How to make digital more responsible? - Interview with Frédérick Marchand (CEO of Digital4Better)

This notion of having an impact is very important to you. How does this translate into the daily life of your company?

This is an extremely broad concept and we try to give it substance in several ways within our company. First, we have democratic governance, which means that all employees have access to all the company's figures. They participate alternately in the management committee and they are the ones who elect all the action committees. We are really in a sharing of governance but also in a sharing of profits. With us, it is quite simple: 50% of the profits are reinvested in the company to ensure its resilience. The remaining 50% is distributed in social utility actions and returned to employees. We are transparent about the use of our profits and the founders prohibit any personal enrichment.

In addition, we carry out a whole range of daily actions to constantly improve our environmental and social impact. We have defined major axes and indicators to measure them, such as how to make digital more accessible to everyone or how to ensure that digital has a better environmental footprint.

How do you evaluate these actions?

We have an impact committee that meets every two weeks. It is managed by employees and everyone can get involved. In the management committee, we look at the main impact indicators every month. Also, twice a year we have a mission committee and every year we publish our impact report which is online on our website. It is accessible to everyone. We do it in complete transparency.

Where does this desire to have a business with an impact come from, with this operation of the Social and Solidarity Economy?

I am firmly convinced that this economy will take on an increasingly important role. It will not replace the existing economy but it will work with it, that is to say, it will challenge the traditional economy, while taking on a more important role. I think that this is the best way to change things: we do not oppose our model with traditional models. We really want to help large groups to transform themselves, to challenge themselves, to show that we can do things differently, and that ultimately this virtuous research is also healthy, to ensure a sustainable and resilient business.

Does this mean that even in your relationship with your clients and your service providers, your approach is impacted by this choice?

That's right, for service providers, we look first at companies that are ESUS (social utility solidarity enterprise), then those that are ESS (social and solidarity economy). If they are not there, we will choose those that are labeled BCorp or the Lucie label... It is really a factual notion that we will look at first to work with a service provider.

For our clients, it's a little different, because what interests us is to do projects with always this idea of ​​having a positive impact. We don't forbid ourselves from working with companies that are not necessarily virtuous. On the contrary, we want to help them change. In fact, you should know that today, when you work for a company that is very socially committed, our impact is less, because it has already done a lot of things. Whereas with a company or a large group that is not particularly virtuous, our collaboration will have much more impact.

When the company has made little progress on the subject of responsible digital technology, will the important thing for you be the commitment of the CEO or that your contact shows a willingness to take action, to avoid greenwashing?

The advantage with the fruggr.io tool is that it allows us to evaluate the footprint that the platform had before and after our action. So it's very concrete. It also allows them to communicate internally and externally, and to set objectives. That's why we created fruggr.io , to support the services. And yes, we expect the client to make commitments. Sometimes they make them in a very tangible way, with a commitment to results. Other times, the client does not give themselves specific figures, but it will just be an attention. In the end, what matters is that we are convinced that this approach has an impact and we will demonstrate it to the company.

What do we actually mean when we talk about more responsible digital technology?

There are several concepts in responsible digital technology. First, we need to design a more environmentally friendly digital technology, that is, reduce the environmental footprint of digital technology: greenhouse gases, water and electricity costs, natural resources, etc. All of this calls upon eco-design concepts. We must therefore ask ourselves the question of digital sobriety very early on, because we need it. We cannot do without digital technology today. Then comes this environmental concept: how can I reduce negative impacts and maximize positive impacts.

And finally the social notion which is less known. How can we make digital accessible to everyone, especially vulnerable groups? There are obvious disabilities such as the visually impaired, who represent 2 million people in France. But also milder disabilities which are linked to digital, such as dyslexics or color blind people who cannot distinguish certain colors. Not to mention people with "electronic illiteracy", who lack one or more digital skills and who find themselves somewhat excluded from society. 

Responsible digital technology also helps to address societal issues. As we saw during the lockdown, digital technology helped to create social ties and prevent people from becoming isolated. So there are still plenty of positive contributions from digital technology and that's the "tech for good" part, as we call it.

In your opinion, why is it important to build sustainable digital technology?

I often draw a parallel on the environmental aspect. For example, today, a car manufacturer that would release a vehicle model without considering its fuel consumption is unthinkable, and yet that is what we do in digital technology.

Today we are on a digital path that is catastrophic, because we are digitalizing everything. We have more and more equipment, more and more data and we are on a pattern where all this is multiplying. Today, digital accounts for 4% of greenhouse gases worldwide. According to different scenarios, such as that of the Shift Project **, we will reach 8% in 2030. And if we do nothing, it will become a real catastrophe.

If we had to take 1 to 3 good practices in digital in order to have a better ecological footprint in the company, what seems essential to you?

The first best practice is to extend the life of equipment. We need to ask ourselves these questions:

• Do I really need to renew the equipment?
• Can't I just upgrade my computer instead of buying a new one?
• If I no longer need it, can't I give it to someone else?

We also need to question digital sobriety, especially regarding the features we create. Here, you can ask yourself:

• Is my feature really useful?
• Is it usable the way I designed it?
• Is it really going to be used?

Finally, the third point is to raise awareness and provide training. You can't improve what you haven't been trained on. Unfortunately, today in schools and businesses, we don't provide enough training in eco-design, accessibility and the negative externalities of digital technology.

You wrote a guide on the 40 words for responsible digital***. What is your favorite word in it?

I really like the word illectronism. I think it's a nice marriage between illiteracy and digital technology. We're starting to become aware of the environmental and social impact of digital technology. I think it's a real key issue today, to which I'm extremely sensitive. We often talk about retired people who have trouble with digital services and it's a reality. My mother, for example, regularly asks me to help her and that's normal. But the biggest problem is for young people who are far from employment and who today are in a state of disconnection from society because they don't know how to use digital services. They don't dare ask and they find themselves excluded. Illectronism is a nice word, but at the same time it's a real social issue that we need to address.

*"Tech for good": technology serving the common good.

**The Shift Project: French non-profit think tank advocating the transition to a post-carbon economy. The cited report can be viewed at: https://theshiftproject.org/en/article/unsustainable-use-online-video/ 

*** “40 words for responsible digital technology” by Frédérick Marchand, Editions ContentA (March 2021)