Assisted Sustainability: How Digital Technologies Promote Corporate Sustainability

Abstract

Sustainability has evolved from a new trend to an imperative and strategical necessity for companies. Despite the growing focus from economics and information systems (IS) research, practical solutions for integrating sustainability into business practices remain limited. Moreover, there is a growing demand for corporate sustainability (CS) and an increasing ability to implement digital technologies in companies. In our paper, we scrutinize how digital technologies promote corporate sustainability. We use the Delphi method to discuss future scenarios and assess the mechanisms of digitally assisted sustainability in companies. Our findings indicate that the synergy between sustainability measures and digital technologies, such as digital assistants, holds significant potential for improving sustainability, efficiency, and profitability across various use cases within businesses. For a company’s strategy, this means integrating sustainability as a core component, leveraging digital technologies to drive sustainable practices, enhance operational efficiency, and boost profitability.

1. Introduction

The world is experiencing significant changes and disruptions, driven by emerging technologies and ongoing shifts in our environment and climate. As a result, sustainability and digitalization have emerged as two major trends in response to these challenges, leading to the need for a twin transition [1,2,3]. This entails the “utilization of technology and data to propel sustainability objectives” [2] (p. 1) with the emerging popularity in the realm of new sustainability regulations and laws. The importance of sustainability has been well-documented and the demand for it continues to grow [1,4,5,6]. Several significant measures and legally binding agreements have been established at both national and international levels to achieve essential sustainability objectives [7,8]. Yet, achieving sustainable development requires the commitment of individuals and organizations [9]. Companies have the potential to drive this needed change. Not only do they play a crucial role in shaping the business landscape, but their actions also have a significant impact on social and ecological environments [10,11]. Moreover, companies that respond to these market demands and integrate sustainability in their strategy are more likely to remain competitive in today’s market, with actionable methods in the form of sustainability measures [6,12]. However, sustainability measures oftentimes appear to create tensions with corporate profit goals, and a lack of strategic integration in companies results in weak or non-existing sustainability outcomes, adding to the importance of the strategic recognition of corporate sustainability (CS) [12,13,14].

The call for a sustainable and digital economy using information systems (IS) is a logical outcome of ongoing efforts to promote both sustainability and digitization [15,16,17,18]. This critical need for change requires strategic and practical approaches. Digital technologies, one of the key elements of this work, represent a crucial area of application that is shaping the working environment [19,20,21,22]. These include, for example, cloud computing, artificial intelligence (AI), and digital assistants [18,20,23]. Digital technologies are essential components of digital transformation in companies, which refers to the strategic use of new or innovative digital technologies to improve the companies’ efficiency and overall performance [21,22,24]. To date, however, digital transformation or the use of digital technologies has been less closely aligned with sustainability measures in companies [17,25,26]. This transformation process has several parallels with the transition towards increased sustainability, both in society and in the corporate context [27,28,29]. Combining and implementing digital transformation with enhanced CS merits further investigation, motivating the following research question:

How can digital technologies contribute to the promotion of corporate sustainability?

To better assess and understand this practical gap, we have developed a theoretical framework, which illustrates the key elements of our work. With its help, we want to investigate the mechanism and strategic implications of digital technologies to support CS. We also examine concrete use cases and possible digital technologies for implementation. To achieve this, we use the Delphi method, which is a suitable method already utilized in many research fields for not only assessing and refining frameworks but also for gaining knowledge about future scenarios [30,31]. It is, therefore, well-suited for deriving statements with a group of selected experts on whether and how digital technologies can contribute to CS. Our research seeks to deepen our understanding of how digital technologies can contribute to corporate sustainability. With our work, we therefore address both academics and practitioners, to whom we seek to provide opportunities for implementations in their corporate practice.

In the following, we first introduce the relevant terminologies and present our Delphi study design chosen for this work. We then present the results obtained and discuss them in the context of our research question and future implications, which we round off with a conclusion and outlook.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Digital Transformation

The digital transformation describes the process of digital technology creating a fundamental change in the economy, society, and individual lives [32,33,34]. A key aspect is the usage of digital technologies, such as cloud computing, AI, or other digital tools [22]. However, digital transformation clearly distinguishes itself from mere digitization, i.e., the conversion of analog information into digital formats, and the isolated implementation of individual digitization solutions, which rather reflect stand-alone measures that have the potential to be part of the transformative process [35,36].

In companies, digital transformation entails the strategic use of (new/innovative) digital technologies to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and overall performance of the business and its outcomes [21,22,24]. It is a profound transformational roadmap to enhance the digital maturity of the company [37]. As a consequence, it is considered a radical and disruptive process because it breaks the “traditional ways of doing business by redefining business capabilities, processes, and relationships” [38] (p. 372). Besides a significant performance enhancement, digital transformation in companies also changes the process of strategic decision-making [22,24]. Mostly every part of a business can be digitally transformed, which is why it not only requires strong leadership to drive the change but also a vision for what parts of the company should be transformed [22]. Important elements of digital transformation in companies are, for example, customer-centric approaches (e.g., data analytics or engagement on social media platforms), process digitization (e.g., through automation), work enablement (e.g., virtualizing work through communication platforms), or the enhancement of the companies’ business model towards digital products and services [22,39].

A digital transformation strategy is an approach that “serves as a central concept to integrate the entire coordination, prioritization, and implementation of digital transformation within a firm” [24] (p. 339). It is a corporation-wide strategy, aligning with the general corporate strategy and every other subordinate strategy, which makes it a holistic approach [24,40,41]. Matt et al. [24] describe four essential dimensions in a digital transformation strategy: the use of technology, structural changes, changes in value creation, and financial aspects ought to be aligned to ensure a successful implementation of a digital transformation strategy [24,41]. A digital economy, achieved by digital transformation, is also demanded and still to be pursued as a sustainable economy [15,16,26].

Digital technologies have the power to serve sustainable approaches in companies [17,25]. As a key success factor for digital transformation “[d]igital technologies create opportunities […] that have the potential to transform certain aspects of the organization” [42] (p. 438) that the organization ultimately benefits from. The multifaceted nature of digital technologies is based on the hardware, software, and networks, which allows for a wide range of applications. This includes software programs and platforms as well as physical devices and integrated cyber–physical systems [43,44].

As mentioned earlier, possible digital technologies for the digital transformation in companies are cloud computing, AI, or smartphone applications [22,45]. For our study, we have derived nine relevant digital technologies from the literature that are already being used in a business context—to a varying degree—and are to be assessed for their suitability for CS.

Table 1. An overview of the technologies assessed in our study.

Technology	Definition	References
Artificial intelligence	AI entails computer systems that can perform tasks requiring human intelligence, such as problem-solving, learning, and decision-making, utilizing techniques like machine learning and natural language processing.	[46,47,48]
Automation technologies	Automation technologies streamline and enhance structured and semi-structured tasks, minimizing human intervention in the process. Its aim is to lower costs, enhance service quality, and accelerate delivery times by optimizing the division of labor between humans and computers.	[46,47,49,50]
Big data management and technologies	Big data management and technologies refer to the utilization of computer systems to handle structured and unstructured datasets from different sources that surpass the capacity of traditional systems.	[51,52,53,54,55]
Cloud computing	Cloud computing is the provision of information technology (IT) resources, including software, storage, and processing power, over the internet. It encompasses both the delivery of applications as services and the infrastructure in data centers supporting these services. Users access these resources remotely, without concern for the physical location of servers or storage.	[56,57]
Communication tools	Digital communication tools are software-based platforms or applications designed to facilitate communication between individuals or groups through digital means such as text, voice, or video. They enable real-time or asynchronous interaction, collaboration, and information sharing, fostering connectivity and productivity across various contexts, including business communication.	[57,58,59]
Digital assistants	Digital assistants are application programs designed to aid users in tasks through text or speech input and output. They are defined by their input, output, and processing capabilities and operate through the interaction of three key components: a user seeking to accomplish a goal, a task required to achieve the goal, and the technology utilized by the user to complete the task.	[60,61]
Digital process management technologies	Digital process management technologies map workflows within organizations, supported by IS. Effective process management facilitated by appropriate technology, such as modeling systems, enhances digitization possibilities.	[62,63,64]
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems	ERP systems are comprehensive software frameworks to standardize and organize business processes within companies. They can integrate diverse functions into a centralized platform, enhancing business activities and efficiency.	[52,53,54,65,66]
Internet of things (IoT)	IoT is a network of interconnected smart objects, like machines, linking physical entities to virtual representations. It enables wireless digital devices to collect, distribute, and store data without human or computer interaction. IoT serves as a global infrastructure for advanced services, leveraging existing and evolving technologies for interconnection.	[67,68,69,70]

shows the derived technologies and the associated definitions and references.

The digital transformation process has certain parallels with the shift towards increased CS [27,28,29]. In the following, we discuss CS and our integrated theoretical framework.

2.2. Corporate Sustainability

The concept of sustainability entails managing the use or consumption of a particular target unit in a way that some degree of it will still be available for use in the future, thus, preserving the essential characteristics of the given natural system in the long term [71]. According to the renowned triple bottom line model (TBL), sustainable action must strive to achieve a balance between three aspects: the ecological, the economic, and the social [72]. Even though the TBL is often discussed—including by its originator—it is an established model that is intended to inspire further measures in addition to a more in-depth examination of sustainability [14,73,74].

With CS, these general concepts are applied in a corporate context and have evolved with the idea of sustainable development [75,76,77]. In the past, many companies focused on generating shareholder wealth and used philanthropy to gain social effects. However, while philanthropy alone did not address the societal costs of their actions nor ensure long-term efficiency recognition [75], companies began incorporating a broader set of responsibilities toward multiple stakeholders. Today, CS is seen as a competitive advantage to implement strategies and actions to create value and long-term benefits for all stakeholders, including employees, customers, and the broader society [73,78,79,80]. It involves providing short-term solutions and measures while also preserving, maintaining, and enhancing natural and human resources for future needs. Key elements of CS include integrating economic, environmental, and social considerations, which are also reflected in the TBL [81,82]. Amini & Bienstock [13] developed a CS framework which aims to “provide a concrete, multidimensional and comprehensive perspective with regard to CS and contribute to the development of a systematic theory of CS” (p. 18). Scaling the level of the sophistication of defined sustainability dimensions, such as business-level applications and communication, sustainability-oriented innovation, or compliance stance, this framework highlights the importance of integrating sustainability in the companies’ strategy to reach a high level of sophistication and therefore creating “significant efforts towards sustainability” [13] (p. 15).

Sustainability measures, on a more concrete level, describe the actions taken by companies to implement or enhance CS in their business [83,84]. Ideally, they originate directly from the company’s continuously evaluated CS strategy [85]. Due to companies’ emphasis on maintaining steady economic growth, there is often a trade-off with other sustainability aspects [11,12,14]. Some studies have utilized the paradox theory to show that CS is prone to competing tensions between different goals and demands. It is suggested that addressing the competing demands of the TBL to different extents over time can help to succeed in this matter—by successively engaging in a cycle of tension and resolution, forming CS over time [76,86,87].

However, a company can adopt various approaches to incorporate sustainability measures based on the TBL, for instance, through resource efficiency and the prudent utilization of a company’s essential resources, advocating for worker protection throughout the supply chain, or implementing policies to support a work–life balance [88,89]. In addition to the environmental benefits, adopting such sustainable measures often leads to cost savings, thereby enhancing the company’s competitiveness and economic sustainability [72,90,91]. In this paper, we focus on two of the three components of the TBL—the economic and ecological—as the effects of digital technologies in companies on these two are most apparent. This is also due to their direct impact on operational efficiency, regulatory compliance, and long-term profitability [17,88].

The social and environmental challenges of our time have a direct impact on corporate activities and thus on corporate strategy. The awareness of the importance of sustainability in companies is not only relevant for maintaining their own competitiveness. Companies are important enablers too, as they shape social and ecological landscapes with their actions [92]. However, the need for more sustainability is still substantial. Companies in particular hold great potential when it comes to achieving the internationally stipulated sustainability goals [12,93]. In the following, we present our framework for achieving this with the help of digital technologies.

2.3. PEDS: Integrated, Theoretical Framework

In our study, we focus on four important key elements: profit, efficiency, digitalization, and sustainability (PEDS) in companies. Efficiency, outside of the CS lens, refers to the optimization of resource allocation and the enhancement of operational processes, enabling companies to maintain and strengthen their competitive advantage [18,94]. Meanwhile, profit is a business indicator that reflects the financial strength and performance of a company and therefore oftentimes has a strategic and operational priority [95,96].

These key elements are derived from our previously undertaken structured literature study, which showed the following mechanisms and dynamics in companies [17]. Figure 1 shows them according to their importance and how they relate to each other based on beforementioned deductions. Generating profit, in line with economic sustainability, is the overarching goal of every company, being integrated in the majority of the companies’ strategy as the most important element. Also, the relationship between efficiency and profit is positive (+), meaning more efficiency leads to more profit in companies [17,73,97]. This also applies to digital transformation. Digitalization contributes to maintaining competitiveness and innovative capacity as well as the efficiency of companies and therefore also to sustaining their profit [22,24].

To date, this does not seem to apply to sustainability and profit—a tension that needs to be overcome (–). A practical aspect to consider is that sustainability measures can result in notable efficiency effects [98]. Measurements like reducing the use of paper and route optimization imply that there are (resource) efficiency and sustainability effects. Furthermore, companies that are sustainable generally have a competitive advantage over others [6]. This is backed by the proven competitive advantage and long-term benefits when implementing CS into the corporate strategy [73,78,79,80]. Consequently, sustainability measures have the potential to increase efficiency and hence increase profits (?). Nevertheless, sustainability needs to subordinate to profit and efficiency at first, resulting in it being the least important of the four [17,57].

Further, we want to scrutinize the status quo of PEDS in companies and assess how digital technologies can promote corporate sustainability (?). Early studies anticipate that they not only allow for the establishment of sustainability measures in companies more easily and accessibly but are also (more) profitable [17,25]. In the following we present our study design for this endeavor.

3. Research Method and Process

3.1. The Delphi Method

In contrast to quantitative surveys, the Delphi method aims to explore “what could/should be?” instead of simply identifying “what is?” [99,100]. Our topic of digitally assisted sustainability in companies is complex, interdisciplinary, and in need of future forecasts, scrutinizing probable scenarios of digital transformation and sustainability in companies. The Delphi method offers an opportunity to interview experts from different areas, discuss the topic, and reach a consensus on complex problems and future developments involving four key elements [101,102,103,104]. The method also allows to brainstorm and develop frameworks, which is part of our work [31,103]. We used the Delphi method to examine how digital technologies can promote sustainability in companies. The Delphi method is widely used not only to identify and prioritize issues but also to provide a structured approach for tackling complex problems by the systematic collection and analysis of the knowledge from an expert panel, using interviews and/or questionnaires with controlled feedback [30,102,103]. In a predefined number of structured (survey) rounds, a selected group of experts is invited to give their opinion on a specific issue [31,104]. Two to three rounds are considered most appropriate and are carried out in most Delphi studies [30,104,105]. We conducted three structured survey rounds with a selected group of 30 experts invited to give their opinions on a specific issue [30,105,106,107]. Since there is no clear consensus concerning the panel size, most Delphi studies have a range of between 11 and 35 experts in their panel [30,101,104,105].

The sampling of the expert panel is another crucial element when conducting a Delphi study [30,101,108]. This applies to both the size and the composition of the panel. As the results of the Delphi method depend on the expertise, opinion, and judgment of the experts, they should have appropriate domain knowledge and should be chosen by clear selection criteria [31,99,104]. These criteria mostly include their job position, professional experience, company affiliation, education level, and location [30,99,101,104]. Another criterion when creating a panel is heterogeneity among the experts. The more complex and multifaceted the nature of the research problem is, the broader the panel design should be concerning the knowledge domain and experience [99,101,104,106,107].

To avoid socio-psychological pressure, specious persuasion among the panel, and to encourage the experts to openly state their opinions, we ensured the experts’ anonymity and opted for a web-based format [30,105,106,107]. This encourages the experts to openly state their opinions, share critique, and minimizes the occurrence of unwanted dynamics in social situations, such as the halo effect or group pressure [30,106].

Throughout the Delphi study, the panel receives controlled feedback from the facilitator which is another vital characteristic of this method [30,106,108]. Controlled here means that the feedback is intentionally designed and distributed, according to the topic, structure, and course of the study. This can be achieved through the direct integration in the provided list of items or basic information provided in the subsequent rounds [30,106].

A consensus can be determined by a variety of measures and definitions, depending on the type of Delphi study conducted [105,108]. It describes the level of agreement among experts or panelists regarding a particular idea, element, or concept [101,109]. A review of 100 Delphi studies by Diamond et al. [105] showed that consensus is presented a priori in 92% of cases and most frequently as a percent agreement. Other measures to identify consensus include the use of medians, standard deviation, or rankings [101,105,106]. We assessed the consensus, depending on the type of question, using a 75% threshold agreement rate on a five-point Likert scale, the mean, the variance, and the standard deviation, and the ranking mechanism [101,105,106,108,109].

While the Delphi method is often associated with qualitative inquiry due to its emphasis on expert judgment and iterative feedback, it also holds quantitative significance. As responses become more structured, statistical tools such as median ratings and measures of consensus (e.g., standard deviation) can be applied to assess the degree of agreement among participants. This allows for a more systematic evaluation of expert opinions and supports evidence-based decision-making, particularly in fields where empirical data may be limited [106,108]. Nonetheless, in our study, the Delphi method was primarily employed for its exploratory strengths rather than its statistical rigor.

An overview of our Delphi process is outlined in Figure 2. In the next section, we describe our preparation and panel recruitment.

3.2. Preliminary Stage: Preparation and Panel Recruitment

After defining the Delphi goal and staking out the topic domains, we began selecting experts. The expertise, opinion, and judgment of the experts are crucial to the outcome of the Delphi study, so experts should have appropriate domain knowledge and should be chosen by clear selection criteria [31,99,104]. The criteria for our expert panel include their job position, professional experience, period of employment, and knowledge domain [30,99,101,104]. Due to the trifold nature of our research topic, we also wanted to ensure heterogeneity among the experts [99,101,104,106,107]. We achieved diverse and significant perspectives from the fields of digital transformation, sustainability, and corporations by dividing the panel into three sub-groups, which we explain in more detail below. The overall panel is outlined in Appendix A.

Overall, we identified three thematic panels—the corporate experts (CRP), the digital transformation experts (DigiX), and the sustainability experts (NaX, adapted from the German word for sustainability)—with each consisting of 10 experts, resulting in 30 experts in total, which falls within the panel size range recommended in a Delphi study [30,110]. The interviewed CRPs were a heterogeneous group in terms of their company size, industry, and position, but all had at least three years of company affiliation. The DigiX required relevant working expertise in digital technologies and their application in companies. The NaX had to have theoretical and practical experience in the field of CS, whereas all participating experts also provided general digital transformation expertise. Expertise was assessed based on their previous projects and vita. Another prerequisite was that the DigiX and NaX needed substantial experience in the respective thematic work with companies. All experts are from German-speaking countries, some with an international working context.

The online questionnaire for the first round of the survey was also prepared and pretested at the preliminary stage. Exemplary questions from the first round are shown in Appendix B. We present the survey stages in the following section.

3.3. Survey Stage

All survey rounds were based on an online questionnaire and pretested before the respective rounds. The aim of the first round was to query general information about the experts (e.g., age or company size) and their input on the key elements of digital transformation, efficiency, sustainability, and profit in the company [103]. These key elements and the experts’ opinions on them were vital to put the subsequent questions and input into context. If a question referred to experience in companies, the CRP group was asked to refer to their own company and the expert groups (DigiX and NaX) to their experience of working with (comparable) companies. This first survey round further contained questions concerning how each mentioned key element was approached in either their own company (CRP) or how the experts see these approaches working with other companies (see DigiX and NaX) and how they think they relate to each other. For example, we asked how efficiency is measured in companies, how their digital transformation is going, if any of the key elements are implemented in the company strategy or are particularly interesting for a specific area of the company, and what measurements are taken to become more sustainable or digital. At first, we assessed this input for each key element separately, followed by a ranking of them and an assessment of linkages. This entailed input to the questions on how digital technologies potentially enhance sustainability and efficiency in companies or how profit and efficiency are interrelated in companies.

For this purpose, open questions were used on the one hand to brainstorm concepts and ideas, and on the other hand closed questions were used to achieve a desired comparability, for example, by ranking the key elements and providing specific options, like company areas, as well as closed-ended yes/no options [30]. The open answers were analyzed using a qualitative data analysis, more precisely through coding with a computer-aided qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) using atlas.ti [111,112]. We utilized In Vivo coding, an inductive coding method to preserve the experts’ meanings of their input and be able to systematically analyze and categorize the qualitative data of the open brainstorming questions [112,113]. A consensus, where applicable in the first round, was achieved through the ranking mean value and 75% threshold among the closed questions and was assessed through our coding analysis of the open brainstorming questions. The first round thus aimed at assessing the experts’ understanding of the digital transformation, sustainability, efficiency, and profit and what mechanisms and relations they see between them in the corporate context. We label this the reference round (also see Figure 2).

As round 1 already revealed a consensus on most points, we built the second round on these results, delivering controlled feedback in the form of a summarizing entry statement for this second round. The aim of the second round was to derive strategical implications by mirroring scenarios of digital technologies being used for (more) sustainability in companies—in terms of their estimated probability in 5 or 15 years. These included, for example, “Digital assistants help companies to act more sustainably in logistics” or “Sustainability measures can only be implemented profitably with the help of digital technologies”. The experts should classify the scenarios in the context of their probability and desirability on a five-point Likert scale from very likely to rather likely, rather unlikely to very unlikely, and “not sure”. Our scenarios are derived from both the existing literature and the mechanisms of our theoretical framework, as well as the input from round 1, and will be further elaborated in this paper [17,22].

In the subsequent process, we asked the experts to rank different scenarios with regard to which of them was most and least desirable. The experts were also asked to rank which of the nine predefined technologies (see Table 1) they considered to be the most to least suitable for implementing sustainability measures in companies.

Based on the last rounds’ input and consensus, for the third survey round, we derived five use cases and asked the experts to rank them according to their probability and desirability. The use cases are presented in Table 2. As an introduction to the final round of the ranking, we gave the experts summarizing feedback on the consensus from the last round. The final result was determined using the mean and the standard deviation of all the rankings. We present the results in the following section.

4. Results

4.1. Survey Round 1 and 2: Future Scenarios and Potentials

The first two survey rounds investigated the status quo of the four key elements and reinforced the potential for digitally assisted sustainability measures. On the one hand, the potential can be observed by the need to expand digitalization in companies, as there seems to have been a limited implementation of digital technologies within traditional small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), as expressed by the following digital expert: “Large companies are usually ahead in digitalization, smaller companies are less digital, and craft businesses almost not at all”. (DigiX-03). However, the will to digitize and implement even more sophisticated technologies (such as AI) is given: “Companies are willing to take steps toward digital transformation but have little knowledge base to do so”. (NaX-02). On the other hand, the experts also recognize the importance of sustainability for companies; 96% of experts recognize that companies with a sustainability strategy have a competitive advantage in the market. An equal number of experts also believe it is desirable for companies to establish a long-term sustainability potential using digital technologies.

However, according to the experts’ ranking of the importance of digitalization, profit, efficiency, and sustainability in companies, 50% of the NaX and 80% of the DigiX think sustainability must be subordinate to all other key elements. In contrast, only 33% of the CRP see sustainability as a subordinated element, which still leads to its last rank among the four key elements in companies but is more promising for the implementation of sustainability measures in companies. On average, the experts state that efficiency is the second most important component in companies, after profit; 50% of NaX would even see efficiency in the first rank. Figure 3 shows the overall ranking of these four key elements.

These findings match the ones on the companies’ strategies: when asked about the implementation of these elements in the companies’ strategies, efficiency seems to be the most certain embedded element. As Figure 4 shows, it is followed by digitalization, which is rather narrowly followed by sustainability. Based on the perceived importance of digitalization in companies, sustainability seems to be at least catching up in strategic terms. As profit is a vital aspect for companies, its implementation in the strategy was not investigated separately. The experts were able to indicate whether the three key elements were part (yes) or not part (no) of their corporate strategy or that they were “not sure”.

Experts often view digital support as ideal for enhancing efficiency measures, e.g., resource or material efficiency: “The [digitally supported] optimization of the production can result in higher material efficiency” (NaX-03). Efficiency is also a recurring component that is not only associated with increased profits but is also repeatedly linked to sustainability effects. With efficiency, “profit can be increased while costs remain stable, and resources are used less in the long run” (CRP-03). This also appears in our coding of the open-ended answers, as codes on efficiency and sustainability had significant intersections, with material and resource efficiency being the most frequent code allocated. Efficiency promotion measures are thus predestined when it comes to simultaneously increasing sustainability effects. In practice, the experts illustrate the implementation in the form of “Recognizing [and avoiding] scrap and waste” (DigiX-07) or “the efficient use of needed resources and corporate assets” (NaX-06).

Figure 4. The key elements and their embedment in the companies’ strategies.

Figure 4. The key elements and their embedment in the companies’ strategies.

Survey round 2 also showed that digital technologies can not only help companies stay profitable but can also assist with an easier and profitable implementation of sustainability measures. For example, 96% of all experts believe that digital assistants for CS measures make the most sense in production and logistics. Additionally, 92% find the area of purchasing/sales to be the most suitable, followed by administration, which 79% of experts also find suitable. As Figure 5 shows, these are the company areas that are also most relevant to efficiency, digitalization, and sustainability in general and they enable more potential overlap in the resource and also process efficiency.

When it comes to suitable technologies for establishing sustainability measures in companies, the experts favor automation, digital assistants, and process management, as well as artificial intelligence. A total of 95.8% consider them suitable for the intended purpose. Since our research looks at future developments, we focused our investigation on the promising category of AI-based digital assistants in the further course of our Delphi study, namely survey round 3 [114,115]. In addition, automation is also considered a potential technological support: “Automation […] could be used for different processes and company areas”. (CRP-08).

The potential of digitally supported sustainability measures in companies was also confirmed. While in 5 years, 67% of the experts found this scenario likely, more than 95% found this likely to happen in the next 15 years.

4.2. Survey Round 3: Promising Use Cases

Building on round 1 and 2, survey round 3 focused on the ranking of possible and previously mentioned use cases.

Table 2. Top 5 use cases with mean and standard deviation (survey round 3).

UC (Rank)	Use Case	CRP	DigiX	NaX	Mean	Standard Deviation
UC1	With the help of a digital process map, a digital assistant could identify potential for enhancing sustainability.	3.86	3.63	3.57	3.69	0.125
UC2	AI could help to use required resources more efficiently and thus is more environmentally friendly in certain processes (e.g., washing, building, or assembling).	5.57	3	3.71	4.09	1.084
UC3	With the help of digital data and processes, companies could create a life cycle assessment.	3.29	5.13	6.57	4.99	1.342
UC4	A digital assistant could help determine the most sustainable option when making a decision based on multiple factors.	5.14	4.38	5.71	5.08	0.545
UC5	AI could help break through rigid maintenance cycles and use predictions to recommend more demand-driven, and therefore potentially more resource-efficient, maintenance.	6.14	4.75	4.43	5.11	0.742

shows the top five use cases according to the perceived probability ranked by all experts.

In UC1, UC3, and UC4, the digital assistance can be focused on specific company areas or be implemented company wide. This aligns with the results of previous survey rounds, that certain company areas are seen to be more suitable for digitally assisted sustainability measures than other areas. In the pursuit of sustainability measures, one crucial characteristic elaborated from our data coding is the focus and promotion of efficiency. Scalable efficiency considerations are derived from UC1, UC2, UC4, and UC5, ranging from not promoting efficiency to partially and highly promoting efficiency. These use cases and technologies are characterized by the fact that they do not only have a representational aspect (like UC3, which is “only” a life cycle assessment) but have an impact on the operational action within the sustainability measure. For example, an implemented digital assistant in UC5 has a direct impact on actions taken or suggested to a user and on resource or material efficiency, while in UC3 such an assistant would “only” calculate and map efficiency data, without any direct, operational impact [116].

The ranking also shows that the use cases based on digital assistants prevail, followed by those based on AI. For example, in UC4, a digital assistant could selectively interact with the user in successive rounds to obtain the best option as part of making a purchase decision, or it could just propose an option with no upstream interaction at all. In UC5, for example, a digital assistant could autonomously initiate a maintenance process of a certain machine or product, or it could propose this with the last process initiation being dependent on human involvement (partially autonomous) [117].

In the following, we will discuss the meaning of these results in terms of their theoretical and managerial implications—and what this means for corporate strategy.

5. Discussion

With our study, we offer different perspectives and valuable insights on how digital technologies can contribute to the promotion of CS. An overarching aspect is the strategic alignment of digitalization, sustainability, efficiency, and profit in terms of their prioritization within the company, as well as leveraging the synergies arising from digitally supported efficiency measures. In the following, we discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of this alignment.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

Our study provides several theoretical implications. Firstly, we contribute to a better theoretical understanding of the TBL in a corporate context. The holistic approach is oftentimes challenged, and companies are missing a strategy for overcoming tensions between the sustainability aspects. However, our results suggest that through utilizing digitally supported efficiency measures, companies can benefit from a significant intersection of economic and ecologic sustainability. Although we could reinforce that profit and efficiency are still important elements in companies, to which sustainability must be subordinate, efficiency and sustainability have large common areas of overlap, for example, in energy, material, and resource efficiency. Our Delphi study further demonstrates that bridging the existing gap requires more than a binary choice between profit and efficiency on the one hand and sustainability on the other. We were able to show that the digital transformation offers an opportunity to combine these elements—towards an emerging twin transition. This implies that sustainability and digital technologies need to be considered together even more—both strategically and operationally. We therefore contribute to the envisioned holistic approach that the TBL obtains.

Secondly, with our results, we can soften the competition premise of the paradox theory in the field of CS, as it is no longer an iteration from the demand and resolution to accept and somehow overcome given tensions, but the targeted and strategic use of digital technologies, especially in the mentioned intersection. This finding aligns with a recent study of Zdonek et al. [118] who were able to show in the resource-intense fashion industry that strategic components of profit and sustainability act as a synthesis when creating a sustainable value proposition.

Thirdly, our results show that sustainability in companies is seen as an increasingly important element that is critical to success. Hereby, we align with the proposed importance of the strategic integration of the CS framework. In addition, our results, as well as the CS framework, once again state the importance of a holistic approach as stated in the TBL.

Finally, we also contribute to the knowledge surrounding digital technologies and their demand for sustainability measures in companies. Further studies on this intersection confirm the need and even urgency when it comes to combining the two components [119,120,121]. They also show that there are specific areas of sustainability measures and application that are more suitable for different types of digital technologies [121]. It is also emphasized that digital-assisted sustainability is not only crucial to companies but determines the competitiveness of entire nations [119]. Our research aligns with these assessments and can be enhanced by a further aspect that needs to be scrutinized: the role of employees. Our Delphi experts agree that they are a vital factor in achieving efficiency in companies, but that they also need assistance in making more sustainable decisions (“a digital assistant that helps employees make sustainable decisions” CRP-09). Veit et al. [122] address this issue in their study and examine how digital technologies can support employees in adopting so-called employee green behavior (EGB). In this context, they emphasize the importance of technology in aiding the perceived organizational support for the environment. The aspect of employee involvement must therefore be investigated further, which consequently leads to the technology-related questions: how much automation and autonomy of the systems is desired, or how strongly may employees be involved and can they no longer be involved [123]? In all these cases, digital technologies act as the connecting factor, which raises the question of what exactly this technology should look like to fulfill this function in the best possible way. In order to contribute to this knowledge, we recommend further investigation and prototyping using Design Science, which is suitable to elaborate an applicable artifact for such cases [124].

5.2. Managerial Implications

According to our research, there are several managerial implications that aim to support managers and decision-makers in successfully taking the next steps of digitally assisted sustainability measures.

Firstly, digital technologies have great potential to promote CS. This is especially seen in the field of efficiency effects and digital assistants as well as AI. Also, CS is gaining more importance in companies and markets [125]. Managers and decision-makers must incorporate both digital and sustainable transformation into the corporate strategy and align them in operational terms. These findings align with other studies undertaken on the strong leveraging effects of digital technologies used for successful CS actions [126,127]. One key element that managers can utilize to bridge this effect is efficiency. Due to its already strong and positive association with corporate profit, it offers a common denominator that can inspire initial use cases for companies. We portray this change of our initial framework in Figure 6, which illustrates the changing strategic importance and dynamic in companies. Now the synergy of digitally assisted and efficiency-driven CS measures can create a positive effect on profit (+) and therefore also support CS being closer on par with profit strategically. As a first step, a hypothetical company could use the PEDS framework to determine the status quo of the company regarding the dynamic and strategic relevance of profit, efficiency, digitalization, and sustainability; like how we scrutinized these circumstances in our Delphi study. This investigation will presumably produce a scenario like the one shown in Figure 1, with different prioritizations and either conducive or less conducive dynamics. Managers and practitioners thus have a reliable baseline for developing the strategic importance and dynamics in their company towards a digitally assisted and efficiency-driven CS. Depending on this starting position, they should ask themselves the following questions: Which digital opportunities have we not yet exhausted? How do existing or further possible efficiency measures contribute to CS? And how can they be digitally supported to approach the goal of a CS that drives profit? Inspiration can be found in our UCs from survey round 3 (see Table 2). They show that there are already scalable and customizable use cases recognized by all experts. The digital assistant in UC4 could, for example, assist a purchasing employee in the process of finding the most sustainable product option available on the market.

Secondly, companies need to advance their digital transformation and connect it with their sustainability action. Most companies seem to have incorporated basic-level digitization, like the digital mapping of processes. Even if companies are still at a rather heterogeneous and thus also “simpler” level of digitization, technologies such as automation, AI, and digital assistance systems are considered suitable technologies to promote sustainability in companies. Possible use cases include “data-driven efficiency enhancement in the energy sector” (DigiX-02), “digital twins for identifying resource-saving in the production processes” (NaX-03), or “refraining from traveling to customers, by using appropriate digital solutions” (CRP-03). In operational terms, managers have to analyze existing processes and areas regarding their optimizing potential and technology maturity, meaning a status quo and assessment of possibilities for implementing technologies for certain measures—such as sustainability measures. On a strategic level, they need to advance their digital transformation, as a higher level of digital maturity offers more opportunities to integrate sustainability measures.

Finally, it is essential for companies to strategically recognize sustainability as a vital component. According to our study, there is still room for improvement among companies, which is why managers and decision-makers should include sustainability in their corporate strategy on the one hand and, on the other, place its strategic importance at least on par with the other key elements. This aligns with a recent study by Rosário and Boechat [128], which concludes that leaders who incorporate sustainability into their strategy and metrics set their companies up for successfully tackling global challenges while maintaining profitability. As a first step, managers can make use of the large intersection of sustainability and efficiency to initiate this strategic implementation.

Based on the results of our study, managers and decision-makers should also evaluate their strategy on a divisional level, since some company areas hold more potential for overcoming mentioned tensions than others. It is particularly advisable to look at the areas of production, purchasing/sales, logistics, and administrative processes to examine the potential of digitally supported sustainability measures.

6. Conclusions

In our study, we explored how digital technologies can promote corporate sustainability, focusing on the intersection of digitalization, efficiency, and profitability. Through a Delphi study with a diverse panel of experts, we demonstrated that digital technologies—particularly AI-based digital assistants, automation, and process management tools—represent significant potential to enhance sustainability efforts in companies. Our findings highlight that digital technologies can help overcome traditional tensions between sustainability and profitability by leveraging efficiency as a critical link.

This study confirmed that sustainability, while often still subordinate to profit and efficiency in corporate strategies, is gaining strategic relevance. Experts emphasized that areas such as production, logistics, and purchasing are especially well-suited for digitally assisted sustainability measures, offering tangible benefits like a reduced resource consumption and optimized processes. The top-ranked use cases include the AI-driven optimization of resource usage and digital assistants supporting sustainable decision-making, which provide practical avenues for companies seeking to align ecological and economic objectives.

From a theoretical perspective, our results underline the importance of integrating sustainability and digitalization within a unified strategic framework—contributing to the growing discourse on the twin transition. The findings also soften the traditional view of conflicting sustainability and profit goals, instead pointing to a synthesis enabled by digital transformation.

For practitioners, the message is clear: companies should advance their digital maturity and simultaneously embed sustainability as a core strategic element. Digital technologies offer immediate, scalable opportunities to achieve both environmental and economic gains—particularly through efficiency improvements. Managers are encouraged to start with a sound assessment of the dynamic and strategic importance of the four key elements as portrayed in our PEDS framework and clear impactful use cases, especially in divisions with a high sustainability leverage potential. Furthermore, they should consider how digital tools can empower employees to make more sustainable choices.

While this study provides valuable insights, it also highlights areas for future research. In particular, the role of employee engagement in digitally assisted sustainability, the optimal degree of system autonomy, and the design of user-friendly, effective digital sustainability tools warrant deeper investigation. Design science research could be instrumental in developing and testing practical artifacts that translate these insights into actionable solutions. Consequently, clear requirements for the respective technology should be derived, informing both its design and its application in the context of corporate sustainability.

Despite providing valuable insights, this study has several limitations. Firstly, the Delphi method, while effective for exploring expert consensus, relies on subjective judgments, which may introduce bias based on the experts’ backgrounds and experiences. Although we ensured diversity in our expert panel, the focus on German-speaking countries may limit the generalizability of the findings to other cultural and regulatory contexts. Secondly, this study is exploratory in nature and does not include an empirical validation of the proposed use cases or technological implementations. Furthermore, the focus was primarily on economic and ecological aspects of sustainability, leaving the social dimension underexplored. Future research should aim to test and refine the identified use cases in real-world settings and expand the analysis to include broader sustainability perspectives and different organizational contexts.

In conclusion, with our study, we affirm that digital technologies are not merely enablers of operational improvements but key drivers of sustainable transformation. To remain competitive and responsible, companies must embrace the synergy between digitalization and sustainability, ensuring that both are firmly embedded in their strategic and operational agendas.