A Comparative Analysis of Green ICT Maturity Models

Abstract

Maturity models have become a common tool for organisations to assess their capabilities in a variety of domains. However, for fields that have not yet been researched thoroughly, it can be difficult to create and evolve a maturity model that features all the important aspects in that field. It takes time and many iterative improvements for a maturity model to come of age. This is the case for Green ICT maturity models, whose aim is typically to either provide insight on the important aspects an organisation or a researcher should take into account when trying to improve the social or environmental impact of ICT, or to assist in the auditing of such aspects. In fact, when we were commissioned a comprehensive ICT-sustainability auditing for Utrecht University, we not only faced the need of selecting a Green ICT maturity model, but also to ensure that it covered as many organisational aspects as possible, extending the model if needed. This paper reports on the comparison we carried out of several Green ICT maturity models, how we extended our preferred model with needed constructs, and how we applied the resulting model during the ICT-sustainability auditing.

Green Enterprise Architecture (GREAN)—Leveraging EA for Environmentally Sustainable Digital Transformation

“…This field focuses both on the greening of ICT itself and on leveraging ICT to reduce the EF of processes. The use of specific maturity models to assess and improve the adoption of Green ICT has been gaining increasing attention [85][86][87]. Hankel et al [85] found that many factors influence the adoption of Green ICT, the most important ones being strategic alignment, leadership, culture and beliefs, ownership, and knowledge.…”

“…The authors emphasize the importance of using tools like the SURF Green ICT Maturity Model (SGIMM) in gaining awareness, identifying improvement areas, generating suggestions on how to improve, and measuring progress [85]. Lautenschutz et al [87] compared seven Green ICT maturity models and mentioned that all models aim at raising awareness and identifying Green ICT improvement areas, but they emphasize different aspects; no model is all-encompassing, and its usefulness depends on the task at hand [87]. The authors used this comparison to extend the SGIMM to include missing topics.…”

“…The authors used this comparison to extend the SGIMM to include missing topics. The addition of extra topics made the model more comprehensive, but also more complex and time-consuming to use [87]. The complexity of such maturity models has been identified as a hurdle by Foogooa and Dookhitram [88], who propose a simple self-assessment tool to assess the maturity of an organization's Green ICT based on a simple questionnaire in four categories: equipment lifecycle, end-user computing, enterprises and data centre, and ICT as a low carbon enabler.…”

Towards a Software Sustainability-Quality Model: Insights from a Multi-Case Study

“…Lautenschutz et al [26] compared and contrasted various Green ICT maturity models. Inspired by the CMM, Hankel and Lago [27] defined the SURF Green ICT Maturity Model (SGIMM 3 ) with the aim to assess the maturity of overall 3 https://goo.gl/f0ORLV organizations with respect to Green ICT.…”

A Framework and a Web Application for Self-assessment of Sustainable Green ICT Practices in SMEs

“…Each attribute has a maturity level with a description of what it contains. The main aim of this framework is to cultivate an inside exchange in organizations, encouraging concurrence on analysis of the present circumstance (the general development level), and defining development activities [18]. The model has been evaluated in a survey of green ICT experts [19].…”