Benchmarking your IT asset management ESG performance against peers and industry standards gives you context for understanding whether your programme is leading, lagging, or keeping pace. Without benchmarks, even strong absolute numbers lack meaning because there is no reference point. Understanding how to benchmark effectively and what metrics to compare helps you identify improvement opportunities and set credible targets.
Why Benchmarking Matters
ESG benchmarking serves several practical purposes. It helps you set realistic targets by understanding what peer organisations are achieving. It identifies areas where you are underperforming relative to industry norms. It provides evidence for internal business cases by showing where improvement is needed or where your programme is already competitive. It supports credible ESG reporting by contextualising your performance against recognised standards. And it helps you respond to investor and stakeholder questions about how your performance compares to others in your sector.
Key Metrics for Benchmarking
Several IT asset management metrics lend themselves to benchmarking. E-waste diversion rate measures the percentage of retired IT equipment diverted from landfill. In Victoria, where e-waste landfill has been banned since 1 July 2019, the baseline should be 100 percent. The meaningful benchmark becomes the quality of diversion, specifically how much is refurbished versus simply recycled.
Refurbishment and reuse rate is the percentage of retired IT equipment that is refurbished and returned to productive use rather than recycled or destroyed. Industry benchmarks vary significantly by equipment type and age, but leading programmes typically achieve 50 to 70 percent refurbishment rates for equipment under five years old.
Average equipment lifecycle measures how long IT equipment remains in productive use before retirement. Industry averages for corporate laptops sit around three to four years, while leading organisations are pushing toward five years or more through better maintenance and targeted refreshes.
CO2e avoidance per tonne of IT processed quantifies the carbon benefit of your ITAD programme relative to its scale. This metric allows comparison between organisations of different sizes by normalising to the volume of equipment processed.
Remarketing value recovery as a percentage of original purchase price indicates how effectively your programme captures residual value from retired equipment. Benchmarks depend heavily on equipment age and type, but recovering 15 to 30 percent of original value is typical for well-managed programmes processing equipment at three to four years old.
Sources of Benchmark Data
Several sources provide benchmark data for IT lifecycle management. Industry reports from organisations like the International Association of IT Asset Managers (IAITAM), the IT Asset Disposal Alliance, and market research firms publish periodic reports on ITAD industry metrics. Your ITAD provider should be able to share anonymised benchmarking data showing how your programme compares to their other clients of similar size and industry.
ESG frameworks provide implicit benchmarks through their scoring methodologies. A CDP score of A indicates leadership performance, while B indicates management level. Understanding where the scoring thresholds sit for IT-related metrics gives you a benchmark to aim for.
Peer sustainability reports are a valuable source. Reviewing the sustainability reports of companies in your industry and of similar size reveals what metrics they disclose and what performance levels they report. This peer analysis is particularly useful for understanding stakeholder expectations and competitive positioning.
Government and regulatory data, including e-waste collection and recycling statistics published by the Australian Government, state EPAs, and industry bodies, provides a broader context for your performance.
Building an Internal Benchmarking Programme
A systematic approach to benchmarking involves several steps. First, select the metrics you want to benchmark, focusing on those that are most material to your organisation and most relevant to your stakeholders. Second, establish your current baseline with accurate data from your IT asset register and ITAD provider reports.
Third, identify appropriate peer groups. This might include companies in your industry, companies of similar size, companies in your geographic region, or companies recognised as sustainability leaders. Different peer groups provide different perspectives, and using multiple groups gives a more rounded picture.
Fourth, collect peer data from the sources described above. This is often the most time-consuming step, but it becomes easier over time as you build a database of comparative information.
Fifth, analyse gaps between your performance and peer benchmarks, identifying areas where you lead and areas where you trail. Sixth, set targets informed by the benchmarking results, aiming to close gaps with leaders while maintaining areas of strength.
Using Benchmarks in Reporting
Including benchmark context in your sustainability reporting strengthens your disclosures. Rather than simply stating your refurbishment rate is 55 percent, you might note that this compares to an industry average of 40 percent and that your target is to reach 65 percent, which is the level achieved by leading programmes. This contextualisation helps stakeholders assess whether your performance is strong, adequate, or needing improvement.
Be transparent about the source and methodology of any benchmarks you reference. Unclear or cherry-picked comparisons undermine credibility rather than building it.
Continuous Improvement Through Benchmarking
Benchmarking is most valuable when treated as an ongoing process rather than a one-time exercise. Annual benchmarking allows you to track how your performance evolves relative to peers, identify emerging best practices that you could adopt, adjust targets as industry standards advance, and demonstrate progress to stakeholders over time.
For guidance on the full range of metrics relevant to IT lifecycle sustainability reporting, see our guide on measuring the environmental impact of IT disposal. For a comprehensive view of ESG reporting for e-waste, our ESG reporting guide covers the Australian landscape in detail.
]]>