Comparative Analysis of Sustainable Project Management Frameworks: IPMA ICB4 vs. GPM P5 Standard through the Lens of Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind

Sustainable project management is increasingly recognized as a moral responsibility that extends beyond economic efficiency and environmental compliance.

This study provides a comparative analysis of two leading sustainability frameworks in project management—the

IPMA ICB4 Sustainable Project Management Guide and the GPM P5 Standard—evaluating their alignment with

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),

Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards,

empirical sustainability research,

and moral imperatives.

Drawing on Jonathan Haidt’s moral foundations theory from The Righteous Mind (2012), this study examines the ethical underpinnings of each framework, analyzing how they reflect distinct moral imperatives within sustainability discourse.

Using Retrieval-AugmentedGeneration (RAG) methodology, a random sample of 30 text chunks from each documentwas analyzed for explicit references, framework integration, and practical applicability.

The findings indicate that GPM P5 provides a structured, metric-driven approach to sustainability that aligns with Haidt’s Care/Harm and Fairness/Cheating foundations, while IPMA ICB4 adopts a broader competency-based approach, aligning with Authority/Respect and Loyalty/Betrayal frameworks.

The study concludes with an exploration of the ethical implications of each framework and recommendations for future research in sustainability, ethics, and project management