The Reality Check for Sustainable IT Procurement in 2026

Deb:
Hello, I’m Deb Boehling from LB3, and this is Staying Connected—where we talk about what really matters to enterprise buyers navigating today’s technology and sourcing decisions.

I’m on the other side of the microphone today with Tony Mangino from TC2 to update our ongoing discussion on ESG and sustainability in enterprise IT. In past episodes we’ve discussed how to incorporate sustainability into your RFPs for network services, we’ve examined how ESG initiatives can drive competitive advantage and done a deep dive on how procurement teams can reduce ESG compliance risks.

Today we’re revisiting ESG, specifically: sustainability and sustainable procurement of IT goods and services in large enterprise in 2026.

Here’s the tension we’re seeing: globally, there continues to be momentum behind sustainable procurement. But in the U.S., some companies are dialing back ESG language, reorganizing teams, or even eliminating dedicated sustainable procurement functions. So enterprise buyers are left asking: is this a retreat—or just a restructuring? And what’s the right move for IT sourcing teams that want to stay compliant, competitive, and agile?

Tony:
Thanks, Deb!  The headline so far for 2026 is: the label may be changing, but the requirements are getting more specific—and more evidence-based.  This is a really great moment to check in on what’s changing, what’s staying, and the steps IT procurement leaders can take without turning sustainability into a sourcing bottleneck.

What’s Changing in 2026

Deb:
Let’s start with the market signal. Even with mixed messaging, sustainable procurement is still moving into the core of procurement performance. One statistic I came across in the trade press is that by 2026, 70% of technology procurement leaders are expected to have environmental-sustainability-aligned performance objectives. That’s not a “nice-to-have.” That’s performance management.

Tony:
That stat is a good reality check. And it explains why this topic keeps showing up in RFPs and supplier QBRs, even when companies are quieter about “ESG” as a banner initiative.

In 2026, a lot of organizations are shifting from broad ESG narratives to three operational drivers:

1. Risk and defensibility — to reduce exposure to regulatory, legal, and reputational risk.
2. Customer readiness — to respond to sustainability questions quickly and consistently, and
3. Supplier performance — which entails moving from aspirational claims to data driven, measurable commitments.

Deb:
And that may help explain the “functions shutting down” dynamic. Sometimes it’s less “we’re abandoning sustainability” and more “we’re embedding it.”  So Tony, are large enterprise really shutting down Sustainable Procurement?

Are Companies Really Shutting Down Sustainable Procurement?

Tony:
Some are, but it’s more often a reorg. In practice, we see three patterns:

First, central teams are shrinking and responsibility is being shifted into different categories. Category managers and supplier management are becoming the point of execution.

Second, scope is narrowing to what can be proven. Companies are getting more careful about broad claims and are moving toward relying on documented, auditable supplier data.

Third, there is a recognition that initiatives need dual value—including both risk reduction and cost impact—because budgets are tight.

Deb:
That “dual value” point matters. There’s a perception that sustainability always increases cost. But the data doesn’t really support that as a universal truth. In fact, reporting indicates that around 40% of companies report measurable cost savings from sustainable procurement—often from reduced waste, efficiency gains, and longer product lifecycles.

Tony:
Exactly. Sustainable procurement is increasingly being justified as better procurement: less waste, more lifecycle discipline, fewer surprises, and stronger supplier controls.

Why IT Procurement Can’t Ignore This

Deb:
Let’s shift to IT specifically. Why do IT goods and services sit at the center of sustainable procurement in 2026?

Tony:
Because IT is measurable and vendor-driven—and customers have real levers.

Also, customers are increasingly demanding data.   So, for IT suppliers: hardware OEMs, cloud providers, systems integrators, network providers—“trust us” isn’t enough. Buyers want a repeatable way to collect, validate, and use sustainability inputs in sourcing decisions.

Deb:
And that’s where procurement can either create velocity or create friction. If sustainability requirements are unclear, inconsistent, or too heavy, sourcing slows down and the business pushes back.

Tony:
Right. You want a minimum viable approach that scales.

Where Sustainable IT Procurement Shows Up Most

Deb:
Tony, what are the IT categories where sustainability expectations show up most reliably?

Guest:
Five areas.

1) First is End-user devices and lifecycle

This is one of the most controllable levers for enterprise buyers. Sustainable outcomes come from operational decisions: refresh strategy, repairability, spares, warranty approach, refurbishment, take-back programs, and secure disposition.

Here the cost-savings statistic actually makes intuitive sense: if you extend useful life without increasing risk, you reduce spend and waste.

2) The second is Cloud and data center consumption

This is shifting from “what the hyperscaler claims” to “how you consume.” Sustainability requirements increasingly translate to: transparency, reporting capability, and governance expectations. Procurement can’t right-size workloads—but procurement can require reporting and visibility that enables it.

Third, IT services and outsourcing

For services providers, buyers are asking for delivery transparency, boundaries/methodology for reporting, and a cadence for progress. In 2026, the expectation isn’t perfection—it’s consistency and defensibility.

Fourth, Telecom and network services

As enterprises modernize networks for resiliency and capacity, sustainability questions show up around equipment lifecycle, disposal, and reporting—especially in large multi-year deals.

Finally, SaaS and software

This category is more nuanced, but the direction is clear: supplier disclosures, reporting maturity, and alignment with enterprise governance requirements.

Deb:
So sustainability shows up differently by category—but the theme is consistent: evidence, reporting, and operationalizable requirements.

The Execution Gap Buyers Need to Fix

Deb:
Tony, if sustainable procurement is maturing, what’s the biggest operational gap you see?

Tony:
Data and systems. Even in the largest and most sophisticated enterprise, the ability to track suppliers’ ESG performance through real or near real-time systems is severely limited.

That gap creates a familiar enterprise problem: leadership wants accountability, but procurement doesn’t have integrated data—so it becomes manual, inconsistent, and slow.

Deb:
And that’s why sustainability can feel like bureaucracy—when really the issue is the lack of repeatable process, tooling and reporting.

Tony:
Exactly. The organizations that do this well reduce friction by standardizing requirements and making supplier data collection routine.

What Enterprise IT Procurement Leaders Should Do Now

Deb:
Let’s turn this into a playbook. If I’m leading IT sourcing in 2026—maybe my ESG team is smaller, maybe the org model changed—what do I implement?

Tony:
Five moves that scale.

1) Reframe it as supplier transparency and risk management to avoid internal ideological debates about sustainability generally.  

2) Create category-specific minimum requirements

3) Separate supplier claims from evidence

Ask suppliers, explicitly:  What can you prove consistently, what documentation supports it? Who owns the data and how often is it updated?

4) Contract what you score

Define sustainability criteria in your agreements including reporting obligations and audit rights

5) Finally, integrate sustainability measures in your supplier performance management.  Even a small set of KPIs reviewed in QBRs prevents last-minute scrambles for metrics and makes sustainability an operating rhythm, not a one-off event.

Deb:
And I’ll add the practical procurement warning: don’t create friction for friction’s sake. Keep requirements tight, repeatable, and aligned to what the business actually needs.

Tony:
Deb, that’s spot on and is the difference between a strategic capability and bureaucracy.

Closing Remarks

Deb:
So to bring this full circle, in 2026, the ESG label may be less prominent, and some organizations may be reorganizing teams, but sustainable procurement—especially across IT categories—is moving toward performance objectives, supplier data requirements, and contractable expectations. It’s becoming operational.

And if your organization is restructuring ESG or reducing centralized functions, the right response isn’t retreat—it’s embedding: that is, building a repeatable sustainable procurement capability inside category strategy, contracts, and supplier governance.

Tony:
And if you do it right, it’s not just compliance. It’s better procurement: stronger supplier accountability, fewer surprises, and—often—better lifecycle economics.

Deb:
Thanks for your time today Tony!

To our listeners, if you’d like to discuss sustainable procurement or any other technology strategy, sourcing and cost reduction needs please give us a call or shoot us an email.

You can also stay current by subscribing to Staying Connected, checking out our websites, and following us on LinkedIn.