Winning Companies And Nonprofits Recognized At The 2023 Engage For Good Conference In Atlanta, GA. FromEngage for Good • Reposted: May 19, 2023
Campaigns that raised millions for Ukraine relief, inspired young people to learn about conflict mitigation and moved employees to cycle across the country for cancer research – all while building stronger businesses – were among the initiatives honored at the 21st annual Halo Awards.
Eighteen category-specific winners were selected out of more than 140 entries by Engage for Good at its annual conference in Atlanta, GA.
In addition, ESPN and Big Brothers Big Sisters of America each received a Golden Halo Award, Engage for Good’s highest honor, for their long records of achievement at the intersection of profit and purpose.
“This year’s winners reflect the tremendous diversity of causes and strategies that companies embrace to sustainably build a better world,” said Engage for Good President David Hessekiel. “It’s an honor to recognize programs that fight disease and hunger, support education and mental health, offer aid to those in Ukraine and so much more.”
A collaboration between Dunkin’ and the Dunkin’ Joy In Childhood Foundation, dubbed “2022 Iced Coffee Day,” was recognized as the “Best Of The Best,” an award presented by social impact agency For Momentum. In 2022, Dunkin’ franchisees united for a nationwide one-day charitable event, whereby one dollar from each iced coffee sold at participating outlets was given to the foundation. The initiative increased restaurant traffic and raised $1.8 million, 100% of which was given to hospitals near Dunkin’ restaurants.
“I’m honored to present this year’s prestigious ‘Best Of The Best’ Halo Award to Dunkin’ and the Dunkin’ Joy In Childhood Foundation. This award shines a spotlight on their ‘2022 Iced Coffee Day’ campaign, where best-in-class strategy, franchisee participation and execution allowed them to raise $1.8 million for children’s hospitals nationwide in one day. They should feel incredibly proud of this special recognition. On behalf of For Momentum, I want to extend a heartfelt congratulations to the Dunkin’ team – we are thrilled to support your partnership success,” said Mollye Rhea, President and Founder of social impact agency For Momentum.
Please join us in congratulating this year’s Halo Award-winning campaigns:
Best Consumer-Activated Corporate Donation Initiative Gold: 2022 Iced Coffee Day – Dunkin’ & Dunkin’ Joy In Childhood Foundation Silver: Bringing Communities Together In Nature – Sun Outdoors & National Park Foundation
Best Consumer Donation Initiative Gold: PetSmart + PetSmart Charities 10 Millionth Adoption Supported By Pet Parents – PetSmart & PetSmart Charities Silver: JOANN and Susan G. Komen Integrated Partnership To Drive Point-Of-Sale Donations – JOANN & Susan G. Komen
Best Education Initiative Gold: Subaru Loves Learning – Subaru Of America, Inc. & AdoptAClassroom.org Silver: MLK Scholars Program – John Hancock
Best Emergency/Crisis Initiative Gold: Stand With Ukraine All-for-Charity Initiative – Humble Bundle, Razom For Ukraine, International Rescue Committee, International Medical Corps & Direct Relief Silver: PayPal’s Response To The Humanitarian Crisis In Ukraine – PayPal & Multiple Nonprofits
Best Employee Engagement Initiative Gold: Employee Empowerment Thru Volunteering – FedEx & Operation Warm Silver: Coast 2 Coast 4 Cancer – Bristol Myers Squibb & the V Foundation for Cancer Research
Best Health Initiative Gold: Bloom: Growing Kids’ Mental Well-Being – Nationwide Foundation, Nationwide Children’s Hospital & On Our Sleeves Silver: iHeart National Recovery Month – iHeartMedia & The Voices Project
Best JEDI Initiative Gold: Leveling The Playing Field – U.S. Women’s National Team Players Association & Kiva Silver: Nespresso x Ali Forney Center – Nespresso USA & The Ali Forney Center
Best Social Impact Video Gold: Teen Tech Center “Mentor Moments” – Best Buy & The Best Buy Foundation Silver: Peace Builders – Microsoft, Minecraft Education, Games For Change & The Nobel Peace Center
Best Social Service Initiative Gold: Meals With Meaning – HelloFresh & Partners Silver: Lowe’s Hometowns – Lowe’s & Points of Light
Best Of The Best 2022 Iced Coffee Day – Dunkin’ & Dunkin’ Joy In Childhood Foundation
By Mary Riddle from Triple Pundit • Reposted: May 18, 2023
The global economic turndown is top-of-mind for business leaders. In the U.S., 59 percent of CEOs anticipate needing to pause or scale back their environmental, social and governance (ESG) efforts as a result, according to a recent survey by KPMG.
However, walking away from ESG right now could be disastrous for business, argues Geetanjli Dhanjal, senior director of business transformation for the consulting firm Yantra.
Scaling back environmental commitments would not only be detrimental to the planet, but it could also hurt the bottom line. “Companies should be committed to ESG and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) now more than ever,” Dhanjal told TriplePundit. Pausing these programs to bolster the budget could backfire by eroding consumer perceptions and damaging trust among employees, she warned.
Case in point: The retail sector proves ESG still matters
While certain sectors are more vulnerable to recession than others, retail is one of the highest-risk industries during economic downturns. Still, Dhanjal noted that many of her clients in retail, fashion and apparel are not turning away from ESG to save money. Rather, they are doubling down on their initiatives, from sourcing sustainable materials to ensuring fair pay for workers in their supply chains.
“These clients know that when in an economic downturn, one doesn’t just stop investing in ESG,” Dhanjal said. “ESG is a long-term strategy and roadmap. During economic downturns, businesses can invest in low-cost sustainability initiatives in order to maintain brand value and give back to the community.”
Further, many sustainability programs come with a cost savings. “When we enable green shipping methods, we reduce our costs, reduce our carbon footprint, and the customer benefits by paying less for shipping,” Dhanjal noted as an example.
Investor trust is in jeopardy: Stronger ESG programs and reporting can help
While robust ESG programs can help grow consumer affinity and employee engagement, businesses now face a new problem: waning investor trust.
In KPMG’s survey, 3 out of 4 institutional investors said they do not trust companies to meet their ESG and DEI commitments. Dhanjal believes their concerns are valid: Indeed, many companies are not meeting their commitments. But the trust gap also presents investment and growth opportunities for companies that are serious about implementing ESG, she said.
“There are many reasons for distrust,” Dhanjal told us. “There are no consistent reporting frameworks. Enterprises may have more standardized reporting methods than small businesses, but they need to report transparently with the proof that they’re doing what they’re saying.”
Businesses and international agencies have also recognized the need for companies to demonstrate proof of their progress through standardized frameworks for sustainability reporting. At the COP26 climate talks in 2021, the United Nations and participating governments established the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) in order to create a standard, global framework.
An evolving regulatory landscape calls for more ESG investment, not less
Dhanjal sees more changes on the horizon for corporate ESG programs. Regulatory changes will make compliance more challenging for companies that do not proactively measure, monitor and report on their sustainability efforts. Time is critical.
“Companies must invest in the tools they can use and the systems to provide them with the data they need to create their long-term strategy,” Dhanjal said. “Companies also need the right consultants and partners to guide their programs and initiatives. Your specific company doesn’t need to be experts in ESG, but you can invest in the consultants and tools to guide you.”
Investment in tools to measure sustainability data is increasingly critical for companies that hope to to stay ahead of ESG regulations. The United States and European Union are moving toward making sustainability reporting mandatory for large businesses. That includes climate risk reporting in the near term, with mandatory disclosure of nature-related risk not far off.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in particular is expected to release its long-awaited climate reporting rules this fall. But many businesses are not waiting for the final verdict. In fact, 70 percent of business leaders said they’ve already begun to disclose their climate-related data in alignment with expected changes from the SEC, according to 2023 polling from PwC and Workiva. Still, 85 percent of those respondents worry their teams don’t have the right technology to accurately track and report their sustainability data.
Keeping up with the times requires consistent investment, and pulling back could mean falling behind. “It is not easy to implement systems, transform supply chains and invest in proper tools,” Dhanjal said. “Things are changing rapidly while everyone is learning about sustainability at the same time, and that can be a challenge. Making sure we have appropriate tools and clear guidelines is a major challenge for ESG, but this is also our work [as ESG professionals]: to educate.”
Low uptake of digital technology for net zero reporting is putting companies at risk of significant consequences, a new study from Verdantix finds. By Lucy Buchholz from Sustainability Magazine • Reposted: May 18, 2023
A recent Verdantix report warns that companies face significant risks due to the limited adoption of digital technologies for net-zero applications. The survey of 350 net-zero leaders reveals that only 8% of firms believe they possess the necessary software tools to achieve net-zero goals effectively.
The inaugural Verdantix Global Corporate Survey 2023: Net Zero Budgets, Priorities and Tech Preferences report highlights that in-house digital capabilities are not enough to deliver net zero. The report identifies a lack of climate change expertise at the board level as the biggest obstacle to net-zero strategies.
This lack of expertise is particularly worrying for US firms, as the SEC’s proposed climate disclosure rule may demand clarity as to whether any board members possess expertise in climate change.
The increase in reporting
Over one-third of the world’s largest listed firms are now publicising net zero targets, a significant increase up from just one-fifth in December 2020. With incoming regulations set to impact economies globally, tens of thousands of firms are at risk of severe consequences, including legal penalties, reputational damage, financial risks, investor pressure, and employee dissatisfaction, if they fail to accurately report ESG and climate information.
In light of this, it is imperative for companies to promptly embrace digital technologies in order to provide accurate and high-calibre carbon data. This step is crucial to address the increasing demand for regulated climate disclosures and the amplified stakeholder pressure for transparency and performance.
“The low market penetration of net zero reporting tools highlights the urgent need for companies to adopt digital technologies to deliver reliable and high-quality carbon data,” said Ryan Skinner, Research Director at Verdantix. “With regulated climate disclosures and increasing stakeholder pressure for transparency and performance, it’s critical that firms prioritise decarbonisation and invest in net zero reporting tools.
“We anticipate a significant increase in spending on net zero digital tools over the next few years as companies seek to avoid penalties and demonstrate their commitment to sustainability. However, achieving success in decarbonisation will require consistent collaboration with other departments to drive change at the operational level.”
Climate change budgets are set to increase
According to Verdantix’s projections, the expenditure on carbon management software is projected to reach US1.4bn by 2027. The survey reveals that budgets for net zero and climate change initiatives are expected to experience substantial growth in 2023, with most companies anticipating double-digit spending increases. However, effectively achieving net zero goals will necessitate ongoing collaboration with other departments to drive decarbonization efforts at the operational level.
As advertising regulators, consumer watchdogs and even governments take a tougher stance, the risks of getting it wrong grow significantly; and the pressure is on communicators to up their game and back up their claims. By Tom Idle from sustainable brands.com • Reposted: May 18, 2023
It’s officially, and legally, getting harder for brands to greenwash. In Europe, the EU Parliament has just voted to ramp up regulation to deter companies from making ‘carbon-neutral’ claims that can so easily mislead consumers into believing the products they are buying are good for the environment. Proposed new anti-greenwashing rules – said to represent a “significant victory for consumers and the environment” – were voted by an overwhelming majority of 544 votes in favour, 18 against and 17 abstentions.
This paves the way for EU nations to adopt their own laws that will ban dubious claims and “strengthen the fight against greenwashing by banning practices that mislead consumers on the actual sustainability of products,” as put by EU Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders. The move will effectively ban the use of generic ‘green’ marketing claims such as ‘environmentally friendly,’ ‘natural,’ ‘biodegradable’ and ‘eco,’ if they are not supported by evidence. Brands won’t be able to suggest a whole product or service is ‘sustainable’ when only a part of it is, either. And only official sustainability certification schemes will be recognised when it comes to marketing claims.
Where carbon offsetting is used, companies will no longer be able to make ‘net-zero’ or ‘carbon-neutral’ claims, which have long been criticised by campaign groups for seriously misleading consumers. In fact, banning the use of offsets as the basis for carbon-neutral claims is already happening. In the UK, the Advertising Standards Authority has spent the last six months reviewing the landscape and is about to commence stricter enforcement procedures. Brands are set to be banned from declaring their products or services are carbon neutral using offsets, unless they can prove they are actually working. This has coincided with a renewed focus on the true impact of offsets. In January, a Guardianinvestigation found that 90 percent of the rainforest project-derived offsets generated byVerra, one of the world’s biggest offset certifiers, were “worthless.” Verra strongly disputed the findings, but it got the world talking — not only about the value of offsetting, but the validity of making carbon-neutral claims more generally.
Greenwash clampdowns are also underway in the UK investment scene. The fact that so-called ‘sustainable’ pension funds are still entrenched in oil and gas firm funding has prompted the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority to publish anti-greenwashing rulesdesigned to clean up the labelling of investment funds.
6 CRITICAL STEPS TO AVOID GREENWASHING
Sustainability stakes are high; so are stakeholder distrust and scrutiny. So, how can your brand win the trust, loyalty, and advocacy of conscious consumers while protecting your reputation from greenwashing? Join us as Simon Mainwaring outlines 6 critical steps to avoiding greenwashing, building brand love and enabling consumers to live the sustainable lifestyles they seek at Brand-Led Culture Change – May 22-24 in Minneapolis.
In the US, the Federal Trade Commission has updated its Green Guides for the first time in more than a decade, with a similar goal – to make it harder for companies to fall into the trap of making overblown sustainability claims about the products and materials they use.
Obviously, it will take time to completely stem the tide of greenwash; but incoming regulation and improved standards are having the desired impact, as evidenced by recent action taken to halt greenwash from the likes of airlines including Etihad andLufthansa. Yet, in the race to win more savvy consumers and meet increasingly ambitious sustainability goals, avoiding greenwash remains a challenge. Even companies forced to row back on their ambitions face huge scrutiny. Just look at the backlash footwear business Crocs received this week having announced plans to push back its net-zero target from 2030 to 2040 after recording a 45.5 percent increase in absolute emissions year-on-year after acquiring another company. The new goal might be “more credible and realistic;” but consumers expect more transparent and sophisticated communications from brands.
And that is proving to be a real struggle. New research suggests that while marketing professionals acknowledge the need to be braver when it comes to sustainability communications to avoid greenwashing, more than a third of them lack the capacity or knowledge to do so. At a time when more brands claim to have a sustainability-related story worth sharing (41 percent versus 25 percent in 2021), the survey suggests the situation is getting worse; capability gaps were cited by 35 percent of respondents, versus 20 percent in 2021. This is especially a concern given that more brands have sustainability as a KPI in their marketing functions – up from 26 percent in 2021 to 43 percent today: “It’s remarkable that even though 94 percent of marketers are willing to be brave to drive transformative change, organizations still behave in the same way,” says Ozlem Senturk, a senior partner with Kantar, which was behind the research.
This research echoes the key findings of a recent Chartered Institute of Marketing survey, which showed half of companies were reluctant to work on sustainability campaigns for fear of getting tripped up and accused of greenwash.
As with many sustainability challenges, solving the greenwash problem can benefit from a collaborative response. That’s certainly the view of the team behind Creatives for Climate— which has just launched a new platform designed to help communicators ‘reskill’ for sustainability communications. The website features a training program called Greenwash Watch — which provides a useful analysis of anti-greenwashing regulation and rulings and provides a framework from which to craft credible strategies that do not mislead consumers.
As advertising regulators enforce tougher sanctions, consumer watchdogs get more savvy and even governments double-down on their efforts, the era of unsubstantiated green claims from corporates is over. But as the risks of getting it wrong grow significantly, the pressure is on communicators to up their game and be sure to back up their claims.
Many workers consider environmental sustainability practices when deciding whether to stay, or accept a job with, a company. Image: ADP
Publicizing sustainability efforts can help a company with employee recruitment. Learn how sustainability is also affecting retention, as well as some best practices for HR leaders. By David Beck via tech target.com • Reposted: May 17, 2023
As the talent marketplace remains competitive, a company’s stance on social issues, such as the environment and climate change, can help attract talent or potentially drive it away. HR leaders must encourage companies to publicize their environmental, social and governance practices so they can hire the candidates they want and keep them as employees.
Over 70% of workers and those looking for work are drawn to environmentally sustainable employers, according to the 2021 study “Sustainability at a turning point” by the IBM Institute for Business Value. In addition, more than two-thirds of respondents said they are more likely to seek out and take jobs with environmentally and socially responsible organizations, and almost half surveyed would take a lower salary to do so, according to the IBM study. A company’s sustainability record can make a major difference in its talent search and employee retention.
Here’s more about environmental, social and governance initiatives, as well as some steps HR leaders can take to get the word out about their organization’s ESG efforts.
What is sustainability?
For the most part, when job candidates inquire about a company’s environmental sustainability record, they are referring to the organization’s environmentally related business practices, such as carbon footprint and energy use. Social issues, like diversity, equity and inclusion programs and labor practices, are also part of ESG.
Companies are facing more pressure from the government and from consumers to make their business practices more sustainable. Customers have increasingly expressed interest in supporting companies with what they view as positive ESG practices, with 55% of respondents saying company sustainability is “very or extremely important” when they’re making purchasing decisions, according to the IBM study.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission proposed a rule last year that would require public companies to share climate risk and greenhouse gas emissions, among other information, though the rule may be delayed until later this year.
Why companies should care about sustainability
Many company executives believe their recruitment will be positively affected by increased ESG reporting.
Fifty-two percent of respondents ranked talent attraction and retention as one of the most likely beneficial outcomes of enhanced ESG reporting, according to a 2022 Deloitte study, “Sustainability action report: Survey findings on ESG disclosure and preparedness.”
In addition, a positive sustainability record can potentially help with the perennial challenge of employee retention as well. ESG high performers also have high employee satisfaction, according to the 2023 study “Do ESG Efforts Create Value?” by Bain & Company and EcoVadis.
How HR can use sustainability to improve recruitment, retention
Job applicants may not be aware of a company’s ESG efforts, so HR leaders must take the lead in communicating them to the public.
HR staff can develop blog posts for the company website about the organization’s sustainability efforts. HR staff can also create initiatives within the company, like sponsoring a community composting program, and publicize those initiatives so potential job applicants will be aware of them.
If company leaders are weighing whether to take on sustainability initiatives, HR leaders can share the talent-related benefits of adapting an ESG-driven corporate culture.
HR leaders should also make sure company leaders are aware that partners’ sustainability practices are an emerging area of contention. Job candidates may object if the company works with vendors or other partners who are seen as negatively affecting the environment.
However, HR executives must also remain alert to the danger of greenwashing. Greenwashing is information that provides a misleading impression that a company’s processes, policies or investments are environmentally sound.
A company’s attempts to attract recruits can backfire if the public believes the company is practicing greenwashing. HR leaders must make sure HR staff or others working on recruitment efforts aren’t exaggerating the company’s sustainability practices in an attempt to win over job candidates.
Is it over for greenwashing? Photograph: Andre M Chang/Zuma Press/PA Image
Insiders welcome stricter rules in the UK and EU over the use of terms such as ‘carbon neutral’ in adverts, and claims concerned with offsetting. By Ellen Ormesher and Patrick Greenfield via The Guardian • Reposted: May 16, 2023
Across the advertising industry, agencies are wrestling with their role in greenwashing scandals and their support for clients driving the climate and nature crises.
Companies are to face stricter rules from regulators in London and Brussels over what they can tell consumers about their role in the climate crisis and the loss of nature. Terms such as “carbon neutral”, “nature positive” and those concerned with offsetting are to undergo greater scrutiny by organisations such as the Advertising Standards Authority in the UK. In order to take meaningful action, agencies must also reconsider their relationships with major polluters, industry insiders have said.
“The era of unspecific claims such as ‘environmentally friendly’ is over,” said Jonny White, senior business director at AMV BBDO, which works with companies including Diageo, Unilever and Bupa. “Misleading environmental claims are under the microscope from advertising regulators, consumer watchdogs and even governments. The risks of getting it wrong are huge, with brands being shamed publicly when they are guilty of misleading the public,” he said.
Creative members of advertising agencies are having to work closely with their legal teams when advising clients on their climate claims, insiders have said, with an increased risk of fines and advert bans in some countries.
In the UK, the Ad Net Zero programme was launched in 2020 in a bid to reduce the carbon impact of the advertising industry’s operations to net zero by 2030, but many agencies are developing in-house teams for sustainability-focused campaigns.
“In many client organisations, there is still a big gap between the marketing and sustainability teams. They have different, often competing objectives, and are accountable in very different ways,” said Ben Essen, global chief strategy officer at the global marketing agency Iris Worldwide, which works with firms such as Adidas, Starbucks and Samsung, and is also doing the campaign for Cop26.
Essen said there is an “inherent tension” between the need to engage audiences through “often hyperbolic stories” and the need for sustainability teams to deal in the substance.
On Thursday, the European parliament voted to ban claims of carbon neutrality that are based on offsetting. The EU environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevičius, said firms would face greater scrutiny about their claims with offsets, but stopped short of supporting a ban, given their potential to fund climate crisis mitigation.
“Climate-related claims have been shown to be particularly prone to being unclear and ambiguous, misleading the consumer. Claims like ‘climate neutral’, ‘carbon neutral’, ‘100% CO2 compensated’ and ‘net zero’ are very often based on offsetting. We need to set things straight for consumers and give them full information,” he said.
Blake Harrop, president of Wieden+Kennedy Amsterdam, which works with Airbnb, Meta and Nike, said that the greenwashing clampdown in the EU and UK would provide competitive opportunities for companies that had genuine environmental credentials. “For good brands with good intentions and responsible messaging, I expect there will be little change. But for companies that have oversimplified and overstated their sustainability claims, then life is about to get complicated,” he said.
“It’s an interesting time to work in the legal department of an advertising agency. We need to pay a lot of attention to the opportunities and risks generated by AI, government policies regarding media platforms like TikTok around the world, and of course greenwashing laws.
“If all brands can claim they’re green, then you remove the incentive to win consumers based on superior commitments to the environment. This will hopefully make being an environmentally responsible brand even better for business,” he said.
By Joel Makower, Co-founder & Chairman, Green Buzz, Reposted • May 15, 2023
Corporate communications on sustainability issues have long been a sore spot, as I’ve written about multiple times. The questions are fundamental: Talk or not talk about your company’s commitments and achievements? Speak out in an era of political pushback on environmental, social and governance issues or keep a low profile? Be accused of greenwashing or greenhushing?
That was the basis of our daylong GreenBiz Comms Summit back in February, which brought together communications, sustainability and legal professionals from inside large companies for a candid conversation about the challenges companies face when they communicate, internally or externally, about sustainability matters. Nearly 200 professionals participated in hands-on exercises, where small groups were asked to concoct messaging for several hypothetical companies, both B-to-B and B-to-C. It was, by all accounts, an engaging event.
We recently published a summary of what took place there, which I’m pleased to share, in particular the on-stage conversations as opposed to the more candid table-level work. The event was conducted under the Chatham House rule, meaning that no participants can be identified without permission.
Getting internal alignment
One session built on a column I wrote last August, about the “Bermuda Triangle” of sustainability messaging: communications, sustainability and corporate counsel. Individually, each has a slightly different interest when creating press releases and media pitches. In concert, they often undermine a company’s messaging. Among the suggestions from a panel of experts:
Bring the players together early and often. Imagine reaching the end of a cross-functional, collaborative working group with external stakeholder input — and legal wants to frame the message differently, a sustainability expert says the language is imprecise, and comms is at a loss for how to tell acompelling story. That confounding situation can be prevented by inviting key internal stakeholders to the table much earlier than may seem necessary for the project. Try day one.
Integrate the expertise from each department and speak their language. Understand the subject matter and pain points of other stakeholders, and be hyper-transparent. Long before soliciting sign-off from a subject matter expert, check and double-check the accuracy of a communication. Have resources and questions ready on an ongoing basis; don’t just spring a problem on someone during a meeting.
Have playbooks, guides and protocols ready. To disseminate an effective message, have all of your analysis and facts in order and be able to stand behind them in case there is a challenge. Prepare messaging playbooks, guides and protocols for your teammates to help them understand the whole picture involved in a messaging challenge.
Avoiding greenwash
The practice of making exaggerated or unverifiable claims about environmental benefits is widely frowned upon, butwithout a single definition for greenwashing, companies all too easily make missteps. Some takeaways:
Greenwashing charges are up. Although it’s probably impossible to quantify how much greenwashing exists, regulatory challenges related to it have risen over the past several years. These include actions by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and U.S. state attorneys general, private litigation and challenges by the Better Business Bureau.
Greenwashing is in the eye of the accuser. The FTC considers greenwashing through the eyes of the “reasonable consumer,” which leaves lots of room for interpretation. Accusations of greenwashing tend to focus on one of two things: either the types of words or even the colors used to describe a product or brand, such as lawsuits charging that Keurig falsely called its coffee pods recyclable, or the tactics used to achieve a goal, such asBloombergcalling out companies for using renewable energy credits toward their net-zero targets. Watchdog groups may target an industry leader, for example, that fumbles in efforts to decarbonize its supply chain, yet they leave alone competitors who haven’t even announced a similar initiative.
Greenwashing is ‘more sloppy than sinister’. Cases of a nefarious business setting out to mislead the public are relatively few and far between. More often, greenwashing charges tend to target companies fumbling their way through their sustainability communications. Maybe someone without the right expertise led a public relations or ad campaign or a communication gap arose from failing to speak to the right stakeholders or providing inadequate (or inaccurate) proof points.
Dealing with haters and critics
Of course, even the best-laid communications plan can attract criticism — sometimes more than if a company had said nothing at all. “The rise of anti-ESG rhetoric” was a top concern among Comms Summit attendees, according to a pre-event survey.
Adversaries who slur business leadership as “woke” for addressing the world’s urgent social and environmental challenges are true “haters,” but not every critic is a hater. Here are the three types of pushback and what to learn from them:
Haters. Haters are diametrically opposed to your existence. For instance, they may hate you as a corporation because they believe capitalism shouldn’t exist. In general, don’t listen to haters — although sometimes they offer important information about what you’re getting wrong.
Critics. Critics want you to be your best self, even if there’s no business case now for what they demand that you do. They won’t stop until you do what they say, but they tend to be right over time. Greenpeace, for example, has “been right” years ahead of the curve about climate change, biodiversity and plastics. Instead, consider critics your early warning system of what will go mainstream next.
Critical friends. Critical friends push you to do better, telling you what you’re doing isn’t good enough, calling you out on greenwash or on not reaching targets or claims. But don’t confuse critical friends for haters.
That’s a taste. There’s more insight and inspiration in this free, downloadable report. Feel free to share it with your internal and external comms partners.
A refinery in the US owned by ExxonMobil, one of the companies invested in by supposedly ‘green’ funds. Photograph: Barry Lewis/In Pictures/Getty Images
Warning comes as UK watchdog set to tighten rules for asset managers given short-term targets. By Bewtasy Reed, Editor from the Guardian.com • Reposted: May 15, 2023
People investing their pensions in funds that claim green credentials are being warned they may actually be backing the world’s largest oil and gas companies.
It also found that 25 members of the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative had invested in those companies and some had increased their holdings in 2022. NZAM said its international initiative started two years ago and investors needed time to change their strategies.
The warning comes as the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority prepares to publish anti-greenwashing rules that are intended to clean up how investment funds are labelled.
Just under 50% of all UK employees now pay into employer schemes or private pensions where they can make a choice about how their money is invested – a huge rise since 2012 when employers became legally obliged to automatically enrol workers in a workplace scheme. Most people with a private pension or a stocks and shares ISA make a choice as to how their money is invested and many emphasise sustainability.
The financial industry has reacted by creating funds badged as sustainable, climate, carbon, transition or ESG – short for environmental, social and governance.
“What we found is that these funds, despite their names, can often include sometimes large positions in fossil fuel companies,” said Maeve O’Connor, one of the report’s authors, and an analyst at the Carbon Tracker Initiative. “For retail investors that could be seen to be misleading. If I’m investing in a green fund, do I want my investment to be going to ExxonMobil? Probably not.”
According to the report, BlackRock’s ACS Climate Transition World Equity Fund says it invests in companies “well-positioned to maximise the opportunities and minimise the potential risks associated with a transition to a low-carbon economy” – but it has $219m in 10 of the 15 leading oil and gas companies.
O’Connor said asset managers were usually given performance targets over short periods, which might influence their thinking. She said: “They could be assessed over two to five years and that timescale doesn’t really fit with the realities of the energy transition.”
Coalitions such as UK Divest and Share Action campaign for pension funds to be invested sustainably. Robert Noyes, an energy economist at Platform London, part of UK Divest, said that with about £2tn invested in pensions, it was the largest source of investment in the UK and people should ask their pension providers for information.
“People should ask three questions,” he said. “Does it invest in the problem, like a company that spends money on fossil fuels? Does it invest in things that drive changes in the real economy that lead environmental programmes? So, for example, it’s hard to see how investing in Microsoft is driving a change towards net zero.
“And thirdly, is it vocal about the need for political action?”
A spokesperson for NZAM said that while its partners “share Carbon Tracker’s perspective that the oil and gas industry must very rapidly decarbonise to meet the urgency of the climate crisis, the Net Zero Asset Managers’ commitment statement does not require signatories to choose equity holdings to meet a particular climate target”. It added: “Passive investors cannot divest from the oil and gas sector without significantly changing their investment strategy.”
NZAM expected those funds with passive portfolios to engage in dialogue with companies, proxy voting and policy advocacy to align their holdings with the 1.5C commitment. Asset managers depended on governments to follow through their own commitments under the Paris agreement, the spokesperson added.
By Jordan Wollman via Politico • Reposted; May 12, 2023
SURVEY SAYS — The data is pretty clear-cut on who brands should target for sustainability-related marketing campaigns: It’s younger urban women.
A new predictive model from BlueLabs Analytics shared first with POLITICO scores American adults on their likelihood of making purchasing choices based on sustainability.
Perhaps the topline takeaway isn’t too surprising. But BlueLabs, a Washington-based data science service, found some other interesting data points that could be useful for brands looking to figure out who might be persuadable.
For one, the gaps based on gender, age and location were stark. Women were 19 percent more likely than men to say they’d made purchases based on sustainability, people aged 18 to 29 were 23 percent more likely to be sustainability consumers and people living in urban areas were 25 percent more likely.
White people were the racial demographic least likely to be sustainability consumers, with Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders the most likely.
A “sustainability consumer” is described as someone who responded to BlueLabs’ February survey of 1,800 American adults and said that in the last two weeks they had purchased a product or service because it was the environmentally friendly choice. BlueLabs then applied a model based on the survey to the country’s nearly 200 million adults to identify those most likely to make purchasing decisions on that basis.
The model showed that people in communities of color were more eager to make purchasing decisions based on sustainability compared with white people, said Meagan Knowlton, director of sustainability practice at BlueLabs. Knowlton clarified that the model doesn’t address whether a person actually made the environmentally friendly choice, but rather focuses on the individual’s perception of whether they actively made a sustainable purchase.
“It was the communities of color that were really exciting to us,” Knowlton said. “We think that this is an area that brands should really move forward exploring when designing or advertising products.”
The model identified 38 million Americans who rank within the top 20 percent of sustainability consumer scores — and in general, they’re more easily reached by digital and social media than cable TV or radio. Of those, 77 percent are women, with 37 percent being single women. About one-fifth are people aged 50 to 64.
BlueLabs conducted the research and compiled the report, and no brands paid for it, Knowlton said.
The European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive won’t just affect local companies, it will transform sustainability reporting around the globe. By Matt Orsagh from green biz.com • Reposted: May 8, 2023
Europe has long been the trendsetter in policy and regulation around environmental, social and governance issues. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is the latest in a line of European Union policies intended to nudge economic and investment activity towards more sustainable outcomes.
The CSRD replaced the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD), which only covered the disclosure requirements for about 11,000 EU companies. In contrast, the CSRD will require nearly 50,000 companies to enhance their reporting around sustainability. This number includes about 10,000 companies outside the EU, and it doesn’t just include the largest of the large companies.
The CSRD was adopted by the EU Council in November. EU companies already subject to the NFRD will have to begin compliance with the CSRD, which means reporting in 2024. Those for whom this reporting will be new, including companies outside the EU, have until 2025 to begin complying.
The NFRD was never mandatory. As a result, investors, regulators and civil society groups were often frustrated with the lack of sustainability-related information from companies and the lack of comparability of that data. The European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) recently released an implementation appraisal on the NFRD that highlighted many shortcomings of the NFRD:
71 percent of respondents believed the non-financial information contained in the NFRD reports was deficient in terms of comparability
82 percent believed that CSRD’s requirements for companies to use a common standard would address identified issues
The purpose of the CSRD is to provide investors and businesses with more information about the sustainability of companies operating in the EU, that is timely, consistent and comparable.
In essence, the CSRD is becoming the de facto sustainability disclosure regulation for large global companies; as companies with significant business in Europe will have to adhere to the rules Europe sets down.
The rules will cover both public and private business that satisfy two of the following criteria:
Have more than 250 employees
Have net turnover of more than $44.51 million
Have a balance sheet of more than $22.25 million
Compliance with CSRD isn’t that far away. Companies that meet the reporting requirements will have to submit their first report of aligning with CSRD by Jan. 1, 2025. Smaller and medium-sized entities (SMEs) won’t have to comply with the rules until January 2026.
Companies outside of Europe that do business in the EU will also be covered by the new rules — companies that generate total revenue of $167 million in the EU and have at least one branch or subsidiary in the EU with more than $44.51 million in net revenue will be required to comply with the new disclosure requirements.
In essence, the CSRD is becoming the de facto sustainability disclosure regulation for large global companies; as companies with significant business in Europe will have to adhere to the rules Europe sets down. The hope of European regulators — and sustainability-minded professionals around the world — is that this higher disclosure bar will export European best practices in disclosure globally. As large companies in global markets are forced to raise their standards, these disclosure standards will cause other companies in those markets to follow the more stringent disclosure standards set by the EU in order to keep up with best practices.
What is covered?
In addition to information already required by the NFRD, companies that comply with the CSRD will have to publish information related to:
Environmental protections
Greenhouse gas emissions targets
Social responsibility and treatment of employees
Respect for human rights
Anti-corruption and bribery
Diversity on company boards
Double materiality
How sustainability risks might affect performance
The company’s impact on society and the environment
Materiality assessments
Forward-looking ESG targets and progress
Disclosures on intangible capitals (social, human, intellectual)
Due diligence processes in relation to sustainability
Potential adverse impacts due to sustainability issues
Companies will be required to set annual ESG targets and report their process hitting these targets, including transition plans (if any).
The CSRD will require third-party assurances, including integration into the auditor’s report, a requirement not covered by the NFRD. This information will be required to be presented in a company’s annual financial reports, not in a separate sustainability report. Assurances can at first be “limited” but must reach the threshold of “reasonable” assurances by 2028. For those of you out there who are not accountants (good for you), reasonable assurances amount to an auditor affirming that the information reported is materially correct, while limited assurances simply state that the auditor is not aware of any material modifications that need to be made.
The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) is drafting the upcoming EU Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) that the CSRD will adopt as its reporting standard. The European Commission is due to adopt the initial ESRS standards in mid-2023.
Start now. Get buy-in from everyone
If all of this sounds like a lot of work, you are right. If all of this sounds like a lot of work and a little bit intimidating if you are not a European company used to European regulation, accounting and disclosure standards, you are right again. Companies outside the EU that will be subject to CSRD reporting have realized the daunting task ahead of them. Those ahead of the curve have already started the process of adjustment to the CSRD landscape.
Chris Librie, senior director of ESG at Applied Materials, acknowledged that CSRD will require companies outside the EU to change their perspective on sustainability. “CSRD is pretty comprehensive,” Librie said. “It involves double materiality, which may bring into scope things that we may not have considered. For example, we haven’t traditionally looked at biodiversity, but that may come up.”
Most companies will need to expand their ability to measure and manage sustainability issues in their own operations; as well down their supply chains to comply with CSRD disclosure rules.
“Our ESG team is fairly small,” Librie said, “so we will be reaching to other divisions such as human resources, environmental health and safety and others, as well as our outside auditors and consultants. The number of potential topics are so many that we are taking a team approach to develop a structured approach to the CSRD process.”
The race is on to train financial professionals for the transition. Several organizations are working with companies to help them prepare for the transition. One of these is Accounting for Sustainability (A4S). A4S was established by King Charles III in 2004, with the aim of working with chief financial officers and other financial leaders to drive a shift towards more sustainable business models. A4S routinely hosts workshops to share best practices and build knowledge of financial professionals to bring them up to speed.
The number of potential topics are so many that we are taking a team approach to develop a structured approach to the CSRD process.
Brad Sparks, executive director of A4S Foundation U.S., emphasized how A4S is seeing significant interest from finance and accounting professionals that A4S works with around CSRD.
“CSRD has become part of the reporting workshops that we host,” Sparks said. “We also started a new controllers forum and had a meeting earlier this year where we brought in someone from EFRAG to discuss the emerging ESRS standards. The forum is designed for chief accounting officers, controllers and ESG controllers to exchange insights, challenges and responses to sustainability issues among peers. Our initial meeting had a focus on double materiality — a topic that is new to many in the finance and accounting community.”
Part of the learning curve for those outside the EU will be navigating the differences in accounting standards, investor expectations and legal systems that underpin EU regulation and norms outside the EU. “Finance and accounting professionals in the United States are seeking additional guidance to help with the emerging standards,” Sparks said. “In general, global accounting standards are typically principles-based, while U.S. accounting (GAAP) is typically rules-based. This is similar with the ESRS following a more principles-based approach, which some in the U.S. view as more challenging to implement.”
Although adjusting to a CSRD world will take time and resources, in the end, the goal is to provide investors, policymakers, civil society and companies themselves with better information. It may move sustainability reporting more to the mainstream, which has both positive and negative implications.
What companies and investors can do to prepare
Preparing for CSRD reporting will be a step change in managing and measuring sustainability data for many companies outside the EU. Companies that need to report under the CSRD standard will need to start now if they haven’t already: January 2025 isn’t that far away. There are steps companies can take to get ready. Here are just a few places to start:
Perform a gap analysis to determine current holes in sustainability measurement and management system.
Review EFRAG exposure draft ESRS rules.
Determine who within an organization will lead the CSRD process and determine what other people within an organization will be needed in the CSRD process.
Determine what outside resources such as accountants and consultants will be needed to undertake CSRD compliance reporting.
Coordinate with others within your industry to share best practices.
“I see this possibly driving companies toward more integrated reporting,” Librie said. “I think ultimately we will see more 10-Ks and sustainability reports that merge, so we will have a one-stop shop for all this information. That is a positive but a potential negative is that in a 10-K type document, you can’t be as verbose. You have to be more economical about telling your story, and that might make ESG engagement more challenging.”
“Companies are seeking to understand how they can comply with reporting requirements in an effective, efficient and impactful manner,” Sparks said. “They want to understand what best practices are and are looking for more guidance.” Sparks noted that A4S plans to hold more workshops around CSRD in the future, as it sees increasing demand from the CFOs and financial professionals they meet with.
By Nadine Sterley, Chief Sustainability Officer, GEA and Judith Wiese, Chief People and Sustainability Officer and Member of the Managing Board, Siemens from the World Economic Forum • Reposted: May 3, 2023
Corporate sustainability has become a crucial strategic imperative.
Sustainability leaders are pivotal in shaping organizational change.
Two leaders share their thoughts on how this can be achieved.
The need for critical action to achieve climate and nature goals has elevated the role of the Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO). The private sector will play a key role in multistakeholder partnerships to actualize the impact on climate and nature.
However, this cannot be achieved without a human-centred approach, making the Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) role also essential for sustainability transformation.
Within the private sector, CSOs and CHROs will shape fundamental strategies for organizational change to catalyze sustainable habits in organizations and individuals.
“Sustainability, HR and organizational change can influence companies and their value chains”
Nadine Sterley, Chief Sustainability Officer, GEA Group
As the world is confronted with the consequences of the climate crisis and other environmental challenges, acting sustainably is becoming increasingly essential in companies. This is true both from a strategic point of view as well as with regard to innovations and successful recruiting. At the same time, the breadth of sustainability topics is increasing year-on-year.
The growing importance for companies to act sustainably and report on their sustainability performance has elevated the role of the Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO). Sustainability has evolved from being a niche function to a strategic one. CSOs are expected to take a key role in leading their organizations towards sustainable business practices. At GEA, the CSO role belongs to the inner circle of the company’s decision-making. It plays a crucial role in helping its executives and the entire workforce to easier understand, reasonably measure and adequately report on sustainability impacts, risks and opportunities.
As sustainability has fundamental strategic importance, GEA has put the topic at the heart of its strategic approach. In fact, sustainability is the core theme in GEA’s corporate purpose, “Engineering for a better world”, from which the company’s vision is derived: “We safeguard future generations by providing sustainable solutions for the nutrition and pharmaceutical industries.”
Moreover, sustainability has its own pillar within GEA’s Mission 26 corporate strategy and underpins the other six key levers. Taken together, they form the roadmap to ensure GEA achieves its targets. Within this framework, the CSO works strategically to ensure sustainability is integrated into all business activities and the entire company. This requires adept networking and advocacy skills and the ability to connect the dots within and outside the organization to drive sustainability transformation.
However, as important as they are, neither strategy, nor the organization or the products on their own are enough to make the key difference. What matters most to achieving real transformational change and becoming a truly sustainable company is the mindset, behaviour and commitment of a company’s employees. To help their organization succeed, employees need to be engaged, empowered, and assume a key role in the transformation. And this is where the human resources function must become part of the game. It can create a supportive environment that fosters a sustainable mindset and behaviour. It also plays a critical role in hiring and helping ensure new employees understand and embrace company values.
GEA is taking this aspect very seriously. Of GEA’s five values, the first one is: “Responsibility: We care for people and planet.” Internally and externally, our CEO, Stefan Klebert, has made it his personal mission to promote this value, thus setting the tone for all employees.
The clarity and importance placed on caring for people and planet, reinforced by GEA’s corporate purpose: “Engineering for a better world”, serve as a promise to current and future employees. This has already had a positive impact on our goal to become “Employer of Choice” in our industry. Likewise, our values and purpose set a clear expectation toward all employees and, consequently, any people-related decisions.
In addition to requesting a driving mindset towards sustainability from all employees, GEA is significantly investing in the competency development of its business leaders. Just recently, the top 160 leaders of the company, went through a comprehensive programme with a renowned business school that was strongly focused on identifying new ways of leveraging sustainability as a source for competitive advantage.
Building on that, the company’s leadership teams are now expected to develop their own strategies to create additional value for their customers by offering products and solutions that allow a reduction of energy, water, or waste. To encourage even more innovation in these areas, we set up cross-function and cross-divisional sustainability-focused hackathons to spark creativity.
As of 2023, a significant proportion of GEA’s senior leaders will participate in a variable compensation plan which is linked to GEA achieving its sustainability-related targets. For example, the reduction of CO2 emissions in GEA’s own plants and along entire supply chains will lead to higher compensation, as will the development of more efficient products that support customers in achieving their sustainability targets.
With the support of our employees, GEA is not only driving its own sustainability transformation but also the transformation of the many industries it supports through engineering excellence.
“Being Chief People and Sustainability Officer is a game changing superpower”
Judith Wiese, Chief People and Sustainability Officer and Member of the Managing Board, Siemens
The challenges to human (co-)existence on the planet from resource depletion, climate change, and unsustainable practices of the industrial age are undeniable. In the corporate world, the broader attention needed to handle sustainability issues is generally allocated to the role of the Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO). There are, however, no universal standards for what this function does or how much authority it has to be effective. At Siemens, the CSO role has been a board-level position since 2008, underscoring the importance of sustainability as a building block of our DNA and setting a strong foundation to build on. And that’s what we do, every day.
As Chief People and Sustainability Officer (CPSO) at Siemens, I have the unique opportunity to wear two hats: one for ensuring the well-being of our people and nurturing our company culture, and one for advancing sustainable practices in our own operations and all aspects of our business – multiplying the impact for our customers and communities. For me, this is a superpower. It joins two powerful elements that run horizontally across all our businesses: people and sustainability – both necessary if solutions are to be found for solving the most critical issues of our time. Add in the power of technology that Siemens brings as a technology company, and you have an unstoppable combination that actively supports the mindset shift needed for achieving a more sustainable world.
At Siemens, our push for sustainable business practices is encompassed in our 360-degree framework, containing six fields of action: Decarbonization, Ethics, Governance, Resource Efficiency, Equity, and Employability or DEGREE. Our DEGREE framework is, among other things, a commitment to ethical standards based on trust and respect for human rights in the supply chain.
DEGREE allows a holistic view of sustainability that puts people topics like employability and equity, as well as environmental and societal impact topics, in focus. We encourage continuous learning and are committed to re- and upskilling, especially green skills. In the last fiscal year, we invested €280 million in professional training and continued education to transform our workforce into sustainability ambassadors. Our highly popular Base Camp for Sustainability offers an introduction to DEGREE and 66,000 participants have completed the course already in FY23.
We value the E for Equity that helps us integrate and promote diversity, equity, and inclusion into the fabric of our company. It helps us create a workforce that reflects our customer landscape and brings a fresh perspective to the way we think about creating solutions. The intersection of people’s interests with our company values creates a sense of belonging and engagement that we both admire and appreciate.
Combining the responsibilities for sustainability and people operations allows social aspects to be complemented by proficiency in the environmental and corporate governance spheres. At Siemens, with sustainability at the core of our processes, we need relevant skillsets across our business units and corporate functions. This allows sustainable approaches to be developed in an ecosystem manner, observing the cross-functional and business governance standards required to comply with new EU Taxonomy regulations and develop non-financial reporting and accounting guidelines.
To effect change, a cultural and organizational transformation and mindset shift are necessary. The convergence of people and sustainability can be a useful tool to speed up the momentum of much-needed change in all aspects of our existence. Indeed, for a company like Siemens – undergoing the transformation from industry to global technology leader – sustainability is a tremendous opportunity. Crucially, this applies both to our own operations and to our portfolio. We have increased our CO2 reduction target from 50% to 90% by 2030, compared to 2019, and will invest €650 million in decarbonizing our activities by 2030. But our products and solutions can also help our customers with their sustainability challenges – ~150 Mio tons of emissions were avoided by customers in FY22 alone.
Those companies that recognize the power of this combination will be well positioned to be drivers of innovation and growth, increase employee engagement, and mitigate the challenges associated with rapid transformation.
As a company at the intersection of the real and digital worlds, we at Siemens believe that technology is a key driver of sustainability. Embracing a holistic view that goes beyond environmental topics, we anchor sustainability firmly in all our business and operations. We are confident that leveraging the superpower combination of technology, people and sustainability can make a difference and transform the lives of billions.
By Jeff Bradfor, PR pro, president of Dalton Agency’s Nashville office, author of “The Joy of Propaganda: The How and Why of Public Relations and Marketing.” via Forbes • Reposted: May 3, 2023
Today, consumers demand that companies not only offer quality products and services but also behave ethically in their marketing practices. Ethical behavior is a critical aspect of building long-term relationships with consumers.
In this article, I will list what I believe are the fundamental, perennial philosophical values that guide ethical marketing—values that have guided the work of our PR agency for the past 23 years—and describe how brands have implemented them in their strategies.
Honesty
Honesty means telling the truth, being transparent and avoiding deception. In the past, many companies have used deceptive tactics in their marketing practices to gain a competitive advantage. However, with the rise of social media and other digital channels, such tactics are easily exposed and can damage a brand’s reputation.
An example of deception is Volkswagen’s diesel emissions scandal. The company admitted to using software that could detect when its cars were being tested for emissions and then adjust the performance to pass the test. However, in real-world driving conditions, the cars emitted up to 40 times the legal limit of nitrogen oxide. The company faced massive backlash, with many consumers feeling betrayed and questioning the brand’s ethics.
On the positive side, Tylenoldramatically demonstrated how to honestly and openly respond to a crisis during the infamous Tylenol tampering incident in 1982, in which several people died after taking Tylenol laced with potassium cyanide. The company quickly and completely shared information about the incident and took a huge financial hit by removing and destroying all products on the market at the time. Not only did Tylenol’s honesty save lives, but it also saved the company’s reputation. Within a year of the incident, sales of Tylenol had rebounded to pre-incident levels—and the company was widely praised for its ethical response to a tragedy that cost it over $100 million.
Respect For Individual Rights
This includes respecting privacy, data protection and avoiding discrimination. Consumers have the right to control their personal data and decide how it is used by companies. Brands must ensure they are transparent about their data collection and usage practices and obtain explicit consent from consumers.
A recent example of this is the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union. Brands that prioritize individual rights and respect consumer privacy are more likely to build trust and loyalty with consumers.
Respect For Human Dignity
Brands must recognize the inherent worth and value of each person and treat them accordingly. In marketing, respect for human dignity means avoiding tactics that exploit or manipulate consumers, such as intentional deception.
For instance, while influencer marketing can be an effective way for businesses to reach new audiences, some influencers have been criticized for promoting products that they do not actually use or endorse, or for promoting products that may be harmful or unethical. This lack of authenticity and transparency can be seen as a violation of respect for human dignity.
Responsibility
Marketers have a responsibility to ensure that their marketing efforts do not harm people or society. They should also be responsible for ensuring that their products or services are safe and reliable.
For example, in 2019, a well-known vaping brand was criticized for its marketing practices, which contributed to the rise of teenage vaping. The company had used colorful packaging and social media influencers to target young people, despite knowing that its products were highly addictive and harmful. The company’s marketing practices had undermined the common good and contributed to a public health crisis.
Another example of irresponsibility is the issue of greenwashing, the practice of making false or misleading claims about the environmental benefits of a product or service. It has become a significant problem, as consumers are becoming more aware of environmental issues and are looking for sustainable products. Companies are being urged to be more transparent about their environmental practices and ensure that their marketing efforts are responsible.
Conclusion
Ethical marketing is critical for building trust and long-term relationships with consumers. Brands that prioritize honesty, responsibility and respect for individual rights and human dignity will not only meet consumer expectations but also set themselves apart from their competitors. By implementing these values in their marketing strategies, brands can create a positive impact on society while also driving business success.
Tourists try to stay dry in a flooded St Mark’s Square in Venice, Italy, in 2018. Flooding in the region has only intensified in recent years. Image credit: Jonathan Ford/Unsplash
By Joyce Coffee from Triplepundit.com • Reposted: May 2, 2023
It has become de rigueur for companies eager to reduce their climate-related disaster risks to sign up with groups that focus on assisting corporate clients with their climate change challenges.
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), for one, helps the private sector set science-based emissions reduction targets. It’s a partnership between CDP, the United Nations Global Compact, the World Resources Institute and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). Another, the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures, offers guidelines for how companies can report their exposure to physical climate-related risks, among other things.
The assistance these groups provide is timely. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which protects investors and regulates publicly-held companies’ disclosures, is considering rules to require public companies to provide climate risk-related financial data. And most (if not all) U.N. agencies and other international climate change-related programs recognize the need to address disaster risks and other forms of climate risk worldwide.
But do these groups follow climate science? That question arose last month when a distinguished engineer openly questioned climate science in a presentation to the U.N. Disaster Risk Reduction Private Sector Alliance for Disaster Resilient Societies (ARISE) and its growing membership of U.S. corporate leaders. “We don’t know if climate change is happening now, and we don’t know if it will happen in the future,” he contended.
Peruse any legitimate climate source, and it’s nigh impossible to question climate science, whether our planet is warming and the effects of greenhouse gas emissions. The U.N. has a growing set of resources, among them:
Race to Resilience, a global campaign that convenes non-government actors to build climate resilience in vulnerable communities.
U.N. Environment Program (UNEP) online course on Nature-based Solutions for Disaster and Climate Resilience, which has extended nature-based solutions certificates to more than 60,000 leaders worldwide.
Annual agreements from the U.N. Conference of the Parties, of which the Paris Climate Agreement is the best known
As the U.N. plainly asserts: “It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred.”
ARISE, whose U.S. arm I co-chair, follows the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. The latest documents of the Framework — the 2015 U.N.-adopted document that calls for assessing and reporting progress on disaster-reduction plans — emphasize that disaster risks “are growing at an unprecedented rate globally, inflicting damage across sectors and vital systems for human societies and economies.”
It also maintains: “We are living outside the boundaries of what our planet can sustain, to the detriment of future generations. Radical shifts are needed to change course toward a more sustainable and risk-informed pathway, as the world is facing a projected 40 percent increase in disasters during the lifetime of the Sendai Framework to 2030.”
The Framework cites climate change on over half of its 140 pages, and the No. 1 commitment of the U.N. Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience is to take a risk-informed approach.
We must also heed another distinguished engineer, U.N. Secretary General António Guterres, who earned a degree in the field from the Instituto Superior Técnico in Portugal back in 1949. “Greenhouse gas emissions keep growing, global temperatures keep rising, and our planet is fast approaching tipping points that will make climate chaos irreversible,” he told CNBC last year. “We are on a highway to climate hell with our foot still on the accelerator.”
And we must promote companies looking to the SBTi and others for assistance in mitigating disaster risks. Onward with this important work!
Joyce Coffee, LEED AP, is founder and President of Climate Resilience Consulting. She is an accomplished organizational strategist and visionary leader with over 25 years of domestic and international experience in the corporate, government and non-profit sectors implementing resilience and sustainability strategies, management systems, performance measurement, partnerships, benchmarking and reporting.
While the volatility of economic change around us can be distracting, one thing remains clear: A new generation of expectations is shifting business for good.By Del Hudson from Sustainable Brands • Reposted: April 30, 2023
Government regulators are playing a key role in shaping how we address climate change; however, influential businesses have a chance to ensure these requirements speak to the metrics that make a true impact. Policy is a catalytic vehicle for change. As a business community, we should be embracing it as a means to address the existential threat of the climate crisis — to not do so would be irresponsible and dangerous. Recognizing the tension in the system among trade organizations, policymakers and corporations doesn’t mean it can’t be done right. For businesses and brands, creating incentives around impact reductionthat tie clearly to company goals is a key opportunity for transformative action.
It’s no secret that multiple industries have reaped the rewards of a broken economic model that relies on extractive and exploitative practices that continue to harm people and the planet. Consumer goods is one of those industries; and responsible leaders recognize it is time for a new system — one that transforms design and consumption and imagines a new way of doing profitable business. Over two-thirds of US consumers are willing to pay more for sustainable products. Globally, that number is just over a third — though that number rises to 39 percent for Gen Z and 42 percent for millennials. Capital markets will reward those that are de-risking their supply chains; and employees want to work where purpose and responsibility matters.
The argument that without perfect data we can’t do this work ignores the reality that science is always evolving. We must move forward with urgency, using the significant directional data that already exist and show where the key issues and intervention opportunities lie. Taking accountability for the full product lifecycle and impacts up and down the value chain is the only way to achieve meaningful ESG performance. It’s not about marketing single environmental or social attributes of a product. It’s not just reducing impact in owned operations while ignoring the manufacturing impact or material inputs of the end product. It’s believing that tomorrow’s customers will want (and deserve) something different than they get today.
This is hard, complex work; it won’t be completed in my lifetime. But we must move rapidly to accurately understand impact and take action with urgency. And we must be ready to learn and change as we know more. The tools to begin this work already exist. Smart businesses already see their futures. And while the volatility of economic change around us can be distracting, one thing remains clear: A new generation of expectations is shifting business for good.
By David Herpers, Forbes Councils Member via forbes.com • Reposted: April 29, 2023
As Generation Z begins to harness its buying power and make significant financial decisions, competition for its attention grows. For companies hoping to capture this generation’s business, it’s important to understand the way they view their finances and how they engage with a brand. While Gen Z’s relationship with money and brands is similar to that of its older siblings, millennials, it’s certainly not the same. Let’s look at how Gen Z approaches finances and consumer brands.
Money Habits
As with the members of any younger generation, we tend to expect Gen Z to have irresponsible spending habits and not to be the biggest savers. Studies show this isn’t the case.
Gen Z tends to spend less and save more than the other generations, contributing an average of $867 in savings per month, almost doubling what the average American saves each month ($462). One may find themselves asking, is Gen Z more fiscally responsible than the rest of us?
The answer is yes and no. One main factor leading to the high monthly average of savings is many Gen Zers still live at home. According to a 2022 study by Credit Karma, Gen Z is setting records for the number of people living with their parents following high school education. With costs of living at an all-time high, most Gen Zers are making the decision to stay home in the best interest of their short- and long-term financial security.
That said, there’s still a large portion of Gen Z that chooses to spend over saving. However, those that fall into the spending category are still taking a cautious approach. Over 68% of Gen Zers use a budgeting tool of some sort to manage their finances. Of those surveyed, 43% say they prefer the old-fashioned pen-and-paper method, while 38%, respectively, say they use online budgeting tools.
Brand Enthusiasm
Gen Zers’ cautious nature isn’t exclusive to their housing and higher costs. It extends to their relationships with brands as well. When looking at the relationship between Gen Z and brands, a recent IBM study measured brand loyalty (repeated purchases) and brand enthusiasm (active engagement between brands and customers).
According to the IBM study, Gen Z is more likely to display brand enthusiasm over brand loyalty. Known as the “generation of researchers,” this is likely due to Gen Z’s habit of turning to online platforms for reviews before making even small purchases.
Rather than committing to a brand they are familiar with, Gen Zers will evaluate all options, taking into consideration customer and influencer reviews, social media presence and value alignment. When they find a brand that checks all their boxes, they are eager to share and engage with it. But keep in mind, should the brand harm the relationship in some way, Gen Zers quickly move to purchase from a competitor.
An advantage of appealing to brand enthusiasm, as noted by IBM, is that it creates opportunities to gain insight into customers’ attitudes and purchasing habits in relation to a brand. Companies get to have conversations with customers about what they want rather than guessing. And we already have insight into what Gen Z customers crave.
Authenticity
While millennials may stray away from content that’s been highly edited and airbrushed and that poses perfect “promises,” Gen Z has taken it to the next level—by adeptly recognizing the differences between real and fake online content. As the first generation born into social media and becoming more tech-savvy than generations so far, Gen Z is quick to identify fantasy versus reality. According to IBM’s study of Gen Z’s relationships with brands, it’s clear this generation places a high value on a brand’s authenticity and prefers real content over staged content.
The concept of authenticity extends beyond advertising and product images for Gen Z; it includes the company’s impact. According to a 2019 Kearney study, 57% of Gen Z reports a brand’s social and environmental impacts are key factors in its purchasing decision. But a statement about a brand’s commitment isn’t enough to sway the generation of researchers. In fact, Gen Z will go out of its way to find—and even pay slightly more for—a product or service if it means the purchase aligns with its values.
As Gen Z’s influence on the market and society continues to grow, companies and brands can best position themselves for success by aligning with the values and habits of this generation. With a large number of consumers that can take the success of a brand into their own hands, keep in mind their financial concerns, engagement expectations and craving for authentic content, as these are likely essential to keep a brand afloat in the rise of this new generation.
David Herpers is the SVP of Digital Bank at Credit One Bank. His expertise includes wealth management, banking and product management.
While it may be tempting to take a ‘wait and see’ approach, more and more companies are developing their own solutions to mitigate this gap internally. Here are four such strategies. By JOANNA BUCZKOWSKA-MCCUMBER via Sustainablebrands.com • Reposted: April 29, 2023
Businesses across industries are under mounting pressure to adopt sustainable practices, reduce their environmental impact, and provide ESG reporting and transparency in their efforts while staying accountable to their commitments. As demand for sustainability grows, so does the need for skilled professionals and workers who can drive and implement strategy and practices effectively across organizations and supply chains. However, most companies do not have the talent with the knowledge, experience and skills to achieve their sustainability goals.
Companies are recognizing that the demand for sustainability talent is outpacing the supply; and the gap is only growing — as sustainability roles expand and new ones get created, a Corporate Sustainability Officer is just not enough. The International Labour Organization suggests that 18 million net new jobs could be created worldwide by net-zero commitments by 2030. Recent research found that 82 percent of sustainability executives believed there were significant skills gaps within their own organization to tackle sustainability requirements. The World Economic Forum has directly linked the lack of qualified talent as being one of the significant barriers to implementing sustainability strategies; while the UN Global Compact has called for direct action to address this skills gap — prompting companies to prioritize and invest in skilling, upskilling and reskilling their teams.
While it may be tempting for companies to take a ‘wait and see’ approach, it won’t bridge this gap fast enough and will have negative effects. More and more companies — includingMicrosoft, Salesforce and Interface — are turning to mitigate this gap internally by developing and implementing their own solutions.
Bridging the sustainability skills gap internally will be fundamental for businesses in reaching their sustainability objectives. Here are four such strategies.
Make sustainability a strategic priority
First and foremost, a strong sustainability strategy sends a clear signal to potential and current employees that a business is committed to sustainability. This can be a major selling point for job seekers who are looking to work for a company that shares their values. By publicly committing to sustainability and investing in the resources needed to achieve sustainability goals, businesses can attract top talent and build a workforce that is passionate about sustainability. But it’s not just about attracting the right talent — a sustainability strategy can help to engage, motivate and develop the skills of existing employees.
Investing in a sustainability strategy can also help businesses to stay ahead of the curve when it comes to trends and regulations. As governments around the world enact more stringent sustainability regulations, businesses that are already taking a proactive approach to sustainability will be better positioned to adapt to these changes. By investing in a sustainability strategy now, businesses can ensure that they have the knowledge, skills, and resources needed to comply with future regulations and stay ahead of their competitors.
Provide training across your organization
They’re perhaps the most obvious on the list, but education and training programs are essential for building the skills and knowledge needed to implement sustainable practices effectively. These programs can take various forms — including workshops, online courses, mentoring programs, internships, etc — and can be customized to specific job functions and levels. They can be developed internally, sourced online or even co-developed with educational institutions.
The trick is ensuring that you are levelling up your current workforce while priming the incoming talent pipeline. That focus then has to consider both an internal and external training lens. Microsoft is an excellent example of how a company can tackle the sustainability skills gap on both sides — focusing on internal training for employees while also building out external learning opportunities through its Sustainability Learning Center.
Integrate sustainability into company culture
Planning and training are key tools in providing knowledge and setting the playing field but incorporating sustainability into corporate culture is what makes sustainability efforts meaningful. In 2021, the World Economic Forumreleased a study that found companies with a strong sustainability culture are more likely to attract and retain employees with the appropriate skills and knowledge — helping to mitigate brain drain.
Building a culture rooted in sustainability entails fostering a culture that prioritizes and values sustainability and encourages employees to develop their sustainability skills regardless of their job responsibilities. Companies can start by creating plans that set sustainability goals and targets, and ensuring those are communicated clearly and in a format that not only engages but enables every employee to feel that they have a role to play in the execution of the plan.
Providing channels where employees can execute sustainability goals while having the agency to develop and recommend new sustainability initiatives, rounded out by volunteering opportunities or employee resource groups, provides a rich internal ecosystem for sustainability to thrive. Acknowledging employees who exhibit leadership and innovation and celebrating teams that achieve sustainability goals is an added strategy to inspire and motivate employees to become champions of sustainability within the organization and sustain an engaged workforce.
Embed sustainability into the employee lifecycle
Companies must prioritize sustainability throughout the employee lifecycle, integrating it into major HR functions. A Harvard Business Review study found that embedding sustainability in the employee lifecycle by incorporating sustainability targets and social impact considerations into the attraction and recruitment processes can improve employee engagement and retention rates. For example, job descriptions, interview questions and selection criteria can emphasize the importance of sustainability skills and experience or even a desire to learn new sustainability skills.
Investing in sustainability initiatives can offer ample opportunities for employees to develop their skills and enhance their knowledge in this critical area. Ensuring that sustainability elements are baked into regular HR functions such as professional development, checks-ins and performance reviews will enable leaders to be aware of specialized skill development and matching employees with new opportunities within the company as they arise.
To remain competitive in the marketplace, companies must adopt proactive measures to address the sustainability skills gap — by investing in making sustainability a priority, training, and embedding it across culture and people functions. Being proactive in bridging this business challenge will only have a net-positive effect on performance across environmental and social factors; but without it, companies will be left behind.
By Tina Casey from Triple Pundit • Reposted: April 28, 2023
An organized effort to prevent corporations from practicing ESG (environmental, social and governance) principles has gained traction among state-level Republican officials in recent years. They typically deploy scary rhetoric about the evils of “woke capitalism” to make their case against ESG investing and corporate practices. However, the movement is beginning to run out of steam. Business leaders are pushing back, and a new study from Rokk Solutions indicates that voters on both sides of the political divide are siding with them.
The anti-ESG movement sowed the seeds of its own destruction
From the beginning, many have said the anti-ESG movement was nothing more than a thinly disguised effort to protect fossil energy industries and prevent investor dollars from flowing into decarbonization technologies, including energy storage as well as wind and solar power. Some anti-ESG measures are also aimed at protecting gun industry stakeholders.
In some cases, there has been no disguise at all. Republican office holders in Texas, for example, passed a state law in 2021 that explicitly prohibits state pension funds from doing business with financial firms that “boycott” fossil energy industries.
Anti-ESG laws are ostensibly aimed at protecting pensioners, but because they have no basis in actual bottom-line impacts, they can backfire. In some cases, banks and other investment firms can pack up and take their business elsewhere. In Texas, for example, competition dried up after the anti-ESG law passed, costing the small city of Anna $277,334 on its bond sale.
In addition to interfering with direct bottom-line decisions, the anti-ESG movement also interferes with businesses that are pursuing DEI (diversity, equality and inclusion) goals. A strong DEI policy helps businesses to attract and retain top talent while building stronger relations with communities, consumers and clients. In contrast, the anti-ESG position overlaps with the “woke capitalism” canard and with hate speech expressed by white supremacists and religious extremists, a sentiment that poses reputational risks for businesses.
Big business quietly finds its voice
To a great extent, businesses only have themselves to blame. Many U.S. corporations have provided financial support to help raise Republicans to power in both the legislative and judicial branches, only to see the “party of big business” suddenly turn around and become their enemy.
But those financial ties may have helped some business leaders gain the ear of Republican office holders. Earlier this week, reporter Ross Kerber of Reuters took a deep dive into the issue. Among other leaders, he spoke with Lauren Doroghazi, senior vice president at the consulting firm MultiState Associates, who said businesses have seen some success lobbying against anti-ESG bills. Doroghazi estimates that businesses and their allies have succeeded in nipping more than 80 percent of state-level, anti-ESG proposals in the bud, though many still remain on the table.
Kerber also spoke with BlackRock Chief Financial Officer Martin Small, who also indicated that investment firms have had some success in alerting Republican office holders to the potential for anti-ESG bills to backfire and the resulting costs for public pension plans.
For example, earlier this month in Kansas, the state’s own Division of the Budget released an estimate that a newly proposed anti-ESG bill would cut state pension returns by $3.6 billion over a 10-year period, Kerber reported. Legislators made some changes in the bill, and a watered-down version eventually passed into law on April 24. However, it still includes provisions aiming to prevent public officials from considering ESG principles in financial transactions.
Your indoor voice is not working
So far, most of the corporate pushback against anti-ESG laws is happening in meetings behind closed doors. That strategy has met with much success, according to Doroghazi’s analysis. But the approximately 1 in 5 anti-ESG laws that do pass could do considerable damage. Even if banks and other financial firms suffer little direct impact, businesses could still feel the ripple effect and reputational loss of doing business in states with anti-ESG regulations and increasingly repressive social policies.
Businesses can and should begin listening to public opinion and amplifying the public’s voice. Survey after survey shows that the majority of U.S. voters and other adults support climate action, abortion rights, racial and gender equality, restrictions on gun ownership, and other progressive values that are consistent with corporate ESG principles.
The fact is that the public voice needs help. Minority rule by Republican office holders has become a feature in states like Wisconsin, where gerrymandering has provided Republican districts with outsized power relative to their population.
With red-state Democratic representation concentrated in cities, state-level Republican office holders can also consolidate power by stripping municipalities of their authority to govern. In Texas, the state legislature is currently considering a bill that would pre-empt local control by cities and counties on a variety of issues including drought response, predatory lenders and worker protections. The Tennessee legislature has moved to undermine Democratic representation in Nashville, and the New York Times has described how state legislatures in Georgia and elsewhere are stripping power from local election boards.
Last week, the K Street communications firm Rokk Solutions issued an updated survey of voter opinions undertaken last year. The latest polling found that a majority of voters in both parties “believe corporate environmental action is relevant to their financial futures.”
“This belief increases for specific efforts like conservation and resource management,” the report reads. Strong majorities of both Republican and Democratic voters also view de-risking business as important to their financial futures. In particular, voters in both parties indicate that climate action is “important to their financial fortunes.”
“Republican support rises significantly for specific areas like water conservation, waste management and biodiversity,” Rokk found.
Republican voters are still skeptical of long-term climate goals, and a partisan difference of opinion persists on social issues, the report found. Still, the growing consensus on specific areas of sustainability provides businesses with a common ground on which to make the case for ESG investing, out loud and in public.
NRG Energy, Wednesday, April 26, 2023, Press release picture
By Greg Kandankulam from NRG Energy Inc. • Reposted: April 28, 2023
Now more than ever, organizations are prioritizing sustainability planning to achieve long-term climate goals. However, not every business has a dedicated team. In many cases, leaders take on such planning as an added responsibility outside of their traditional job scope.
Like many fields, sustainability has its own language with a long list of terms related to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors. Being able to understand and speak the language is key to pursuing, tracking, and reporting sustainability outcomes. Here, we focus on terms in one of the most critical areas: climate.
For energy and facility managers helping to lead their companies’ sustainability efforts, these terms are essential to ensure their businesses can set appropriate climate goals, and then track and report progress using best-practice standards.
Climate vocabulary basics
Climate-related sustainability action is needed because of the impact of greenhouse gas emissions that magnify both climate change and human-induced global warming. These factors are the foundation, so it’s important to have a firm grasp of what those three highlighted terms mean.
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are a set of naturally occurring or human-generated gases that transform the atmosphere. According to Cornell Law School, humans generate most GHGs through actions such as agriculture and burning fossil fuels for energy, manufacturing, and transportation purposes. GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (NxO), and manufactured fluorinated gases.
According to NASA, climate change is a long-term change in the average weather patterns that have come to define Earth’s local, regional, and global climates. Changes observed in Earth’s climate since the mid-20th century have been driven by human activities that have increased heat-trapping GHG levels in Earth’s atmosphere, raising Earth’s average surface temperature. While natural processes also contribute to a changing climate, they are far outpaced by human-induced activities.
NASA defines global warming as the long-term heating of Earth’s surface observed since the post-industrial period due to human activities that increase GHG levels in Earth’s atmosphere. This term is not interchangeable with the term climate change but rather is a key component of a changing climate.
Climate disclosures
At face value, climate disclosures are not complicated at all. They are simply any disclosure your company makes about the impact of its operations on climate change, such as GHG emissions totals, use of renewable energy, or energy savings from energy efficiency efforts.
However, climate disclosures get complicated when the topic of standards and requirements is introduced. In the United States, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in March 2022 proposed rules to enhance and standardize climate-related disclosures for investors. If finalized, investor-owned companies subject to SEC regulation will be required to make certain climate-related disclosures, including information about climate-related risks.
These disclosures are reasonably likely to have a material impact on their business, results of operations, or financial condition, and certain climate-related financial statement metrics within their audited financial statements.
Beyond the SEC rules, which won’t apply to all businesses, there are other voluntary standards for climate disclosures. For example, the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures or TCFD, created by the Financial Stability Board, has issued recommendations on climate disclosures supported by more than 3,000 companies across 92 countries. The nonprofit CDP runs a widely accepted global disclosure system to help companies manage their environmental impacts.
Scope 1, 2, and 3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Many businesses include GHG reduction goals in their sustainability plans, which means they need to track GHG emissions and disclose annual GHG emissions from operations to show progress toward their goals.
Simple, right? Not so fast. Who’s responsible for the GHGs created by the Amazon and FedEx trucks that deliver your products to customers? What about GHGs from the electricity delivered by your local electric provider to keep your business running?
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides helpful definitions for different categories – or “scopes” – of emissions so that businesses can track and report GHGs and GHG reductions consistently.
Scope 1
Direct GHG emissions that occur from sources that are controlled or owned by an organization (e.g., emissions associated with fuel combustion in boilers, furnaces, company-owned fleet vehicles).
Scope 2
Indirect GHG emissions associated with the purchase of electricity, steam, heat, or cooling. Although an organization’s Scope 2 emissions physically occur at the facility where they are generated, they are accounted for in the organization’s GHG inventory because they are a result of the organization’s energy use.
Scope 3
Indirect GHG emissions resulting from activities not owned or controlled by an organization, but that the organization indirectly impacts in its value chain. Scope 3 emissions for one organization are the Scope 1 or 2 emissions of another organization and often represent the majority of an organization’s total GHG emissions.
Any company with a GHG reduction goal will be expected to track and report Scope 1 and 2 emissions, while Scope 3 emissions may be considered optional. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, a global nonprofit, has developed a widely accepted corporate accounting and reporting standard with guidance for companies preparing a GHG inventory.
Net-zero emissions
The World Economic Forum defines net-zero emissions as “a state of balance between emissions and emissions reductions.” For an individual business to reach net-zero, that does not mean it cannot emit any GHG emissions from operations. It means the business must offset its Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions through verified means of reducing other GHGs, such as through the purchase of renewable energy credits or carbon offset credits, carbon capture, sequestration, and/or other technologies.
As with GHG reporting, there is an internationally recognized standard for achieving net-zero, also called carbon neutrality.
Net-zero is becoming a rallying point for businesses across the globe. More than 1,200 companies have committed to science-based net-zero targets. Being a sustainable business is one of five pillars of NRG, and we are proudly committed to our own climate targets. As an organization, we set an ambitious goal to achieve net-zero and reduce our carbon footprint by 50% by 2025, using our 2014 emissions as our base year.
Science-based Target-setting
Did you notice the term “science-based” in the last paragraph about net-zero targets? Many companies have been criticized for greenwashing by claiming carbon neutrality with the use of various trading and accounting measures, while their operations still produce significant real emissions. According to the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), emissions targets are considered “science-based” if they are in line with what the latest climate science deems necessary to meet the goals of the United Nations Paris Agreement – limiting global warming to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.
SBTi is a partnership of the United Nations, CDP, World Resources Institute (WRI), and others that defines and promotes best practices in emissions reductions in line with climate science. Nearly 1,000 organizations have set emissions reduction targets grounded in climate science through the SBTi’s guidance.
Get started
We all have a role to play in creating a more sustainable future through planning and action. When it comes to climate and energy, look for a trusted advisor who can help you implement a range of solutions to track, report, and ultimately achieve your sustainability goals.
In today’s world, sustainability challenges affect people’s lives, ecosystems, and businesses. Whether we’re discussing environmental sustainability or people sustainability, the facts of why we collectively need to focus on sustainability are staggering.
Faced with this reality — and pressure from multiple stakeholders — sustainability has become a critical topic for organizations worldwide, prompting businesses to adopt more sustainable practices.
The Sustainability Execution Gap
The above statistics clearly show that sustainability is not just about compliance with regulations, it is about creating a holistic vision for an organization that supports the strategy and creates a rallying point for employees. Regulations and legislation are increasingly focusing on environmental impacts, making it imperative for companies to have a sustainability strategy in place. Sustainability is about creating a business that is environmentally and socially responsible that can thrive in the long term.
Sustainability is a journey, not a destination. Businesses need to develop a road map that will allow them to advance their business transformation toward a sustainable intelligent enterprise. That starts at the top and the bottom so that everyone within the organization has a role to play in guiding the approach toward success. An overall culture of sustainability needs to be created to ensure participation at all levels.
However, even when the companies understand the need for more sustainable practices, a challenge remains for many on how to close the gap between their sustainability strategy and execution, transforming the whole organization while creating sustainable business value. Understanding the role emerging technologies play and leveraging them is a powerful enabler to close this gap and accelerate sustainable business growth and positive impact.
Emerging Technologies Are Key for Businesses Looking to Become Sustainable Intelligent Enterprises
Technology can help companies improve efficiency in business processes, utilize renewable energy, adopt circular economy practices, increase transparency, and make more informed decisions by providing real-time data and analytics. With the increasing stakeholder expectation for companies to operate sustainably, technology can enable companies to agilely adapt to changing market conditions and customer demands and build trust with their stakeholders. Ultimately, employing the right technology can lead to cost savings, new business opportunities, and a reduced impact on the environment.
Cloud technology can provide real-time monitoring for the usage of sustainable technology, while facilitating remote work and collaboration, reducing the need of scattered physical servers and hardware, and helping cloud providers invest in renewable energy sources to power their data centers. This will help organizations achieve their zero-emission goals while improving operational efficiency and reducing costs.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning can help many organizations optimize their waste management processes by using predictive analytics to identify potential areas of waste, forecasting demand for recycled materials, optimizing waste collection routes, and automating the process of reporting to track and comply with regulatory requirements. If the “business as usual” scenario is allowed to continue regarding the use of plastics, the oceans will contain 1 ton of plastic for every 3 tons of fish by 2025, and more plastic than fish by 2050. There is a huge opportunity to reduce waste through reuse and recycling processes, as well as building a more sustainable design process for many industries. Internet of Things (IoT) technologies such as sensors and smart meters provide real-time data that can be used to reduce waste and identify recycling opportunities.
Renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power can reduce reliance on fossil fuels and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Blockchain provides a transparent, secure, and efficient way to track and verify emissions, encourages sustainable practices, and facilitates renewable energy trading. Electric vehicles (EVs) can reduce transportation emissions, while IoT devices can help monitor and optimize energy consumption in buildings and processes. Additionally, advances in carbon capture and storage technologies can enable organizations to capture and store carbon dioxide emissions, preventing them from entering and adversely affecting the atmosphere.
The mindset shifts in the organization — and their role in the business network — also impacts the success of the sustainability efforts and uptake of processes. No single company can achieve sustainability alone. Collaboration among governments, business, technology partners, and industry players bring the necessary capabilities and perspectives to enable this collaboration. There is no need for businesses to walk this alone. Rather a joint and collaborative effort is needed to tackle this issue.
Welcome to Your Sustainability Journey
Sustainability is a strategic opportunity for companies. Whether it be the focus on creating sustainable products, services, and business models for long-term growth, or embedding it into business processes to make sustainability profitable and profitability sustainable, there is no downside. By doing this right, facilitated by the right technology, businesses can earn customer loyalty, attract funding or investment, maintain a committed workforce, and enhance brand image and reputation.
Sustainability requires collaboration as well as a deep understanding of the business and its wider impact, with a commitment to continuous improvement. Companies that can close the gap between their sustainability strategy and execution — and identify opportunities for sustainability in the business — will be well positioned to succeed in the long term.
By Lisa Bennett, Forbes Councils Member via Forbes.com • Reposted: April 26, 2023
Business leaders increasingly realize how important environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns are to the success of their organizations. But when making changes to how they operate, managers don’t necessarily consider their marketing events. Hybrid and virtual events offer an opportunity to reduce environmental impact and make it easier for marginalized groups to attend.
There’s no denying the environmental consequences of in-person events. A 2019 research study found that a three-day 800-person conference had a carbon footprint of 455 tons of CO2. That’s more CO2 than 95 cars produce in a year. Now consider the waste: food, marketing materials and, of course, freebies. Swag is a $64 billion industry churning out cheap water bottles, stress balls, branded socks, screen cleaners, sleep masks, gift cards and yoga mats. There must be a more responsible way to promote our brands.
That’s not the only way events, in-person or otherwise, are falling short of the mark. Despite the awareness that ESG is crucial for business, there’s a lack of diversity among attendees and speakers at business events. Nearly 70% of professional event speakers are male. This is part of a wider problem. A survey by IBM showed nearly 80% of companies are not prioritizing gender equality. And, of course, women are by no means the only group affected by the failure to promote diversity and accessibility.
Open The Doors To Everyone
There is a better way. Running virtual and hybrid events not only helps you to reduce your carbon footprint. It also allows you to level the playing field—transcending borders, languages and even time. It gives access to working parents, disabled people and those without the means to travel. With online and hybrid events, you can make the connections you need for your organization to thrive while putting your values into practice for the world to see.
In-person events still have an important role to play. They are fantastic for relationship-building, networking and learning. It’s hard to recreate this online, even though technology is improving all the time.
There are many steps you can take to make environmental sustainability and inclusivity priorities for your in-person events, too. For example, select suppliers with an active ESG policy. Minimize swag and make sure it’s recyclable. Ensure access to public transportation to and from the venue. Finally, make sure your event caters to people with disabilities and includes a diverse range of voices on your speakers’ bill.
Forget the powerful moral incentive for doing the right thing. With activist investors, switched-on customers and younger consumers who increasingly prioritize environmental impact, finding more sustainable ways to operate is a smart move. If you want to meet your ESG criteria, your events schedule is an important area to consider.
An Uncomfortable Truth
Until carbon-neutral transport is the norm, the only way to prevent travel-related emissions from an in-person event is not to hold it in the first place. So, reducing the carbon footprint of your events schedule is, at least on the face of it, simple—move some of them online. Improving the accessibility of your events so everyone gets a seat at the table is more nuanced. It’s all in the planning and the technology you use.
One big benefit of running a virtual event is the choice of features you can use to maximize convenience for all groups. For attendees with impaired vision or hearing, you can offer closed captions, an audio recording of each session and sign language. It’s possible to add dubbing and alternative audio tracks for speakers of other languages. You can stream the video of a single session at various times so people can join from different time zones. Simulive (simulated live) means recording sessions ahead of time so you can prepare captions and translations in advance while still giving your audience the feeling of a live event.
All these features, unsexy in themselves, add up to something potentially revolutionary. By making it easier for people of all abilities and backgrounds from around the world to attend your events, you’re increasing the diversity of the voices that will be heard. Exposure to a variety of views takes us out of our comfort zones, reduces the likelihood of groupthink and helps us build a future that benefits everyone.
Be Part Of The Solution
Large organizations can be like oil tankers: Once their course is set, they’re slow to change direction. But the benefits of rethinking how you run events make the transition worthwhile. By reducing the number of IRL events you run and moving them online instead, you can:
• Shrink your carbon footprint.
• Improve accessibility and welcome all groups.
• Enhance your reputation.
• Strengthen relationships with clients, suppliers and partners.
We’ve mistreated the planet. The consequences are all around us every day. Companies are part of the problem, no doubt, but they can be a big part of the solution, too. The world of events is a prime example of how technology can have a positive impact, both environmentally and socially. Reducing your carbon footprint and giving underrepresented groups a seat at the table is not just the right thing to do; it’s also good for business.
Lisa leads marketing at Kaltura. She enjoys finding the right balance between the art and science of marketing. Read Lisa Bennett’s full executive profile here.
A perpetual knowledge gap of sustainability topics has increased within the industry, cited by 35% in 2023, compared to 20% in 2021. Image: edie.net
The majority of marketing professionals feel they need to be braver and clearer in how they communicate sustainability to avoid greenwashing, but very few within the industry feel they have the capacity or knowledge to do so. From edie.net • Reposted: April 25, 2023
The World Federation of Advertisers, which represents 90% of global marketing spend, has today (24 April) published the findings of a global survey of the marketing industry. Developed in partnership with Kantar’s Sustainable Transformation Practice, more than 900 senior client-side marketers were surveyed across 48 countries.
The survey found that the marketing profession is lagging behind other areas of the business when it comes to understanding and embracing the broad agenda of sustainability. In total, 39% of respondents claimed they had only just started out on their sustainability journeys.
There is an understanding within the industry that corporate sustainability strategies need to be more ambitious, with 90% claiming so and a further 94% stating that marketers need to act more bravely and experiment to drive transformative change. Indeed, 43% of companies have now added sustainability as a KPI for marketing departments, up from 26% in 2021.
The industry realises that, in spite of the risks of greenwashing, companies need to be braver and smarter as to how they communicate their sustainability efforts, with 82% calling for more ambition. Additionally, 41% of brands now believe they have a sustainability story and strategy that they are “proud” to share, up from 25% in 2021.
There is, however, a widening capability gap emerging for marketing professionals. A perpetual knowledge gap of sustainability topics has increased within the industry, cited by 35% in 2023, compared to 20% in 2021. One of the issues in this regard is that sustainability no longer fits into one sole function, and a lack of metrics, definitions and complex jargon all contribute to the knowledge gap.
Key challenges highlighted by the profession include a lack of internal resources (35%), a knowledge and skills gap (35%), organisational mindset where sustainability is viewed as a cost (32%), and a lack of transparency in measurement (30%).
WFA’s chief executive Stephan Loerke said: “Marketers are finally starting to grasp the scale of the sustainability challenge, particularly the climate crisis. We have reached the point where the status quo is no longer an option.
“Radical transformation is essential. We passionately believe that marketers are uniquely placed to drive the change we need on account of their unique creativity, innovation and communication skillset. The Sustainable Marketing 2030 initiative focuses on how marketers can drive growth while embracing the sustainability agenda.”
The survey also found that 54% of marketers agreed that consumers need more education about sustainable choices and actions and that brands are well-positioned to help.
Greenwash marketing
According to a survey conducted by the Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) in 2021, half (49%) of UK-based marketing professionals communicating the sustainability ambitions and actions of companies are worried their work may be perceived as greenwashing, amid increased consumer demand for – and scrutiny of – environmental claims.
while more than half of the 210 respondents recognised environmental sustainability as a business priority and an existential risk (51%), there was confusion about how to communicate targets and initiatives externally. Half of the respondents said they fear their company or client being accused of greenwashing by consumers if they publish communications leading on sustainability. A key problem is the fact that 40% of marketers admit to not having qualifications relating to communicating sustainability.
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) will assess claims made online and in-store, including on-pack labelling and other marketing. Claims will be assessed against the Authority’s ‘Green Claims Code’ – a set of 13 guidelines for businesses and brands with consumer-facing products and services. Issues covered by the code include ensuring the accuracy and clarity of claims; not omitting important information and enabling ‘fair and meaningful’ comparison.
Study from Bain & EcoVadis suggests firms that prioritise ESG are more successful, and that those with more senior female execs also perform better. By Sean Ashcroft from supplychaindigital.conm • Reposted: April 24, 2023
New in-depth research suggests that companies that prioritise ESG are more profitable.
The study claims organisations that focus on ethics, environmental and labour practices within their supply chains have margins 3-4% greater than those that don’t.
The research was commissioned by global management consultancy Bain & Company and EcoVadis, a provider of sustainability ratings.
Called Do ESG Efforts Create Value? It also suggests that ESG-compliant companies have higher employee satisfaction and that firms with more women at board level perform better than those with fewer.
The study was based on how thousands of private companies’ EcoVadis sustainability Scorecards compared against their financial performance.
It found a correlation between advanced performance on key sustainability topics and stronger profitability and faster growth.
Most of the 100,000 EcoVadis-rated companies – 80% of which are private – are engaged in supply chain relationships.
EcoVadis says this has “strong implications” for procurement teams.
A spokesperson said: “In addition to mitigating risk and complying with due diligence regulations, using ratings in sustainable procurement programs is a vital lever in building financial success and resilience of their value chain partners.”
As we celebrate Earth Day, consider doing some research aimed at transitioning to a more sustainable and responsible portfolio. These four companies are worth a look. By Peter Krull, CSRIC® via Kiplinger.com • Reposted: April 23, 2023
Earth Day is a great time to take stock of your environmental impact. It’s also an ideal time to think about how your money is invested and consider making some sustainable investments. Do the companies you own positively affect the world, or are they contributing to the problems?
Most investors don’t think about the underlying holdings in the mutual funds or ETFs they purchase, and many others simply allow their financial advisers to pick and choose the individual stocks that they own. But taking the time to ask questions, do a little research and understand what you actually own can be both scary and enlightening and help empower you to transition to a more sustainable and responsible portfolio.
Other than aligning your investments with your values, investing responsibly may also reduce the long-term risk in your portfolio. Companies that employ a more sustainable and resiliency-focused business model will be more likely to succeed in a new economy that requires these attributes in order to remain competitive.
A Holistic Perspective on Sustainable Investments
I view sustainable investing from a holistic perspective. While solar, wind and electric vehicle (EV) companies are certainly an important part of our portfolios, so are complementary industries. For example, our Green Sage Sustainability Portfolio(opens in new tab) includes companies involved with water filtration, sustainable real estate and green buildings, scientific instrumentation, insurance and even biotechnology.
Understanding that and putting it in the context of what naturalist John Muir(opens in new tab) said: “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe,” many industries are connected and complementary to each other and contribute to society’s vision of sustainability.
With that in mind, here are a couple of companies worth taking a look at:
STMicroelectronics (STM (opens in new tab)). Much of thisSwiss semiconductor company’s technology is used in devices that you use every day, like tablets and automobile infotainment systems. But beyond these everyday uses, STMicroelectronics(opens in new tab) also makes chips that help control the motors in EVs, chips that help distribute solar power more efficiently and chips that are helping to create smart homes, cities and industries. Sustainable innovation would not be possible without semiconductor technologies underlying the advances.
Acuity Brands (AYI (opens in new tab)). This U.S.-based company manufactures high-efficiency lighting products. I often say the best kilowatt is the one that isn’t used, and through energy efficiency, we can make this true. Our homes and buildings use a considerable amount of energy, mostly for heating and cooling, but also for lighting.
The transition from incandescent bulbs to LEDs has been a major opportunity to reduce our impact. A 10-watt LED replaces a 100-watt incandescent bulb — that’s a savings of 90%. Acuity Brands(opens in new tab) manufactures a wide array of lighting products, from home to office and industrial. It even makes ultraviolet lights to disinfect health care facilities (and others) that require sterilization.
Hannon Armstrong Sustainable Infrastructure (HASI (opens in new tab)). Hannon Armstrong(opens in new tab) is considered a “pure play” sustainable company in that everything it does revolves around sustainability. It finances a range of projects broken down into three areas: behind-the-meter, grid-connected and fuels, transport and nature. Its behind-the-meter investments include energy efficiency projects, distributed solar and storage, while grid-connected focuses on utility-scale wind solar and storage.
It’s also involved in landfill gas projects, commercial fleet decarbonization and ecological restoration. And for income investors, the stock pays a nice dividend as well.
AXS Green Alpha ETF (NXTE(opens in new tab)). The folks at Green Alpha(opens in new tab) have been managing sustainable investments for years, going back to the old Sierra Club Mutual Funds, so they know what they’re doing. They eschew the recent trend of creating, as I call them, “less bad” ESG portfolios and focus on solutions-based investments in the next economy.
Like Earth Equity’s Green Sage Sustainability Portfolio, the portfolio is more than just solar, wind and EVs and takes a broad approach by examining systemic risks and opportunities. If you’re not comfortable with individual stock investing, or if you’re looking to diversify, check out this ETF.
Make Sure You Understand What You’re Investing In
Remember that if you choose to invest in a mutual fund or ETF, it’s important to look under the hood to truly understand what you are investing in.
I look at investing as voting with your hard-earned dollars, so consider what you want to stand for this Earth Day and how to make the best impact on the planet for generations to come.
Advisory products and services offered by Investment Adviser Representatives through Prime Capital Investment Advisors, LLC (“PCIA”), a federally registered investment adviser. PCIA: 6201 College Blvd., Suite #150 Floor, Overland Park, KS 66211. PCIA doing business as Prime Capital Wealth Management (“PCWM”) and Qualified Plan Advisors (“QPA”).
This article was written by and presents the views of our contributing adviser, not the Kiplinger editorial staff. You can check adviser records with the SEC(opens in new tab) or with FINRA(opens in new tab).
By Solitaire Townsend, Contributor via Forbes • Reposted: April 23, 2023
I’m lucky enough to meet lots of passionate folk who want to change the world. Many of them have already built a career in sustainability – they are Chief Sustainability Officers, ESG experts, social entrepreneurs, D&I advisers, climate geeks and CSR specialists.
They are in demand. According to LinkedIn, ‘Sustainability Manager’ is the second-fastest growing job title across the UK (it was seventh last year). And 1 in 10 job adverts require some green skills – a trend which is growing at 8% per year. Helpful leaders share new sustainability jobs online as the ‘war for ESG talent’ rages on.
Today is a good day to join a booming industry. The question is, how?
The first thing to say is that you don’t have to have fancy qualifications, specific knowledge or tons of experience to start working in sustainability. Solving the world’s problems takes all kinds of people, with all kinds of skills, working in every industry, sector and team.
The only thing you do need is a Solutionist’s mindset. Solutionists are the world’s problem solvers; they are people who believe they absolutely can do something about society’s biggest challenges. They are brilliant, curious, determined types – so much so, that I wrote a book about what makes a Solutionist and how to become one.
What I learned from speaking to hundreds of Solutionists over the years – is that their path is rarely a linear one. Some have known since childhood that they want to make a difference, others realise later in life; some follow traditional career paths, but (spoiler) – most do not.
So, if you’re still figuring out how to bend your career in a sustainable direction, you’re in good company. Here are just three of the many different routes available to you as you take the first steps in your sustainability career:
Make change from the inside. You know your current workplace better than any other – you understand the industry, the internal politics, the norms and the need for change. You probably already know the most important decision makers, and what it will take to convince them to do things differently. Harness your knowledge by staying in your current job, and driving sustainability initiatives from the inside. This is called intrapreneurship, and it’s a powerful way to get sustainability issues on the agenda.
Do sustainability on the side. Even if your main job isn’t sustainability focused, that doesn’t stop you taking on side gigs and community roles that mean something to you. Your skills and experience can make a huge difference in charities and local activist groups. Look into becoming a charitable/non-profit trustee, where you can be part of positive change while learning what’s involved in high stakes decision making.
Start a sustainable business. This is the path I took. Identify the sustainability gap in your industry, and fill it. If you know the world of food and drink – what product could you launch that would support food sovereignty and environmental justice? If you’re an HR expert – what product or service could you create that makes hiring more fair and equitable?
Whichever route you take, the important thing is to do it now. Don’t wait for the perfect sustainability job description to land in your inbox – it might never happen. Solutionists operate at the very forefront of society’s responses to the world’s biggest challenges, which means traditional job roles often can’t keep up with us.
Still not sure? In my book, I set out prompts to get you going:
Sign up for an online course about sustainability.
Start a ‘sustainability team’ at work, for those passionate about change.
Finish that book/blog post about sustainability you’ve been working on.
Build out a business case for your current workplace to pivot into social & environmental solutions.
Look for promising sustainability start-ups to invest in.
Eliminating negatives is about to become the minimum viable approach to social performance. Companies and suppliers benefiting people and communities will see stronger corporate brands and accelerated revenue growth. By Jeff Baldassari from sustainablebrnads.com • Reposted: April 23. 2023
Fueled by an upcoming Securities and Exchange Commission rule on human capital management, increased focus on the ‘social’ element of ESG, and rising consumer awareness of supply chain issues, social sustainability in supply chains is poised to become the next frontier for brands.
The S in environmental, social and governance performance has been gaining currency over the past couple of years; and public companies will soon have to start reporting more thoroughly on their social impact. A Bloomberg Lawanalysis of the SEC’s direction predicts that human capital management will be a front-burner topic this year, and investors will seek more disclosures to ensure that companies are walking their talk. At the same time, pandemic-driven disruptions have sparked ongoing media coverage of supply chain issues. Consumers are seeing the sausage-making, and it isn’t always pretty.
This is all to the good. Accountability can sting; but for companies that view it as an opportunity, the new focus on social sustainability in supply chains can lead to stronger corporate brands and accelerated revenue growth for suppliers pursuing positive social impact.
Focus on social impact brings risks and opportunities
What is a socially sustainable supply chain? Certainly, it’s free of negative practices such as child labor, forced labor, unsafe working conditions, below-living wages, and racial and gender discrimination. The case for excluding suppliers that layer these social costs into a corporation’s products and services is clear from both an ethical and a business standpoint: Investors, customers and employees are buying into a brand’s reputation — and “risking that over a supplier with poor ESG credentials could cost you all three,” Moody’sobserves.
Eliminating negatives is fast becoming table stakes, though. The emerging standard is net-positive impact — actively contributing to solving social problems.
“The very nature of social impact isn’t just about risk; it’s also about prosocial behavior. In other words, a company’s actions, policies and investments can and should positively impact people’s lives,” writesJason Saul, executive director of the Center for Impact Sciences at the University of Chicago. And, he notes, these social impacts can also positively affect a company’s financial performance “through competitive advantage, business growth, market relevance, brand purpose and securing license to operate.”
Stocking the corporate supply chain with companies that are broadening workforce opportunities, contributing to stronger local economies and providing other social benefits brings real supply chain reliability and ESG benefits. Suppliers that hire from a broader talent pool and create a positive work environment that reduces churn are better able to deliver consistently. Those that also build community wealth and diversify their supply chain contribute to equity and inclusion goals.
For supplier companies, delivering these positive social impacts is a differentiator — especially where other value dimensions such as effectiveness, design and price are comparable — and it will remain so until their competitors catch up.
3 big impact areas cut across supplier types
Building a socially sustainable supply chain requires reviewing and upgrading the full spectrum of suppliers — not only suppliers of raw materials, value-added inputs and finished goods, but also professional services and technology providers. That is a big universe; but when looking at it from a positive social impact perspective, most suppliers can add value in three broad areas.
Workforce development: Companies that actively recruit, train and retain people who have been excluded from opportunities or face barriers to employment can improve the lives of whole families and communities while developing untapped talent pools that provide a hedge against tight labor markets. For example, the growing second-chance (or fair-chance) movement delivers high social returns by focusing on hiring formerly incarcerated people. Nearly 70 million Americans have a criminal record; and even after they’ve paid their debt to society, many remain marginalized. Incarceration brands those it touches, trapping them in a cycle of unemployment and poverty — which can lead to recidivism. Second-chance hiring can transform their lives. It also has multiple business benefits. At U.S. Rubber, for example, we fueled substantial growth through pandemic labor shortages by making a significant investment in second-chance hiring: Ex-felons now constitute about 60 percent of our workforce.
Diverse leadership: Diversifying the supplier pool to include more companies owned and led by women and people of color — especially in fields where they continue to face barriers to entry — contributes to corporate diversity, equity and inclusion goals and expands both opportunities for the suppliers and resources for the buyers. This is also an area where corporate commitments are under a microscope and investors, customers and employees are looking for measurable progress.
The opportunity in supply chain sustainability is huge. Eliminating negatives is about to become the minimum viable approach to social performance. Public and large private companies and their supply chain partners that go beyond that to create positive impacts will reap the benefits: stronger brands, greater customer loyalty, investor favor and the ability to attract increasingly choosy workers. And in doing so, they’ll help advance prosperity for everyone.
JEFF BALDASSARI: Jeff Baldassari is CEO of US Rubber Recycling — a triple-bottom-line business that manufactures high quality fitness flooring and acoustical underlayment by giving discarded tires a second life and providing employment to a second-chance workforce.
Transforming a business to reduce its environmental impact and embrace sustainable practices isn’t a quick fix, but a journey of a thousand steps. Diageo, the beverages giant behind brands like Guinness, Johnnie Walker and Smirnoff, has been on that journey since 2008, and it’s forced it to innovate and make difficult decisions. It has been scrutinising its supply chain – last year it launched a pilot in regenerative farming for its Guinness business and announced a new hydrogen-powered glass furnace to reduce the impact of glass bottle production. And when it comes to marketing, it has rolled out brand activism training across its marketing teams to ensure that they’re equipped to talk about green issues in a responsible way. . And on Earth Day, Diageo will be switching on a huge field of solar panels in Scotland to power its packaging plant at Diageo Leven.
This Earth Day, the beverages giant talk about the lessons they’ve learned, how an innovation gap drove them forward and how they’re steering clear of greenwashing. From lbbonline.com • Reposted: April 22, 2023
LBB’s Laura Swinton caught up with a Diageo spokesperson to find out more.
LBB>What inspired Diageo to prioritise sustainability?
Diageo> Sustainability has long been a priority of Diageo and our work on it started in 2008. Environmental sustainability is key to our long term business success and we have a responsibility to care for the people and planet around us.
LBB> And what have been the key lessons you’ve learned as a business since embarking on this journey?
Diageo> We set our 2030 sustainability targets with an innovation gap built into them as we know we need to stretch ourselves to reach them. We’ve learnt partnership working is core to us making progress on our targets, and that reaching those targets will be a challenge and will take a change in approach across our business.
LBB> How does Diageo ensure that each brand can adjust to fit into those sustainability objectives in a way that works for that part of the business?
Diageo> The work our brands do on sustainability is guided by our corporate sustainability goals in Society 2030. All the sustainability action they take ladders up our commitments on packaging and waste, water and carbon.
LBB> Baileys has been accredited as a B Corp – what have you learned from this process and is it something you’re considering rolling out across more Diageo brands?
Diageo> We’re really proud of Baileys for being B-Corp certified and it’s definitely a robust process to the accreditation, so is well-deserved. We’re learning through Baileys on the process and benefits of being B-Corp certified before taking a decision on the rest of our brands.
LBB> Diageo has been getting really granular on the environmental impact of its supply chain, and there’s quite a bit of innovation involved. For example you’ve been working with Encirc on the use of hydrogen to produce glass bottles with a reduced environmental impact, producing 200 million for brands like Captain Morgan’s, Tanqueray and Smirnoff. How is Diageo enabling that level of innovation?
Diageo> Innovation is central to us achieving our 2030 goals. The hydrogen powered furnace is an example of the power and outcome of working closely with our suppliers and partners to embed sustainability across our supply chain. We’re really excited that by 2030, up to 200 million of our bottles will be net zero, which is a huge achievement in the glass industry. We also foster innovation through our Diageo Sustainable Solutions programme. This gives innovators who we don’t currently work with, to provide a solution to sustainability challenges that we put out to them. It generates new ideas and ways of working to help us tackle the trickiest issues.
LBB> How are you tracking the impact of these innovations and ensuring buy-in across the organisation?
Diageo> All sustainability reporting is in our Annual Report and ESG Reporting Index, which includes innovation work on sustainability. All employees across the business have a responsibility for helping us achieve our corporate goals, and achieving our sustainability goals is as important as delivering our financial performance. Our senior leadership group is responsible for the delivery of a subset of our ESG targets via our Long Term Incentive Plan, which helps us to embed that accountability across our business.
LBB> Diageo has some great green initiatives underway, transforming its supply chain, from regenerative farming to net zero glass bottles – but how are you thinking about the balance between talking about these projects, sharing knowledge with the need to avoid overclaiming and greenwash?
Diageo> Greenwashing is a real reputation risk when talking about sustainability. We have a robust approach to our sustainability comms and ensure that all comms on sustainability are approved by our CR and legal teams to validate the claims. Claims are only made where we have validation.
LBB> On this, Diageo has invested in sustainability training for marketers – why was that so important and what are some of the key principles or takeaways from this training?
Diageo> It’s important that everyone knows the role they can play in helping us achieve our goals, but to also have the confidence in doing so.
LBB> What are some of the challenges that the team has been navigating in putting that training into action and implementing the insights on a company-wide level?
Diageo> We’re using the training to build our marketing team’s confidence in talking about sustainability. A key challenge has been giving them the confidence to talk about it credibly without the threat of greenwashing. We’ve also recently rolled out a partnership with the Said Business School at Oxford to educate our top 600 leaders on sustainability, both within Diageo and outside of it, so they can make the connections between the work we do and the difference this can make externally.
LBB> What advice would you have for marketers that are still wrestling with all of this?
Diageo> It’s an exciting but difficult space! If you’re ever not sure on putting something out on sustainability, ask your experts and listen to their advice. Also, read around what others are doing in sustainability marketing and see where companies are being caught out for greenwashing and what you can learn from this.
By Paola Peralta from Benefitnews.com • Reposted: April 22, 2023
For employees, “going green” has evolved beyond a corporate buzzword. Sustainable business practices are now a must for discerning workers.
A recent study from Oxford Economics reported that 65% of companies have created a clear mission statement around sustainability, and an additional 23% are in the process of developing such a mission, meaning that the vast majority of businesses are prioritizing sustainability and building pathways to reduce company-generated emissions and environmental impact.
“For sustainability to be successful, it has to be embedded into the core business units themselves,” Adam Braun, CEO sustainability startup Climate Club, recently told EBN. “It needs to be done in a way that helps every single person across a large enterprise understand what their unique goals are, how they can contribute towards those goals, and then how they’re attracting clear performance benchmarks both internally and externally.”
From a sustainability report card to help employees understand the potential impact of their retirement investments to startups that focus on ensuring that businesses are creating more sustainable investment opportunities, it’s in employers’ best interest to meet their workforce’s demands.
Catch up on EBN’s recent coverage of sustainability in the workforce as well as the growing prominence of ESG retirement contributions — and what it will all mean for the future.
Where ESG meets recruiting: 65% of employees want to work for a sustainable company
Eighty-three percent of workers think their employer is not doing enough to be more sustainable and tackle climate change, and 65% would be more likely to work for a company with robust environmental policies, according to a 2021 report from intranet company Unily.
“Whereas sustainability and climate change used to be more siloed within companies, now it’s really integrated throughout the company,” says William Theisen, CEO in North America at EcoAct, a climate consultancy that provides a wide range of sustainable solutions to businesses. There’s no part of the company that’s not going to be affected by setting science-based targets or net zero targets.”
Climate Club’s software platform is helping companies and employees meet ESG goals
How to show employees you’re making steps toward sustainability? Startup Climate Club partners with companies to create a dashboard that employees can interact with, tracking their own carbon emission levels (as well as their employer’s) and providing resources to help meet sustainability goals.
“[When we started], the big question was: what can we do as individuals to contribute towards reversing climate change?” says CEO Braun. “We started to really observe that, not only were individuals asking this question, but companies were also stepping up to contribute toward goals across the sustainability and climate spectrum.”
Why ESG retirement plans could get employees to save more for the future
Eighty-seven percent of retirement plan participants want their investments to be aligned with their values, according to Schroder’s 2022 Retirement Survey. That’s leading the majority of employees (74%) to seek out investment options that follow environmental, social and governance goals. Those employees would also contribute more if offered an ESG option.
“There is a lot of education necessary with adding ESG options, when they’re implemented and ongoing,” she says. “Another factor is a final Department of Labor regulation ruling, and that is the main reason why plan sponsors are getting ready and thinking about adding this option.”
Microsoft, Campbell’s shareholders rejected resolutions to make 401(k)s sustainable. What it means for ESG goals
As You Sow, a California-based nonprofit that advocates for corporate sustainability, last year submitted official shareholder resolutions to both Campbell’s and Microsoft, asking them to prepare a report assessing how the companies’ retirement funds and investments may be contributing to climate change. The request was made after investors reached out to engage As You Sow.
“We think that there’s a fiduciary duty to consider climate change in employees’ [investments],” says Danielle Fugere, president of As You Sow. “The question that we raise with Campbell’s is, why does a company that believes in climate risk have a significant amount of its employee retirement funds invested in target date funds that have high levels of fossil fuels and high-carbon companies?”
History shows the CIO role is well positioned to broker a more environmentally sustainable way of doing business. But adjustments are required as the landscape shifts. By Mark Chillingworth from CIO • Reposted: April 21, 2023
Over 90 wildfires ravaged Spain’s Asturias principality in March this year. Though not as cold and wet as northern Europe, March is still the tail end of winter in northwest Spain, a region not typically considered a tinder box. But the climate emergency is steadily changing that.
But Spain’s predicament isn’t unique. Across the world, climate change has bitten hard into the economies of tech-centric California, again due to wildfires. Australia and Pakistan have seen communities wrecked by large-scale flooding and continual rain, while in 2022, Europe had its hottest summer on record.
There is a need and realization by the business world to be more environmentally sustainable since organizations are seeing an impact on the bottom line as a direct result of climate change. So the CIO, the technologies they deploy, and the partnerships they form are essential to the future of a more environmentally sustainable way of doing business.
A question of time
Thomas Kiessling, CTO with Siemens Smart Infrastructure, part of the German engineering and technology conglomerate that makes trains, electrical equipment, traffic control systems, and more, understands that time is running out. His concerns are backed up by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which on March 20, 2023, said it’s unlikely the world will keep to its Paris Climate Accord promises.
And if the world’s temperatures rise by or above 1.5 degrees Celsius, businesses will feel further impacts to their bottom line, including increased supply-chain issues on a network already overstretched and fragile. Food and water insecurity will increase, and energy systems, housing stock, insurance, and currency markets will all become more volatile—a worrying set of scenarios for business leaders and boards.
CIO enablement
Historically, CIOs have been vital enablers during times of major change, championing e-commerce, digital transformation or agile ways of working. Organizations responding to the climate emergency are, therefore, calling on those enablement skills to mitigate the environmental impact of the business.
use of unsustainable practices and resources. As with most business challenges, data is instrumental. “Like anything, the hard work is the initial assessment,” says CGI director of business consulting and CIO advisor Sean Sadler. “From a technology perspective, you need to look at the infrastructure, where it’s applied, how much energy it draws, and then how it fits into the overall sustainability scheme.”
CIOs who create data cultures across organizations enable not only sustainable business processes but also reduce reliance on consultancies, according to IDC. “Organizations with the most mature environmental, social, and governance (ESG) strategies are increasingly turning to software platforms to meet their data management and reporting needs,” says Amy Cravens, IDC research manager, ESG Reporting and Management Technologies. “This represents an important transition toward independent ESG program management and away from dependence on ESG consultants and service providers. Software platforms will also play an essential role in an organization’s ESG maturity journey. These platforms will support organizations from early-stage data gathering and materiality assessments through sustainable business strategy enablement and every step in between.”
Sadler, who has led technology in healthcare, veterinary services, media firms, and technology suppliers, says consultancies and systems integrators should be considered as part of a CIO’s sustainability plans. Their deep connections to a variety of vendors, skills, experience and templates will be highly useful. “It can often help with the collaboration with other parts of the business, like finance and procurement as you have a more holistic approach,” he says.
The IDC survey further finds that the manufacturing sector is leading the maturity of ESG strategies, followed by the services sector, indicative, perhaps, of industries with the most challenging sustainability demands to get on the front foot.
CIOs in organizations already with ESG maturity adopt data management, ESG reporting, and risk tools. In the 2022 Digital Leadership Report by international staffing and CIO recruitment firm Nash Squared, 70% of business technology leaders said that technology plays a crucial part in sustainability.
“CIOs are in a great position to demonstrate their business acumen,” says Sadler. “They can cut costs and generate additional revenue streams.” And DXC Technology director and GM Carl Kinson says IT is now central to cost reduction, while high inflation and rising energy costs make CIOs and organizations assess their energy spending in a level of detail not seen for a long time. This will have a knock-on environmental benefit. Kinson says CIOs are looking to extract greater value from enterprise cloud computing estates, application workloads, system code, and even the use or return of on-premise technology in order to reduce energy costs.
“We’re working with clients to set carbon budgets for each stakeholder to make them accountable, which is a great way to make sure all areas of the business are doing their bit to be more sustainable,” says Sadler.
Great expectations
Falling short of corporate sustainability goals will not only upset the board but exacerbate the search for skills CIOs face, which, in turn, complicates strategies to digitize the business.
Becoming an environmentally sustainable business is core to the purpose of a modern organization and its ability to recruit and retain today’s technology talent.
Climate urgency also impacts CIOs themselves in their employment decisions, too. “I would need to understand the sustainability angles of an organization,” says James Holmes, CIO with The North of England P&I Association, a shipping insurance firm. Business advisory firm McKinsey also finds that 83% of C-suite executives and investment professionals believe that organizational ESG programs will contribute to an increase in shareholder value in the next five years. And the Nash Squared Digital Leadership Report adds that due to the urgent global move to integrate sustainability into core business operations and the customer proposition, it’s important that digital leaders have what it calls a dual lens on sustainability.
Part of that increased shareholder value will be to ensure the business is able to meet the evolving regulations surrounding environmental sustainability. For CIOs in Europe, the EU Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation was adopted in April 2022, and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) secured a majority in the European Parliament in November 2022. California also introduced environmental regulations in September 2022, and other US states are likely to follow.
“Regulation can be pro-growth,” Chi Onwurah, shadow business minister in the UK Parliament and a former technologist, recently said at an open-source technology conference. “Good regulations create a virtuous circle as more people trust the system.”
CIOs and IT leadership, whether in the UK or not, are integral to make organizations more environmentally sustainable in order to help stave off environmental collapse. No vertical market can operate effectively during an ongoing environmental emergency unless a technological response based on collated data is enacted and supported across the organization.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, CIOs and IT leaders enabled new ways of adapting to change, and these need to continue as environmentally sustainable business processes become greater priorities.
With Earth Day approaching and stricter laws on the horizon in the EU and the UK, figures from the creative industries take stock. F
rom lbbonline.com • Reposted: April 21, 2023
Greenwashing. We’ve been talking about it for years, but still many brands are struggling to kick the habit. Whether it’s deliberately making false claims about carbon emissions, or (intentionally or unintentionally) hiding a toxic company behind a comforting cloud of fluffy, feel-good green haze, it’s a practice that lingers like pollution.
So, with the stick coming in to take the place of the carrot, how can brands and agencies skill up and clean up their act?
Rob McFaul, co-founder, Purpose Disurptors
How do we avoid greenwashing? It’s a question that comes up nearly every time we onboard a new agency to the #ChangeTheBrief Alliance, our sustainability and climate learning programme for the industry. It’s a signal that the industry is recognising they need to skill up and fast, especially as greenwashing moves up the regulatory agenda.
We all need to be sustainability professionals now. We all need to be comfortable asking the right questions of the brands we work with, and become familiar with the net zero pathway for a brand’s sector: What changes are required and when? What are the brand’s actions in response to reaching net zero? Are brands being transparent and ambitious enough in their current actions and future ambitions?
Essentially, we need to shift our perception of sustainability as just a slogan toward understanding it as a clearly defined pathway for that brand to transition to reach net zero. If we can’t find the answers to our questions…
Then take a moment to pause.
You could be greenwashing.
Greenwashing only maintains business as usual and delays the transformation we know we need to create a thriving future.
Juan Jose Posada, CCO, Grey Columbia
I think the creative industry – maybe as a reflection of the people that make it – has been, for years, pushing for more responsible, more environmentally concerned brands on all fronts: design-wise, communicationally, and with the products themselves.
However, the pace of these changes has been too slow and totally insufficient. If manufacturers, brands, communication actors and society can’t understand change needs to happen at a faster pace and in a more honest way, then regulators will have to step in. It will take everyone’s effort; we’re simply not doing enough as a society who’s self-inflicting at a faster pace than it is healing its wounds.
But also, one thing that has bothered me – having taken part in many initiatives seeking popular support – is how indifferent people can be. It is heartbreaking.
People are watching closely and judging greenwashing mercilessly, so for brands it just isn’t worth taking the risk.
Valerie Richard, Head of corporate social responsibility, BETC Paris
In France, advertising’s accountability about climate change has been heavily questioned during the last few years. The public debate ended up with reinforced regulations and new legislations introduced. Advertisements now have to include messages with an environmental argument to fight against greenwashing. In 2021, these measures lead to the signing of the Climate & Resilience law that regulates some types of advertising. For example, it is now forbidden for an advertiser to claim that a product or a service is carbon-neutral without precise proof or detailed efforts. Brands can lead themselves to financial sanctions otherwise. Also, ads for automotive brands are now regulated and have to include the environmental rating of the car shown. This rating varies from ‘A’ (low CO2 emission) to ‘G’ (high emission of CO2).
As you know, French people love to debate endlessly. And these measures have opponents and supporters. In a more objective way, a 2022 Greenflex/ADEME survey indicates that 84% of people in France need to see proof in order to believe a brand’s commitment to the environment. It constitutes a four point increase to the same 2021 survey. The survey also demonstrates that only 30% of French people generally trust large companies – a significant drop from a number that was close to 58% between 2004 and 2016. So, even though we have strict regulations in place, there is still a lot of trust to gain between brands and consumers.
Facing this enormous challenge that we have to overcome against the climate crisis, we need to go beyond regulations. As communication professionals, it is our duty to orient brands towards a type of advertising that is clearer about actual commitments. We are also blessed with a superpower: our creativity and our unique ability to make products and lifestyles appealing. Now is the time to make the need for urgent global environmental action sexy.
Ad Net Zero
Greenwashing may be unintentional, leading to accidental or even well-meaning greenwashing. No matter how it happens, there is simply no place for misleading environmental claims, given the importance of people trusting the advertising of sustainable products and services.
As the world transitions towards a net zero economy, it is vital that advertisers and brands can showcase everything they can offer. Ad Net Zero has a training qualification to help people working in the advertising and marketing services industry. This includes providing an understanding of the regulatory landscape, reviewing examples of rulings by regulators – for example, in the UK, the ASA – and providing global examples for those taking the international training. It also offers practical tips for anyone working in advertising, such as ‘greenwash checks’ for client work, how to upskill their teams in an engaging way, and how to proactively reframe existing work if needed.
Over 1,000 people from across 130 companies have taken the training to date, and we encourage everyone to sign up.
We also recommend everyone keep an eye out for rule updates. We try to make this simpler for supporters by providing updates from the ASA and in addition, the CMA, which has green claims guidance. Both these organisations also offer supportive information on their websites.
Alex Thompson, strategic planner, Ardmore
As long as sustainability is an important issue for consumers, greenwashing remains a problem to be solved for brands and agencies. Advertising performance is directly tethered to brand reputation, and marketers will always pursue avenues that benefit this metric – sustainability messaging included.
The pending EU and UK regulations may therefore be a double-edged sword. It’s great that efforts are being made to help stave off dubious eco claims, but we may see businesses hop off the sustainability train if it becomes more laborious to shout about it in their advertising. Reputation will always be a strong motivator for brands to change behaviour for the better, and sustainability is no different.
The rub is that we need a real, quantifiable proposition. You can’t market something if the claims don’t stack up, and so for marketers, this means calling out unsubstantiated statements to deliver campaigns that are both impactful and transparent. We must ensure that marketing activity is built on strong foundations of data and insights, so that greenwashing isn’t an issue.
For this to work, brands must also be honest about what they can promote, and recognise that it’s okay if the changes to their sustainability practice have been incremental. Consumers will always respect and appreciate a willingness to progress and improve.
Ardmore is on its own sustainability journey, and key to our commitment to deliver a sustainable model for advertising is acknowledging that Rome wasn’t built in a day. So, whilst it’s tempting to present your green machinations as transformative and revolutionary, just showing that you’re moving in the right direction can go a long way.
There is a new acronym in town and it’s HoT. From Planet Tracker • Reposted: April 17, 2023
If you are looking for a job where compensation can be linked to your impact, consider becoming Head of Traceability(HoT), especially at a nature-dependent company.
Here is why:
Under pressure from regulators1,investors2 and consumers, nature-dependent companies in particular need to substantiate their sustainable claims. This cannot be achieved without traceability.
Traceability is cross-functional, covering sustainability, IT, product development, sourcing, legal, logistics and marketing: it needs a dedicated person to oversee all of these. Instead, traceability is often the remit of sustainability departments, who have limited leverage over sourcing and logistics staff, raising the risk of traceability-washing (when companies’ claims on traceability cannot adequately be traced to real initiatives). Or it is siloed in sourcing, logistics, or IT departments, potentially without considering sustainability issues.
Traceability allows companies to save costs and reduce risks (through increased efficiencies, reduced waste and recalls mostly): in textiles, we calculated that it would increase net profits by 3-7%. In seafood, we estimated that the whole industry’s meagre profits could rise by 60% if it became fully traceable.
This makes HoT an attractive job where performance means a simultaneously positive impact on the company’s bottom line and a reduced negative impact on nature is feasible. Crucially, that performance can be measured and traced. It should therefore form part of the remuneration package of any HoT. Indexing remuneration on sustainability performance is badly needed, but proposals to do so typically fall short.
Being in charge of traceability is likely to be a challenging job: senior managers typically expect traceability to generate a variety of different outcomes – see Figure 1.
Figure 1: Companies’ top goals for traceability initiatives (Source: Bain, 2021)
Planet Tracker did not find enough HoT jobs
We have searched for all companies which have appointed a Head of Traceability (or equivalent title) on LinkedIn and performed a simple search on Google too. Our results are incomplete since “only” 25-30% of the global workforce is on LinkedIn,3, 4 the search was made in English only, and we might have omitted synonyms/equivalent titles. Still, we believe the results are noteworthy.
We found only 18 companies with a Head of Traceability – excluding companies whose business is to sell traceability solutions and government agencies. By comparison, there are at least 10,000 Heads of Sustainability on LinkedIn.5
One of the possible reasons why HoTs are a rare species could be that it exposes management to more searching questions from financial institutions. Access to a HoT, who has extensive reach and understanding of a company’s operations, could provide investors and lenders with significant insights. They should be very much in demand by the financial markets. Presently, the information asymmetry between management teams and their stakeholders is skewed in favour of the former.6 Please see ‘Implementing Traceability; Seeing Through Excuses’.
Companies with a HoT are engaged in a variety of sectors exposed to recognisable sustainability challenges – e.g. palm oil, textiles, tuna, leather, fertiliser, waste management. They are headquartered in 16 different countries on all continents, except South America. Three quarters of them operate in the food or textile industries – see Table 1. The absence of companies engaged in plastic production or meat production is noteworthy.
Table 1: List of companies with a Head of Traceability
Whilst large textiles companies such as H&M Group and Inditex have a Head of Traceability, many large food companies typically do not. This is concerning since a lack of oversight on traceability within a company is likely to elevate their risk profile and impede their success.
Achieving traceability in food systems is a key requirement that could increase overall food system profits by USD 356 billion or more and is key to transforming this global system. Please see the Financial Markets Roadmap for Transforming the Global Food System. Planet Tracker’s work on the seafood system alone suggested that companies that implemented fully traceable supply chains could see profits increase by 60%. Please see ‘How to Trace USD 600 billion’.
In many cases, the companies in our sample have a Head of Traceability with an IT background: traceability is viewed as a digitalisation issue. In others, they have a supply chain/logistic background. In a minority of cases, the responsibility for traceability is assumed by the Head of Sustainability.
Why HoTs will be hot
Presently, there are not many Heads of Traceability in place – if we have missed one at your company, please get in touch – but we believe this will change, for a number of reasons listed here, the most important being regulation.
For this reason, the urgent implementation of traceability systems overseen by a Head of Traceability or an equivalent cross functional person, is key in our view. Financial institutions should be engaging with company executives and enquiring where the traceability function sits within their management structure.
Note: this blog was inspired by this article in Vogue Business. Credit goes to Bella Webb for raising awareness on the need for Heads of Traceability.
By Joanna Martinez from accelerationeconomy.com • Reposted: April 17, 2023
In a previous analysis, I laid out reasons why sustainability should be a priority for every chief procurement officer (CPO). Now, I’d like to focus a bit on how procurement can make a positive impact on sustainability. Taking just a few measures can set the right foundation for a meaningful program that helps your organization meet its goals in this area.
Drafting Governing Principles
Adopt a sustainability mindset. If your company has an ESG (environmental, social, and corporate governance) already, you draw your sustainability objectives from the policies to be found there. Procurement professionals, in particular, must remember that sustainability initiatives, to be effective, require actions in at least two areas: Purchasing the greenest materials from suppliers while also implementing sustainable practices within the company. A good place to start is with the overarching principle that whatever goes to the customer, whether it is a good or a service, is produced in the greenest way possible.
Most of your suppliers have sustainability initiatives of their own and you may already be buying green without realizing it. Tap into their knowledge base by asking what their other customers are doing or what initiatives they have in place internally or with their suppliers. There will likely be some good ideas for your company to adopt.
I’ve looked at the websites of competitors to see what sustainability initiatives they are emphasizing — everything from products made of post-recycled plastic to delivery via EV trucks — to get ideas on what my employer may have been missing.
Purchasing the Greenest Materials From Suppliers
In a manufacturing company, changes to any materials that go into the finished product must undergo rigorous testing to make sure there are no compatibility or shelf-life issues. As such, direct materials and chemicals will not be a source of quick wins. Even so, it still makes sense to pursue green initiatives, even if it takes time to see sustainability results; the sheer volume of what gets purchased to support manufacturing will inevitably yield bigger sustainability gains than other parts of the business.
Here are just a few practices for procurement to consider regarding the sourcing and purchase of materials:
Convert to recycled materials and packaging where it makes sense
Prioritize sourcing wood products, such as corrugated packaging, that are certified by the Forest Stewardship Council
Include sustainability questions in RFPs and evaluate potential new suppliers on their sustainability programs
Rethink the global supplier mindset and make room for some materials coming from local suppliers, which would reduce the carbon emissions produced by transportation and help support local economies
Choose energy-efficient equipment
Purchasing Indirect Materials
Not every company manufactures, but all companies buy indirect goods and services that are obtained to help their employees and facilities function. Typically, there is a wide range of items here, from carpeting to technology. Actions that procurement sponsors will be visible to the organization and reinforce that the company is “walking the walk.” Here are just a few examples:
Source products that are designed for longevity and can easily be recycled. For example, reusable water bottles and coffee mugs are small items from a cost standpoint, but are visible indicators of a company’s commitment to sustainability.
Require that office paper be made from recycled materials
Ensure that the cleaning crews use biodegradable cleaning products
As with direct materials, make room for local businesses in the supplier mix
Include energy efficiency as a factor in equipment decisions
Prioritize sustainable transport, such as using EVs or hybrid delivery trucks
Measure and Report
There are many ways to measure sustainability progress — carbon footprint, energy consumption, ESG performance, and waste generation, to name a few. Many businesses track their CSR (corporate social responsibility) score, which evaluates a company’s actions in the areas of the environment, labor and human rights, ethics, and sustainable procurement. It’s important to choose a few measurements — whatever is relevant to a given business — that can be tracked and understood. Too many metrics — especially at the start — can result in information overload and resources being focused in the wrong place.
Proof Point
I worked for a global facilities management company, and our clients typically expected both cost reductions and sustainability initiatives. One way to get both was to focus on energy. The first thing that happened when a new client came on board was to conduct a thorough assessment of their energy usage. We looked at carpets, windows, HVAC, lighting, and even the water usage on the landscaping, to make sure that improving energy efficiency was a priority. If your company is just beginning a sustainability program, this might be a great place to start, and there are third-party experts who can help you.
By Tom Swallow from sustainabilitymag.com Reposted: April 15, 2023
With work-from-home and hybrid working being the major trends in the employment landscape. How can leaders navigate the struggle of employee engagement?
What is at the heart of every great organisation? Of course opportunities are created by financial means and a brand to bridge the gap between a business and its customers, but there is something just as crucial, if not more so, in the eyes of a sustainable, equitable business—employee satisfaction and engagement.
Employee engagement being the end goal, satisfaction is the key to unlocking the full potential of the workforce, which is why it’s important to understand what makes them want to work hard and take ownership of their role, project, brand, or branch.
However, it’s fair to say that the majority of employees are not satisfied at work. According to Gallup’s State of the Workplace report, 85% of staff are preparing to grab their pay check and head home.
Particularly as the crisis of increased living costs looms over employees’ heads—to say they are the only ones—employee satisfaction, and ultimately retention, starts at the top. So, what can leaders do to engage with their teams and draw out their best qualities and highest work ethic.
Position employees in future plans
To encourage employees to take ownership of their jobs, give them the opportunity to do so. The lack of engagement in the workforce today is a result of high figures of labour turnover, which is subject to around 87% of employees not gaining much satisfaction from their roles.
The employment trends are changing and more and more people consider the type of work they are doing and would even take a pay cut in return for more satisfaction within their role. In the Gen Z population, 71% would reduce their salaries for more meaningful work.
This also goes hand-in-hand with employee wellbeing and many of the workforce have been given a taste for a more balanced working lifestyle following the coronavirus pandemic. In the remote-working era, we’re seeing more and more organisations adopting work-from-home or hybrid-working models, however, this is not to say employees shouldn’t check in with them in the process. Allowing employees to work from afar presents new challenges, such as loneliness and the inability to separate work from home life.
The cost-of-living crisis exacerbates concerns as many employees are spending more time at home, which is increasing this further due to the increased use of home amenities for work. An easy way for employers to support them with this is by ensuring they have the knowledge of relevant work-from-home tax breaks and benefits that are available to them to cover some of the costs of working remotely.
Jim Harter, Chief Scientist of Workplace and Wellbeing, Gallup. Submitted photo
“When your employees’ wellbeing is thriving, your organisation directly benefits—they take fewer sick days, deliver higher performance, and have lower rates of burnout and turnover. But, when your employees’ wellbeing suffers, so does your organisation’s bottom line.”
Being transparent about human resources matters that affect employees is one thing, but proactive behaviour to support them while working from home is a key factor in building a lasting relationship with them. The most resilient teams are able to be transparent with their colleagues and likewise encourage them to speak out to leadership if they are in a troubling situation or concerned for their wellbeing.
By Dan Berthiaume, Senior Editor, Technology from Chain Store Age • Reposted: April 15, 2023
A new survey reveals widespread consumer interest in sustainable products, but there are a lot of nuances.
The vast majority (86%) of respondents want brands to provide more sustainable products, and 72% are already familiar with the sustainable products and alternatives available on the shelves, according to shopping rewards app Shopkick, which surveyed more than 10,000 consumers across the country to understand their values around sustainability and how they incorporate them into their shopping behavior.
When it comes time to purchase a product, more than half of all respondents (55%) consider the sustainability practices of a brand. However, drilling a little deeper, Shopkick found that consumer interest in sustainability is not uniform across every type of product or absolute. For example:
Close to eight in 10 (78%) respondents say that groceries are the most important category for sustainability. When asked about the specific types of sustainable products they tend to buy, a slim majority (52%) purchase recyclable alternatives (such steel straws or glass tupperware) and products with less wasteful packaging. Significant numbers of respondents will purchase fresh produce (37%) and eco-friendly products like natural soap (30 percent).
When asked why they consider a brand’s sustainability practices, 60% of respondents cite a desire to reduce production waste, 54% say they are concerned about the environment overall, and 49% want to create a better world for next generations.
About four in 10 (39%) respondents say they are willing to pay more for sustainable products. Of those willing to buy sustainable products at a higher price, most (70%) would pay one to five extra dollars. Additionally, 63% of respondents say that sustainability is just as important as budget friendliness.
If a brand is not committed to sustainability, more than half (52%) of respondents say they would still buy from them. However, 23% say they will wait for the brand to produce a more sustainable alternative and 19% would switch to a brand that aligns with their values.
Forty percent of respondents say they have purchased more sustainable products now than they did a year ago, and they plan to purchase even more sustainable products a year from now.
Blue Yonder collected responses in February 2023 from more than 1,000 U.S.-based consumers, 18 years and older, via a third-party provider.
By Emma Chervek | Reporter | SDXCentral.com • Reposted: April 14, 2023
Corporate sustainability isn’t as important to top-level executives as it was a year ago, according to the results of Google Cloud‘s latest Sustainability Survey.
The new research found global executives place environmental, social and governance (ESG) efforts as their third most important business priority. That represents a change from last year’s survey, which identified ESG as executives’ No. 1 organizational concern.
This increasingly common view of sustainability as a short-term cost rather than a long-term investment is being driven in part by the way today’s macroeconomic environment is forcing organizations to make sustainability progress with fewer capital resources, which was cited by 78% of respondents.
Justin Keeble, Google Cloud’s managing director for global sustainability, told a group of reporters that even though sustainability dropped in prioritization, executives are still “interested in moving the needle, which is great. But there are new pressures,” he said. “In particular and, of course, economic headwinds, but we’re also seeing challenges around measurement and skill building and some of the implementation challenges that come from having to deliver on the big, ambitious goals that organizations have set,” Keeble explained.
Speaking of ambitious goals, the survey found a majority (59%) of global executives admit they overstate or inaccurately represent their organization’s sustainability efforts. Google Cloud describes this “pervasive concern” as “corporate greenwashing” or “green hypocrisy,” and the research found most executives view this hypocrisy as accidental.
The survey also revealed nearly 75% of executives agree a majority of companies in their industry would be caught greenwashing if they were “thoroughly investigated,” which further highlights the popularity of this tactic.
However, executives identified a lack of sustainability tools as their main barrier to ESG progress, with 87% searching for better measurement systems to help set accurate and reasonable targets.
Chris Talbott, who leads sustainability at Google Cloud, added that because “executives don’t have the insights related to sustainability efforts at their fingertips,” they find themselves “in a precarious position with so much pressure to talk publicly about sustainability efforts.”
Moving past greenwashing
Sustainability continues to be about transforming the business, Keeble argued. “Companies that are taking this agenda seriously aren’t wavering in the face of economic headwinds. They see the imperative to rotate their businesses to more sustainable models, to drive efficiency by doing more with less and building resilience in their operations, in their supply chains,” he said.
To that point, he sees sustainable business as “much more than a PR exercise” or a way to boost brand reputation. And during these tougher times, “you get to see who’s serious about this agenda versus who’s paying lip service,” he noted.
Sustainability also needs a greater focus on its business benefits and value. In light of the budget trimming rippling across most industries, the situation presents an opportunity to bring clarity to strategic areas of investment that make good business sense, like dedicating resources to sustainability-driven technology and innovation, he explained.
Sustainability programs help organizations identify inefficiencies in material or energy use, manage broader risk sets like acute climate risks and provide transparency to stakeholders while working toward environmental goals.
By Afdhel Aziz, Contributor and Co-Founder, Conspiracy Of Love, And Good Is The New Cool via Forbes • April 14, 2023
AllPeople Marketplace is a new entrant to the world of ethical marketplaces. Their ambition is to change the way we use our voices and our wallets by gathering high-quality, safe products that prioritize environmental and social impacts and having customers at the top of their business model. AllPeople is creating an ever-growing community of responsible, like-minded people, brands, and nonprofits who make conscious purchasing decisions to help ignite positive change.
Humans are habitual, and it can be challenging to change patterns unless they have a reason. AllPeople Marketplace gives three reasons—company ownership, cost savings, and charitable donations.
Its equitable business model leads intrinsically motivated customers to shop at AllPeople to buy the brands they already know, trust, and love. AllPeople is 100% customer and employee-owned and every aspect of its model finally, and rightfully, places people before profits. Its business model, including funding and word-of-mouth marketing, creates a customer-centric system that inherently reduces wasteful expenses, allowing its products to be sold at the lowest price on the market and the savings to be donated to customers’ choice nonprofit, charity, or school.
I caught up with the founder of AllPeople Marketplace, Bill Wollrab to discover more about this progressive and innovative business model and how consumers can spark social and environmental change.
Bill Wollrab. Photo: ALLPEOPLE MARKETPLACE
Bill Wollrab started the discussion by shedding light on his previous endeavors that got him to start AllPeople Marketplace by crowdfunding. “I was one of the founders of the Yard House restaurant chain which sold to the Olive Garden for $575 million in 2012. I mention this only to describe how we raised our first million dollars for this successful venture. I told my partners that we should raise money from a large group of small investors versus a small group of large investors because I thought that the more investors we had, the more loyal customers we would have,” Wollrab explained.
This turned out to be very true, but it also created so much buzz in the local community that it allowed them to cut their marketing costs in half compared to other restaurants and therefore greatly increased our profit margins.
In 2016, he became aware of the new equity crowdfunding legislation which was passed by Congress, and he knew that a similar strategy could be used to acquire both customers and investors simultaneously but on a much larger scale.
AllPeople is an online marketplace that sells most of the staple products that consumers are already purchasing on a regular basis but where it gives them the opportunity to invest in the company with as little as $100. By doing this, AllPeople Marketplace achieves these goals:
AllPeople is creating the ultimate customer-centric business model where customers are very loyal to the AllPeople brand. Simultaneously the company is greatly reducing its marketing expenses, thereby significantly reducing its customer acquisition costs or CAC which creates a much higher customer lifetime value or LTV.
AllPeople is creating a more fair and equitable business model which rewards its customers/investors through profit sharing rather than having most of the profits go to billionaires and institutional investors.
The AllPeople model also motivates its customers/investors to be its evangelists by incentivizing them to tell their friends and family about AllPeople as well as to post on their favorite social media channels.
“They know that the more they advocate for us, the more we grow which only has a positive effect on the stock value. The second AllPeople competitive advantage is having another low-cost customer acquisition strategy where we partner with nonprofits and schools or PTOs,” Wollrab added. AllPeople Market provides these organizations with the tools to market AllPeople to their supporters and families where 5% of each purchase is donated to their organization. This is ten times as much as the Amazon Smile program which recently ceased to exist.
Again, AllPeople is utilizing very effective and low-cost word-of-mouth marketing instead of expensive paid advertising. He emphasized, “We would rather give this money to your favorite nonprofit or your children’s school instead of Google and Facebook. We currently have a group of nonprofit partners with over one million supporters.”
Buy Better. Give Back. Graphic: ALLPEOPLE MARKETPLACE
AllPeople Marketplace product prices are very competitive because the company’s greatly reduced marketing costs allow it to offer lower product prices while building a more profitable business model for its customers and investors. It has also recently signed an exclusive agreement with a company that was chosen by Microsoft to become the new Amazon Smile for Microsoft.
We talked more about the opportunity for customers to invest in the company. Customers own and invest in AllPeople through JOBS Act and Performance-Based Funding, creating a deep-rooted connection to the company. Wollrab explained, “JOBS Act is the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act that now allows for non-accredited investors, meaning non-millionaires, meaning 92% of the rest of the population, to invest as little as $100 in new startup companies. Performance-Based Funding greatly mitigates investment risk and incentivizes the consumer to help us grow. We put the responsibility on us to reach our milestones before we ask the customer/investor to invest. Only when we reach our next milestone can consumers increase their investment, thus motivating consumers to continue sharing our business and shopping on our site.”
As for the selection of products that are listed on the AllPeople Marketplace, Wollrab added, “Our products put the desires of our customers first. AllPeople focuses on the pantry, personal care, and health and beauty. We offer products that are nonperishable, easy to ship, have high margins, and are aligned with the socially responsible, non-toxic, eco-friendly values of our customers.”
Make Change with Your Wallet. Graphic: ALLPEOPLE MARKETPLACE
Wollrab elaborated more on the successful customer acquisition strategy and building a customer-centric model. Because AllPeople’s equitable business model allows products to be offered at the lowest price possible, 5% of each purchase is donated to a nonprofit, school, or charity of the customers’ choice. On Instagram, Tik Tok, and Twitter, people share the latest news, graphic, or stat that signals their values and beliefs to their followers. Thus, people will be eager to share where they not only just found their favorite brand at an affordable price, but also donated to a cause they believe in. “We also offer discounts when customers refer friends and family and share on their social media feeds. The customer/investor becomes the marketer, organically fostering word-of-mouth marketing that has a zero to a low-cost strategy of acquiring and retaining customers. Word-of-mouth marketing reduces extraneous costs, which helps build our customer-centric model,” he concluded.
AllPeople Marketplace gives consumers a reason to switch where they shop and excites them to use their voices, decisions, and wallets to create social and environmental change. Its model is one many marketplaces could learn from.
SUBMITTABLE EMPLOYEES PACK BOXES AT THE MONTANA FOOD BANK NETWORK. Photo: Submittable
By Laura Steele from submittable.com Reposted: April 12, 2023
Many corporate leaders are confronting a new landscape when it comes to hiring and retaining employees. It’s not just about dollar signs anymore–people want to work for organizations that are intentional about building a positive company culture and willing to invest in their communities.
Launching a corporate employee volunteer program is a great way to set your company apart. It allows you to tap into one of your best resources—people. A corporate volunteer program empowers employees to give back by creating opportunities for them to spend time helping nonprofits and charities dedicated to causes they care about.
But like any new initiative, creating a successful, lasting program requires a plan. We talked to Chris Jarvis, an expert on corporate volunteering and co-founder of Realized Worth. He shares some unique insights to help frame your approach.
Inspired by his advice, we’ve laid out the 7 strategies you need to get people engaged and the 7 steps to launch your program.
Before you dive in, get the comprehensive guide on measuring employee volunteering impact
A volunteering program can be transformational for employees, community members, and your business. Measuring that transformation may seem daunting, but it’s not. Get the guide: “How to Measure the Impact of Corporate Volunteering“ to learn how to gauge the full impact of your efforts.
Let’s get started.
The benefits of corporate volunteer opportunities
Before we dig into the strategy of building your program, let’s pause to ask why it’s worth it in the first place. Not only will this help you understand the potential power of your investment, but it will help you make a case to your colleagues and leadership team.
The impact of volunteering moves in two directions. There’s the effect on the people or causes being served. But also, those who volunteer benefit as well. As Chris Jarvis explains: “There’s actually data to show the reward system of helping people when you can see their face and you understand the significance of the task—it is almost indistinguishable from the yoga high, the runner’s high, and sexual activity.”
The experience of volunteering can be incredibly meaningful. And that has a profound effect on how connected employees feel to their jobs and the company as a whole.
A good employee volunteer program can contribute to:
Employee retention: When employees feel engaged in their work and connected to the company values, they tend to stick around.
Productivity: Connecting to a meaningful purposehelps people bring their best selves to work and can boost their effectiveness.
Recruiting: Potential employees are attracted to companies that invest in their communities and provide opportunities to give back on the job.
A positive company culture: Incorporating a spirit of service and collaboration can have a profound effect on your workplace dynamics.
Community impact: Putting your resources toward a community need can make a big difference in addressing society’s biggest challenges.
Brand reputation: Consumers are looking to support companies that show up for their communities in meaningful ways.
Leadership development: Volunteer projects give employees opportunities to try on different roles and develop new skills.
When it comes to facilitating a corporate volunteer program, it’s truly a virtuous cycle. Let’s move on to how to implement one effectively.
7 tips to increase participation
One of the big questions about corporate volunteer programs is: if you build it, will they come?
According to the latest Chief Executives for Corporate Purpose (CECP) report, employee volunteering participation has seen a steep drop. Of course there are some external factors at play (looking at you, COVID), but even before the pandemic, only 30% of employees were taking advantage of volunteering opportunities provided by their employers.
So that begs the question: how do you inspire people to get involved?
As you look to build or revamp your program, keep these 7 strategies in mind.
1. Provide paid time off to volunteer
This is a pretty easy one, but it’s important. Give employees dedicated time off to volunteer that they can use during regular working hours. If you set up a program, but then ask people to volunteer on their own time, you’re sending the message that your company is not willing to put resources toward this effort.
And don’t lump volunteer time in with PTO or sick leave. Create designated VTO (volunteer time off) and encourage everyone to use it.
2. Make it easy
Like any process, if you make it difficult or confusing to sign up for volunteer opportunities, people won’t do it. Make it as easy and simple as possible. Think of the sign-up process as part of the program itself. You want it to be a positive experience right from the start.
Using an employee giving software platform that allows each person to browse and sign up for opportunities, view and track their VTO, and get important information all in one place can help. No one wants to sort through spreadsheets or long email threads—don’t make them.
3. Eliminate the unknowns
Some people might be hesitant to volunteer because they haven’t done it in the past. You can help them get over this barrier by providing simple information up front.
People like to know what’s coming. Think of times you’ve been reluctant to say yes to something because you weren’t sure where exactly to go or who would be there. Make sure volunteers know what to wear, where they’ll be working, and if they need any special skills. This can make a big difference in helping people feel comfortable as they try something new.
4. Make it social
Corporate team volunteering is a great way to connect with teammates on another level. It’s also a good chance to work with new people—if you’re at a larger company, there are probably a lot of folks you don’t get to interact with directly. Volunteering can facilitate new and deeper relationships across your organization.
Choose a platform that allows employees to see who else will be volunteering with them so they can start forging those connections early. This also allows them to invite others and coordinate plans.
Jarvis explains that not all volunteers are alike. He breaks them down into three stages. “The first stage space is for individuals who don’t volunteer much and who end up volunteering because of an extrinsic reason,” he says. Social connections are a great external motivator. Building this into your program will help inexperienced volunteers take that first step.
From there, some volunteers will move onto the second stage of volunteering in which they’re motivation to give becomes intrinsic—they derive a deeper meaning from the work. In stage three, which only a small percentage of participants reach, volunteering becomes an integral part of someone’s identity. At this stage volunteers are considered guides; they can lead and inspire inexperienced individuals.
5. Consider behavioral science
In some ways getting people to volunteer is like getting them to exercise. People know volunteering makes them feel good, but still, finding motivation can be tricky.
A lot of Chris Jarvis’s work centers on how behavioral science comes into play. Behavioral science explores how people make decisions. Surprisingly, it isn’t always a matter of logic. Jarvis explains how this relates to employee engagement and volunteerism: “Most programs are not configured based on how people consider options, evaluate, and make decisions,” he says.
“Incorporating behavioral science is about taking advantage of the insights that we have around our cognitive biases—the shortcuts or heuristics we use to make decisions,” he says.
For example, Jarvis highlights the power of loss aversion bias. People don’t like to lose things. In fact, that aversion to loss is much stronger than the desire to make gains. How can this play into a corporate volunteer program? You can make VTO hours “use them or lose them”. Psychologically, this can help motivate people. Suddenly, they don’t want to lose the opportunity to volunteer and they feel a greater sense of urgency to get involved.
Tapping into behavioral science doesn’t require a big overhaul of your program. It’s about finding opportunities to align how your program is structured with how people actually perceive the world and make decisions.
6. Keep the pressure off
Nothing can sour the joy of volunteering like making it mandatory. As much as you want employees to get involved, don’t apply intense pressure. In the end you want it to be their decision.
Rather than trying to force employees to participate, do your best to lower barriers that might prevent them from getting involved. For instance, you can ensure that opportunities are convenient—no one is likely to sign up for a shift that would force them to sit in rush hour traffic, for example.
Jarvis frames the approach around nudges, or subtle interventions that encourage employees to be more engaged in giving. In fact, he has recently launched Nudge the Good, an initiative that seeks to leverage behavioral science, neuroscience, and transformative learning theory to help improve results in corporate citizenship.
7. Incorporate virtual volunteering
Virtual volunteering has taken off over the last two years. Of course it can’t replace the experience of being in person, but including some opportunities to volunteer remotely will help engage more people. It’s a particularly good option for distributed teams.
Don’t skimp when it comes to planning these virtual events. You’re not just trying to check a box—you want everyone who participates to feel like the work they do has meaning.
7 steps to launch your program
1. Choose a cause
When it comes to choosing a focus for your volunteer program, you want employees to be involved. Too often an executive sets the priorities and the program begins to feel like a pet project for the boss—not a great model for getting people across the company excited and invested.
You can use an employee engagement platform to create a survey or a nomination process so that employees can weigh in on what causes matter to them and which organizations they want to support.
Maybe it makes sense to have some coordinated volunteer opportunities, but you may also consider letting employees choose when and where they volunteer. Perhaps they already have a relationship with an existing nonprofit and they want to use their VTO to continue that work. To take it a step further, perhaps you can empower employees to leverage their relationships with nonprofits to bring new opportunities to their coworkers.
Starting the volunteer experience with a sense of ownership and autonomy ensures that your employees will feel more engaged in the work.
2. Create a unique program
Although it might be worth taking some inspiration from other companies with volunteer programs, don’t just copy what someone else is doing.
You want to lean into your strengths. Craft your program strategy so that it aligns with your organization’s mission. Think about what inspires your team to do its best work and try to tap into that energy.
One way to leverage the unique skill sets of your employees is through skills-based volunteering. Your team can put their talents and expertise to work for nonprofit organizations. Not only can this provide deeper meaning and engagement, but it can help nonprofits address some of their critical needs.
Don’t be afraid to get creative and try new approaches. Across philanthropy there has been a reckoning around “best practices”. Sometimes processes have become so entrenched, organizations adopt them without interrogating whether they truly serve the mission at hand.
As Chris Jarvis puts it: “A square wheel was a best practice until someone invented a round one.”
3. Center the meaning
Part of the power of volunteering is the deep sense of meaning participants feel when they give back. Chris Jarvis explains it as “transformative experience” for volunteers “at a psychological level (changes in understanding the self), a convictional level (revision of belief systems), and behavioral (changes in real-world actions)”.
Be sure to keep this meaning at the center as you build your program. If employees feel like the company doesn’t care about the outcomes and is only trying to create good PR, they will be much less likely to participate.
Help volunteers connect with the meaning of the work. This can mean connecting them directly with the people who benefit. For example, instead of just packing boxes of food, can they help deliver food to people in need?
Roy Baumeister at Florida State University explains that people derive meaning from situations in three ways: when they see purpose and value in what they are doing, when they have a sense of personal efficacy and control, and when they feel a sense of self-worth.
Do everything you can to help participants get close to the meaning of the work.
4. Get leadership involved
When it comes to getting company leadership involved, it’s all about striking a balance. As mentioned earlier, you don’t want executives setting priorities and undercutting the sense of ownership employees feel. On the other hand, you don’t want the higher ups to seem disengaged or uninterested.
Organization leaders should be your program’s biggest cheerleaders. They should volunteer alongside employees so they understand the value of the work and can speak honestly about the experience.
Updates and information about volunteering should be included in company-wide communications. Leaders should champion these efforts in the same way they celebrate business wins. And the positivity needs to be genuine. Employees can easily recognize inauthenticity. If your leadership team isn’t truly invested in giving back, it will show.
5. Provide structure
Although you want employee enthusiasm to drive your program, your company needs to provide the logistical support and infrastructure.
Your CSR or HR team should work to build relationships with community partners so you can develop a deep understanding of the community’s needs. Establishing these partnerships gives your program legitimacy and will help employees understand the wider impact of their work.
Before you launch, you also want to choose a corporate volunteering platform that allows employees to view available opportunities, sign up easily, and track their VTO. Having this piece in place from the outset is essential. If employees’ first impression of the volunteer program is that it’s difficult or confusing to sort through, they’ll lose interest and it’ll be difficult to re-engage them.
One part of your plan should involve setting goals. Decide what outcomes matter most to you. You could set goals around participation rates, total VTO hours used, employee experience, or community impact. Don’t get bogged down by trying to track too many metrics—choose a couple aspects you want to focus on and use your employee volunteer management software to track your progress.
6. Take stock
A lot of energy and excitement can go into launching a volunteer program. That’s great. Initial enthusiasm is important to get everyone on board. But creating a successful program that lasts is all about continuing to cultivate what you’ve built.
First of all, you want to take stock of what your program achieves. Are you reaching the goals you set? Are you seeing the engagement and impact you want to see? Share your findings with employees and the public. This transparency will show that you’re willing to show up authentically and honestly.
Make it a practice to seek feedback from employees about their experience. Use their insight to refine or reshape your approach.
You also want to continue to develop your program. Maybe you seek out additional community partners or add new volunteer opportunities over time. Or perhaps you find fresh ways to celebrate participation. What’s important is keeping the program relevant and active–if it starts to feel stale to employees, interest will wane.
7. Make volunteering part of your company culture
You want to integrate the spirit of giving and stewardship into your company culture. The last thing you want is to create a volunteer program that feels at odds with or separate from how you do business.
People from all across the company and all departments should be engaged. For example, if only folks from HR are showing up, you want to figure out why. Are some managers not supportive of employees taking time to volunteer? Is messaging around the program not reaching everyone?
Celebrate the successes of your program both internally and externally. Become a brand people associate with giving. This also means you need to look at how your business operates more broadly. If you’re creating volunteer opportunities to address problems you’re helping to perpetuate, people will be quick to point out the hypocrisy.
Look at your business practices. Are there more ways you can consider the social impact of your work? Sometimes a volunteer program is just the start.
Find the right partners to support your work
As you look to build or reshape your corporate volunteer program, you want to leverage tools that will simplify the process and increase engagement. Submittable is a social impact platform built to help you launch, manage, and measure your CSR programs. Find out more.
Localism is here to stay; and brands will increasingly be expected to understand what that means, so that they can make positive contributions to communities everywhere.By Tom Idle from sustainable brands.com • Reposted: April 11, 2023
COVID-19 changed everything — especially how people think about their local communities. In all corners of the world, local people, businesses and community groups suddenly became incredibly important as we all navigated the restrictions imposed by the virus. Lockdowns fostered a sense of belonging; we all felt much more connected to where we live and much more likely to support local companies, look after our neighbors, and promote our local identity.
Localism is a trend that has outlasted COVID.
As many nations grapple with rising inflation and a cost-of-living crisis, people continue to be drawn to ideas, products and organizations that promote a local agenda — whether in politics, business or ecology. As economic uncertainty and geopolitical disruption dominate, people are seeking a sense of belonging as they become more attached to their local environment.
In response, brands are making moves to link their own agendas to localism — whether that is promoting their sustainability performance, enhancing their transparency or highlighting how their business is benefitting local communities. In China, for example, many brands follow what’s known as guochao — the concept of incorporating traditional Chinese cultural elements into products, showing that they understand and acknowledge what is important to local movements.
It is a trend supported by research that shows 53 percent of consumers say shopping with small and local businesses gives back to their communities and gives them more purpose in their shopping habits. 62 percent of Malaysian consumers say they would like to know more about the people who produce the food and drink they buy; and 63 percent of US consumers say that they try to buy from local companies where possible.
Meanwhile, the latest research from Panoptic — a trend and foresight tool developed by the Internet Freedom Foundation — highlights ‘local spirit’ as one of its 30 trends currently driving change among consumers. In its analysis, it highlights that people are “dismissing mass-produced goods in favour of products and experiences that are more unique and authentic. People want to experience more personal and meaningful interactions with local communities. They appreciate products and businesses that understand local cultures and history. And there is more value being placed on the stories behind products, brands and experiences.”
Brand examples
So, how are brands leveraging the love for localism? Last year, for example, McDonald’ssupported Spanish farmers affected by wildfires by launching the “Burger That Could Not Be.” The profits from the limited-edition product — merely an empty, charcoal-black box to act as a reminder of the crops destroyed and all the burgers that could not be produced due to agricultural losses — were donated to farmers struggling to rebuild after the wildfires destroyed more than 47,000 acres of land in Valencia.
Elsewhere, Nike launched Nike Unite — a concept designed to help locals connect more closely with sport. Each concept store ensures that only local people get hired; and the design and visual merchandising is all about showcasing local partnerships with hometown athletes and local landmarks.
Food-delivery company Deliveroo has teamed up with the Singapore Red Cross to deliver first-aid training for its drivers. They are now equipped with vital skills and first-aid knowledge that could help them respond to situations when they are out delivering food in their communities.
Localism is big in beer
Building more authentic and locally focused brands has been a real focus for the beer market in recent years. As the world’s most popular alcoholic drink, beer has both a big environmental footprint and a significant opportunity to effect change.
Most beer relies on barley — by far the biggest raw material used in brewing — which is malted in a process that goes back more than 5,000 years. However, beer makers have always played around with different raw materials to save money and create new tastes — from oats and rye to cassava and sorghum. They have also added adjuncts to their process, such as un-malted grains or grain products to supplement the main mash ingredient, along with enzymes to overcome the challenge of low enzyme content in many adjuncts and lower the viscosity in the process.
All of this is good news for the localism agenda. Using locally sourced ingredients can offer consumers a more authentic experience from their favourite beer brands, making them feel more connected to the local community. Guinness parent company Diageo, for example, runs East African Breweries in Kenya. It has been buying sorghum from 60,000 smallholder farmers, using the barley alternative for its Senator Keg product.
Authenticity and transparency are key
Tapping into the localism agenda is a great way for brands to bring local communities together, creating a sense of society that more and more people crave. But it’s important for brands to be authentic and transparent in doing so. For example, companies will need to go further in giving consumers access to information that explains the local relevance of their products, why local ingredients and products are more sustainable, and how these products are providing local communities with a source of income.
Beyond product localisation, brands must also demonstrate they understand the local culture, how they fit into it and how their approach will benefit local people.
Localism is here to stay; and brands will increasingly be expected to understand what that means, so that they can continue making positive contributions to communities everywhere.
Activists protest greenwashing in Amsterdam on Nov. 25. Photo: ROMY ARROYO FERNANDEZ – NURPHOTO – GETTY IMAGES
By Andrew Martin via Fortune • Reposted: April 9, 2023
The apparel sector is responsible for between 2 and 8% of annual global greenhouse gas emissions. As one of the most polluting industries on the planet, it must urgently reduce its environmental impacts.
To date, efforts to transition to a more responsible industry are often self-policed. While real commitments to drive impact have been made, this has historically been more a result of deep commitments from some brands, retailers, and manufacturers to create positive change across the industry.
Voluntary initiatives have helped make real strides towards a more responsible sector. However, they alone cannot drive the necessary scale of change. Our own initiative, the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC) represents around half of the global apparel and footwear industry. We know there are brands, retailers, and manufacturers who are already going beyond baseline standards to lower their environmental and social impacts–but now we need to see everyone working towards the same ambitious goals.
Regulation is a crucial lever for creating an apparel and footwear industry that protects both people and the planet. Unfortunately, it has lagged far behind what’s required for such a vast global industry. But this is changing, and fast.
Green and social regulation is coming for the apparel sector. In 2023, we expect momentum to build globally for the widespread policing of apparel’s sustainability claims. At the SAC, we believe this is long overdue.
The EU Commission recently proposed the hotly anticipated European Substantiating Green Claims Directive, aimed at fighting misleading advertising and stamping out greenwashing. It will require all environmental claims to be backed up with credible evidence. Legislation is in the pipeline elsewhere too. In the U.S., for example, a federal act to protect garment workers’ rights–the FABRIC Act (Fashioning Accountability and Building Real Institutional Change Act)–is in the offing. The New York Fashion Act is another proposed bill that would require companies with revenues of over $100 million doing business in the state to disclose their environmental performance and climate targets.
Due to the nature of some of the work we do at the SAC, it may come as a surprise that we don’t think voluntary action alone can solve apparel’s sustainability problems. But the situation is too urgent–and all our futures depend on it. The window in which we can act on the climate crisis is rapidly closing. Consistent, science-backed regulation is needed to help drive the tangible, industry-wide progress we need.
New laws to protect people and the environment will not render voluntary initiatives like ours obsolete, as we believe our role sits comfortably alongside legislation. Through developing tools and frameworks, and sharing knowledge, experience, and best practice, not only can we support apparel and footwear businesses to deliver against legal requirements, but also be an accelerator for positive change on a global scale with the help of smart regulation. This should be the approach for all consumer goods industries.
However, we want to highlight the need for such legislation to be harmonized and mandatory. The proposal for the EU Substantiating Green Claims Directive does not mandate a single, clearly defined framework based on scientific foundations, such as the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF), which opens the door to a range of alternative methodologies and could undermine rather than advance progress in the sector. We are concerned that the directive will create confusion for brands and retailers looking to advance their sustainability credentials, in turn leading to an increase in miscommunication to consumers.
In addition, the directive opens to door to different interpretations by member states, which risks leading to greater fragmentation when it comes to how we articulate and communicate environmental impacts in EU countries. In a climate emergency, this is not how to create the clarity we need to drive mass consumer change. As the move towards proper policing accelerates, we need to ensure a consistent approach is taken worldwide.
In the meantime, organizations must have a clear and consistent method for calculating a product’s environmental footprint. To date, the PEF still represents the most holistic, scientifically grounded method for assessing the environmental impact of a product, reducing inconsistencies in how life cycle assessments (LCAs) can be interpreted. We firmly believe action needs to start today, not further down the line while further revisions are developed, consulted on, and piloted. We need clear legislation that removes confusion and supports positive business action.
No industry can police itself. It’s time to regulate apparel and footwear’s environmental and social impacts. Strong legislation will drive everyone in our sector–as well as the wider consumer goods industry–to step up and take responsibility. At the SAC, we recognize that regulation will bring us closer to our shared goal of an industry that leaves the world in a better place. We’re calling on other voluntary organizations to do the same.
Andrew Martin is the executive vice president at the Sustainable Apparel Coalition
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
The rise in the severity and frequency of extreme weather events and natural disasters is impacting real estate markets across the country. Higher temperatures, flooding, wildfires, droughts, seasonal storms, etc., are damaging homes and affecting communities at increasing rates. The climate risk profile of certain areas is changing, causing shifts in housing preferences, buyer demand, property values, resale ability, financing options and insurance rates.
As mainstream awareness of these climate-related risks grows, consumers are increasingly factoring sustainability and green features into their real estate purchasing decisions.
According to the 2022 REALTORS® and Sustainability Report – Residential, agents and brokers found that 34% of consumers were very or somewhat concerned about the impact of extreme weather and climate change on the market, and 51% were somewhat or very interested in sustainability.
Widespread consumer interest in these issues makes it crucial for real estate professionals to be knowledgeable on topics such as weather- and environmental-related risks in their local market, sustainability, energy efficiency and green home features.
Here are some tools and resources that will help you better understand these issues and address the questions and concerns of your clients.
“Intro to Sustainability & Resiliency: What REALTORS® Need to Know” is a one-hour course available at no cost to members of the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) at learning.realtor. This course provides a solid overview of the issues and highlights the importance of sustainability in real estate.
The 2022 REALTORS® and Sustainability Report – Residential provides a statistical snapshot of agent perspectives on sustainability issues in the industry, gathered from a survey of NAR members.
NAR’s Green Designation is designed for agents who want to learn how to effectively market green properties and confidently serve clients interested in energy efficiency, sustainability and green home capabilities. The Green Designation coursework has been revamped and restructured, and can be completed in a classroom setting or in a self-paced online format. You can learn more about the education at https://green.realtor.
The REALTORS® Property Resource® (RPR®) includes a ClimateCheck® tool that agents can use to help their buyer-clients understand the current and future climate-related risks of a property they are considering purchasing. The ClimateCheck® tool analyzes data from local and national sources to rate a property’s future risk of climate change-related hazards (drought, fire, storm, heat and flood) and assigns a rating from one to 100, with 100 representing the highest risk. Ratings are displayed in a climate-change risk snapshot in the Additional Resources section of any RPR® Property Details page. RPR® is free for all NAR members.
Research shows that sustainability matters to consumers. Real estate agents who understand climate risks and stay up to date on sustainability and resilience strategies in their markets will be better prepared to help their clients make informed purchase decisions.
Every organisation should be able to identify what a sustainable version of itself looks like, who is needed to run and support that, and where there are needs for new skills and roles within it.By Kathleen Enright from sustainable brands.com • Reposted: April 9, 2023
The war for talent may be ongoing, but the battlefield is being redrawn. The seismic changes to people’s lives wrought by COVID, the climate emergency and the cost-of-living crisis have all reshaped the demands employees are making on the companies they work for. The Great Resignation was, at its core, a movement to find greater purpose in work and is an indication of the power dynamics swinging in favour of the workforce. To win the hearts and minds of the best and brightest, corporates need to acknowledge these shifts and alter their tactics accordingly.
Tony Danker, Director General of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), openedits recent Future of Work Conference by recognising that “new realities demand a new approach.” Alongside the expectation for more flexible working models, he highlighted that people are increasingly making career choices based on employers’ social and environmental ethics and that businesses need to adopt new values to win them over. “It’s no longer just that they work for us,” he warned. “We have to work for them.”
Danker’s argument was that British businesses must embrace bold climate goals and demonstrate their social awareness through “active diversity and inclusion strategies” if they want to attract Generation Z workers. Young talent, he believes, will only work for businesses that share their own values.
It doesn’t start — or end — with Gen Z
All of which is true. But by focusing on the need for purpose among workers at the start of their careers, Danker overlooks the rising demand among employees of all ages for corporations to demonstrate social and environmental accountability. Generations X and Y are just as keenly focused on sustainability when it comes to picking their employer.
A 2020 report by intranet company Unily found that 72 percent of multigenerational UK office workers were concerned about environmental ethics — and 65 percent would be more likely to work for a company with strong environmental policies. Climate change, human rights and social equitychimed particularly loudly with workers in their 30s and 40s.
Employers who focus solely on the demands of Gen Z when it comes to incorporating sustainability into their business, marketing and brand strategies will be ignoring the needs of a significant — and expanding — proportion of their staff. Employee demographics are changing, with the proportion of over-50s in the workforce steadily increasing. According to Cebr research, by 2030 47 percent of over-50s will be in employment. To put this into context, in 2032 the first of the millennials — aka Generation Y — will enter their 50s. Meanwhile, the employment rate of over-60s has almost doubled in the last two decades and is set to continue increasing.
Attraction is futile without retention
While it is clearly crucial to consider the requirements of their future workforces, businesses need to be aware that social and environmental issues also play strongly with senior talent. The generation of employees currently raising young children have heightened fears over the planet’s fragility, while those established in their careers have greater leverage to make employers respond to their priorities. Disregard them, and they will take their skills and experience elsewhere. Fundamentally, corporate responsibility isn’t just a factor in talent attraction but, crucially, in talent retention.
Among every demographic, the talent pool is worried about the future and well-informed about the realities of the climate crisis. Workforces want businesses to do more but they will not be duped by punchy slogans or unsupported promises. The Unily research found that 83 percent of office workers believed their employers were doing too little to address climate change, suggesting a worrying gap between intention and action on the part of employers.
This is partly due to a failure by companies to align their sustainability strategy with business strategies across every aspect of their organisations — a failure to demonstrate how sustainability is rooted in the business, how it is driving change, reshaping it for tomorrow; and how employees will play a critical role of in that journey. In our ProgressPoint survey of 20 global companies, Salterbaxter analysed the employee communications of progressive employers to understand how their sustainability strategy was being framed to staff and if it enabled them to make active decisions. Were employees, for example, provided with opportunities to take on real-world sustainability challenges? It was an area when almost every business fell down.
Empowering workers to contribute to sustainability solutions is far more motivating than simply raising awareness of corporate sustainability strategies and is a significant factor in talent retention. But we found that the companies we analysed scored only averagely or poorly in how they positioned sustainability in their employee value proposition or in their employee development programmes — they may have progressive sustainability strategies, but they are not taking their talent along with them.
Authenticity is everything
The retention issue makes it essential that companies embed their sustainability strategy into their human capital strategy — as well as their wider business strategy — rather than having it sat alongside existing HR operations. Doing so means demonstrating how the sustainability strategy helps deliver the business strategy and effectively communicating that combined strategy to existing and potential talent so that they are engaged and inspired.
Marketing an organisation as a sustainability-led employer is largely insufficient. Attracting and retaining top talent means hitting multiple proof points that show the sustainability strategy is long term and operational. This includes making genuine progress against environmental and social goals, including the UN SDGs, and striving to meet credible corporate sustainability standards.
Alongside those goals and targets, the sustainability strategy should outline who will deliver them. There must be a framework in place to bring talent into the company, and then a platform from which they are empowered to take the strategy forward. Each business should be able to identify what a sustainable version of itself looks like, who is needed to run and support that, and where there are needs for new skills and roles within it.
Conclusion
Demonstrating that sustainability strategies lie at the heart of the business will enable companies to secure the best talent — which will then allow those businesses to deliver on the sustainability challenges they face now and in the future, thus attracting (and retaining) future talent. It’s a powerful virtuous circle for those that get it right.
We are already seeing that the future of work will be very different from the past. Business as usual is over. This is the beginning of a long-term shift in power dynamics in the workplace that will see employers fighting to attract and retain talent in new ways. Those that recognise and authentically respond to the ethical priorities of their current workforce and future talent will be best placed to succeed in tomorrow’s business landscape.
Eric Block On Responsible Branding 
You must be logged in to post a comment.