Some Highlights:
- A standardized process in ITAD and data capture should be implemented globally, with some exceptions for local custom fields.
- 95% of clients want unique requests that add complexity and cost to the process.
- Defining the process is key, but management on the back end is equally important.
- ESG perspective needs to consider how calculations are used differently in different countries with different vendors.
- Benefits of using a single global vendor as opposed to multiple partners include more accurate environmental reporting from ITAD collaborations.
Todd’s assessment:
Todd Zegers,
President & CEO
Circular Integrity
info@CircularIntegrity.com
(949)346-1683
I think a standardized process in ITAD and what data capture you want back should be something that can be fairly standardized globally, and maybe some parts of the country or some parts of the business may say “OK, listen, here’s the 12 audit report data that I want across the board no matter who are you using. If you want to get some other additional information or custom fields you want your ITAD provider to do, then great, but here are the 12 at minimum we want as a global organization.
I think that’s very important because ITAD for the most part is a fairly standardized process, but I would tell you of the hundreds of clients I’ve dealt with over the years, 95% of them want this one little weird thing on their report, they want a red tag instead of a blue tag or, you know, footprint numbers or whatever it may be. And people always have these weird things, which is a shame because they’re adding complexity and cost into the process, and they’re not doing themselves any favor, and a lot of that data, to me, is pointless. But I think when it comes to defining the process is one thing, how things are reported and managed on the back end is another. Again, if you’re going to use multiple partners, coming up with the standardized process is a key thing to drive out and, say “listen India, you guys are fine to use whoever you want locally and negotiate your deal. But here’s the data we want at a minimum, because when it comes back to the ESG perspective.” You need to understand that depending on how you’re going to report the ESG outputs, your greenhouse gas emissions, your energy savings, etc., that’s coming out of whether those devices were repurposed and reused, or whether those devices were recycled, those four different vendors may use a different calculator, and there’s no perfect calculator out there right now, although there’s a lot of money being spent in trying to build these things. But if you’ve got the same type of devices being disposed of in four different countries by four different vendors, if they’re using four different calculation methods, science-backed or not, how can you be confident in that the environmental reporting that you’re getting from your ITAD when you collaborate and pull that stuff together, pushing up the ladder to your sustainability team is actually accurate or not? That’s where I think the benefit of using a single global vendor is potentially beneficial, because at least they’re pulling in commonalities of the weight of those different device types and whether again, it was recycle reused to give you that output to your ESG report, to give your environmental impact report.
