Scaling cross-organizational decarbonization efforts as the CSO

The single most common obstacle isn’t budget, or even buy-in. It’s the lack of structured, high-quality emissions data. CSOs cannot act on what they can’t trace, verify, or compare. Unstructured data delays internal approvals, breaks the link between sustainability and finance, and undermines investor confidence.

Decarbonization can’t scale until the data behind it is trustworthy, and that requires a smarter, cross-organizational collaboration.

Why poor data blocks progress

When ESG and carbon data are scattered across spreadsheets, slide decks, and business units, three problems emerge:

First, the organization loses visibility. Site-level decisions can’t be compared, modeled, or rolled up into group-level strategy. Second, verification becomes a bottleneck. Without a clear audit trail, reduction estimates are viewed with skepticism. Third, it limits funding. Projects that might save energy or reduce emissions are deprioritized because the numbers don’t hold up under financial scrutiny.

No-one likes to fight an uphill battle to get a sustainability initiative with financial gains implemented, only to find out that there is a fault in the calculations they made to put it together.

This is what creates the decarbonization “execution gap”—where companies have goals, but lack the infrastructure to act on them.

What structured data makes possible

Structured sustainability data enables faster, smarter decisions. When all emissions sources are measured consistently, by entity and reporting period, CSOs can prioritize action based on real impact—not guesswork.

This allows for consistent reporting, verified baselines, internal benchmarking, and accurate scenario modeling. It also makes cross-functional collaboration easier. Operations, procurement, and finance can speak the same language when the underlying data is clean and shareable.

Structured data is what transforms ESG metrics into levers for cost reduction, compliance readiness, and long-term value creation. For example, understanding that your emissions in one area of operations is great, but knowing that these are Scope 2 emissions that are significantly higher than your industry average allows you to paint a more pointed picture about where the inefficiencies are in your business.

Centralizing this in the right platform is a given, but giving your business the tools to contribute is a crucial part of the process.

So, let’s inspire you a little bit with a story from one of our customers.

Example: how Ependion built internal ownership of sustainability reporting

This need for structured, consistent data isn’t just technical—it’s organizational.

Ependion’s approach to their Double Materiality Assessment (DMA) is a clear example. As part of their broader ESRS readiness, they chose to run the entire process internally, distributing ownership across the business rather than outsourcing it to consultants.

You can read the full story here, but for now, here’s a summary of what they did.

Finance, sustainability, HR, and operations teams were each tasked with assessing impacts, dependencies, and risks within their respective areas. Instead of waiting for final reporting stages to coordinate, Ependion built cross-functional engagement into the workflow from the beginning.

To make this possible, they established a standardized process for assessment and documentation. Teams aligned around shared definitions, ensured consistency in how risks were evaluated, and made use of familiar financial language to integrate sustainability into existing management.

By embedding a culture of shared responsibility, they strengthened internal transparency, and gave business unit leaders a direct stake in the outcomes.

This kind of structural alignment, where sustainability isn’t separate from operational or financial planning, is what makes data actionable. By using our platform, as well, they had a reliable means of sharing the workloads, tracking projects, and ensuring the data they were taking action on was accurate and categorized appropriately.

How to scale this across an organization

The same logic applies when scaling across a portfolio of business units, facilities, or regions. Start by setting consistent definitions for each emissions metric. Ensure every unit reports with the same granularity, at regular intervals. Use software to verify source data and lock reporting workflows. Then layer on benchmarking, forecasting, and financial modeling.

Over time, this builds a repeatable decarbonization engine, one that mirrors how companies manage capital or cost. Without structure, you get spreadsheets and summaries. With structure, you get levers for action.

That all sounds well and good though, but naturally you may come up against some resistance from the departments you try and approach with this. The first question they’re likely going to ask is: “How much time is this going to take?”

It’s a fair question, and if you had planned on bootstrapping with excel sheets, even we would be concerned for your colleagues. No one likes to invest time and energy across their department in activities that aren’t directly related to their KPIs, budget, or strategy.

However, this is where our software truly starts to shine, and where you can demonstrably show that this type of data exercise won’t impede their work, but enhance it.

Why Position Green make this possible

Structured data needs software that enforces consistency and supports decision-making. Position Green’s Carbon Accounting software allows CSOs to:

• Capture emissions data per entity, site, and scope
• Validate and audit data centrally
• Model reduction scenarios with financial metrics
• Benchmark across the business and against peers
• Align with reporting standards like ISSB and CSRD
• Apply decarbonization levers with estimated cost of realization

This creates the foundation for climate action that is traceable, fundable, and repeatable. It’s how you move from isolated wins to organization-wide transformation.

Conclusion: structure enables scale

Decarbonization doesn’t fail because of strategy. It fails because the numbers don’t add up—or can’t be proven.

Structured sustainability data is what closes that gap. It gives you the clarity to act, the credibility to gain approval, and the systems to do it again and again.

By having a system that holds onto this date for you, makes it easy to access, review, and share with your team, you’re in a far stronger position to be creating a decarbonization plan with confidence.

Want to chat with us about your net-zero or decarb-dependent financial goals? We’re only a few clicks away.