An opened coral smartphone, copper components, a turquoise battery and a yellow screwdriver form a painted study of repair and continued use. The scene is a conceptual illustration, not a technical repair guide or a photograph of an actual device.
For small organisations, longer-lasting technology begins with better questions about parts, support and the work a device must do.
By Arbab Naseebullah Kasi, Chief Executive Officer - CEO, Feel Worldwide Foundation Inc.
A phone that no longer lasts through a working day creates a familiar decision. Replace the battery, replace the phone, or keep managing the inconvenience.
By then, some of the most important choices may already have been made. Can a suitable battery be obtained? Is there a competent repairer nearby? Will the device still receive the support needed for its work? Can the organisation manage without it while the repair takes place?
Those questions belong in the buying conversation, while there is still a choice between products.
For a small business or nonprofit, technology is meant to help people do useful work. The person approving a purchase should be able to explain how the device will be maintained, supported and eventually retired, alongside what it costs on the first day.
This does not require a complicated procurement department. It requires a little more curiosity before buying and a clear place to keep the answers.
Give the replacement request a closer look
Start with the work that needs doing. A device used for occasional video calls has different demands from one used throughout the day for field visits, photography or intensive design work.
When someone asks for a replacement, invite them to describe the difficulty rather than defend a preference. Does the battery run down? Does a particular application fail? Is the screen hard to use? Is the equipment physically damaged? Has the organisation changed what it expects the person to do?
In a hypothetical community organisation, a staff member reports that a phone is no longer reliable. A check by an appropriate technician might establish that a battery replacement would address the problem. It might instead reveal a fault that is uneconomic to repair. The important step is finding out before deciding.
Age alone gives an incomplete picture. So does the fact that a device still switches on. An older device may serve its purpose well, while another may no longer meet accessibility, performance or security requirements.
Ask the person who uses it to help define what acceptable performance looks like. Keeping equipment longer should not mean expecting staff to absorb preventable interruptions or struggle with tools that do not meet their needs.
The waste figures give this ordinary decision wider meaning
The Global E-waste Monitor 2024, released by UNITAR and the International Telecommunication Union on 20 March 2024, estimated that the world generated 62 million tonnes of electronic waste in 2022. Only 22.3 percent of that mass was documented as formally collected and recycled. These are figures for 2022, not a measurement of today's waste stream. UNITAR and ITU's report announcement.
The report identifies limited repair options, shorter product life cycles and design shortcomings among the challenges contributing to the growing gap between waste generation and documented recycling. Its findings make repairability relevant to how organisations buy, not only to how they dispose of unwanted equipment. Global E-waste Monitor 2024 findings.
These global numbers cannot tell a particular organisation whether repairing one phone is the best environmental decision. That would require information about the device, the repair, its likely further use and the alternative. They do provide a reason to examine avoidable replacement rather than assume recycling will resolve every consequence later.
A practical starting point is modest: before approving the next routine replacement, establish why the existing equipment can no longer do the job and whether that problem can reasonably be addressed.
Ask what repairability means for this exact model
A product described as durable or repairable still needs a more specific examination.
Before buying, ask the supplier about the components most likely to matter to your use. Can the battery and screen be replaced? Who is permitted and equipped to carry out the work? Where are the parts available, and what would the repair cost today? What warranty applies to the device and to a later repair?
Ask for written information tied to the exact model. A general statement about a brand may not describe every product it sells. Keep the date of the answer, too, because prices, service arrangements and availability can change.
European policy offers an example of making some of these questions more concrete. In its 20 June 2025 announcement, the European Commission described new requirements for covered devices placed on the EU market. For covered smartphones and slate tablets, the framework includes batteries capable of at least 800 charge cycles while retaining at least 80 percent of initial capacity. It also requires key spare parts to be supplied within five to ten working days and remain available for at least seven years after the model's last unit is placed on the EU market. European Commission announcement.
The Commission also introduced a repairability class running from A to E for covered smartphones and slate tablets. Its product guidance explains the label and links to the EPREL database, where buyers can inspect model information. The rules have a defined product and geographic scope. They should not be assumed to apply to every laptop, older device or purchase elsewhere. Commission product and label guidance.
For a buyer, a rating is useful evidence to investigate. It does not settle the local repair price, the suitability of a nearby service provider or whether a particular repair makes sense. The purchasing decision still needs those practical answers.
Put software support beside the hardware specification
A replaceable battery is only part of a device's useful life.
Before purchase, establish the manufacturer's published security-support period for the exact model and the support requirements of the applications your organisation relies on. Record the end date or the terms used to define it. If the seller cannot establish a clear commitment, retain that uncertainty in the comparison.
This matters particularly when considering discounted or refurbished equipment. The purchase date does not, by itself, establish how much manufacturer support remains. Ask what is left, rather than treating the device as newly supported because it is new to your organisation.
Bring the person responsible for IT into decisions involving sensitive information or important services. They can assess whether the proposed equipment and its support arrangements suit the work. A general ambition to reduce waste should not override an identified security requirement.
The same care applies to accessibility. Check the functions that the intended user needs, with their involvement. A device that is inexpensive, repairable and well supported may still be unsuitable for that person.
The aim is a defensible working life: a period in which the equipment can reasonably remain useful, supported and appropriate for its assigned role.
Compare costs over the period you actually need
The purchase price is certain at checkout. Future repairs and replacement dates are not. A useful comparison makes that difference visible.
Consider this hypothetical four-year planning exercise, with all amounts in US dollars. Option A costs $400. The organisation assumes it will need another $400 device after two years, giving an equipment-purchase total of $800. Option B costs $550, and the organisation assumes a $100 battery replacement will allow it to serve for all four years, giving a purchase-and-repair total of $650.
Under those assumptions, Option B costs $150 less. But if Option A lasts four years without replacement, its $400 purchase cost is lower. The conclusion changes when the useful-life assumption changes.
These invented figures illustrate a comparison method. They are not market prices or a forecast. A real comparison would also consider taxes, setup, staff time, downtime, software costs, disposal and any residual value. It would confirm that both options meet the same working requirements.
Try more than one plausible scenario before presenting an apparent saving. Ask what happens if a repair costs more, takes longer or provides less additional use than expected. A supplier's written commitment and your organisation's own maintenance history are better starting points than a hopeful lifespan chosen to make the arithmetic attractive.
Leave room in the budget for upkeep. A device can be repairable in principle while the organisation has no way to approve or pay for the repair when it is needed.
Make repair a manageable process
Once equipment is in use, give someone clear responsibility for its maintenance record and for deciding when an assessment is needed.
For a small team, the record can be brief: model, purchase date, warranty, support information, assigned role, significant faults, repairs and current status. Keep it proportionate and protect any personal or security-sensitive information associated with it.
When a fault appears, obtain a diagnosis and quote before promising a repair outcome. Check the likely turnaround, what happens if the repair fails, and how the person affected will continue working. An available temporary device may make a repair practical. Without one, the interruption may need a different plan.
Safe handling matters. The US Environmental Protection Agency's lithium-ion battery guidance, updated on 20 March 2026, warns that not all batteries are removable or serviceable by the user and directs people to the manufacturer for specific guidance when a battery is damaged. A repair-minded policy should not encourage untrained staff to open damaged batteries or improvise electrical work. EPA battery guidance.
There will be cases where replacement is the responsible decision. Record the reason plainly: an unsuitable device, an unresolved safety concern, unavailable support, repeated failures or a repair that does not justify its cost. Keeping that information helps the next purchase improve on the last one.
Plan the handover before the equipment leaves
A device that has finished one assignment may still have a suitable second use. That possibility deserves a careful check rather than an automatic donation.
Confirm the receiving person's or organisation's needs, the condition of the equipment, the remaining support and the accessories required. Make limitations visible. Passing along an unresolved fault or an unusable device simply moves the decision elsewhere.
Data also needs a deliberate process. NIST's Guidelines for Media Sanitization, published on 26 September 2025, describe an organisational approach to selecting appropriate sanitization methods and controls according to information sensitivity. For a small organisation, the practical implication is to agree an appropriate process with its IT lead or qualified provider before equipment is reused, transferred or disposed of. Do not assume that deleting visible files establishes that the information has been safely removed. NIST SP 800-88 Revision 2.
When reuse is no longer appropriate, check the destination and the service being offered. In guidance updated on 31 July 2026, the EPA recommends certified electronics recyclers and identifies R2 and e-Stewards as the two accredited certification standards in the United States. Elsewhere, consult the relevant local authority and applicable requirements. EPA guidance on certified recyclers.
Confirm that a provider accepts the specific equipment and can meet the organisation's data and handling requirements. The word “recycling” on a collection box is not enough information to make that decision.
Make the next purchase easier to defend
An organisation does not need to replace all its equipment to become more thoughtful about technology. It can start with the next purchase already under consideration.
Write down the work the device must do. Check whether the current equipment can meet that need after a reasonable intervention. If a purchase is necessary, compare the exact models for support, repair arrangements, accessibility and cost over a plausible working life.
Then keep the answers somewhere the next person can find them.
Months or years later, when a battery weakens or a screen breaks, the organisation will have more than a receipt. It will have a basis for deciding what to do, who can help and what continued use is worth.
That is a useful standard for responsible purchasing: leave the people who will maintain the equipment with options they can actually use.
