The best software to measure and manage ESG impact in 2025

Measuring ESG impact isn't about checking boxes or producing reports that sit on shelves. It's about building the data infrastructure that lets you compete in markets where sustainability performance determines who gets contracts, financing, and market access.

Companies that can't quantify their environmental footprint, social impact, and governance structures are losing opportunities right now. 

Not because they're performing poorly, but because they can't prove their performance with data that stakeholders trust.

This guide covers the practical aspects of ESG measurement and management. We're talking about the systems, methodologies, and software that turn scattered information into actionable insights and compliant reports. 

From carbon accounting to lifecycle assessments, from supply chain tracking to governance risk management, we'll break down what you actually need to measure, how to do it efficiently, and why the right approach turns compliance into competitive advantage.

The companies getting this right aren't spending more money. They're spending it smarter, building systems that collect data once and use it for multiple purposes. 

That means regulatory compliance, customer requirements, investor relations, and strategic decision-making all drawing from the same underlying information.

Understanding ESG Measurement: What You're Actually Tracking

The Three Pillars and What They Mean in Practice

Environmental metrics cover everything from carbon emissions to water use, waste generation to biodiversity impacts. But the depth of measurement varies dramatically depending on your sector and stakeholders.

For most companies, the starting point includes direct emissions from owned sources (Scope 1), indirect emissions from purchased energy (Scope 2), and all other indirect emissions in your value chain (Scope 3). 

Beyond carbon, you'll need to track energy consumption broken down by source, water use and wastewater discharge, plus waste generation and disposal methods.

Social metrics focus on people throughout your value chain. This means workforce composition covering diversity, equity, and inclusion metrics. 

Health and safety tracking includes incident rates, lost time injuries, and fatalities. You'll also measure training and development through hours per employee and skills advancement, plus human rights through due diligence findings and grievance mechanisms. 

Don't forget community impact measuring local employment and community investment, alongside supply chain labor conditions covering working conditions, fair wages, and child labor prevention.

Governance metrics address how decisions get made and risks get managed. Board composition examines independence, diversity, and expertise. 

Executive compensation looks at links to performance, including ESG metrics. 

Ethics and compliance tracks policies, training, and violations. Risk management covers identification, assessment, and mitigation processes. Stakeholder engagement measures mechanisms, frequency, and outcomes, while transparency assesses disclosure practices and audit results.

The challenge isn't just collecting these metrics. It's doing so in a way that's consistent, auditable, and useful for both compliance and strategy. 

That requires systems, not spreadsheets.

Why Materiality Matters More Than Completeness

You can't measure everything with equal rigor. 

Materiality assessments help you focus resources on what actually affects your business and stakeholders.

Financial materiality asks which ESG issues could impact your financial performance. This includes regulatory risks that could result in fines or restrictions, physical climate risks affecting facilities or supply chains, transition risks from policy changes or market shifts, social issues affecting workforce stability or brand value, and governance failures leading to legal or reputational damage.

Impact materiality asks where your operations have significant effects on people and the environment. 

This covers emissions contributing to climate change, pollution affecting local communities, water use in stressed regions, labor practices in your supply chain, and economic development in regions where you operate.

Companies subject to double materiality frameworks like CSRD need to assess both. Even if you're not required to, understanding both perspectives helps prioritize measurement efforts and communicate effectively with different stakeholders.

The Data Quality Challenge

Poor data quality undermines everything. If your stakeholders can't trust your numbers, the measurement effort is wasted.

Common problems include inconsistent methodologies across facilities or time periods, estimation used where primary data should exist, missing data for parts of the value chain, outdated emission factors not reflecting current science, manual processes introducing transcription errors, and lack of documentation making it impossible to verify sources.

Improving data quality requires systematic approaches. 

You need clear data collection protocols for each metric, training for people collecting or inputting data, validation rules catching obvious errors, and regular audits identifying systemic issues. 

Documentation standards support verification, while continuous improvement based on audit findings and stakeholder feedback keeps quality rising over time.

Carbon Accounting: The Foundation of Environmental Measurement

Why Carbon Accounting Comes First

Carbon accounting software has become the entry point for ESG measurement for most companies. The reasons are straightforward.

Regulatory pressure makes carbon reporting mandatory for growing numbers of companies. 

CSRD requires detailed climate disclosures, TCFD mandates climate risk reporting for UK entities, SEC proposed climate rules in the US, and national regulations exist in France, UK, and other jurisdictions.

Customer requirements flow down the supply chain. Large companies demand Scope 3 data from suppliers, procurement questionnaires include carbon metrics, and contract terms increasingly include emissions targets. 

Investor expectations drive disclosure through CDP questionnaires, ESG ratings, and screening for climate risk.

Carbon accounting provides structure for measuring other environmental impacts. If you can track energy use for emissions calculations, you can track water use.

If you can engage suppliers for carbon data, you can ask about labor practices.

Scope 1 and 2: The Controllable Baseline

Scope 1 emissions come from sources you own or control. 

This includes combustion in owned boilers, furnaces, and vehicles, process emissions from chemical reactions, and fugitive emissions from refrigeration or gas leaks.

Calculating Scope 1 requires activity data like fuel consumption, process throughput, and refrigerant quantities. You apply emission factors representing CO2e per unit of fuel or activity, following methodologies from the GHG Protocol, ISO 14064, or sector-specific standards.

Scope 2 emissions come from purchased electricity, heat, or steam. 

The location-based method uses average grid emission factors, while the market-based method reflects contractual arrangements like renewable energy purchases.

The data sources for Scope 1 and 2 are relatively accessible. 

Utility bills provide purchased energy data, fuel purchase records cover owned combustion, maintenance logs track refrigerants, and production data supports process emissions calculations.

Most companies can get decent Scope 1 and 2 data with moderate effort. The real challenge is Scope 3.

Scope 3: Where Most Emissions Actually Are

Scope 3 carbon footprint typically represents 70-90% of total emissions for most companies. It includes 15 categories across upstream and downstream activities.

Upstream categories cover purchased goods and services (emissions from everything you buy), capital goods (emissions from equipment and infrastructure), fuel and energy-related activities (upstream emissions from energy production), upstream transportation and distribution, waste generated in operations, business travel, employee commuting, and upstream leased assets.

Downstream categories include downstream transportation and distribution, processing of sold products, use of sold products, end-of-life treatment, downstream leased assets, franchises, and investments (financed emissions from portfolio companies).

The data challenge scales with complexity. Purchased goods requires supplier-specific data or spend-based estimates. Transportation needs weight, distance, and mode data. Product use demands assumptions about customer behavior. 

End-of-life requires knowledge of disposal methods.

Software for calculating Scope 3 must handle multiple data sources with varying quality levels, calculation methodologies for each category, supplier engagement and data collection, estimation techniques for data gaps, and documentation supporting audit trails.

Moving from Estimation to Primary Data

Most companies start Scope 3 calculations with spend-based estimates. You take procurement spend by category and multiply by emission factors representing typical emissions per dollar spent.

This is quick but inaccurate. Emission factors are averages that don't reflect specific supplier practices, geographic differences, technology choices, or efficiency improvements.

Improving data quality means moving toward primary data. 

That means getting supplier-specific data showing actual emissions from your suppliers' operations, activity-based data covering quantities, distances, and processes, and product-level data showing emissions per unit of product purchased.

The challenge is supplier engagement. 

Getting hundreds or thousands of suppliers to provide quality data requires clear communication about what data you need and why, simple processes for data submission, support helping suppliers calculate their emissions, incentives making participation worthwhile, and verification ensuring data quality.

This doesn't happen overnight. Companies typically prioritize suppliers by spend or estimated emissions impact, working with the most significant suppliers first and improving coverage over time.

Comprehensive Carbon Footprint Measurement

Beyond Carbon: Other Environmental Metrics

Carbon footprint measurement software often serves as the foundation for tracking other environmental impacts.

Water footprint measures water withdrawal from different sources, water consumption (not returned), water quality of discharge, and water stress in regions of operation. 

Waste footprint tracks waste generation by type, disposal methods (landfill, incineration, recycling), hazardous waste requiring special handling, and circular economy initiatives reducing waste.

Pollution metrics cover air pollutants beyond GHGs (NOx, SOx, particulates), water pollutants in discharge, soil contamination from operations, and noise pollution affecting communities. 

Biodiversity impacts assess land use and habitat conversion, protected areas near operations, species affected by activities, and restoration efforts and effectiveness.

The methodologies resemble carbon accounting. 

You identify activities generating impacts, collect activity data (water use, waste generated, pollutants emitted), apply impact factors where relevant, aggregate across operations, and report against relevant frameworks.

Lifecycle Assessment: Complete Product Impact

Lifecycle assessment software takes environmental measurement to the product level, tracking impacts from raw material extraction through end-of-life disposal.

LCA stages include raw material extraction (mining, harvesting, drilling), material processing (refining, manufacturing intermediates), product manufacturing (assembly, packaging), transportation to distribution and customers, use phase covering energy, materials, and maintenance during product life, plus end-of-life disposal, recycling, and recovery.

LCA calculates multiple impact categories beyond just carbon. 

This includes global warming potential (carbon footprint), acidification from SOx and NOx emissions, eutrophication from nutrient pollution, resource depletion of minerals and fossil fuels, toxicity to humans and ecosystems, and land use and habitat impacts.

The data requirements are substantial. 

You need the bill of materials for each product, process data for manufacturing steps, energy and material flows at each stage, transportation distances and modes, use patterns and product lifetime, plus end-of-life scenarios and recycling rates.

Why companies do LCA:

Companies pursue lifecycle assessment for product development to identify hotspots for improvement, marketing claims through Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs), customer requirements from B2B buyers demanding lifecycle data, regulatory compliance with ecodesign requirements and EPR schemes, and strategic decisions around material selection, supplier choices, and design changes.

LCA software manages the complexity of databases with thousands of processes and materials, modeling of product systems and alternatives, uncertainty analysis in data and assumptions, comparison of design options, and reporting in standardized formats.

Setting Science-Based Targets

Once you've measured your carbon footprint, the next question is what targets to set. Science-based targets tie reductions to what's needed to limit global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C.

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) provides methodologies for setting targets aligned with climate science, validation that targets are ambitious enough, and recognition enhancing credibility with stakeholders.

SBTi requires targets for Scope 1 and 2 through absolute reduction targets, plus Scope 3 if it's 40%+ of total emissions (which it usually is). 

Target timeframes include near-term covering 5-10 years from baseline, and long-term requiring net-zero by 2050 at latest.

Setting targets requires establishing a baseline year with complete data, forecasting emissions without action (business-as-usual), developing reduction pathways aligned with climate scenarios, and creating action plans specifying how you'll achieve reductions.

Companies often find that Scope 3 targets are the hardest. 

You have limited control over suppliers and customers, influence requires engagement and collaboration, and progress depends on technology development and market changes. 

But that's exactly why they matter. Scope 3 is where most emissions are, and addressing it requires systemic change across value chains.

Social Impact Measurement: Beyond the Numbers

Workforce Metrics That Actually Matter

Social measurement often starts with workforce data because it's relatively accessible. But the challenge is moving beyond compliance metrics to indicators that reflect actual outcomes.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion requires measuring representation through demographics across levels and functions, pay equity examining wage gaps by gender and race, progression tracking promotion rates for different groups, retention analyzing turnover rates and reasons, plus inclusion through survey results on belonging and psychological safety.

Health and safety covers injury rates including TRIR, LTIR, and severity, near misses as leading indicators of potential incidents, occupational illness tracking long-term health impacts, mental health addressing stress and burnout, and safety culture through reporting, investigation, and learning processes.

Development and engagement tracks training hours by employee level and topic, skills development through certifications and advancement, career paths via internal mobility and succession planning, engagement scores from surveys over time, and retention analyzing voluntary turnover and exit reasons.

The data sources include HRIS systems for demographics, compensation, and tenure, safety systems for incidents and investigations, learning platforms for training records and certifications, and survey tools for engagement, inclusion, and wellbeing data.

The challenge isn't collecting the data. It's ensuring it tells you something useful about employee experience and whether interventions are working.

Supply Chain Social Performance

Supply chain social metrics are harder because you're measuring beyond your direct control. 

But regulations like CSDDD and stakeholder expectations make this non-optional.

Labor practices include working hours covering overtime and rest days, wages measuring minimum wage compliance and living wage benchmarks, freedom of association tracking union rights and worker committees, child labor through age verification and remediation, plus forced labor monitoring recruitment fees, passport retention, and debt bondage.

Working conditions assess health and safety through incident rates and hazards, facilities examining sanitation and ventilation, and harassment and abuse through grievances and investigations.

The data sources are challenging. 

You might use supplier self-assessment through questionnaires and declarations, third-party audits via social compliance audits and certifications, worker interviews providing confidential feedback, grievance mechanisms capturing reports from workers or communities, and public sources including NGO reports and media coverage.

The reliability varies dramatically. 

Audits can be superficial or miss systemic issues, self-assessments are subject to bias, and grievance systems only work if workers trust them.

Effective supply chain social measurement requires risk-based prioritization focusing on high-risk sectors and regions, multiple data sources for triangulation and accuracy, capacity building to help suppliers improve rather than just measure, remediation processes for addressing findings, and transparency reporting not just metrics but actions taken.

Community and Stakeholder Impact

Community impact extends beyond workforce to affected populations around operations and throughout the value chain.

What to measure includes local employment tracking jobs created and hiring rates, economic development through procurement from local suppliers and taxes paid, community investment in social programs and infrastructure, grievances monitoring complaints received and resolution, impacts assessing noise, traffic, and pollution affecting quality of life, and engagement documenting consultations and stakeholder feedback.

For products and services, measure safety through injuries and recalls related to products, quality via defects and complaints, accessibility examining product availability and affordability, responsible marketing ensuring accuracy of claims, and data privacy tracking breaches and compliance.

The challenge with community metrics is that they're often context-specific. What matters in one location or sector may be irrelevant elsewhere. This requires stakeholder engagement to identify the right metrics rather than applying generic frameworks.

Governance and Risk: The Foundation for Everything Else

Why Governance Metrics Come Last But Matter Most

Governance, risk, and compliance software isn't the most exciting part of ESG, but it's the foundation that makes everything else credible.

Poor governance undermines environmental and social performance. 

Weak oversight allows issues to go unaddressed, misaligned incentives prioritize short-term results over long-term value, inadequate risk management leads to crises, and lack of accountability means failures repeat.

Governance measurement focuses on several key areas. Board effectiveness examines composition covering independence, diversity, and skills, committees including audit and risk functions, meetings tracking frequency and attendance, plus evaluation through director assessments and board reviews.

Executive accountability measures compensation links to performance including ESG, succession planning showing pipeline for leadership roles, conflicts of interest through disclosure and management, and insider trading via policies and violations tracking.

Ethics and compliance covers code of conduct including coverage, training, and attestation, whistleblowing through reports received and investigations, anti-corruption via policies and due diligence, plus sanctions compliance through screening and monitoring.

Risk management includes risk identification processes and frequency, risk assessment measuring likelihood and impact, mitigation through controls and action plans, and disclosure via risk reporting to board and stakeholders.

Stakeholder engagement tracks shareholders through meeting attendance and votes, employees via feedback channels and surveys, communities through consultations and grievance mechanisms, and investors through meetings and ESG ratings.

Integrated Risk Management

ESG risks don't exist separately from financial and operational risks.

Effective companies integrate them into enterprise risk management frameworks.

Climate risks affect physical assets through damage from weather events, supply chains via disruption from climate impacts, markets through demand shifts, and regulations via carbon pricing and efficiency standards.

Social risks include workforce challenges like retention and skills gaps, supply chain disruptions from labor issues, communities affecting license to operate, and customers through potential boycotts and brand damage.

Governance risks encompass compliance violations leading to fines, reputation damage from ESG controversies, legal exposure through stakeholder lawsuits, and strategic misalignment with stakeholder expectations.

Integrated risk systems need to identify ESG risks alongside other risks, assess them using consistent methodologies, monitor them with the same rigor as financial risks, report them to board and management, and respond with appropriate controls and actions.

This integration ensures ESG risks get the attention and resources they deserve rather than being treated as secondary concerns.

Choosing the Right ESG Software Platform

The Build vs Buy Decision

Most companies quickly realize that managing ESG data in spreadsheets doesn't scale. 

But the question of whether to build custom systems or buy existing platforms depends on several factors.

Reasons to buy include faster implementation compared to building from scratch, proven methodologies baked into the software, regular updates as regulations change, lower total cost for most organizations, and vendor expertise in ESG measurement.

Reasons to build include unique requirements not met by standard platforms, existing infrastructure that custom solutions can leverage, internal development capacity and preference for control, and integration needs with proprietary systems.

For most companies, buying makes more sense. The challenge shifts to selecting the right platform.

What to Look for in ESG Software

Best ESG software platforms share certain characteristics regardless of specific features.

Data collection and integration means the system connects to existing systems like ERP, HRIS, and procurement, supports multiple input methods including APIs and file uploads, validates data by flagging errors and inconsistencies, and handles units by converting between measurement systems automatically.

Calculation and methodology requires support for relevant frameworks like GHG Protocol and TCFD, updated emission factors through regularly refreshed databases, transparent calculations showing formulas and assumptions, and scenario analysis modeling different approaches or future states.

Collaboration and workflow includes role-based access so different users see different data, approval workflows for reviews before finalization, task management assigning data collection and setting deadlines, plus communication tools for discussing data issues.

Reporting and disclosure covers multiple frameworks generating reports for CSRD, CDP, TCFD, and GRI, customization adapting to specific requirements, audit trails documenting data sources and changes, and export options including PDF, Excel, and machine-readable formats.

Analytics and insights provides dashboards visualizing performance and trends, benchmarking comparing to industry or peers, hotspot analysis identifying biggest impacts, and target tracking monitoring progress toward goals.

Security and compliance ensures data protection through encryption and access controls, certifications like ISO 27001 and SOC 2, and audit support with documentation for external verification.

Sustainability Software: Integrated vs Specialized

Sustainability software comes in two main flavors: integrated platforms covering multiple ESG domains and specialized tools for specific areas.

Integrated platforms handle carbon accounting across all scopes, other environmental metrics like water and waste, social metrics covering workforce and supply chain, governance data including board and ethics, plus reporting to multiple frameworks.

The advantages include a single source of truth for all ESG data, consistency in methodologies and data quality, efficiency from shared infrastructure, and a holistic view of performance. 

The challenges include potentially less specialized functionality in any one area, higher cost upfront, longer implementation to set up all modules, and risk if the platform doesn't meet needs.

Specialized tools focus on areas like carbon accounting only, lifecycle assessment, supply chain auditing, ESG reporting, or governance, risk, and compliance.

The advantages include deep functionality in specific domains, lower entry cost to get started, faster implementation for one use case, and best-of-breed solutions for complex requirements. 

The challenges include integration needed between systems, data silos if systems don't communicate, higher total cost from multiple vendors, and complexity managing different platforms.

The right choice depends on your maturity, complexity, and resources. 

Companies early in their ESG journey often start with specialized tools for carbon accounting and expand later. Those with more complex requirements or facing multiple regulations may prefer integrated platforms from the start.

Implementation: Getting From Purchase to Value

Buying software is the easy part. Getting value from it requires effective implementation.

Common challenges include data that doesn't exist or isn't accessible, existing data with errors or gaps, connecting to source systems proving harder than expected, users resisting new processes, and platform complexity with more features than initially needed.

Implementation best practices include phasing the rollout by starting with highest priority use cases and getting those working well before expanding. 

Focus on data first by identifying and fixing quality issues before automation, documenting data sources and collection processes, and establishing ownership for each data type.

Train extensively with different training for different user types, hands-on practice rather than just presentations, and ongoing support as questions arise.

 Iterate and improve by expecting the first reports to have issues, using feedback to refine processes, and continuously improving data quality and automation.

Measure success through time savings compared to previous processes, data quality improvements, stakeholder satisfaction with reports, and insights leading to decisions.

Turning Measurement Into Management

From Data to Decisions

Measuring ESG performance is pointless unless it informs decisions. 

The goal isn't reports. It's using insights to improve performance and manage risks.

Strategic decisions include capital allocation investing in efficiency, renewable energy, and safer equipment, supplier selection factoring ESG performance into procurement, product development designing for lower lifecycle impacts, market positioning targeting customers valuing sustainability, and risk management addressing material ESG risks.

Operational decisions cover process improvements reducing emissions, waste, and water use, energy efficiency identifying and fixing inefficiencies, waste reduction through circularity initiatives, safety enhancements addressing high-risk activities, and training priorities upskilling workforce on material issues.

Disclosure decisions determine what to disclose beyond mandatory requirements, how to communicate through framing and context, targets to set including ambition level and timeframe, and progress to highlight covering achievements and challenges.

The companies getting value from ESG measurement have clear processes for reviewing data regularly with relevant stakeholders, identifying insights and their implications, assigning accountability for action, tracking progress on commitments, and adjusting strategy based on results.

Setting Targets and Tracking Progress

Targets turn measurement into management by creating accountability for improvement.

Effective targets are specific with clear scope and metrics, measurable through quantified baselines and goals, achievable given realistic resources and timeframes, relevant addressing material issues, and time-bound with defined deadlines.

Types of targets include absolute targets like reducing total emissions by 50% by 2030 or achieving zero workplace fatalities, intensity targets such as reducing emissions per unit of production by 30% or improving energy efficiency by 25%, and coverage targets including 100% renewable electricity or audit 80% of high-risk suppliers.

Tracking progress requires regular measurement at appropriate frequency, variance analysis explaining gaps to target, action plans addressing shortfalls, reporting to stakeholders on progress, and adjustment if targets prove too easy or impossible.

Common pitfalls include too many targets that diffuse focus and resources, targets that are too easy and don't drive improvement, targets that are too hard leading to discouragement, no ownership meaning nobody accountable for delivery, and no consequences where targets are ignored if missed.

Continuous Improvement: The Real Goal

ESG measurement is never finished. Regulations evolve, stakeholder expectations increase, and your business changes. 

Effective ESG management requires continuous improvement.

Areas for continuous improvement include data quality through expanding primary data replacing estimates, improving supplier response rates, reducing data collection time, and enhancing verification processes. 

Methodology improves by adopting updated standards as they emerge, improving allocation methods for shared resources, refining assumptions based on better information, and expanding boundaries as capability grows.

Systems and processes get better through automating manual steps, integrating new data sources, streamlining workflows, and improving user experience. 

Performance improves by reducing environmental impacts, improving social outcomes, strengthening governance, and delivering financial benefits.

The companies leading in ESG don't just measure better. They learn faster from measurement and act more decisively on insights.

Dcycle: Your ESG Measurement and Management Platform

We're not auditors or consultants. 

We're a solution built for companies that need to measure, manage, and report ESG performance without drowning in complexity or duplicate effort.

The fundamental challenge we solve is this: companies need comprehensive ESG data for regulations, customers, investors, and internal management. 

But traditional approaches create separate systems for different metrics or frameworks, manual processes that waste time and introduce errors, inconsistent data that undermines credibility, and compliance focus missing strategic value.

Our platform centralizes ESG measurement and management across all the areas that matter. We handle carbon accounting across all scopes including Scope 1 and 2 from utility bills and fuel purchases, Scope 3 from procurement and logistics, automated calculations using updated emission factors, and supplier engagement portals for primary data collection.

We provide comprehensive environmental tracking covering energy use and renewable percentage, water consumption and discharge, waste generation and disposal methods, and lifecycle impacts for product-level analysis. 

Social performance measurement integrates workforce metrics from HRIS systems, health and safety incident tracking, training and development records, and supply chain social audits and findings.

Governance documentation includes policies and procedures, risk assessments and mitigation, compliance tracking and reporting, and stakeholder engagement records. Multi-framework reporting covers CSRD with double materiality, TCFD climate disclosures, CDP questionnaires, GRI standards, SASB metrics, and custom reports for customers or investors.

What sets us apart starts with our single source of truth approach. 

Data gets collected once and used across frameworks, ensuring consistency between reports and maintaining audit trails documenting sources. 

Automation where it matters means integration with existing systems, automated calculations following recognized methodologies, workflow management for data collection, and report generation from templates.

We provide flexibility for your needs through a modular approach growing with you, customizable structure for your sectors and operations, and scalable architecture from single site to global operations. 

Expertise embedded in the platform includes methodologies aligned with best practices, frameworks updated as regulations change, and guidance on materiality and prioritization.

Our focus on outcomes delivers analytics identifying improvement opportunities, target tracking monitoring progress, benchmarking comparing to peers, and insights supporting decisions.

Companies using our platform reduce reporting time by 60-80%, improve data quality through automation and validation, increase stakeholder confidence with auditable data, identify cost savings from efficiency opportunities, and make better decisions with integrated ESG insights.

But more importantly, they turn ESG measurement from a compliance burden into a management tool that drives performance and creates value. We're not trying to be everything to everyone. 

We're focused on companies that need to measure ESG performance seriously and use that measurement to manage their business better.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Where should I start with ESG measurement?

Start with carbon accounting, specifically Scope 1 and 2 emissions. 

This gives you a manageable entry point with relatively accessible data and proven methodologies.

Once you have carbon accounting working, expand to Scope 3 and other environmental metrics. Add social and governance metrics based on materiality to your business. Don't try to measure everything at once.

How accurate does my data need to be?

It depends on the use case. For regulatory reporting, you need accuracy that withstands audit. For internal management, directionally correct data that shows trends may be sufficient initially.

The goal is continuous improvement. Start with the best data available, document limitations, and improve over time. Perfect data shouldn't be a blocker to getting started.

Should I hire someone to manage ESG data?

Most companies need dedicated resources once ESG measurement moves beyond basic carbon accounting. But the role isn't just data collection. It's:

• Coordinating across functions
• Managing systems and processes
• Analyzing results for insights
• Reporting to stakeholders
• Driving improvement initiatives

Whether you hire someone or reassign existing staff depends on your organizational size and complexity.

How do I get suppliers to provide data?

Supplier engagement requires a clear strategy:

• Communicate what you need and why
• Simplify data submission with templates and portals
• Prioritize high-impact suppliers first
• Support suppliers calculating their data
• Incentivize participation through contracts or recognition

Don't expect perfect response immediately. This is a multi-year effort requiring relationship building.

What's the ROI of ESG measurement?

Direct ROI comes from:

• Cost savings from efficiency improvements
• Better financing terms from demonstrating ESG performance
• Contract wins from meeting customer requirements
• Risk mitigation from identifying and addressing issues

Indirect ROI includes:

• Reputation enhancement
• Talent attraction and retention
• Innovation from sustainability focus
• Resilience from understanding risks

But viewing ESG purely through ROI misses the point. For many companies, it's about market access. Not measuring means being excluded from opportunities.

How long until my measurement system is mature?

Maturity is a journey, not a destination. Most companies progress through stages:

Year 1: Basic carbon accounting, foundational data collection Year 2-3: Expanded Scope 3, social metrics, integrated systems Year 4-5: High-quality data, multi-framework reporting, strategic use

But this varies by starting point, resources, and pressure. Companies facing immediate regulatory requirements or customer demands accelerate. 

The key is consistent progress, not arbitrary timelines.