppliers for measurable results. Thus, you protect your organization and help to push the technological sector to genuine, long stability.
