Sustainable Software Development: An ADKAR-Based Framework

for Project Managers and Teams

Yassine Talas

and Hajer Rabii

Amaris Research Unit, Paris, France

Amaris France, Paris, France

Keywords: Sustainable Software Development, Software Development Methodologies, ADKAR, Green Information

Technology.

Abstract: This ongoing preliminary research addresses the growing need for environmentally conscious practices in

Information Technology (IT), specifically in software development. It aims to develop a generic framework

for sustainable software development (SSD) tailored to IT project managers and teams, through leveraging

the ADKAR change management model and its five pillars (Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability,

Reinforcement). This work combines two complementary research methodologies: interviews and

participatory action research. The current findings include the overall structure of the framework and suggest

an alignment of the proposed framework with the Agile project management methodology. Further research

is under progress to develop the detailed content of the framework, and test it. The main contribution expected

from this work is to promote the democratization of sustainable practices in software development.

1 INTRODUCTION

The world is currently addressing crucial challenges,

threatening the delicate balance of our planet’s

ecosystem (United Nations Environment Programme,

2023). In this context, the impact of Information

technology (IT) on the environment is mixed. On the

one hand, IT-enabled solutions and tools addressed

various environmental issues in multiple sectors and

supported eco-friendly initiatives and

transformations. On the other hand, IT has introduced

new set of environmental challenges, as studies

indicated in 2020 that IT industry could be

responsible for up to 4% of global carbon emissions

(Freitag et al., 2021) and accounts for 7% of global

electricity consumption (Andrae, 2020). Reports

anticipate a rapid increase of these numbers as IT

demand, usage and manufacturing are expected to

grow in the coming years (Belkhir & Elmeligi, 2018;

Ross & Christie, 2022).

Among the most crucial solutions to address this

issue, “Green IT” has gained growing interest over

the past decade. Green IT refers to the process of

developing, operating and disposing of IT in a manner

https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9479-2522

https://orcid.org/0009-0000-2861-7553

that minimizes harm to the environment (adapted

from Elliot (Elliot, 2007) and Dalvi-Esfahani et al.

(Dalvi-Esfahani et al., 2020)). This process involves

a set of principles, methodologies and tools at the

software and the hardware levels. This paper focuses

on software Green IT, also referred to as sustainable

software development (SSD). According to academia

and practice, SSD techniques have proven to lead to

energy efficiency and thus to less carbon emissions

(e.g. (Capra et al., 2012; Katal et al., 2023; Kravets &

Egunov, 2022; Ournani et al., 2021; Verdecchia et al.,

2021)). Approaches in SSD range from virtualization

and cache management, to coding efficiency,

optimized need and requirements definition, among

others.

At the project level, SSD requires the involvement

of all stakeholders, including project managers,

architects, designers and software engineers. Each of

them can contribute to SSD as part of their respective

scope, by introducing impactful changes to their daily

activities throughout the lifecycle of the project.

To be able to do so, these changes need to be

motivated, acknowledged and deployed while being

aligned to the existing software development

Talas, Y. and Rabii, H.

Sustainable Software Development: An ADKAR-Based Framework for Project Managers and Teams.

DOI: 10.5220/0013371300003928

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE 2025), pages 643-651

ISBN: 978-989-758-742-9; ISSN: 2184-4895

643

methodology used in the project. With their holistic

project view, project managers could be seen as

guarantors of SSD deployment and success.

However, those project managers who aim at

conducting software development with a view to

sustainability and carbon emissions reduction, lack

visibility on the “how” question.

There is indeed little available and structured

knowledge and guidance on these relatively new

issues. Some of the existing frameworks are sketchy

and lack detail and operability. Although maturity

grids for SSD governance were explored by literature,

they do not offer concrete methodologies for

deployment. In the same respect, some described

approaches, despite proposing best practices and key

performance indicators, lack details on the control

elements to make these indicators operational, and

their scope may not be adapted to the practical needs

of project managers. Some recommendations are

neither detailed nor sequenced, thus limiting their

practical application.

In short, although some contributions exist, they

lack detailed and operational approaches to the

effective deployment of SSD, underlining the need

for a more comprehensive and structured

methodological framework.

This research tries to fill this gap. It is a work-in-

progress as our findings have not yet been tested and

applied in real settings, which is planned as our next

research step. Our objective, eventually, is to propose

a validated methodological framework that will

enable project managers to deploy SSD in their

projects and help them engage their teams in this

approach. In concrete terms, this will involve

answering the following questions:

 What methodological framework should be

adopted for SSD?

 What concrete actions should be taken to

deploy SSD?

 How can we support project teams in

implementing SSD?

We aim to answer these questions while ensuring

that our framework could be adapted to different

usage situations and considers the expectations of

project managers, both in form and content. One of

the use contexts that we consider in this work is the

Agile methodology.

Our position in this research is to view SSD as a

major change to existing practices. Hence, we rely

upon a well-known change management framework,

namely ADKAR, to build our project framework for

SSD. ADKAR stands for Awareness, Desire,

Knowledge, Ability and Reinforcement. Our idea is

to align these ADKAR pillars to the project lifecycle

for SSD deployment.

The remaining sections are organized as follows.

First, in the literature review section, we present some

related work and the ADKAR model that structures

our developed framework. Then, we describe our

methodology, which is based on a qualitative method

(i.e. interviews) and participatory action research.

Afterwards, we present the findings of our study,

namely the content of the SSD framework and a

suggestion of alignment with agile methodology. In

the last section, we conclude with intended actions to

validate our framework, and expected implications of

our exploratory research.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

In this section, we will present an overview of

existing SSD methodologies and frameworks as well

as the ADKAR methodology upon which we propose

to build our Green IT methodological framework.

2.1 SSD Methodologies and

Frameworks

Various frameworks and methodologies have been

developed to address SSD, each focusing on distinct

aspects such as energy efficiency, waste reduction,

and the integration of sustainable practices into IT

operations.

The Green IT readiness framework provides a

structured method for assessing an organization’s

Green IT practices and maturity (Molla et al., 2009).

It integrates five dimensions: technology,

organizational, environmental, people and

governance readiness. This model provides a holistic

framework to identify gaps and to design targeted

strategies for sustainable IT adoption.

The GreenSoft model (Naumann et al., 2011) is a

conceptual framework designed to enhance software

sustainability across its lifecycle phases

(development, use, and disposal). The model

conceptualizes components such as sustainability

metrics, procedural guidelines for stakeholders, and

tools for green practices. It suggests how

“conventional” processes could be enriched with a

view to sustainability.

Wati & Koo (2011) developed a strategic

management tool based on a balanced scorecard

approach to highlight how businesses can integrate

environmental considerations into IT strategy. This

model evaluates IT performance from economic,

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

644

social, and environmental perspectives, promoting

sustainability alongside business objectives.

Bose & Luo (2012) developed a step-by-step

process management approach for Green IT adoption.

This approach is cyclical in nature and relies on four

different phases: plan, design, implement and

measure the performance of the process. For each

phase, generic-level guidance is provided to assist IT

managers in their efforts to bring greener practices to

their organizations.

Mahmoud & Ahmad (2013) proposed a two-level

framework to enhance sustainability in software

engineering processes. The first level defines a hybrid

green software engineering process that combines

sequential and iterative methods, incorporating green

practices at each stage. The second level focuses on

using software as a tool for resource monitoring and

energy efficiency.

Through exploratory and confirmatory factor

analysis of large Mauritian companies, the study from

Hardin-Ramanan et al. (2018) developed a Green IT

governance model that outlines the accountabilities,

decisions, mechanisms, and practices necessary for

sustainable IT management.

The Green-agile maturity model provides a

framework to assess the integration of environmental

sustainability and agile practices in global software

development (GSD) (Rashid et al., 2021). The model

outlines maturity levels to help organizations

progress from basic awareness of green practices to

their comprehensive implementation in agile

workflows.

The Environmental Sustainability Computing

(ESC) framework is a holistic approach that addresses

operational energy consumption and carbon

emissions (Pazienza et al., 2024). It includes the

entire lifecycle of computing systems and considers

regulations, accounting and culture issues.

Although these methodologies and frameworks

are well-developed and studied, gaps remain in their

application from a project management standpoint.

Indeed, many frameworks focus on organizational or

strategic levels, with limited guidance on embedding

Green IT into individual project lifecycles. This high-

level granularity of analysis might pose integration

challenges. Especially as some models lack

actionable steps or detailed methodologies for

implementation in IT projects. Moreover, some of the

available frameworks do not address quantitative and

qualitative metrics to assess Green IT adoption and

impact during specific project phases, and neglect

return on investment analysis.

2.2 ADKAR Framework

The ADKAR framework, developed by Prosci

founder Jeff Hiatt, is a widely-used goal-oriented

change management framework designed to guide

individuals and organizations through successful

transformations (Hiatt, 2006). The model is

structured around five sequential building blocks:

Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, and

Reinforcement, each representing essential

guidelines and outcomes for managing change at

different levels, starting from individuals and teams.

 Awareness:

This stage focuses on recognizing the need for

change, emphasizing effective communication to

address resistance and misconceptions. Successful

awareness fosters understanding of why change is

necessary and the consequences of inaction (Angtyan,

2019).

 Desire:

Building motivation and commitment to participate in

and support the change is the second step. Factors

such as individual goals, organizational culture, and

perceived benefits influence this stage. It highlights

the challenge of fostering intrinsic motivation while

aligning it with external drivers (Angtyan, 2019;

Picado Argüello & González-Prida, 2024).

 Knowledge:

This stage centers on equipping individuals with

the information and skills required to implement the

change. Training, mentorship, and access to resources

play a critical role in translating theoretical

understanding into actionable change (Angtyan,

2019; Picado Argüello & González-Prida, 2024).

 Ability:

The ability stage transitions theoretical

knowledge into practical application. Continuous

coaching and feedback help individuals overcome

barriers and demonstrate the desired behaviors

necessary for the change to be effective (Angtyan,

2019; Picado Argüello & González-Prida, 2024).

 Reinforcement:

To sustain the change and prevent regression,

reinforcement mechanisms such as rewards,

accountability structures, and post-change

performance evaluations are essential. This phase

ensures that changes are institutionalized within the

organization (Angtyan, 2019).

The ADKAR model's emphasis on individual-centric

change differentiates it from other frameworks. It has

been applied in diverse contexts, including

technology adoption, industry 5.0, and organizational

restructuring. Research demonstrates its effectiveness

Sustainable Software Development: An ADKAR-Based Framework for Project Managers and Teams

645

in reducing resistance to change and enhancing the

success of digital transformations by addressing both

human and technical aspects of change (Angtyan,

2019; Picado Argüello & González-Prida, 2024).

Hence, we decided to rely on ADKAR to build our

SSD methodological framework.

3 METHODOLOGY

This work used two complementary methodological

approaches: first, interviews for initial input and

understanding, and then participatory action research

for development and refinement of the

methodological framework.

3.1 Interviews

Initial input was collected by means of interviews.

The purpose of data collection was twofold. First, the

interviews tried to understand the expectations of

project managers on SSD deployment and the fit of

ADKAR as a framework for SSD. Second, the

interviews gathered suggestions on SSD framework

requirements, actions, crucial steps and warning

points. The interviews were divided into 5 topics,

namely covering the 5 ADKAR pillars. An interview

guidelines was prepared accordingly.

19 semi-structured interviews were conducted

with IT project managers between January 2023 and

June 2023. The interviewees were employees of the

same IT consulting company, each assigned to

different projects and client organizations across

various sectors, enriching and diversifying the

insights gathered.. Interviewees were randomly

selected from the company directory based on their

profiles and were invited to participate after

completing a brief survey to confirm their Green IT

awareness. None of the interviewees had prior

knowledge of the ADKAR framework. All

interviewees had more than 3 years of experience.

Our sample size (N=19) is close to the 20-30

range recommended by state-of-the-art qualitative

research authors Creswell & Poth (2018). A larger

sample could not be secured due to constraints of

availability and convenience. However, we believe

that data saturation was achieved within our sample,

supported by the complementary research method

detailed below.

With the consent of interviewees, all interviews

have been taped and transcribed. Notes were also

taken during the interviews. The duration of each

interview was between 30 to 60min.

Based on notes and transcriptions, collected

textual data was coded according to the 5 ADKAR

pillars. Then, further sorting and analysis allowed

initial categorization of data within each pillar. Each

category represented a set of SSD actions and themes

to cover by the framework. To support traceability,

analysis was conducted in a versioned Excel

spreadsheet, resulting in almost 70 categories and

over 650 entries. To enhance reliability, each

categorization decision was the result of a double

coding approach and discussions to harmonize the

few differences (Miles et al., 2014; Vaughn &

Jacquez, 2020).

3.2 Participatory Action Research

Participatory action research was the second stage of

our methodology. It could be defined as the active

participation and collaboration of individuals being

studied in research phases (Vaughn & Jacquez,

2020). As such, our work involved the direct and

collective participation of project managers in the

development of the Green IT methodological

framework. These project managers work at the same

IT consulting company cited in 3.1, and have

different profiles, backgrounds, and expertise sectors.

The approach started on December 2023 and is

still ongoing. A team of 5 project managers, in

average, worked on the SSD framework, in

collaboration and under direct and daily supervision

of the authors. The team of project managers

continuously changed over time, with more than 25

different participants so far. The outcome benefits

from the diversity of the contributors’ profiles.

The project managers brought all their field

expertise to review, propose and refine the SSD

methodological framework. The starting point was

the initial categorization obtained from the

interviews’ analysis. The team added to it, refined it

and assessed the practical relevance and clarity of the

content. After few versions, a draft structure for the

framework was built. For each ADKAR pillar,

different categories of SSD actions were proposed,

and for each category, different sub-categories were

proposed as well. These categories and sub-categories

encompass all 450 isolated entries stemming from our

textual interviews’ dataset and the teams’

suggestions. A glossary was defined to describe the

different categories and sub-categories.

Then, a backward effort was made to regroup the

entries into macro-actions and provide enough

descriptions and detail to ensure the potential of

implementation. A Word document was created

afterwards for each macro-action (i.e. action sheet).

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

646

In each document, the content of the underlying

actions was built and developed by specifying

implementation stages and topics, means, tools and

stakeholders.

Throughout this process, multiple iterations were

necessary due to the scale of the content, and to check

for clarity, redundance and relevance. All

incorporated content was cross-reviewed and

validated by the team. As new input arose, the global

structure of the methodological framework evolved,

as well as the detailed content of each action sheet.

4 FINDINGS

First, we will present our proposed ADKAR-based

framework for SSD and then we will suggest an

alignment of our framework with the agile

methodology.

4.1 Sustainable Software Development:

An ADKAR-Based Framework

The presentation of the findings will consist of an

overview of the main tasks for each ADKAR stage.

Detailed and personalized (depending on

stakeholders profiles) content is currently still under

development for each of the actions. The framework,

when deployed in IT projects, will consist of detailed

sheets and a quick-read summary for each of the main

actions,

4.1.1 Prerequisites and Pre-ADKAR Stage

We consider that three prerequisites are important to

be available at the company level before engaging

into SSD projects. First, all interviewees and

participants agree that the company needs to

implement a sustainability driven strategy,

incorporating operations (projects), but also all other

departments. Second, a sustainability or SSD sponsor

is needed to provide support for such projects. Third,

a carbon footprint assessment of the company’s IT

operations, services and architecture could be

beneficial for the teams’ engagement in SSD efforts.

Moreover, to prepare Green IT deployment, it was

deemed necessary to consider a pre-ADKAR stage to

prepare the teams and analyze the pre-deployment

situation.

The suggested content of this stage includes:

 Preface: It aims to introduce the upcoming

SSD change, identify stakeholders and provide

an overview of the inherent framework.

 Project managers’ training and

information: is the purpose is to specifically

train project managers who will coordinate the

SSD approach.

 Stakeholders’ questionnaire: To evaluate

stakeholders’ maturity for sustainability

matters, their understanding of SSD, and their

attitude towards this change.

4.1.2 Awareness

The awareness stage is divided into three main

actions aimed at raising Green IT awareness among

the project teams:

 Introduce Green IT: Here, the goal is to

define Green IT and its key aspects, as well as

the stakes and issues related to it. These should

be adjusted depending on the stakeholders’

profiles. Additional resources (links, success

stories…) should be provided for further

information.

 Understand the impact: Through workshops,

stress is made on the environmental impact of

IT. The idea is to address each and all

stakeholders to prove the necessity for action.

Current and future norms and regulations are

also presented at this stage.

 Communicate on carbon footprint and

questionnaire: To ensure stakeholders

engagement, efficient and targeted

communication to inform on the carbon

footprint assessment and stakeholders’

questionnaire results is proposed. We suggest

interactive and sober means of communication.

 Ensure continuous communication: Further

SSD communication and interactive events

should be maintained across the project

lifecycle, to inform for instance on measured

KPIs, SSD news, feedback and success stories.

4.1.3 Desire

This stage is composed of three main actions:

 Create community engagement: An SSD

community could be built to foster SSD efforts.

It can rely on workshops, gamified challenges

or other interactive digital events.

 Highlight the operational benefits: For each

stakeholder’s profile, insist on the advantages

related to SSD application in day-to-day

project activities.

Sustainable Software Development: An ADKAR-Based Framework for Project Managers and Teams

647

Figure 1: Alignment between our SSD ADKAR framework and Agile methodology.

 Initiate recognition and rewards: Encourage

SSD adoption by putting in place a rewards

system, including at least symbolic rewards and

prices (digital badges, goodies…).

 Ensure engagement upholding: Develop

initiatives to ensure that stakeholders are

supported and that their engagement is

maintained throughout the project.

4.1.4 Knowledge

We propose to carry out the following three main

actions for the Knowledge pillar:

 Identify SSD compatible activities: For each

stakeholder profile, a list of project work tasks

that are compatible with software sustainability

will be developed. Depending on project

specificities, the list will need to be prioritized

based on the best quick win/ impact ratio.

 Structure and map the competencies:

Identify here the required competencies to

conduct the project in an SSD manner, linking

them to green-compatible project tasks. A set

of competencies for different project activities

and stakeholders is being developed and could

be used as a checklist. An evaluation is then

needed to assess the competencies situation and

prioritize the training.

 Provide the training courses: our framework

will include a set of generic trainings. The

format and content of the training will be

adapted to each stakeholder’s needs. Trainings

objective is adjusted depending on the

assessment of competencies situation. Users of

the framework could complement the generic

set according to their specific needs. After

trainings completion, feedback will be

collected for format & content improvement

purposes.

4.1.5 Ability

We suggest conducting two main tasks for the Ability

pillar:

 Deploy: At the beginning of this stage, each

project stakeholder starts applying the Green

IT’s best practices they were trained on,

focusing on prioritized SSD compatible

activities. This will be done according to the

project or task planning.

 Follow-up and adjust: Define metrics

thresholds and follow-up on them. SSD metrics

cover the operational, adoption and financial

levels. Adjust the course of action, if necessary,

while balancing functional needs and SSD

issues.

4.1.6 Reinforcement

The reinforcement stages conclude the SSD ADKAR

framework. We propose to conduct the following

main tasks:

 Continuous improvement: Collect data and

feedback from the previous pillars, to assess

them based on factual KPIs and perception of

the stakeholders. It also refers to the

development of a prioritized action plan to

improve the methodology and bridge the gaps.

 Technology watch: Identify innovations in

SSD field, and update the SSD competencies

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

648

Figure 2: Complementary view of our framework alignment with Agile methodology.

best practices, and SSD compatible tasks. The

latter should be considered for inclusion in the

framework.

 Promotion: Here, it is about promoting the

collective and individual actions, highlighting

the successes (even the smallest ones),

communicating to sponsors and at the company

level, and gathering and sharing key knowledge

and best practices acquired during the project

4.2 ADKAR-Based Framework:

a Focus on Agile Methodology

To confront our framework with project lifecycle and

timeline, we chose to focus on one of the most used

project development methodologies, namely agile.

Agile methodology is a flexible and iterative

approach for project management and software

development, emphasizing collaboration, customer

feedback and incremental delivery. It splits projects

into small manageable units called sprints, allowing

teams to adapt to changes quickly. Agile promotes

continuous improvement through regular reviews and

embraces principles such as prioritizing individuals

and interactions over processes and tools.

Figure 1 presents our suggestion of alignment

between agile software development and our SSD

ADKAR framework. We suggest that Awareness and

then Desire stages for SSD need to intervene at the

project planning phase. However, continuous

communication (Awareness) and engagement

upholding (Desire) need to be ensured throughout the

whole project lifecycle (A and D lines in Figure 1).

Also at the planning phase, global Knowledge

activities that address the entire project’s perimeter

could already be deployed (greyed K in Figure 1).

Then, at each sprint, we suggest successively

conducting Knowledge, Ability and Reinforcement

stages that specifically address the sprint perimeter

(greened K, A and R in Figure 1). We believe that

these iterations are necessary to enhance the

relevance of our framework. It would allow us to have

proper, targeted and only necessary training, to adjust

SSD KPIs and prioritized activities according to a

sprint backlog, and to improve SSD deployment from

one sprint to another. This agile approach stresses the

need for short, modulable and pre-configured training

Sustainable Software Development: An ADKAR-Based Framework for Project Managers and Teams

649

content, a set of customizable KPIs, and adjustable

checklists of SSD activities and best practices per

stakeholder profile.

At the end of the project, a global Reinforcement

stage would be needed, allowing an exhaustive

retrospective on all sprints (greyed R in Figure 1).

With a focus on the sprint perspective, Figure 2

presents a complementary view on how we suggest

our SSD ADKAR framework could be integrated into

agile methodology. First, aside from the ADKAR

framework, we suggest stressing the need to consider

SSD issues since the development of the project

vision, and then integrate these into the user stories

and product backlog. We suggest considering epics

that are dedicated to SSD improvements or at least

rewrite relevant features according to SSD

considerations.

Once the sprint backlog is set, we enter the

Knowledge-Ability-Reinforcement cycle of the

sprint. Knowledge activities are conducted before

sprint starts and could be resumed if needed for a

specific feature. Development, architectural, and

design decisions and actions will align with the

prioritized SSD tasks and activities, with follow-up

guided by the selected SSD KPIs. Finally,

Reinforcement will be conducted alongside the sprint

review and retrospective.

During each sprint, we recommend incorporating

sustainable non-functional requirements into the

definition of done and the acceptance criteria.

Additionally, we propose establishing a 'Green

Champion' role, to be undertaken by the project

manager and one or more technical team members,

depending on the project's complexity and task

requirements. This role involves providing guidance

on SSD-related matters.

5 CONCLUSION

This ongoing research aims to address the gap in

operational guidance for deploying SSD, specifically

by leveraging the ADKAR model as a structured

change management framework. In this paper, we

presented an overview of the methodological

framework we propose to be adopted for SSD. This

provides a preliminary answer to our first research

questions.

Comprehensive materials are currently under

development and refinement, including training

resources, checklists, quantitative and qualitative

KPIs, lists of SSD-compatible tasks and best practices

for project teams, white book for project managers

and an ROI assessment framework. This will allow to

develop concrete actions and fully support project

teams in implementing SSD, as stated in our other

research questions.

Besides the work-in-progress character of this

research, our study comes with some limitations.

First, the framework is built upon the ADKAR

change management model, which is initially a linear

model that might oversimplify the complexities and

iterative nature of projects. Confronting our

methodological framework to the Agile methodology

helps mitigate this risk. In the same sense, this paper

does not address potential conflict between our

ADKAR-based framework and agile practices.

Methodologically speaking, since all interviewees

and participants are employees of the same company,

the questions of organizational bias might be posed.

We note however that the company is a consultancy

one, and its employees are assigned to different client

companies.

Looking ahead, we plan to validate the framework

and its detailed content through multiple pilot

projects, while evaluating its effectiveness and

potential for operationalization and generalization.

This process will include iterative refinements

informed by stakeholder feedback and empirical KPI

measurements. The practical implications of this

work include equipping project managers and teams

with a detailed, adaptable methodology, enabling

broader, more structured and lower-risk risk

deployment of SSD.

This approach ultimately bridges the gap between

high-level sustainability goals and day-to-day project

execution, providing organizations with a clear

pathway to achieve environmental objectives within

their IT operations.

REFERENCES

Andrae, A. S. G. (2020). New perspectives on internet

electricity use in 2030. Engineering and Applied

Science Letter, 3(2), 19–31.

Angtyan, H. (2019). ADKAR Model in Change

Management. International Review of Management

and Business Research, 8(2).

Belkhir, L., & Elmeligi, A. (2018). Assessing ICT global

emissions footprint: Trends to 2040 &

recommendations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 177,

448–463.

Bose, R., & Luo, X. (2012). Green IT adoption: A process

management approach. International Journal of

Accounting and Information Management, 20(1).

Capra, E., Francalanci, C., & Slaughter, S. A. (2012). Is

software “green”? Application development

environments and energy efficiency in open source

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

650

applications. Information and Software Technology,

54(1), 60–71.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry

and Research Design: Choosing Among Five

Approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Dalvi-Esfahani, M., Alaedini, Z., Nilashi, M., Samad, S.,

Asadi, S., & Mohammadi, M. (2020). Students’ green

information technology behavior: Beliefs and

personality traits. Journal of Cleaner Production, 257.

Elliot, S. (2007). Environmentally Sustainable ICT: A

Critical Topic for IS Research? PACIS 2007

Proceedings, 114.

Freitag, C., Berners-Lee, M., Widdicks, K., Knowles, B.,

Blair, G. S., & Friday, A. (2021). The real climate and

transformative impact of ICT: A critique of estimates,

trends, and regulations. Patterns, 2(9).

Hardin-Ramanan, S., Chang, V., & Issa, T. (2018). A Green

Information Technology governance model for large

Mauritian companies. Journal of Cleaner Production,

198.

Hiatt, J. (2006). ADKAR: A model for change in business,

government and our community. In Model for change

in business, government, and our community.

Katal, A., Dahiya, S., & Choudhury, T. (2023). Energy

efficiency in cloud computing data centers: a survey on

software technologies. Cluster Computing, 26(3),

1845–1875.

Kravets, A. G., & Egunov, V. (2022). The Software Cache

Optimization-Based Method for Decreasing Energy

Consumption of Computational Clusters. Energies,

15(20), 7509.

Mahmoud, S. S., & Ahmad, I. (2013). A green model for

sustainable software engineering. International Journal

of Software Engineering and Its Applications, 7(4).

Miles, M. B., Huberman, M. A., & Saldana, J. (2014).

Qualitative Data Analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd

ed.). Sage Publications.

Molla, A., Cooper, V. A., & Pittayachawan, S. (2009). IT

and eco-sustainability: Developing and validating a

green IT readiness model. ICIS 2009 Proceedings –

13th International Conference on Information Systems.

Naumann, S., Dick, M., Kern, E., & Johann, T. (2011). The

GREENSOFT Model: A reference model for green and

sustainable software and its engineering. Sustainable

Computing: Informatics and Systems, 1(4).

Ournani, Z., Belgaid, M. C., Rouvoy, R., Rust, P., &

Penhoat, J. (2021). Evaluating the Impact of Java

Virtual Machines on Energy Consumption.

Proceedings of the 15th Intl. Symposium on Empirical

Software Engineering and Measurement, 1–11.

Pazienza, A., Baselli, G., Vinci, D. C., & Trussoni, M. V.

(2024). A holistic approach to environmentally

sustainable computing. Innovations in Systems and

Software Engineering

, 20(3).

Picado Argüello, B., & González-Prida, V. (2024).

Integrating Change Management with a Knowledge

Management Framework: A Methodological Proposal.

Information, 15(7).

Rashid, N., Khan, S. U., Khan, H. U., & Ilyas, M. (2021).

Green-Agile Maturity Model: An Evaluation

Framework for Global Software Development

Vendors. IEEE Access, 9.

Ross, A., & Christie, L. (2022). Energy Consumption of

ICT. POSTNote. UK Parliament POST, 677(September

2022).

United Nations Environment Programme. (2023). Annual

Report 2022.

Vaughn, L. M., & Jacquez, F. (2020). Participatory

Research Methods – Choice Points in the Research

Process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods,

1(1).

Verdecchia, R., Lago, P., Ebert, C., & De Vries, C. (2021).

Green IT and Green Software. IEEE Software, 38(6),

7–15.

Wati, Y., & Koo, C. (2011). An introduction to the Green

IT balanced scorecard as a strategic IT management

system. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii

International Conference on System Sciences.

Sustainable Software Development: An ADKAR-Based Framework for Project Managers and Teams

651