How does the software detect gaps between the provided data and the ESG frameworks requirements?
How does the software detect gaps between the provided data and the ESG frameworks requirements?
The Greenly system can evaluate each datapoint to determine the following:
- Is the datapoint applicable? (If yes, it is excluded from the reporting perimeter)
- If the datapoint is applicable, is the answer missing?
- If the datapoint is applicable, is there supporting documentation or evidence linked to it?
- If the datapoint is applicable, is there any methodological justification or context attached to it?
- If the datapoints is applicable, was it qualified as "proxy" / non accurate data ?
Does the software distinguish between gaps due to missing data and those due to non-compliance with methodology?
Does the software distinguish between gaps due to missing data and those due to non-compliance with methodology?
Currently, the Greenly Gap Analysis system only automatically detects missing data. Any compliance issues related to information that doesn't meet ESG Framework quality standards must be manually reviewed by Validator users in the Data Collection module.
Does the software track and show a history of updates to the gap analysis whenever new data is added?
Does the software track and show a history of updates to the gap analysis whenever new data is added?
Currently, the Data Collection module doesn't track or display a history of user actions in the forms or questions. However, this feature is a priority on our roadmap and is expected to be released in early 2025.
Are there mechanisms for tracking progress on closing the gaps over time?
Are there mechanisms for tracking progress on closing the gaps over time?
The Greenly platform offers clients Year-by-Year profiles to track their ESG reporting progress annually. For instance, a company can use the "2024" profile to report on its activities for that year, and the "2025" profile to report on activities for the following year. In the future, we will provide a year-to-year comparison dashboard to help users visualize their progress, such as improvements in data coverage and the overall quality of reported data.
How does the software help the user prioritize actions to address gaps (e.g., using severity or feasibility criteria)?
How does the software help the user prioritize actions to address gaps (e.g., using severity or feasibility criteria)?
Indications on whether a datapoint is mandatory or optional, material or non-material, and related to metrics, actions, policies, or targets at the datapoint/DR/ESRS level help clients define subsets of data points for their Improvement Roadmap and prioritize them effectively.