How can you best measure your startup’s impact? There are two main approaches: the Triple Top Line (TTL) framework and the Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) method. Each has a different focus and is suitable depending on your objectives and resources. These frameworks are increasingly relevant as investors, regulators, and consumers demand more robust sustainability metrics from startups and established companies alike.
| Criterion | TTL | LCA |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Holistic value creation | Environmental impacts |
| Target audience | Broad stakeholder group | Technical audiences |
| Data requirements | Medium to high, flexible | High, standardized |
| Regulatory basis | No specific standards | ISO 14040/14044 standards |
The Triple Top Line Framework integrates economic, environmental, and social value creation into strategy development. It’s visualized as a fractal triangle and condenses the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals into 9 key questions, from which measurable KPIs can be derived. This approach helps startups translate complex sustainability topics into clear, actionable business decisions. It demonstrates that economic growth, environmental improvements, and social value can go hand in hand. Notably, research from Harvard Business School underscores that companies integrating ESG metrics into their core strategy outperform peers over the long term, validating the TTL approach for startups seeking both impact and resilience (source).
A concrete example shows how this works in practice: Luxexcel manufactures eyeglass lenses using 3D printing. No toxic materials are used, and production waste is significantly reduced. The company also optimizes its transport routes, resulting in lower CO₂ emissions.
The following table provides an overview of possible KPIs for the different value dimensions:
| Fractal | Example Question | Specific Metric/KPI |
|---|---|---|
| Economy | Can I manufacture my product profitably? | Revenue, profit margin |
| Economy/Justice | Do employees earn a living wage? | Average salary, employee benefits |
| Justice | Does the new factory improve the quality of life for all stakeholders? | Community investments, stakeholder satisfaction |
| Ecology | Are we following the laws of nature? Are we creating habitats? | Biodiversity impact, habitat creation |
| Ecology/Economy | Is our ecological strategy economically viable? | Resource efficiency, waste reduction |
This integrated method opens up numerous possibilities, as the following example and subsequent analysis show.
The TTL framework gives startups the flexibility to tailor KPIs to their business models. This adaptability is especially valuable in a complex regulatory environment. For example, asgoodasnew refurbishes used smartphones, tablets, and notebooks, extending device lifespans and saving up to 50 kg of CO₂ emissions per device compared to new production. This not only reduces e-waste but also appeals to environmentally conscious consumers—a trend confirmed by the GreenPrint Business of Sustainability Index 2022, where 69% of respondents said a product’s environmental friendliness influences their purchasing decisions, and 78% expressed interest in buying from environmentally friendly companies (source).
Academic studies reinforce TTL’s value: Companies that began measuring their ESG performance in the 1990s outperformed their peers over the next 18 years, according to research by George Serafeim (source). TTL thus positions startups to meet both market and investor expectations for sustainability and performance.
Despite its advantages, TTL also has challenges. KPI selection can be subjective, leading to inconsistent measurement if teams set different priorities or interpret the three value dimensions differently. For startups, financial constraints are a particular hurdle. Capturing social and environmental impacts often requires specialized tools and expertise, tying up additional resources. Internal resistance can further hinder the adoption of sustainable practices.
An example of the complexity of such approaches is Novihum. The company offers a patented soil enhancer based on modified lignite and other natural substances. The product can turn infertile land into productive areas and promote reforestation in dry regions. However, measuring such far-reaching ecological effects requires elaborate assessment methods and long-term monitoring, which can be resource-intensive for startups.
Another obstacle is benchmarking. Customizing KPIs to a company’s needs makes comparison with industry standards difficult, potentially limiting external validation and investor confidence. John Elkington, founder of the Triple Bottom Line concept, cautions:
"To truly shift the needle, however, we need a new wave of TBL innovation and deployment. None of these sustainability frameworks will be enough, as long as they lack the suitable pace and scale - the necessary radical intent - needed to stop us all overshooting our planetary boundaries."
These challenges are examined in more detail in the following sections, compared to alternative approaches.
Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) is a standardized method for evaluating the environmental impacts of a product, process, or service throughout its entire lifecycle. It’s based on ISO standards 14040 and 14044 and covers all phases—from raw material extraction to disposal. LCA’s rigor and transparency make it the gold standard for environmental measurement, especially as regulatory and investor scrutiny intensifies (source).
The LCA process consists of four key steps: goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation of results. Depending on the focus, system boundaries can vary, such as “cradle-to-gate” (up to the factory gate), “gate-to-gate” (between production stages), or “cradle-to-grave” (through disposal).
A practical example comes from Urban Mining Northeast, which conducted an LCA for Pozzotive—a material made from recycled glass for sustainable concrete production. The analysis assessed, among other things, impacts on global warming, acidification, and primary energy consumption.
Ollie Taylor, Associate Director at sustainability consultancy Anthesis Group, summarizes the value of LCA as follows:
“The value of LCA really exists in its ability to, as a manufacturer, model all of your variables and find the lowest impact solution... LCA isn't purely about reporting. It's much more about finding optimization and eco-design. It's a decision support tool.”
With this structured approach, we can now take a closer look at the advantages and challenges of LCA.
LCA provides a solid, data-driven foundation for making environmentally conscious decisions. The ISO standards ensure transparency and comparability between products and companies. By considering multiple environmental categories, LCA minimizes the risk of “problem shifting,” where improvements in one area lead to deterioration in another. The method also helps identify environmental hotspots in a product’s lifecycle.
Current market trends show how relevant LCA is: Over 81% of consumers expect companies to actively contribute to environmental improvement (IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022). At the same time, in many industries, more than 80% of environmental impacts occur in the supply chain, highlighting the importance of a full lifecycle perspective (McKinsey).
| Lifecycle Phase | Optimization Potential |
|---|---|
| Raw material extraction | Use of resource-efficient materials and recycled content |
| Production | Implementation of energy-efficient technologies |
| Transport | Shortening transport routes through local production |
| Use | Improving energy efficiency, using renewable energy |
| Disposal | Increasing material recycling rates |
These optimization opportunities are especially interesting for startups, as they offer concrete starting points for improvements—often even with limited resources. LCA also helps with regulatory compliance, such as the EU taxonomy, and provides a reliable basis for sustainability reporting.
Despite its advantages, LCA also comes with challenges. Its complexity and the associated effort are often hurdles for startups. Data collection is time-consuming and requires both primary data from suppliers and secondary data from databases, scientific literature, or government sources. According to a 2023 survey by the European Commission, over 60% of SMEs cited data collection and methodological complexity as the main barriers to conducting full LCAs (source).
Another drawback is that LCA focuses exclusively on ecological aspects. Social and economic impacts are not considered, nor are factors like noise or landscape changes. The construction industry illustrates these problems: It accounts for about 39% of energy-related global CO₂ emissions, with cement production alone responsible for around 8% of global CO₂ emissions. Additionally, cement manufacturing requires about ten times more energy compared to the national average for gross production (IEA).
Another issue is the varying system boundaries and assumptions between studies, which makes comparability difficult and leads to uncertainties in results. For startups with limited resources, the effort required for a full LCA can be disproportionately high—especially when rapid product adjustments are needed.
The ISO definition highlights both the possibilities and limitations of the method:
“LCA studies the environmental aspects and potential impacts throughout a product's life cycle (i.e., cradle-to-grave) from raw materials acquisition through production, use and disposal. The general categories of environmental impacts needing consideration include resource use, human health, and ecological consequences.”
The Triple Top Line (TTL) approach combines economic, social, and environmental aspects, while the Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) method focuses exclusively on environmental footprint. TTL aims to create a sustainable industrial system that is not only economically successful but also delivers social and environmental benefits. LCA, in contrast, analyzes the environmental aspects and potential impacts of a product throughout its entire lifecycle.
| Criterion | Triple Top Line (TTL) | Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Holistic value creation in three dimensions | Environmental impacts across the product lifecycle |
| Time orientation | Future-oriented, potential-focused | Past- and present-oriented |
| Scope | Entire business model and company | Specific products or services |
| Data requirements | Medium to high, flexible | High, standardized data collection required |
| Regulatory basis | No specific standards | ISO 14040/14044 standards |
| Stakeholder communication | Comprehensive impact story | Precise environmental data |
These differences help guide your strategic decision on which method best fits your company. For example, TTL is often favored by companies seeking to communicate a broader impact story to investors and the public, while LCA is essential for those needing to meet technical or regulatory requirements.
If your startup aims for broad societal impact, TTL is often the better choice. For product-focused startups—such as in hardware, chemicals, or consumer goods—LCA may be more suitable, as it reveals concrete optimization opportunities and meets regulatory requirements. According to a 2023 Deloitte survey, 72% of European startups in manufacturing and tech sectors reported that LCA was critical for winning B2B contracts and accessing green funding (source).
One key point is data requirements: While LCA demands standardized and often complex data collection, TTL is more flexible and can be implemented step by step—a plus if your resources are limited. TTL also offers a comprehensive communication strategy that covers both social and environmental aspects. LCA, on the other hand, appeals to technically oriented audiences or B2B customers who value detailed environmental data.
Your stakeholders’ expectations also matter. Investors and customers increasingly value sustainability reports that go beyond pure environmental data. TTL can offer an advantage here. At the same time, LCA is often seen as more credible, especially in technology-driven industries.
German startups face additional requirements from national and EU regulations. One example is the transition from the national emissions trading system (nETS) to the EU-wide ETS 2 by 2027. This will expand CO₂ accounting to fuels in buildings, road transport, and smaller industrial sectors that were previously not covered.
Requirements for sustainability reporting are also increasing due to the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). German startups should consider their investors’ preferences: While international investors often prefer standardized LCA data, German impact investors and family offices place greater value on approaches that include social effects.
The industry structure in Germany also influences the decision. In established sectors like automotive, chemicals, or mechanical engineering, LCA is often standard and expected by partners and customers. TTL, on the other hand, can offer advantages for grant applications, especially those supporting societal change. Technology-oriented funding programs, however, usually require LCA data.
Selecting the right framework should be based on a thorough analysis of your business model. Products often require a Lifecycle Assessment (LCA), while digital solutions are better served by the Triple-Layered Approach (TTL). Available resources are also crucial: LCA typically requires a medium to high investment and extensive data collection from suppliers. TTL, by contrast, is more flexible and can be implemented incrementally.
From 2025, stricter EU requirements on product safety and data management will come into force. For startups, this means both TTL and LCA will need to be more closely integrated into compliance strategies. The time focus is also important: LCA mainly provides past- and present-oriented data, while TTL is future-oriented and highlights potential. Startups with dynamic technologies and limited resources usually benefit from the flexibility of the TTL approach.
Once you’ve chosen a framework, it’s time for consistent implementation. The following tips will help you successfully apply your chosen method.
LCA Implementation
Start by selecting the appropriate methodology. Research industry-specific standards and so-called Product Category Rules (PCRs). If no specific standards exist, use ISO 14040/14044 as your guide. Create a process diagram of your study area to avoid errors, and use the required database for your standard.
To ensure the credibility of your results, use up-to-date, locally relevant datasets and document every figure, calculation, and assumption in detail. Poor documentation can lead to a lack of transparency. Leveraging open-access LCA databases, such as Ecoinvent (source), can help startups reduce costs and improve data quality.
TTL Implementation
Define clear KPIs for all three dimensions—economic, environmental, and social. Create a dashboard that integrates these metrics. Involve different departments to ensure all value creation dimensions are considered.
Software tools can save you a lot of work: LCA software automates analyses, and ready-made templates help you structure your data. Start with a screening LCA to identify the biggest impact areas before diving into the details.
Involve your suppliers early to get accurate input data. This is especially crucial for LCA, as data quality is often insufficient.
The differences between TTL and LCA bring specific challenges. For LCA, methodological inconsistency is a common mistake: Startups often choose the wrong standard or apply it incorrectly. A poorly defined scope can lead to inconsistencies when data from different sources are mixed.
Sensitivity analyses help test the robustness of your results. Unexpected results often indicate system errors caused by faulty primary data or incorrect dataset use. Conduct plausibility checks and get feedback from colleagues to avoid logical errors. Don’t treat the analysis as a one-off task—update it regularly.
Communication errors often arise from unclear visualizations. Use charts, infographics, or interactive dashboards to make complex data understandable. Present your results so they’re relevant to your audience—whether by focusing on costs, risks, or compliance.
For TTL to succeed, it’s important to balance the three dimensions. Avoid overemphasizing one dimension. Set clear goals and define your target audiences to keep your reports transparent.
External validation can strengthen your credibility. Get feedback from experts or third-party reviewers, and align with established standards like ISO principles. For public environmental claims, LCA verification is essential.
These measures underscore the importance of regularly reviewing both methods. LCA can serve as a foundation for improvement plans and provides a precise snapshot of the current situation, triggering optimization processes.
The choice between the Triple Top Line Framework and Lifecycle Assessment is not a one-size-fits-all decision—startups should carefully weigh their specific requirements, goals, and available resources. As sustainability reporting becomes mainstream, integrating impact measurement into your business model is no longer optional but essential for long-term success (World Economic Forum).
It’s crucial to remain flexible, as impact measurement is not a one-off event but a continuous process. Siemens Healthineers is a good example: The company pursues long-term climate strategies, aiming to be climate-neutral by 2030, and aligns with SBTi. This approach not only reflects Germany’s commitment to sustainability but also shows how companies can respond to regulatory changes and investor expectations.
For German startups, factors such as company size, market phase, industry, and the needs of investors and customers play an important role. The new CSRD requirements in particular highlight the importance of establishing a suitable measurement method early on. These regulatory demands make it clear that impact measurement must be firmly embedded in corporate strategy.
Impact measurement should be part of your strategic direction from the outset. This allows you to set clear goals and plan appropriate actions. Lifecycle Assessment provides a valuable foundation for building sustainable business models.
It’s important that measurement is seamlessly integrated into company culture and comprehensively considers social, environmental, and economic aspects. Modular and adaptable KPIs help keep the process flexible. It’s also wise to involve relevant stakeholders early to ensure broad acceptance and support.
Transparent communication and regular reporting build trust and make impact measurement a strategic tool for driving sustainable growth. Whether you choose the Triple Top Line Framework or Lifecycle Assessment: Impact measurement is a dynamic process that should be continuously reviewed and adapted. Iterative feedback loops enable startups to constantly improve their actions and respond flexibly to new challenges. In an ever-changing environment, consistently applying and evolving your chosen approach is the key to success.
Startups should carefully consider whether the Triple Top Line Framework or Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) is a better fit for their business model, goals, and available resources. The Triple Top Line Framework is ideal if you want to take a comprehensive approach to economic, environmental, and social value. It’s especially useful for startups that want to measure their impact using tailored, company-specific KPIs and achieve broad influence. Lifecycle Assessment (LCA), on the other hand, is perfect if ecological evaluation is your main focus. It analyzes the environmental impacts of a product throughout its entire lifecycle and is particularly helpful for product-oriented companies with a strong focus on sustainability. Both approaches require different resources, time, and expertise. Your decision should be based on which aspects of impact measurement are most relevant to your company and how they can best be integrated into your business strategy.
Startups with limited resources can efficiently implement an LCA (Lifecycle Assessment) by leveraging publicly available and trusted databases such as Ecoinvent. They can also collect specific primary data, such as through supplier interviews or simple on-site measurements, to obtain more accurate information. Precisely defining system boundaries and setting a functional unit—such as 1 kg of material or a single product—helps reduce the analysis effort and makes results more comparable. Additionally, an uncertainty analysis can help assess the potential impact of data gaps and increase the reliability of the results. With these approaches, startups can keep the effort of an LCA manageable while still gaining valuable insights into the environmental impacts of their products or services.
The Triple Top Line Framework (TTL) helps companies meet the requirements of the EU CSRD by enabling a comprehensive view of economic, environmental, and social aspects, with company-specific metrics that can be flexibly integrated. This allows the diverse reporting obligations of the CSRD to be addressed in a targeted way. In addition, Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) provides a precise method for measuring environmental impacts across the entire product lifecycle. This approach is particularly important in the context of the environmental reporting standards (ESRS E2 to E5) of the CSRD. The combination of TTL and LCA gives companies a solid foundation for providing the required data for sustainability reporting in line with European regulations.