Sustainable Development Goal strategic tool - The Sustainability Management Wiki

Authors: Rutuja Chavan, Mariam Olawale, Maurine Oluchukwu Okolie
Edited by: –
Last updated: June 24, 2026

Executive summary

This article presents an Excel-based Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) strategy tool designed to help organizations translate sustainability commitments into practical, measurable action. It explains why existing SDG reporting and implementation approaches often fall short, especially for smaller organizations with limited resources, technical capacity, or expertise. The proposed tool addresses these gaps by offering a low-cost, accessible, and adaptable framework that connects business priorities with SDG-related performance management.

The article reviews several existing SDG tools, including the Global Reporting Initiative, SDG Action Manager, SDG Impact Assessment Tool, SDG Compass, Track Your Impact, and ACR SDG Contribution Reporting Tool. While these tools support assessment, reporting, and stakeholder communication, the article notes that many can be complex, resource-intensive, or better suited to larger organizations. This creates a need for a simplified tool that can support organizations of different sizes and sectors.

The proposed tool contains four main sections: materiality mapping, goal setting, action planning, and progress tracking. Materiality mapping helps organizations identify which SDGs are most relevant to their business model, stakeholders, resource use, regulatory exposure, reputation, opportunities, and environmental risks. The Excel-based scoring system converts these qualitative considerations into comparable quantitative scores, helping managers prioritize the SDGs that matter most.

After priorities are identified, the goal-setting framework converts them into measurable commitments using KPIs, units, responsible persons, baselines, targets, and timelines. The action plan then defines how goals will be achieved through concrete activities, business examples, current status assessments, start and end dates, and required resources. Finally, the progress tracker monitors monthly performance against baselines and targets using clear status categories such as not started, behind, on track, and above target.

Overall, the tool supports strategic alignment, accountability, transparency, and data-based decision-making. It helps organizations move from broad sustainability intentions to structured implementation and continuous improvement. The article also acknowledges development challenges, especially the difficulty of defining universal baselines and targets for all SDGs and limited access to some existing tools for comparison.

1 Motivation and background

Unsustainable practices through human activities have prevailed over the years, and continuous efforts have been made to keep them in check. One such effort is the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of 2015, an extension of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which provide a framework for UN members to work toward by 2030 for a sustainable future¹.

Achievements of these goals require transformative measures from all levels of society, including companies, through SDG or corporate sustainability reporting. This has become a vital tool for companies to reveal transparency, accountability, and sustainability commitment². To achieve effective SDG impact, the SDG goals have to be integrated into the organization’s strategies¹. To help companies engage in these SDGs effectively, tools and frameworks have been developed and used to assess different aspects of organizational engagement and track sustainability¹^,³. Some examples of these tools include Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Action Manager, SDG Compass Tool, SDG Metrics, and Sustainable Development Goal Impact Assessment Tool³. These tools exist in different forms, such as web-based, reports, repositories, e-learnings, or trainings, and the choice of the tool to be used depends on the specific context and level⁴. However, sustainability reporting and the implementation of existing tools and frameworks in companies have not been so effective in SDG disclosure, with little or no reporting, others have poorly established reporting, a general imbalance, and unrelated reporting to business goals⁵^,⁶. Some studies also suggest internal factors such as organizational size, type, level of ownership, board composition, and independence are the major determinants of this. In contrast, others suggest external factors, such as complexity and lack of clarity in the SDG frameworks, making it difficult to implement⁷^,⁸. Smaller companies like SMEs face barriers such as a lack of resources, the need for high capital costs required for initial implementation of sustainability measures, technology, and a lack of expertise⁹. One of the reasons for this is that most of the SDG tools were developed with a focus on large corporations that have more resources and financial capabilities than small organizations that are just struggling to survive¹⁰^,¹¹^,¹². Therefore, there is a need for a more quantitative reporting framework or tools with a more standardized measurement for both large and small corporations⁵, which is low-cost, simple, and accessible, sensitive to size, adaptable, and replicable.

This report will give more information about existing tools, a modified SDG Compass tool design to be easily implemented in different businesses regardless of type, size, financial, and technological capabilities. It will also outline challenges encountered in developing the tool and suggestions for a modified tool.

2 Existing SDG tools

Samir (2025) outlined existing SDG tools used by organizations to assess progress. These include:

2.1 Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

GRI is one of the most common and most used sustainability reporting tools, which provides a reliable and comprehensive framework to businesses and organizations to report their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) activities for comparison with SDG targets. Some of the key features of this tool are transparency and accountability to stakeholders who can easily see the impact on sustainability, and, it can also be easily verified as it is widely used, thereby improving credibility. Additionally, it has a customizable framework, making it flexible for businesses to tailor it according to their needs.

2.2 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) action manager

The UN Global Compact and B Lab jointly designed this tool to assist businesses in aligning their operations to the SDGs by providing a framework to measure, manage, and report their SDG impact. This tool is a sector-specific, self-assessment guidance tool, with interactive action plans to engage and promote collaboration, enabling businesses to share their progress with stakeholders and partners.

2.3 Sustainable Development Goal impact assessment tool

The SDG impact assessment tool, which is web-based, is used by organizations to assess the impact of their activities and innovation on the SDGs through free online learning applications and SDG impact standards, which contain a self-assessment checklist that organizations can use to assess how well their practices align with the SDGs. The result of the assessment is often subjective as it depends on know-how and the goal of the person conducting the assessment. According to the GOLD STANDARD for the GLOBAL GOALS (2025), the Gold Standard SDG impact tool, which visualizes the results of their activities, was used to report, validate, and verify SDG impact information. This tool offers a digital-based or Excel-based version as well as manuals and templates to guide users.

2.4 SDG Compass tool

The United Nations Global Compact (2015) defines the SDG Compass as a tool that offers insights on how the SDGs affect businesses and how to incorporate sustainability at the center of business strategy while providing guidelines for companies to use for integrating SDGs strategically into the business. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development elaborates that these guidelines aim to help businesses understand SDGs in a business context, define priority action areas, set SDG-related goals, integrate the set goals into corporate functions, and report progress against SDGs. This tool is a product of a collaboration with the GRI, United Nations (UN) Global Compact, and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD).

2.5 Track Your Impact

The Track Your Impact SDG tool is a user-friendly platform designed for organizations to measure their sustainability outcomes in terms of social and environmental impact. It is customizable and can easily be shared with stakeholders.

2.6 ACR Sustainable Development Goal Contribution Reporting tool

The ACR SDG contribution reporting tool is a useful tool, especially for project developers to identify targets and impacts to be reported. This tool can be used for industrial projects or Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU), following different frameworks¹³.

3 New tool

The new tool is an Excel-based assessment tool organised into four main sections, which include the materiality mapping, goal setting, action plan, and progress tracker. These different assessment strategies are designed to incorporate organizational goals with SDGs and track progress toward their achievement.

3.1 Materiality mapping and its dimensions

Materiality mapping is a tool that organizations use to prioritize sustainability problems that are important for businesses and stakeholders. It is also a framework whereby sustainability topics can be mapped out as “material,” which implies that they can influence a company’s performance, image, and long-term values effectively. By visually organising SDG goals based on their significance for stakeholders and their impact on the business, materiality maps allow firms to focus their resources on specific areas where sustainability initiatives will be more efficient. When considering the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), materiality mapping is very beneficial as it allows companies to assess their alignment with global sustainability priorities and to assess which organizational operations have the most substantial effects. The following dimensions demonstrate how businesses can approach materiality mapping with respect to the SDGs:

3.1.1 Core business link

This section focuses on the direct connection between a sustainability challenge and the main products, services, or operations of a company. It emphasizes whether an SDG challenge is merged into the business model itself. For example, an energy company can be linked to SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), whereas a food company may be closely related to SDG 2 (Zero Hunger). The strength of this connection often dictates the significance of an SDG for a company’s long-term sustainability.

3.1.2 Resource use and waste

This dimension investigates how a business utilizes natural resources and deals with waste produced from its operations. It encompasses considerations related to raw materials, water, and energy consumption, along with waste minimization, recycling, and circular economy practices. Heavy reliance on resources or inadequate waste management can elevate both environmental damage and business risks, particularly amid resource scarcity.

3.1.3 Customer demand and expectations

Consumer preferences and societal expectations are increasingly influencing corporate sustainability strategies. Customers are progressively demanding responsible sourcing, production, and distribution practices. Companies that do not adapt to these expectations risk losing market presence, whereas those that effectively respond can foster greater customer loyalty and gain a competitive edge.

3.1.4 Legal and policy exposure

In today’s businesses, there is a changing regulatory landscape whereby governments globally enforce stricter environmental and social regulations. For instance, carbon pricing, limitations on harmful substances and mandatory disclosures. Companies that are exposed to such regulatory shifts face considerable compliance costs if they do not proactively adjust, making regulatory alignment a significant aspect of materiality.

3.1.5 Reputation risk

The reputation of a company is closely related to its sustainability performance. A firm that is viewed as irresponsible or unsustainable may experience reputational harm, which can result in loss of consumer trust, negative media coverage, or pressure from NGOs. In addition, companies that take pioneering steps in sustainability often improve their brand image, attract investors, and establish partnerships.

3.1.6 Opportunity area

There are opportunities for innovation, market growth, and new business models through sustainability challenges. For example, addressing challenges related to renewable energy, sustainable packaging, or finance can unlock entirely new markets. Therefore, organizations that perceive sustainability as an opportunity are more likely to succeed in the long run.

3.1.7 Environmental risk

This dimension evaluates how vulnerable businesses are to environmental changes such as climate-related disruptions, loss of biodiversity, or depletion of natural resources. These risks can directly impact supply chains, production methods, and operational environments. Companies that prepare for and mitigate these risks can achieve enhanced resilience and stability, while those that do not face the possibility of operational and financial challenges.

3.1.8 How materiality mapping works in Excel

The Excel-based scoring system serves as a practical enhancement to materiality mapping, changing what is typically a qualitative and discussion-oriented process into a structured, measurable model. Conventional materiality mapping focuses on determining which sustainability topics are most significant to a business and its stakeholders, yet this approach can sometimes be subjective or fragmented. The Excel methodology addresses this issue by incorporating systematic scoring, categorization, and visualization. Drop-down menus for each dimension such as Core Business Link, Resource Use Waste, Customer Demand, Legal Policy Exposure, Reputation Risk, Opportunity Area, and Environmental Risk assist evaluators in consistently assessing issues using established options. This ensures that the evaluation process is not subject to personal interpretation but is instead aligned with well-defined materiality categories. Implementing numerical scoring (0–100%) converts these qualitative assessments into standardized quantitative measures. This improves transparency and also facilitates direct comparisons across SDGs and business functions. By calculating average scores across all dimensions, the model produces a comprehensive materiality score for all SDGs. This approach guarantees balance, preventing any single viewpoint, like regulatory risk or customer demand, from dominating the others. To render the results actionable, status indicators—Low, Medium, and High—are introduced. These simplify intricate assessments into a clear summary for executives and stakeholders, emphasizing where focus, investment, or strategic intervention might be most necessary.

Example: Linking back to materiality mapping

To use SDG 1: No Poverty in the Excel framework, the organization might perform highly on Core Business Link (e.g., job creation and fair wages), moderately on Customer Demand (e.g., increasing expectations for social impact), and strongly on Reputation Risk (e.g., possible brand damage if labor exploitation is revealed). In addition, an average score of 87%, means the SDG would be classified as High Materiality. Furthermore, from a materiality standpoint, this outcome highlights that SDG 1 is not just a secondary commitment but a strategic priority, which is essential for both corporate principles and long-term risk management. This further indicates that by incorporating these elements, the Excel framework enables materiality mapping to transition from a theoretical exercise into a comprehensive, data-informed decision-making instrument. Thus, companies can pinpoint their most significant SDGs, monitor changes over time, evaluate performance across business units, and clearly communicate results to stakeholders.

3.2 Goal setting framework after materiality mapping

Once materiality mapping indicates which Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are most important for a company, the next task is to convert these priorities into definite pledges. Without this step, sustainability may remain aspirational rather than a structured pathway toward achieving a goal. To ease this transition, an Excel tool named “Goal Setting” has been introduced. This tool allows businesses to establish, monitor, and assess their SDG goals and the related objectives. With clear accountability, quantifiable indicators, and timelines, the framework ensures that sustainability goals move from strategy into daily practice.

3.2.1 The importance of KPIs

The KPI (Key Performance Indicator) column is the core of this framework. This establishes the basis of the method, as it makes each SDG measurable and practical, ensuring that objectives do not turn into something vague or just symbolic. KPI links SDGs with Business Operations. The SDGs are designed to encompass a wide range of issues on a global scale (for example Zero Hunger, Climate Action), whereas businesses function on a more practical and measurable level. KPIs serve to bridge this gap by converting ambitious global objectives into specific business metrics. For example, while “Zero Hunger” could be expressed as “tons of food waste avoided,” representing a unit that can be monitored and improved within a company and making decision-making easier. Materiality mapping reveals which SDGs are important but without KPIs, managers cannot assess the company’s performance or track progress. KPIs provide a measurable way to evaluate impact, allowing for more effective resource allocation and prioritization of initiatives that are more important. Promoting accountability and transparency is also one of the benefits of KPIs, as it outlines what will be measured, and the framework avoids symbolic commitments. Both internal and external stakeholders, including investors, regulators, and customers, can determine whether progress is genuine and can be substantiated, or if they simply appear in sustainability reports. Lastly, KPI aids comparability among SDGs and units by utilizing standardized KPIs across the organization, enabling comparisons not only between different SDGs but also across departments, projects, regions, or even competitor firms. This enables benchmarking and ensures performance is evaluated within a broader context.

3.2.2 Goal-Setting framework in Excel

The Goal Setting spreadsheet is organized around several key columns, each crucial for operationalizing sustainability objectives:

3.2.2.1 SDG

Each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals is included in the spreadsheet. This guarantees comprehensive coverage and aids the company in maintaining visibility of all SDGs, even if some are deprioritized during the materiality analysis.

3.2.2.2 KPI

Users can choose from a dropdown menu populated with a predefined set of KPIs tailored to each SDG. These KPIs are crafted to reflect both business impact and SDG alignment, ensuring that goals are relevant, measurable, and consistent with global sustainability frameworks.

3.2.2.3 Unit

Each KPI necessitates a standardized measurement unit (such as %, number, USD, or tons of CO₂). This ensures that performance data can be both tracked and compared across various SDGs or organizations.

3.2.2.4 Responsible person

Accountability and ownership are crucial for execution. All goals are assigned to a specific manager or function within an organization (For example, HR Manager or Sustainability Officer). This makes sure that responsibilities are well-defined, and progress is properly tracked.

3.2.2.5 Baseline

The existing performance level is documented as the baseline. This is the benchmark for future progress and mitigating the risk of establishing targets that cannot be measured or contextualized.

3.2.2.6 A specific level of improvement or accomplishment is established as a target

This target focuses on the organization’s dedication and aspirations, for instance, to aim for a 40% reduction in emissions or increase the percentage of women in leadership roles by doubling it. There is also a timeframe outlined for each target, that integrates time-sensitive commitments into the strategy. In the absence of a year, objectives could turn into unclear pledges.

Excel framework: Practical example SDG 1: No Poverty

For SDG 1 (No Poverty), the predefined KPI dropdown may include: number of employees earning above the living wage, percentage of expenditures on local suppliers, value of microloans issued, and percentage of community investment in economically disadvantaged areas. For instance, when a company chooses “number of employees earning above living wage” as its KPI, the sheet would be filled out with units: number of employees, responsible person: HR Manager, baseline: 500 employees currently receiving above living wage, target: 750 employees, year: 2026. This example indicates that the framework translates the SDG into a specific, measurable, and time-sensitive commitment for the organization.

3.2.3 Benefits of the Goal Setting Framework

The Goal Setting Framework serves as a structured method for an organization to integrate sustainability into their fundamental operations, which results in both strategic and practical benefits.

3.2.3.1 Strategic alignment

This framework ensures that sustainability efforts are fully embedded within a company’s overall strategy and accountability mechanisms. This entails directly connecting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with business goals, leadership priorities and performance evaluation systems, companies establish strong coherence between their sustainability objectives and their long-term vision. This alignment is therefore easy to understand for both executives and employees on how their contributions affect corporate success and global progress.

3.2.3.2 Measurability

A significant challenge in sustainable reporting is transitioning from broad goals to specific and measurable outcomes. The framework addresses this issue by transforming general commitment into clearly defined Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). These KPIs can be monitored, compared against historical performance, and reported over time. In addition, this provides companies with a straightforward method to showcase their progress and track areas that need improvement.

3.2.3.3 Transparency

The framework encourages trust among internal and external stakeholders by providing clear insights into actual achievements. Instead of relying on unclear and high-level commitments that can seem symbolic, organizations can present real results supported by data. This emphasizes that transparency reduces the risk of accusations of “greenwashing” and promotes reliability with employees, investors, regulators, and customers.

3.2.3.4 Actionability

In addition to strategy, the framework highlights the significance of practical implementation. It allows managers and teams to progress systematically from identifying priority SDGs to formulating important projects that would have tangible business and societal advantages. Therefore, this structured framework removes uncertainty and directs teams in converting abstract ambitions into actionable initiatives with clear responsibilities, timelines, and outcomes.

3.2.3.5 Scalability

An important advantage of the framework is its standardized design, which makes it readily applicable to various business environments. It can be utilized in a single department, an entire business unit, or operations spanning multiple locations, hence the framework ensures a uniform approach to setting, measuring, and achieving sustainability objectives. This scalability allows organizations to replicate successful practices, foster shared learning, and maintain coherence toward different parts of the business.

Finally, the Goal Setting sheet turns the results of the materiality mapping process into an operational sustainability roadmap. That is, it links the understanding of priorities with the implementation of measurable impact.

3.3 Action Plan framework post goal setting

After finalizing the Goal Setting Framework in which SDG priorities are converted into quantifiable KPIs, baselines, and targets, the next important step is creating a clearly defined Action Plan. The Goal Setting document outlines what must be achieved while the Action Plan shows how it will be achieved. This is where the Action Plan Excel Sheet comes into play. It turns SDG commitments into specific activities, industry examples, and timelines, thereby ensuring accountability and operational transparency. Each SDG, from 1 to 17, is included, with dropdown menus that assist users in identifying the most suitable actions, choosing business examples, and recording the resources required for implementation.

3.3.1 Structure of the Action Plan Sheet

The Action Plan sheet is structured into six primary columns:

Action: This section outlines the steps a company will undertake to support the chosen SDG. To facilitate this, a dropdown list is available under each SDG, featuring predefined “Areas of Action.” For instance, beneath SDG 1: No Poverty, the dropdown might present options such as Employment & Fair Wages, Inclusive Value Chains, Financial Inclusion, or Community Investment. This ensures that actions are uniform, aligned with the SDG framework, and the organization’s operational context.

Business example: This column illustrates practical instances of how businesses can engage with each SDG within a commercial environment. It ensures that the framework is relevant to the industry and shows what implementation looks like in practice. For example, for SDG 2: Zero Hunger, potential examples may include supporting smallholder farmers with contracts or tools, strengthening food products to address malnutrition, or decreasing food waste in supply chains. By providing examples, the sheet helps to connect high-level aspirations with tangible actions.

Current status: At this stage, companies assess their starting point or current performance level compared to each SDG action. This might include phrases like “Currently sourcing 15% of raw materials sustainably” or “Only 20% of employees are included in wellness programs.” This column is essential for monitoring progress against baselines, enabling organizations to know whether they are advancing year over year.

Start date: This column establishes the timeline for when action will commence. By including a start date, the framework eliminates broad or indefinite commitments and promotes time-bound accountability. For example: “01/01/2025, initiation of community investment fund.”

End date: The End Date captures the target deadline for achieving the action. For example: “31/12/2026 – Attain 100% wastewater treatment across all facilities.” Together, the Start Date and End Date enable businesses to strategize phased execution, track progress at specified intervals, and report results to stakeholders.

Resources needed: This column specifies the inputs necessary to execute the action. These can include financial resources (budgets, grants), human resources (expert teams, partnerships), or technical resources (equipment, systems, infrastructure). For example: £2M for solar panel installation, a dedicated energy team, and government subsidy support. Identifying resources ensures that sustainability initiatives are feasible, planned, and supported by investments.

3.3.2 How the Action Plan works in the Excel tool

For each SDG, the sheet has a dropdown menu for actions and business examples, allowing users to select options specific to each goal rather than starting from the beginning. KPI from the goal setting sheet is linked to the “Current Status” and “End Date” sections, ensuring alignment between the two sheets. For example, SDG 1: No poverty, action: employment & fair wages, business Example: Hire people from underrepresented communities and provide salaries that exceed the legal minimum, status: 500 employees currently receiving a living wage. The start date: Jan 2025, end date: Dec 2026, resources needed: budget for wage increases, HR training, and verification systems. SDG 7: Affordable & clean energy, action: adoption of renewable energy, business example: transition 50% of energy use to solar and wind power, status: currently 20% of the energy mix is renewable, start date: Mar 2025, end date: Dec 2027. Resources needed: capital investments in solar panels, energy contracts, collaborations with renewable energy providers. Using this approach, the action plan provides clear direction, assigned responsibilities and detailed operational information, enabling managers to progress from “what we want to accomplish” to “how we plan to accomplish it”.

3.3.3 Advantages of the Action Plan Sheet

The Action Plan Sheet acts as a practical instrument that converts sustainability commitments into structured and attainable results. Instead of allowing SDGs to be just an idealistic concept, the sheet acts as a roadmap that connects strategy to implementation. Its benefits can be recognized from various perspectives:

3.3.3.1 Precision in execution

One of the greatest difficulties with sustainability efforts is transforming big objectives into actionable tasks. The Action Plan Sheet tackles this by breaking down SDG commitments into detailed actions, each backed by defined timelines and measurable units. This ensures that goals are clarified and transformed into daily tasks that teams can execute with accuracy.

3.3.3.2 Relevance to business

Sustainability can sometimes be seen as risks being perceived as a mere symbolic or outward facing effort. The action plan sheet addresses this by integrating examples from various industries and connecting goals to business functions, ensuring that sustainability aims are closely aligned with real business operations. This not only prevents goals from becoming abstract but also demonstrates how sustainability can enhance efficiency, innovation, and long-term competitiveness.

3.3.3.3 Responsibility

Successful implementation requires a sense of ownership. The Action Plan Sheet promotes accountability by clearly assigning responsibilities through resource allocation, assigned leaders, and set time commitments. With accountability clearly defined, progress can be monitored more efficiently, encouraging individuals or teams to achieve goals, thereby reducing the likelihood of initiatives being neglected.

3.3.3.4 Tracking and reporting

The sheet also serves as a tool for monitoring performance. By comparing planned actions with the status and results, organizations can consistently track their progress. This enables timely actions if projects lag and supports transparent reporting to stakeholders, regulators, or investors. Over time, this enhances the organization’s credibility and trust in its sustainability efforts.

3.3.3.5 Adaptability

Another asset of the Action Plan Sheet is its versatile nature. It can be applied across various departments, business units, or even multiple locations. This adaptability ensures that all areas of an organization are aligned with the same sustainability goals while allowing for adjustments to cater to the unique situations of each team or location. Consequently, it promotes consistency and coherence in the execution of SDG-related actions throughout the organization.

3.4 Progress Tracker Sheet

Monitoring progress ensures that sustainability pledges are actionable and yield measurable results. To facilitate this, a Progress Monitoring Sheet has been developed to offer a systematic approach to track each Key Performance Indicator (KPI) regularly, generally monthly. This sheet includes numerical advancements and clearly indicates the status of each SDG initiative, assisting managers, executives, and stakeholders to easily ascertain the organization’s current standing.

Structure of the Progress Monitoring Sheet

The sheet is organized into the following columns:

SDG, which enumerates each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, ensuring thorough coverage. The KPI is used to specify the measurable outcome linked to each SDG, connecting global aspirations to company-specific impact areas. The Unit standardizes the mode of measurement (e.g., %, tons, number of employees, Euro, etc.) to ensure that progress can be consistently monitored. Additionally, the baseline captures the initial performance level against each KPI, acting as the reference point, and the target specifies the intended level of performance to be reached within the designated timeframe. The monthly Columns (Jan–Dec) document the actual achievements made each month, facilitating cumulative and trend analysis. Lastly, the status offers a traffic-light evaluation of performance (e.g., not started, behind, on track, above). To make progress tracking both straightforward and efficient, each KPI is automatically classified with a status based on the actual progress in relation to the target and baseline. Not started signifies that no advancement has occurred. This status is assigned when all monthly fields are blank or recorded as zero. It points to areas where work has yet to commence or where data entry is lacking. Above target indicates that actual cumulative progress has already exceeded the established target. This is an encouraging sign, demonstrating that the organization is outperforming expectations and has improved beyond its commitments. On track indicates that progress is unfolding as intended. Here, actual cumulative results are between the baseline and the target, signifying that the initiative is progressing at the anticipated pace and is likely to meet the goal within the allotted timeframe. Behind brings attention to areas of concern where actual progress lags behind expectations. This status suggests that corrective measures, resource reallocations, or managerial intervention may be necessary to align performance with the intended target.

3.4.1 Ongoing assessment

The progress tracker provides a comprehensive, month-by-month view of performance related to each Key Performance Indicator (KPI). It also allows visualizing progress over time and aids organizations in identifying early indicators of delays, underperformance, or potential problems. This assessment ensures corrective measures to be implemented before minor gaps become major setbacks and enables sustainability objectives to stay on course throughout the year.

3.4.2 Responsibility

This progress tracker promotes responsibility at every level, including a clear record of successes, milestones, and areas needing attention. Teams and individuals can easily observe the goals that are achieved and if other additional efforts are required. This clarity in the distribution of responsibility allows all stakeholders to understand their contributions toward the sustainability objectives, fostering ownership and dedication across different departments.

3.4.3 Support for decision-making

By providing real-time, organized insights into performance, the tracker serves as an essential tool for making informed decisions. Managers can determine where resources—such as time, employees, or funding should be focused to improve results. Additionally, it helps in recognizing effective strategies that can be replicated, boosting overall efficiency and impact.

3.4.4 Openness

The progress tracker improves organizational openness by documenting and communicating results clearly and consistently. Internal leadership can rely on it for performance evaluations, and external stakeholders, such as investors, regulators, or sustainability partners, can utilize it to confirm progress. This transparency promotes trust, strengthens credibility, and shows the organization’s commitment to accountable and measurable sustainability practices.

3.4.5 Encouragement of a data-centric culture

The tracker encourages teams to focus on concrete results instead of abstract objectives when converting sustainability goals into measurable metrics. This evidence-based approach fosters a culture in which decisions, strategies, and improvement are founded on data. It allows employees to analyze, interpret, and act on performance statistics, ultimately driving ongoing improvement and incorporating sustainability deeply within organizational practices. In addition, establishing a sustainability strategy is essential for businesses. It is also important to utilize the approaches of Materiality Mapping, Goal Setting, and Action Planning, so that organizations can transition from mere intentions into tangible outcomes. Furthermore, this document provides a practical guide for connecting business activities with the UN Sustainable Development Goals, guaranteeing that sustainability is embedded in both policies and practices. Using specified metrics, accountability frameworks, and continuous monitoring of progress, companies can lead with conviction, adjust quickly, and make a significant contribution to a fair and resilient future.

3.5 Challenges faced in developing new tools

Developing the new SDG tool was challenging due to the unavailability of global targets for measuring progress for all SDGs. This made it difficult to set baselines and targets for the progress tracker and goal setting in the new tool, and as a result, the targets used were assumed. Secondly, it was difficult to gain access to most existing tools and understand how they work, which made it challenging to compare them with the new tool.

References

1
Grainger-Brown, J., & Malekpour, S. (2019). Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: AReviewofStrategic Tools and Frameworks Available to Organisations. sustainability(1381), 1/18. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/su11051381 ↩︎
2
Adams, C. A., & Abhayawansa, S. (2022). Connecting the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing and calls for ‘harmonisation’ of sustainability reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 82, 102309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2021.102309 ↩︎
1
Grainger-Brown, J., & Malekpour, S. (2019). Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: AReviewofStrategic Tools and Frameworks Available to Organisations. sustainability(1381), 1/18. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/su11051381 ↩︎
1
Grainger-Brown, J., & Malekpour, S. (2019). Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: AReviewofStrategic Tools and Frameworks Available to Organisations. sustainability(1381), 1/18. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/su11051381 ↩︎
3
Samir, A. (2025). SDG Progress: 10 Essential Tools for Tracking Sustainability. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://profiletree.com/sdg-tracking-tools/ ↩︎
3
Samir, A. (2025). SDG Progress: 10 Essential Tools for Tracking Sustainability. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://profiletree.com/sdg-tracking-tools/ ↩︎
4
United Nations. (2022). High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Tools Supporting Voluntary National Review Processes. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://hlpf.un.org/tools ↩︎
5
Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M. (2021). Shortcomings in reporting contributions towards the sustainable development goals. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management., 28, 1299-1312. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1002/csr.2129 ↩︎
6
Emma, G.-M., & Jennifer, M.-F. (2021). Is SDG reporting substantial or symbolic? An examination of controversial and environmentally sensitive industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 298, 126781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126781 ↩︎
7
Killick, N., & Wachenfeld, M. (2015). State of Play Business and the Sustainable Development Goals: Mind the Gap – Challenges for Implementation. https://www.ihrb.org/resources/report-state-of-play-business-sustainable-development-goals ↩︎
8
Subramaniam, N., Akbar, S., Situ, H., Ji, S., & Parikh, N. (2023). Sustainable development goal reporting: Contrasting effects of institutional and organisational factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 411, 137339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137339 ↩︎
9
Jaramillo, J. Á., Sossa, J. W. Z., & Mendoza, G. L. O. (2018). Barriers to sustainability for small and medium enterprises in the framework of sustainable development—Literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(4), 512-524. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2261 ↩︎
10
Berrone, P., Ricart, J. E., Duch, A. I., Bernardo, V., Salvador, J., Peña, J. P., & Planas, M. R. (2019). EASIER: An Evaluation Model for Public–Private Partnerships Contributing to the Sustainable Development Goals. sustainability, 11(8), 2339. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082339 ↩︎
11
Giri, F. S., & Chaparro, T. S. (2023). Measuring business impacts on the SDGs: a systematic literature review. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 2(3), 100044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2023.100044 ↩︎
12
UN Global Compact. (2025). The guide for business action on the SDGs. Retrieved 15 August from www.sdgcompass.org ↩︎
5
Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M. (2021). Shortcomings in reporting contributions towards the sustainable development goals. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management., 28, 1299-1312. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1002/csr.2129 ↩︎
13
ACR. (2025). ACR SDG Contributions Reporting Tool. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://acrcarbon.org/program_resources/acr-sdg-contributions-reporting-tool/?utm_source=chatgpt.com ↩︎

1
Grainger-Brown, J., & Malekpour, S. (2019). Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: AReviewofStrategic Tools and Frameworks Available to Organisations. sustainability(1381), 1/18. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/su11051381 ↩︎
2
Adams, C. A., & Abhayawansa, S. (2022). Connecting the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing and calls for ‘harmonisation’ of sustainability reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 82, 102309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2021.102309 ↩︎
1
Grainger-Brown, J., & Malekpour, S. (2019). Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: AReviewofStrategic Tools and Frameworks Available to Organisations. sustainability(1381), 1/18. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/su11051381 ↩︎
1
Grainger-Brown, J., & Malekpour, S. (2019). Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: AReviewofStrategic Tools and Frameworks Available to Organisations. sustainability(1381), 1/18. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/su11051381 ↩︎
3
Samir, A. (2025). SDG Progress: 10 Essential Tools for Tracking Sustainability. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://profiletree.com/sdg-tracking-tools/ ↩︎
3
Samir, A. (2025). SDG Progress: 10 Essential Tools for Tracking Sustainability. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://profiletree.com/sdg-tracking-tools/ ↩︎
4
United Nations. (2022). High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development: Tools Supporting Voluntary National Review Processes. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://hlpf.un.org/tools ↩︎
5
Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M. (2021). Shortcomings in reporting contributions towards the sustainable development goals. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management., 28, 1299-1312. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1002/csr.2129 ↩︎
6
Emma, G.-M., & Jennifer, M.-F. (2021). Is SDG reporting substantial or symbolic? An examination of controversial and environmentally sensitive industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 298, 126781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126781 ↩︎
7
Killick, N., & Wachenfeld, M. (2015). State of Play Business and the Sustainable Development Goals: Mind the Gap – Challenges for Implementation. https://www.ihrb.org/resources/report-state-of-play-business-sustainable-development-goals ↩︎
8
Subramaniam, N., Akbar, S., Situ, H., Ji, S., & Parikh, N. (2023). Sustainable development goal reporting: Contrasting effects of institutional and organisational factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 411, 137339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137339 ↩︎
9
Jaramillo, J. Á., Sossa, J. W. Z., & Mendoza, G. L. O. (2018). Barriers to sustainability for small and medium enterprises in the framework of sustainable development—Literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(4), 512-524. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2261 ↩︎
10
Berrone, P., Ricart, J. E., Duch, A. I., Bernardo, V., Salvador, J., Peña, J. P., & Planas, M. R. (2019). EASIER: An Evaluation Model for Public–Private Partnerships Contributing to the Sustainable Development Goals. sustainability, 11(8), 2339. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082339 ↩︎
11
Giri, F. S., & Chaparro, T. S. (2023). Measuring business impacts on the SDGs: a systematic literature review. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 2(3), 100044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2023.100044 ↩︎
12
UN Global Compact. (2025). The guide for business action on the SDGs. Retrieved 15 August from www.sdgcompass.org ↩︎
5
Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M. (2021). Shortcomings in reporting contributions towards the sustainable development goals. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management., 28, 1299-1312. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1002/csr.2129 ↩︎
13
ACR. (2025). ACR SDG Contributions Reporting Tool. Retrieved 12 August 2025 from https://acrcarbon.org/program_resources/acr-sdg-contributions-reporting-tool/?utm_source=chatgpt.com ↩︎