Issue

Succinctly describe the issue or problem statement that this Decision addresses. Why is a decision required? What business or technical problem does it address?

The essential building blocks for CSRD reporting is based on tools from many vendors and Syensqos existing technology.  It requires combining into a solution for ESG reporting.  A decision is required on the long term solution post the implementation of RFI ESG Disclosure and Performance in 2024.  

Recommendation

Summarise the recommendation being made for the reader, leaving the pro/con evaluation and exact decision-making process to the subsequent sections.

Background & Context

Explain the context in which the decision is being made.

RFI on ESG Disclosure and Performance was launched in 2024 to consolidate all Sustainability data in one place, create reporting layer and insights layer on top.  The RFI is aiming at a one to two year contract, which is to be revisited with ERP Rebuild.  Demos have been presented by SAP in 2024 to the business together with PWC.   RFI supported by KPMG experience with other clients and finalised in July 2024 based on 2.5 weeks response time for providers to answer by mid June 2024.  Potential providers  were  SAP, Gensuite, Salesforce, Microsoft (new partner AI), Simapro provider Sphera.  Pure players: https://watershed.com/en-GB, https://www.cority.com/, https://figbytes.com/company/about/, Watershed.com. June/July 2023 Go-No Go decision.  

Automation can obtain consistent data and metrics to pinpoint sustainability issues in real-time.  Tech-enabled governance of the reporting process can manage complexity and risk.

Process

1. Assess metrics and data: Priortise ESG topics based on risks and issues
2. Automated data collection and preparation: data capture for emissions and ESG reporting
3. Centralised ESG data: granularity
4. Metric calculation:  aggregation and calculation of scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and other ESG metrics
5. Sustainability tracking via analytic insights (including visualisation) and reports and disclosures (multiple frameworks)
6. Sustainability initiatives based on actions and ESG compliance

The process is driven by a variety of internal and external data sources, which need control, tracing and verification.

Functional architecture

The following tools are data sources for storage and consolidation (automated or manual).  Enrichment with external data may also be required.  Metric calculations should make use of AI generated insights.

Design/R&I:

1. Project portfolio
2. LCA

• WeGo (accolade)
• Simapro/Gabi
• Fast LCA, checklist

STP (Supply Tracking and Prioritisaiton?):

Sustainable procurement

1. Bio and recycled based raw material tracking (SAP - Green Token material origins?)
2. Human rights due to diligence (Ethixbase)
3. Carbon footprint sharing (Sigreen)

Manufacturing:

• PCF
• Cerise
• PURE
• Water live dashboard
• Gensuite
• Wave
• Colmar
• Waste quaterly dashboard

Transport:

1. Carbon scope 3

• EcotransIT
• Concur
• BW Tiers

HR:

1. Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI) (SAP SuccessFactor)
2. Training and performance (xls offline)
3. Gender pay gap (Payroll)
4. Living wages (Payroll)

Marketing:

• SPM

SAP Sustainability Control Towers (SCT)

Launch of 2024 RFI on ESG Disclosure and Performance was extended to SAP.  2024 RFI response by SAP not satisfactory with off the shelf slide pack containing access issues to links.  SAP Sustainability Control Towers (SCT) currently not mature enough, but could be revisited in three years. Scope, AI and insights not good enough. 

ESG data, elements on basic reporting using tools creating KPI library.  This should be covered by SAP.  Enhancement of this data SAP lacks, reporting layer e.g. KPIs, emission factors e.g. ecoinvent, ecotransit.  For example carbon accounting.  

Pureplayers look into public data where plant data is missing, to make assumptions where there is gaps.   Other functionality, AI native pureplayer is integrated benchmark.  Competitors in tool for KPIs in market based on public information. SAP solution does not cover this.  No company in manufacturing uses the Sustainability Control Towers. 

Roadmap?

Gensuite

Gensuite one option as has synergies with reporting.  Target state data capture and clean up close to source.  May mean moving away from Gensuite to where data ownership, modelling is more frequent.  Gensuite is not the right fit, Syensqo leaning possibly more towards Microsoft.  Pilot in autumn to test automation of env metric, modelisation for data cleaning and then consume clean data on corporate level.

Greenomy

Shortlist of two in 2024 RFI.  Favourite Greenomy as short term solution, plug and play, so not overspend.  Recommendation given, waiting for decision.  

PAPM (SAP) currently used for tax purposes by Finance in scope of ERP Rebuild to deal with complex reporting requirements.  Might be an option to cover circularity for Sustainability.  SPM may not be the way forward as missing master data.  Additional option?

Assumptions

Clearly describe the underlying assumptions which informed or limited the choices available, or impacted the decision: cost, schedule, regulatory requirements, business drivers, country footprint, technology, etc. Include links as necessary. This section is important because a future change in circumstances might invalidate some key assumptions, which then prompts a decision to be revisited. 

Constraints

Capture any constraints or limitations inherent to the recommended option. This could be aspects which, if changed or removed in future, could cause the decision to be revisited or invalidated. For example, a constraint might be that a new product has significant gaps in important functionality, which caused an older alternative to be recommended. If those gaps are closed in future, this might cause the decision to be invalidated.

Impacts

Describe the impact of the decision on other aspects such as other processes, infrastructure, other SAP modules or systems, data cleansing and migration, developments, automations, interfaces, in-flight projects, etc.

Business Rules

The decision may translate into business rules which enforce the decision and will require configuration. List these business rules here. For example, "An Outline Agreement cannot be created via the RFQ process. An awarded RFQ can only result in a Purchase Order". 

Options considered

List the options (viable options or alternatives) you considered. These often require a longer explanation with diagrams, or references to other documents (links are best, but attachments are also possible). Use enough detail to adequately explain what you considered so that a project or business stakeholder reviewing this decision will not come back and ask "did you think about...?"; this leads to loss of credibility and questioning of other decisions. This section also helps ensure that you considered enough suitable alternatives rather than just copy/pasting SAP's recommendations.

Option A: SAP Sustainability Control Towers (SCT)

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Option B: Gensuite/Microsoft

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Option C: Greenomy

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Option D: Do Nothing

Describe the option in sufficient detail for a reader familiar with the subject matter to understand it properly

Evaluation

Outline why you selected a position. The best format could be a pro/con table (sample below), but is up to you as the author. You must consider complexity, feasibility, cost/effort to implement, but also ongoing operational impact and cost. You must consider the program principles and explain any deviations in detail. This is probably as important as the decision itself.

	Option A	Option B	Option C	Option D
Criterion 1	Pro Con	Pro Pro	Pro Con	Pro Con
Criterion 2	Pro Con	Con	Pro Pro	Con Con
Criterion 3	Pro	Con	Con	Pro

See also

Insert links and references to other documents which are relevant when trying to understand this decision and its implications. Other decisions are often impacted, so it's good to list them here with links. Attachments are also possible but dangerous as they are static documents and not updated by their authors.

Change log

Workflow history