This week, VF Corporation (the mega holding company for apparel and active lifestyle brands such as Northface, Wrangler, Lee, EastPak) purchased the venerable Timberland brand of sporting footwear for $2 billion.
Of course, Timberland put this positive spin on the news. Timberland Chief Jeff Swartz said in a statement: “Timberland is proud of its rich heritage, its track record of success and its reputation as a responsible and environmentally-conscious global citizen, all of which will be preserved and enhanced by becoming part of the VF family of brands. VF is known for its ability to acquire and grow authentic outdoor brands, while protecting a brand’s unique culture and DNA.”
The jury will be out but many eyes will be watching as the sustainable darling Timberland (ranked number 2 out of 150 companies for sustainability performance by the nonprofit group Climate Counts) will be inspiring to VF. or in the pursuit of stated 10% annual revenue growth – Timberland starts a rocky slide down from sustainability heights of greatness.
According to CSRHUB.com, VF Corporations current performance on sustainability and overall corporate social responsibility measures is hardly a pace-setter.
VF’s overall CSR ranking is 44 – below the averages for other apparel companies, the average U.S. company and all companies ranked. Its performance on the environment was 20% below the average for U.S. companies.
Contrary to VF’s rather uninspiring CSR performance, CSRHUB.com gives Timberland an overall ranking of 63 – and a sterling 65 on environment performance measures (vs. 48 for the average U.S. Company).
Timberland’s track record of integrating socially responsible practices and community outreach into their brand marketing efforts make them a poster child for positive sustainable branding. We worry VF’s leadership won’t cherish the vision and values that has made Timberland special and uniquely sustainable. Stay tuned.
CSRHUB.com is a great resource for evaluating CSR performance of companies – go here.
Monterey, CA – June 8, 2011– Consumer appetite for green products has increased significantly in the past year, according to findings from the annualImagePower® Global Green Brands Survey, one of the largest global consumer surveys of green brands and corporate environmental responsibility. This year’s survey, which polled more than 9,000 people in eight countries, reveals that consumers worldwide intend to purchase more environmental products in the auto, energy and technology sectors compared to last year. Now more savvy about how green choices in personal care, food and household products directly affect them and their families, global consumers are expanding their green purchase interest to higher-ticket items such as cars and technology.
Consumers are divided on which industry currently does the best job of protecting the environment. 18 percent of American and 20 percent of Australian consumers say the energy industry does the best job of protecting the environment. By comparison, most of respondents in Germany (19 percent), India (22 percent), China (33 percent) and Brazil (22 percent) cite the technology sector. In the UK, more than 21 percent of consumers say the grocery store industry is the top protector of the environment.
While personal care, grocery and household products are the industries with the greatest representation among the top ten brands list, consumers in the US indicate that they intend to spend more money on green technology, energy and automotive products or services in the next year. When it comes to current usage of green products or services, the 2011 study reveals that the household products and grocery categories have the highest consumer adoption rates in all countries except China, where packaged goods/beverages and personal care are the most used categories, and in Brazil, where household products and personal care dominate. In all countries, consumers indicate that in the coming year they are less likely to buy green packaged goods and beverages, grocery and household products.
“We’re seeing a shift in the ‘In Me, On Me, Around Me’ mentality when it comes to purchasing green products,” said Russ Meyer, Chief Strategy Officer of Landor Associates. “Consumers have a good understanding of how green choices in personal care, food and household products directly affect their families, and they are now seeing benefits like costs savings that attract them to higher cost items like cars and technology.”
Consistent with last year’s study, more than 60 percent of consumers globally want to buy from environmentally responsible companies. Respondents in all eight countries surveyed indicate that they are willing to spend more on green products. In developed countries such as the US and the UK, roughly 20 percent of those surveyed would spend more than 10 percent extra on a green product.
In developing countries, however, consumers say that green products have a higher inherent value. Ninety-five percent of Chinese consumers say they are willing to spend more on a product because it’s green—with 55 percent of them willing to spend between 11-30 percent more. Similarly 29 percent of Indian consumers and 48 percent of Brazilians say they are willing to spend between 11 – 30 percent more on green products.
“Consumers in developing countries express greater concern over the state of the environment in their countries, which may contribute to their greater willingness to pay more for green products,” said Paul Andrepont, Senior Vice President of Penn Schoen Berland. “Consumers in these markets also differ from their developed-nation counterparts in believing that selection, rather than cost, is the greatest barrier to buying green products. Brands that address these consumers’ very real concern – over air pollution in India or deforestation in Brazil – have the ability to position themselves as premium in the market, a possible competitive advantage.”
Packaging continues to be a matter of great concern for US consumers. Seventy-one percent believe companies use too much material in product packaging – though only 34 percent of US consumers say they consciously purchase products that use less packaging. Almost half of American consumers feel that packaging that can be recycled is more important than packaging made from recycled or biodegradable materials.
Packaging also plays a critical role in communicating product benefits to US consumers. More than 50 percent of American consumers say on-pack information helps them understand how green a product is. Additionally, 40 percent say that packaging is their primary source for information on environmental issues regarding products.
“Other than price, the two biggest influences on purchase decisions are on-package messaging and prior experience with the product, both of which satisfy the consumer need to understand a benefit beyond ‘saving the world,’” said Annie Longsworth, global sustainability practice leader for Cohn & Wolfe. “It’s critical for green brands to communicate the real and tangible benefits of their products in addition to being green, which still feels like luxury to many consumers.”
2011 US rankings
For the first time since the inception of the ImagePower® Green Brands Study in 2006, the four brands perceived to be the greenest are “born green” companies. The full list includes:
“When we analyzed the approach of the top ten brands companies, using our Esty Environmental Scorecard™, it was clear that the winners achieve a product-value-information trifecta,” said Amy Longsworth, partner at Esty Environmental Partners. “The top brands offer clear price value through co-benefits: a great innovative product that meets my functional needs plus green attributes that meet my values needs. These companies also tend to have robust life-cycle insight and complete sustainability strategies across their value chains, which enable them to draw from rich experience and data for their consumer communications.”
The seventh annual Green Brands study polled more than 9,000 people in eight countries —including the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Brazil, India, Germany, France and Australia—and was conducted by WPP agencies (NASDAQ: WPPGY) Cohn & Wolfe, Landor Associates and Penn Schoen Berland Associates (PSB), as well as independent sustainability strategy consulting firm Esty Environmental Partners. The Green Brands Study identifies emerging trends related to consumer perception and purchasing behavior of “green” products. The study was conducted online among the general adult population between April 2, 2011 and May 3, 2011. It has a margin of error of +/- 3.0%. In China, India, and Brazil, respondents were from tier-one cities.
To view 2011 global findings, click here. For US findings, click here.
Congratulations to Coca-Cola with its appointment of former Chief Marketing Officer Beatriz Perez to Chief Sustainability Officer.
Under the vision of CEO Muhtar Kent, Perez will be responsibile for integrating sustainability initiatives into brand and marketing efforts and further demonstrate its monitoring and improving the commitment to the moderate impact of its products and operations on the environment.
We also find it notable that the new office of sustainability at Coca-Cola will include leaders responsible for corporate social responsibility, environment and water, external affairs and sustainability strategy and communication.
Read the news release below.
May 23, 2011 – The Coca-Cola Company (NYSE: KO) has appointed it first Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) and created a new global Office of Sustainability in an effort to better integrate ongoing initiatives.
Beatriz Perez, who is currently Chief Marketing Officer for Coca-Cola North America, will serve as CSO beginning July 1. She will work to integrate Coca-Cola’s sustainability initiatives in the areas of water, climate protection, packaging and recycling.
“We have made significant progress with our sustainability initiatives, but our current approach needs focus and better integration to further accelerate our system sustainability agenda and meet our 2020 Vision goals,” said Muhtar Kent, Chairman and CEO, The Coca-Cola Company. “We are realigning this important work to create a unified team, strategy and business plan that connects our sustainability work and actions.”
Under Perez’s leadership, the Office of Sustainability will create and oversee Coca-Cola’s integrated global sustainability strategy; set goals and commitments; assess and drive scaled investments; and steward and track all global partnerships and key sustainability projects.
Reporting to Perez, the new team will include John Reid, Vice President, Corporate Social Responsibility; Charlotte Oades, Global Director, Women’s Economic Empowerment; Abby Rodgers, Vice President, Sustainability Strategy and Communication; Jeff Seabright, Vice President, Environment and Water; and Lisa Manley, Group Director, Corporate External Affairs.
Perez will report to Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer Alex Cummings.
Kent said Perez is uniquely qualified for the role based on her passion for sustainability and deep experience at the Company, including the incorporation of sustainability initiatives into Coca-Cola’s North American marketing programs.
May 21, 2011
But environmentalists and some consumers are crying foul, saying that many companies are making the products out to be greener than they really are, a practice they call greenwashing.
The term caught on when hotels began asking guests to reuse towels, saying they were trying to conserve water, though skeptics said it was really to skimp on laundry costs.
These days, greenwashing is reaching “epidemic proportions,” according to advertising firm Ogilvy & Mather, which has been pushing for accurate environmental marketing.
“If we allow companies to get away with exaggeration, consumer skepticism will become cynicism and they’ll stop choosing green products at all,” said Scott McDougall, chief executive of eco-marketing company TerraChoice.
Last year, TerraChoice counted 5,000 items in retail stores that claimed to be green, a 73% increase from the year before. But on every toy and 95% of home and family products, at least one eco-friendly claim turned out to be misleading or false, the company found.
Some efforts just seem a bit odd: Plastic Barbie dolls can now sport handbags and accessories made from recycled materials.
“Most companies are engaged in incremental tinkering — symbolic actions without any real substance,” said Kumi Naidoo, executive director of Greenpeace International.
But no one can agree on what exactly makes a product green and therefore what exactly constitutes greenwashing.
As a result, federal regulators have had difficulty setting standards to regulate green labeling. The Federal Trade Commission has a voluntary guideline for eco-advertising, but it is 20 years old. It is being updated.
According to a recent survey, 65% of consumers want a single seal identifying a green product, similar to the way beef is labeled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
But for now, there’s a swarm of companies that issue green certification, endorsements and labels for a fee.
One such program, the EcoAd from EcoMedia, a division of CBS Corp., has earned the ire of some environmental groups. They complained to the FTC that CBS was being potentially deceptive when it sells green leaf badges for advertisers to use in commercials.
“An Eco-label that promises advertisers a green image while telling them they don’t need to do anything to earn that image is the very definition of greenwashing,” said Michael Green, executive director of the Center for Environmental Health, in a statement.
A portion of all EcoAd proceeds go to environmental projects, said EcoMedia President Paul Polizzotto. And although there aren’t disclaimers on the ads themselves, viewers are directed to a website noting that the leaf symbol is not meant as an endorsement of the companies that use it.
“If an advertiser wants 30 seconds of your time, they might as well improve the quality of your life, and that’s the furthest thing from greenwashing,” Polizzotto said. “What I usually see in media is a lot of talk about greening and not a lot of action.”
Labels play a major role in helping consumers decide between products claiming to be green. Nearly 40% said they rely on labels, according to a report from the eco-marketing company Shelton Group.
“Many don’t trust manufacturer motives, but they end up making a decision at the shelf based on the packaging, usually just buying the brands they’ve always bought,” said Suzanne Shelton, chief executive of the group.
It can be a tricky call for consumers, who are regularly met by a vast array of vaguely defined green catchphrases such as “natural,” “clean” and “organic.”
Even manufacturers often don’t know the difference between designations such as “compostable” and “biodegradable,” researchers said. Biodegradable goods break down into carbon dioxide, water and biomass over time, while compostable items do the same while also releasing nutrients into the soil, which can be good for growing plants.
“Companies don’t really understand the science behind it and they don’t question it,” said Steven Mojo, executive director of Biodegradable Products Institute, a testing group. “They think that their packaging or product is somehow going to magically disappear in a landfill.”
Claire Scarisbrick, 26, recently spent half an hour sifting through eco-friendly body wash options atWhole Foods. The dental hygienist and chef, who lives near West Pico Boulevard and South La Brea Avenue, said she researches unfamiliar brands on her iPhone and avoids green products from large companies out of fear of being “duped.”
She likes locally produced products that aren’t heavily processed. She didn’t buy a cosmetic company’s “natural” line of face washes after she compared it to the company’s standard product and found little difference in the ingredients.
“I don’t want to be putting something with 30 chemicals in it onto my skin,” she said. “If I’ve got the money, I’d much rather spend more of it on something that I believe in, not something that’s just easily accessible.”
Marketers are recogizing the value of introducing alternatives to traditional plastic bottles. We encourage continued innovation and adoption of these strong signs of a commitment to sustainability by consumer packaged goods marketers – and support from their customers. It’s a great sign of spring and summer and the “growing season.”
The Heinz Ketchup Plant Bottle will begin arriving in stores in July.
Pepsi recently announced they have devleoped the worlds first PET plastic bottle
made entirely from plant-based renewable resources.
Pepsi’s bottle is made from bio-based materials including switch grass, pine bark and corn husks. In the future, the company expects to broaden the renewable resources used to create the green botle to include orange peels, potato peels, oat hulls and other agricutltural byproducts from its food business. Pepsi says the new bottle is expected to begin appearing on shelves in 2012.
The healthy sign of a race between arch rivals Pepsi and Coke is Pepsi innovation claims to be 100% renewable materials vs. the PlantBottle currently being deployed by Coca-Cola which is made of 30% renewable resources.
Coca-Cola was among the first to pioneer the plant bottle technology in 2009.
Fair Trade USA, the leading third-party certifier of Fair Trade products in the United States, reports new findings which confirm that the prominent appearance of the Fair Trade Certified™ label increases sales among coffee-buying consumers.
To investigate the topic of consumer demand for Fair Trade products, researchers Jens Hainmueller of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Michael J. Hiscox of Harvard University, and Sandra Sequeira of the London School of Economics, conducted a six-month research study in partnership with a prominent national grocery retailer. As reported this weekend in the Wall Street Journal, the team examined purchasing behavior among actual consumers at 26 stores and key findings show that:
The findings are consistent with a Globescan study conducted in 2010, which revealed that 75 percent of consumers said Fair Trade certification makes them feel “very positive or positive” about products; 30 percent said Fair Trade is “likely to increase their purchase interest;” and over half said “independent third-party certification is the best way to verify” a product’s social and environmental claims.
“Overall the findings suggest that there is substantial consumer support for Fair Trade,” said Michael J. Hiscox of Harvard University. “The Fair Trade label by itself had a large positive effect on sales, indicating that a substantial number of coffee buyers place a positive value on Fair Trade certification. In addition, a sizeable segment of coffee buyers were willing to pay a premium for coffee if the premium was directly associated with support for Fair Trade. The tests suggest that there are plenty of consumers ready to vote with their shopping dollars to support Fair Trade when it is offered as an option by retailers.”
The study can be referenced online at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1801942.
A new report from Green Is Universal reports that 78% of consumers believing more than ever that buying green is a way to shop with their values and ethics (up 9 points vs. two years ago). The poll also reveals that an overwhelming majority of consumers feel they have a personal responsibility to take care of the earth (93%), and believe that if we don’t do so, there will be negative consequences for future generations (91%). Nine out of 10 consumers say companies have a social responsibility to protect the environment.
Not only do consumers hold themselves accountable when it comes to protecting the earth, but they believe companies should be held to the same standard. and three-quarters (77%) say they have a more favorable impression of companies that promote environmental causes. Putting their money where their mouth is, findings show substantially more consumers who say they have boycotted a company/product in the past year, because it had policies and practices that were not environmentally responsible (27%) (up 8 points from 2009).
Additional highlights from a related but separate Green is Universal poll on re-use, “From Trash To Treasure,” include the following:
Ogilvy Earth issues an important report on moving sustainability for niche to normal.
The report has some interesting insights into how marketers are creating more confusion and causing more harm than good in terms of getting people to adopt sustainable products into their everyday lifestyles. To quote Oglivy Earth:
Topline: We’ve been getting the message all wrong
Our research shows that when it comes to motivating the American Mainstream, marketers, governments, and NGOs have been approaching messaging and marketing around sustainability all wrong. Indeed much of what we’ve been doing has actually been cementing the Green Gap by making green behavior too difficult and costly from a practical, financial, and social standpoint.
The study found that 82% of Americans have good green intentions but only 16% are dedicated to fulfilling these intentions, putting 66% firmly in what we’re calling the Middle Green.
Other highlights from the report.
“If you are striving to be more sustainable, your actions need to demonstrate that in everything you do,
which means new ways of thinking about branding.”
Kudos to the Sustainable Branding Collaborative for their new research report surveying innovators and early adopters in the sustainable business environment. Some of the key interesting findings that stand out of the work include:
You can download a summary of their survey here.
The Sustainability & Branding Survey
We’ve long known the employee satisfaction is a key driver of customer satisfaction. Now a company’s efforts to improve sustainability is proving to be another driver of employee engagement, pride, productivity and retention.
A public opinion survey conducted by Harris Interactive National Quorum on behalf of Interface, Inc. reveals that 63% of full-time workers believe a company’s impact on the environment is vital when evaluating a new workplace, and 61% say the same about the company’s profit margin. Meanwhile, an even greater majority—71%—value a commitment to sustainability, defined in this study as “environmental protection,” as an important or very important criteria.
“There is broad recognition that companies that focus on sustainability, or protecting and preserving the environment, are appealing to American workers,” said Dan Hendrix, president and CEO of Interface. “Profits are obviously the lifeblood of any company, but what we see here is that employees want their organizations to have more purpose. These results speak to a lasting trend about the kind of long-term-focused organizations that employees want to belong to.”
This telephone study was conducted between February 23 and 27, 2011 among 504 U.S. adults employed full-time to learn and share opinion for ideals about workplace preferences. The study also revealed gender disparities in how employees evaluate potential employers. For instance, 78% of female employees felt a company’s impact on the environment was particularly important, while 52% of male workers believed the same. These findings could point to an opportunity for organizations focused on reducing their impacts on the environment to attract and retain women in leadership positions.
Other results showed the extent to which employees feel engaged with their current companies. National findings carried an overall optimistic tone despite the still-challenging economic climate, with:
Recent research from Edelman Worldwide shows that two thirds of UK consumers think brands spend too much on advertising and should invest more in social causes and promoting them through their advertising.
Nine out of 10 consumers believe that brands need to place at least the same weight on society’s interests as those of business and do more than just give money to good causes.
The report claims that more than 50% of consumers say “purpose” is more important than design, innovation or brand loyalty as a purchase trigger, when quality and price are the same.
Nearly two-thirds of UK consumers say that they will buy and recommend products and services from companies that support a good cause.
Carol Cone, managing director of brand & corporate citizenship at Edelman, says: “Cause related-marketing, as we know it, is dead. It is no longer enough to slap a ribbon on a product. Consumers seek deeper involvement in social issues and expect brands and companies to provide various means of engagement. We call this the rise of the ’citizen consumer’.”
Key findings from the report
In its third Green Gap Study, Cone research continues to document the confusion that reigns over environmental messages in the marketplace.
Consumers Seeking Clarity
A majority of consumers are distrustful of companies’ environmental claims (57%) and are overwhelmed by the amount of environmental messages in the marketplace (51%). Given this confusion, it’s understandable that consumers are somewhat wary of general claims alone:
Consumers are clearly seeking information, but fortunately, they do not expect companies to be saints. A full three-quarters (75%) say it is okay if a company is not environmentally perfect – as long as it is honest and transparent about its efforts.
At the same time, most Americans are willing to punish a company for using misleading claims. Of the 71 percent who will stop buying the product if they feel misled by an environmental claim, more than a third (37%) will go so far as to boycott the company’s products entirely, according to the 2011 Cone Green Gap Trend Tracker.
“It’s telling that three years after Cone first conducted the Green Gap survey, not much has changed,” saysJonathan Yohannan, Cone’s senior vice president of corporate responsibility. “Consumers continue to be confused about environmental claims, often without realizing it. This creates a huge risk for consumer backlash. To overcome this gap between environmental messaging and consumer perception, companies need to provide detailed information in-line with the Federal Trade Commission’s guidelines in a place where consumers are making purchase decisions.”
Consumer Perception and Environmental Reality Not Always Aligned
As corporate marketers and regulators alike evaluate how to communicate environmental commitments and avoid greenwashing, the 2011 Cone Green Gap Trend Tracker tested which of three common marketing approaches was most influential in consumer purchase decisions. Consumers were asked to “purchase” the most environmentally responsible of three generic cleaning products based on an isolated marketing approach – a certification, a vague environmental claim or an environmental image.
Deception Breeds Consumer Backlash
Testing the certification, claim or image on-pack indicated each drove consumer perceptions that the products themselves did not necessarily live up to. This disconnect is a significant threat for companies because consumers who feel misled by an environmental claim may punish the brand. They will:
“As Americans continue to consider environmental claims when shopping, companies must be transparent to build trust – or face the consequences,” says Yohannan. “Puffery and generic claims alone aren’t going to cut it. Companies will be held accountable to ensure the claims are not only accurate, but also aligned with consumer perceptions.”
A new study conducted by Green Research demonstrates that executives charged with sustainability yield influence far greater than their own budgets.
“Sustainability leadership is about leverage,” said David Schatsky, principal at Green Research and author of the study. “Whether it’s deploying new technology to slash power usage at a data center, or reengineering a manufacturing process to use raw materials more efficiently, sustainability executives have to make it happen through leaders of departments throughout their companies. And that means influencing and ultimately adding dollars to other departments’ budgets to achieve sustainability goals.”
Wielding influence inside their companies is the first frontier for sustainability executives. Exerting influence outside companies is the next, Schatsky says. A number of companies are discovering that factors outside their direct control, from the practices of suppliers and logistics providers to the behaviors of their customers, can have substantial environmental impacts and need to be managed if the companies are to achieve their sustainability goals. The report finds that influencing suppliers and customers will become a trend of increasing importance for sustainability executives.
Kudos to ADDorDELETE, the brainchild of the tribe at Haberman. It’s a fresh yet startling conversation centered around the power of marketing and advertising to ADD to society and address social problems and challenges.
By challenging the global marketing industry to re-direct 5% of the $500 billion global ad spend to causes, social problems and people that need help, we can unleash $25 billion for global good.
Learn more at the Add or Delete website
Join the conversation on facebook
Let’s call out all those ads that we’d prefer to delete. Those messages that attempt to entertain at the expense of others. The ads that just create noise and empty moments. ADDorDELETE challenges everyone to take stock – what legacy do you want to leave? Are you ADDING? Here’s to less self-promotion and more social improvement.
In a new survey issued by StrategyOne, 82% of American’s gave a “C grade or lower” on how corporate America did in 2010, with 40% of Americans assigning Corporate America a “D” or an “F”.
The wake up call is that Americans are extremely frustrated and dissatisfied with the behavior of companies in America. Quite literally, if the leadership of American companies were politicians, there would be a landslide election of the American people voting them out of their corner offices.
“Let’s be clear, Americans are not dreaming up some far out vision of utopia,” said said Bradley Honan, senior vice president of StrategyOne. “Instead they are being realistic that Corporate America should – and indeed must – engage in important issues of the day where they can make a demonstrably positive difference. That means the economy and jobs for starters, but also ensuring their products are safe and not harmful to use, and that they simply conduct their day to day business activities in an honest, ethical, and transparent manner.”
Other interesting facts undercovered in the StrategyOne survey included:
Let’s hope company leaders make some serious New Year’s resolutions to improve their performance and more effectively communicate with the public to show how they are being more responsbile, sustainable and ethical. That is the only way to reduce the “trust gap”. And it is important for corporate leaders to recognize—once and for all—that their futures are dependent on their customers….who happen to be the American people, at the end of the day.
StrategyOne Survey Methodology:
StrategyOne conducted 1,081 online interviews among a representative sampling of Americans between December 6 and 8, 2010.
A new report commissioned by KPMG and The Economist Intelligence Group shows that global corporate business executives are seeing positive—and potentially surprising – business benefits from their sustainability initiatives. More than half of those surveyed represented C-Suite executives. This week’s report is a preview of a major research paper coming from KPMG early next year.
Some of the other benefits cited by executives from sustainability initiatives include happier employees, better relationships with clients and suppliers, cost reduction, access to new markets, new product and service offerings and improved investor awareness.
But once again there is a gap between reality and perception, with many companies still not effectively communicating sustainability progress to investors and other stakeholders.
And the vast majority of survey respondants claim they viewed sustainability reporting as “just PR.”
It is time for business to back up their actions with transparent and authentic communication to translate their efforts into positive external perceptions and brand reputation enhancement. The communication challenge is to be real, believable, trusted and for the messages to be served up in digestible, understandable and emotionally inspiring ways. And that friends, is the essence of great branding and the huge opportunity: creating responsible brands that prosper in the new age of sustainability.
Download the KMPG Research Report Preview Here
The first male-specific survey in the six-year history of the PRWeek/Barkley Cause Survey has produced surprising results regarding Men’s relationship with Brands that have cause marketing programs – they are influenced by cause marketing at nearly the same rate as women.
The survey polled 4,252 marketing pros and 2,365 consumers and found that:
While the data indicates that Men direct their dollars to brands associated with causes in high numbers, 68% of corporate marketing executives surveyed said that they had no plans to specifically target men with their efforts.
Although according to the results, there are brands that could benefit from this kind of communication. When asked what companies are not doing as much as they should to associate with causes, the three top answers were BP, Apple and Goldman Sachs.
For the full survey, visit www.barkleyus.com.
Proving once again that existing approaches to reporting and marketing sustainability initiatives and corporate social responsibility are failing to connect, new research from The Hartman Group demonstrates too few people are aware of sustainable products and companies.
While the research indicates at 15% increase in awareness of the term “sustainability” up to 69%, just 21% of people responding to the survey could identify a sustainable product.
“We’re seeing a broad gap in the way consumers and companies think about and approach sustainability,” said Laurie Demeritt, Hartman Group President & COO. “That very few consumers today can name a sustainable company underscores the fact that so many Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and sustainability activities go relatively unnoticed by consumers.”
Demeritt continues in the Hartman release: “Above all consumers are looking for companies that are good citizens. From this perspective, we say consumers equate sustainability with the golden rule, or a reciprocal notion of fair treatment of communities, people or animals, and look through this lens when evaluating companies or thinking about which brands to use.”
More than 1,600 U.S. adult consumers participated in the online survey.
Disturbing new research shows that the vast majority of consumers WOULD NOT CARE if two thirds of brands disappeared in the future.
Congratulations to Havas Media for their new Brand Sustainable Futures global research report on consumers’ rising expectations of business and brands. The report issued this week shows that:
The data is continued support to the need for businesses to accept the criteria and realities of how they are perceived and their expected role in society.
Havas Director of Global Business Innovation Sara de Dios Lopez commented on the research by saying:
“There’s a real opportunity for companies who shift from relying only on ‘what they do’, through their corporate facts and transparency initiatives, and start building relevant brand roles and engaging initiatives that capture ‘collective will’ and spur people into action.”
WE LOVE THIS NEW VIDEO FROM YEO VALLEY – AN ORGANIC DAIRY IN THE UNITED KINGDOM.
Released last week, the 2010 Cone Cause Evolution Study reports significant new evidence supporting the rise in importance of cause related marketing. Despite overall low consumer confidence and prolonged unemployment due to the recession, the one thing consumers are confident in is their belief in brands that support worthy causes.
Higlights of the report show that:
The report also highlighted the powerful role of linking moms and causes in brand purchasing behavior.
Of mom’s surveyed, 95% say cause marketing is acceptable and 92% say they want to buy a product supporting a cause.
In an edited excerpt of his new book Aftershock: Reshaping the World Economy After The Crises, Phillpee Legrain writes about the need to embrace new approaches capitalism and consumerism. His point is that without consumption, there is no production, no income and no jobs. And in plenty of markets around the world, there are millions and millions of people with unmet needs. Responsible brands understand that they need to be serving those markets not only with sustainable products but with efforts that aid the public good. The balance is essential for the retention and recruitment of new audiences of prosperous consumers.
“The aftermath of the crisis opens up huge opportunities to reshape the world economy for the better. A fairer, richer, greener and more stable global economy is possible. But to achieve it, we need to rediscover the virtues of open markets, open societies and open minds that go hand in hand with progress: great opportunities for everyone to chase their dreams and fulfill their potentials.”
A new survey of corporate business executives by Deloitte identifies the gap that still exists between sustainability vision and execution. While most business leaders surveyed indicated knowledge of the benefits of developing a relationship between sustainability and the business, much more work needs to be done to make it a fundamental part of the operational, cultural and strategic performance of the company.
Thanks for Deloitte for making this research available to business leaders everywhere.
“There must be a better way to make the things we want, a way that doesn’t spoil the sky, the rain or the land.”
– Sir Paul McCartney
Coming to South Africa in October is a conference entitled Brands and Branding for Good.
Congratulations to the organizers and the roster of speakers representing a wide range of global brands including IBM, McDonald’s, Nike, and Dell for coming together to understand and demonstrate how brands can work for the public good.
Learn more about the Brands and Branding For Good Conference here
This article from Brandweek demonstrates that the recession has affected not only consumer wallets, but also brand perception. Kudos to the folks at Landor Associates, Penn Schoen Berland and Burson-Marsteller for their new consumer survey demonstrating that transparency and corporate responsibility have become far more important to consumers in a tough economy.
The survey measured consumer perceptions of corporate social responsibility practices and ranked companies that are the most responsible. It found that despite the recession, 75% of consumers believe social responsibility is important, and 55% of consumers said they would choose a product that supports a particular cause against similar products that don’t.
“[Corporate social responsibility] can be the olive branch between struggling industries and consumers in cases where consumers are experiencing the highest expectations and the biggest let downs,” said Scott Osman, global director of Landor’s citizenship branding practice, adding that the industries with brands that have performed poorly, are the ones in which responsibility is valued most.
While 38% of respondents plan to spend the same or more on products or services from socially responsible companies, more than half of consumers are unsure about the meaning of CSR. And those who do know what the term means, define it as “giving back to the local community” (20%), and as “self-regulation and accountability” (19%).
Additionally, the survey found that 70% of consumers are willing to pay a premium for products from socially responsible companies. In fact, 28% are willing to pay at least $10 more. That means companies have an opportunity to differentiate themselves if they can communicate clearly how they give back to their employees, communities, and the environment, per the survey.
When asked to name the most surprising findings, Osman pointed to the fact that nearly 50% of 18-24 and 25-34 year olds are more likely to take a pay cut to work for a socially responsible company—a much higher percentage than any other age group. However, Osman added, “a year where there seems have been so much responsibility expressed, especially in light of the earthquake in Haiti, only 11% of Americans say they’ve heard corporate CSR communications.”
May 21, 2010 – A recent study conducted by Cone LLC finds that while the overwhelming majority of American consumers believe that their ideas can help business build more sustainable products, a much smaller number believe companies are doing enough to encourage communication about corporate sustainability.
The report, entitled 2010 Cone Shared Responsibility Study, finds that 84% of the 1,045 American consumers polled believed that their ideas could benefit businesses sustainability offerings, while only 53% felt encouraged to engage at any level. The four key areas consumers wanted more engagement in are: including how a company conducts its business (85%), its products and packaging (83%), its support of social and environmental issues (81%) and its marketing and advertising (74%).
In grading companies on their engagement levels, over 75% of those surveyed gave companies either a “C”, “D”, or “F” on customer engagement. Cone calls this a lost opportunity for most companies, as many more consumers would be more likely buy products and services and recommend companies with better engagement policies.
Consumers are also prepared to listen to companies willing to engage them, with a full 92% of respondents wanting more communication from brands. While this number sounds like an overwhelming endorsement for more brand communication, some other statistics bring to light the dichotomy of the situation:
For a copy of the complete 2010 Cone Shared Responsibility Study fact sheet, please visit http://www.coneinc.com/research/.
Ana’s Playground, the breathtaking allegory short film about children at the hands of armed conflict, may be coming to a film festival near you in early 2010. I encourage everyone who has a chance to take in this riveting drama which is well on its way to receiving a best short film nomination at the Academy Awards.
It’s a perfect way to kick off the New Year with the resolution to learn more and get involved in helping children in war torn countries and the countless number of kids that can benefit from organizations like Right to Play, the principal non-profit organization benefiting from funds raised by Ana’s Playground.
You can see Ana’s Playground at the following film festivals. Follow the links to each individual film festival for screening times and locations.
Santa Barbara International FIlm Fest – Feb. 4 – 14th (Academy Sanctioned)
Boulder International Film Fest – Feb. 11th – 14th
Sedona International Film Festival – Feb. 21st – Feb 28th
Cinequest (San Jose) Feb. 23rd – Mar. 7th (Academy Sanctioned)
Tiburon Film Fest – Mar. 18th – Mar. 26th
In addition to these Film Festivals, Ana’s Playground will have a special screening at Right To Play’s event for sponsors and supporters at the Vancouver Winter Olympics.
Here’s a recent spot from Mastercard Canada raising awareness about Right to Play.
And for friends in the Twin Cities, Ana’s Playground has been selected as the exclusive film to be screened at Augsburg College during the annual Nobel Peace Prize forum on Friday, March 5 on campus. The screening will follow a keynote address by 2008 Nobel Peace Prize winner Martti Ahtisaari.
Details on the Nobel Peace Prize Forum
Some of the recognition Ana’s Playground has earned around the world includes:
WINNER – Best Int’l Short Film – Foyle Film Festival (Oscar Qualifying)
WINNER – Best Screenplay – Los Angeles Int’l Short Film Festival
WINNER – Best Short Film – Norwich Int’l Film Festival
WINNER – Best of the Fest – Norwich Int’l Film Festival
WINNER – Best Dramatic Short Film – New Hampshire Film Festival
WINNER – Best Short FIlm – Cenflo Film Festival
The last team standing (sort of) at the end of the Copenhagen Climate Summit was The Age of Stupid TV Show production team.
The Stupid Show Recaps Copenhagen
You can watch a post -conference Age of Stupid Show with hosts Franny Alexander and Mark Laynas featuring interviews with attendees, dignitaries and others who left with strong opinions about the “agreement”. A re-freshingly non-American-centric perspective.
Measures to combat climate change could have appreciable direct as well as indirect benefits for public health, say authors of a series of six papers and four comments in The Lancet Online First.
In the first comment, authors from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine say that many policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can also have a range of ancillary effects, including effects on health. The authors of the first paper in the series looked at the effects of two hypothetical interventions: to improve the energy efficiency of UK housing stock (combined fabric, ventilation, fuel switching and behavioural changes); and to introduce 150 million low-emission household cookstoves in India. The UK housing changes were estimated to cut disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) by 850 and to save 0.6 megatonnes of carbon dioxide per million population in one year. Introducing cookstoves was calculated to result in substantial reductions in acute lower respiratory tract infection in children, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and ischaemic heart disease resulting in 12,500 fewer DALYs and a saving of 0.1-0.2 megatonnes of carbon dioxide per million population per year.
A further paper modelled the health and environmental effects of changes to urban land transport in Delhi and London, which included lower-carbon-emission motor vehicles and a higher level of active travel. Increasing active travel – in either city – gave rise to more health as well as environmental benefits than increasing use of lower-emission motor vehicles. Much of the benefit arose from a reduction in the number of years of life lost from ischaemic heart disease, by 10-19% in London and 11-25% in Delhi. Other papers looked at the health effects of strategies linked to low-carbon electricity generation, short-lived greenhouse pollutants, and food and agriculture. In his own comment, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, points out how this research could help combat the public’s negative perception of initiatives to combat climate change: “The overwhelming impression among the public is that any response to global warming will be negative … We will have to drive less, fly less, eat differently, change the way we generate energy, and alter our lifestyles in ways that will limit our freedom to do as we please … Not surprisingly, this political message is hard to sell to a public already struggling during a time of global financial insecurity.” “Health is likely to become an increasingly important concern, not only for a public anxious about the impact of climate-change mitigation policies on their lives, but also for politicians eager to sweeten the climate-change policy pill. This latest report aims to accelerate political and public assent for large cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions.”
Professor Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the British Medical Association, said of The Lancet’s papers: “Climate change not only contributes to disease and premature death but exacerbates existing health inequalities in the UK and globally. Today’s research shows that a reduction in emissions will have a positive effect on health in both high and low-income settings, and that lifestyle changes made by all us will have direct health benefits.”
The filmmakers behind the groundbreaking documentary on climate change–The Age of Stupid—hope to webcast The Stupid Show live from the United Nationals Climate Summit in Copenhagen in December. To make this happen, they need your support.
I can’t believe I just wrote that headline – but the truth is stranger than fiction. The Guardian reported today:
Boris Johnson came to the rescue of a high profile climate change activist and filmmaker who was being attacked by a group of young girls brandishing an iron bar, it was revealed today.
Franny Armstrong, the director of The Age of Stupid, described the mayor of London as her “knight in a shining bicycle” after he came to her defence as she was walking home in Camden, north London, last night.
She called out for help to a passing cyclist after being surrounded by a group of hoodie-wearing young girls who pushed her against a car, one holding an iron bar.
She called out for help to a passing cyclist after being surrounded by a group of hoodie-wearing young girls who pushed her against a car, one holding an iron bar.
The cyclist turned out to be none other than Johnson, who has made tackling youth crime a key mayoral priority.
He stopped and chased the girls down the street, calling them “oiks”, according to Armstrong, who praised the mayor’s intervention.
Johnson returned and insisted on walking her home.
Armstrong is the founder of the 10:10 campaign, which aims to cut 10% of carbon emissions in 2010 and has attracted support from leading firms – including the Guardian – and personalities.
“I was texting on my phone so didn’t notice the girls until they pushed me against the car, quite hard,” she said.
“I noticed that one had an iron bar in her hand. It was very frightening. At that moment a man cycled past and I called out for help.
“He said to the girls: ‘What do you think you are doing?’ He picked up the iron bar, called after the girls and cycled after them. He returned a few minutes later and walked me home.
“He was my knight on a shining bicycle.”
Watch an interview with Franny Armstrong.
Like the first important primary of a presidential election, New Hampshire represents a key milestone for another candidate. Ana’s Playground— the short film about children as victims of armed conflict—won Best Short Drama in this past weekend’s festival in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. More than 80 independent films were screened over the weekend.
With award winning honors in three of its first few screenings, Ana’s Playground continues its world tour. Check out the Ana’s Playground filmmaker blog for other news and updates.
One of the largest film fests in New England, the four-day event draws celebrities, academy-award winners, film industry veterans and local film lovers. Most importantly, NHFF offers workshops and discussions for young and new filmmakers to interact with industry pros and learn the art and business of film.
Eric Block On Responsible Branding 
You must be logged in to post a comment.