Our path to implementing a Sustainability Management System

Setting up a functioning sustainability management system in a short time? For a medium-sized construction company it is far from a guaranteed. Whether construction or any other industry: Companies that deal with sustainability – voluntarily or not – face major challenges in general.

Nevertheless, we managed to set up a sustainability management structure within just one year. It would be an exaggeration to say: With blood, sweat and tears. But of course, we had some tough nuts to crack – some of them really tough! – but with the right tools, we managed to get the job done.

Confusion caused by Politics

Rapid political developments can sometimes cause uncertainty. It is easy to feel like you are losing track.

At CHRISTMANN + PFEIFER we took the initial requirement to publish a sustainability report as an opportunity to establish an appropriate management structure. Even after the Omnibus Package and accompanying easing of requirements, we have deliberately continued down this path. It was clear to us: Wait and see is no strategy.

By voluntarily addressing sustainability and publishing a report in accordance with ESRS, we have laid the groundwork for any future requirements and are already well prepared.

The Costs of Sustainability

Those who want change have to invest. Setting up sustainability management structure involves costs – especially because of the use of human resources, external consultants and the implementation of new processes. This is a major hurdle, especially for a medium-sized company.

Therefore, we deliberately chose a pragmatic approach: Instead of investing directly in complex systems, we at first worked with existing resources, built up internal responsibilities and brought in external support where needed.

At the same time, we realized that sustainability not only incurs costs but also unlocks potential. Through more transparency regarding consumption and processes we were able to identify first efficiency gains and opportunities for savings.

For us, sustainability is therefore not merely a cost factor, but a strategic investment in the future viability of our company.

The Data Gap – and how to close it

Another challenge was the data availability. All of a sudden, we needed data for many aspects of sustainability that never played a role before. At first, data related to carbon footprint calculations was uncharted territory for us.

Through intense communication across departments and divisions we nevertheless found common approaches to collect the required data. In doing so we were able to build up processes for the coming years. We are continuously improving these and will gradually simplify them going forward.

Dependence on Supply Chain

Much of the information that is important for sustainability management must be provided by the upstream supply chain. For this reason, companies are heavily reliant on their suppliers' willingness to share information.

However, obtaining this information is often time-consuming – and not every partner is able to provide the required data.

That is why we have decided to ask our largest suppliers for detailed sustainability information and are currently using industry averages to fill in any gaps in the data. In this way, we are gradually expanding our information and building an increasingly detailed data set without presenting our partners with insurmountable challenges.

What we learned

• Our most important lesson: Just get started!
• If you take a step-by-step, pragmatic approach, you can make significant progress even without perfect data.
• Incomplete data is better than no data at all – and progress comes not from perfection, but from taking action.
• Good things take time – but you have to take the first step.