Comments on: Branding Sustainability: Do Good, Then Talk About It http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/ Business, Better. Since 2005 Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:05:57 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Leah Edwards http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/comment-page-1/#comment-11516 Leah Edwards Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:47:04 +0000 http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/#comment-11516 I agree that it will be helpful to have third-party certifications and verifications--to combat greenwashing. However, perhaps I'm just an optimist, but I believe that companies who are not consistent (in product choice, hiring, sourcing, operations and marketing, everything) trip themselves up. Tim Manners' new book is not specifically focused on sustainability, but it does talk about a brand needing to be based on reality. Here's a synopsis: http://ecopreneurist.com/2008/09/19/relevance-green-businesses-just-be-real/ I agree that it will be helpful to have third-party certifications and verifications–to combat greenwashing.
However, perhaps I’m just an optimist, but I believe that companies who are not consistent (in product choice, hiring, sourcing, operations and marketing, everything) trip themselves up.
Tim Manners’ new book is not specifically focused on sustainability, but it does talk about a brand needing to be based on reality. Here’s a synopsis:
http://ecopreneurist.com/2008/09/19/relevance-green-businesses-just-be-real/

]]> By: Mario Vellandi http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/comment-page-1/#comment-11515 Mario Vellandi Wed, 24 Sep 2008 04:21:55 +0000 http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/#comment-11515 Brian you bring up the excellent question of "how can we be sure what they're saying is true?". The answer to this question is through credible third party certification and transparency programs as initiated by Patagonia and Banana Republic. <br /><br /> What you're referring to in a nutrition label is practically a scorecard with additional relevant info. SMaRT certification by MTS is exactly this, and was established by a co-founder of the USGBC which also uses a scorecard for LEED. Cradle to Cradle by MBDC is similar, but not nearly as comprehensive nor transparent. Brian you bring up the excellent question of “how can we be sure what they’re saying is true?”. The answer to this question is through credible third party certification and transparency programs as initiated by Patagonia and Banana Republic.

What you’re referring to in a nutrition label is practically a scorecard with additional relevant info. SMaRT certification by MTS is exactly this, and was established by a co-founder of the USGBC which also uses a scorecard for LEED. Cradle to Cradle by MBDC is similar, but not nearly as comprehensive nor transparent.

]]> By: Brian Bishop http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/comment-page-1/#comment-11514 Brian Bishop Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:30:17 +0000 http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/#comment-11514 It's going to be hard for consumers to tell the difference between sustainability branding that is greenwashing, or branding that represents an internal core belief that truly parallels the tenets of sustainability. Clorox is a great example that triggered a red flag for me. Just before our debate in our Sustainable Marketing discussion at The Presidio School of Management, I had seen the Clorox green line of products and brushed them off as a thinly veiled attempt to grab business from those just caring enough to want to "go green" but not yet aware of what that really means. But was I wrong to brush them off? Is their new effort downright sincere? How would I know without having done a lot of research? What about the customers - the millions of baby-boomers, for example - who have progressive leanings but haven't been brought online yet to embrace the ethic of a more sustainable lifestyle? Will they detect greenwashing branding trying to win their purchase; will they roll their eyes and move on to a product they know but which is not at all sustainable? I think Gap Inc.'s steps to deeply vet their supply chain, and their leash on Banana Republic, are very good signs. I appreciate their humility too. Perhaps they can set the tone in the marketing and branding of sustainability. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is a great tool to bring to the production process and gives a company a substantial, quantitative and qualitative assessment of their line of products - something most companies haven't pursued but which adds significant credibility. Such an analysis can pinpoint production problems before they escalate. If we're really serious about exposing greenwashing, a labeling system akin to the Nutritional Information box on food packaging may be needed. This is not a new idea, and involves a system whereby the consumer can be relatively confident, with minimal effort, that a product is not just green fluff and actually was produced with sustainability in mind. Seventh Generation has embarked on a Show What's Inside campaign, to help the customer make an informed decision. As Banana Republic has demonstrated, integrating sustainability into product design can be extremely lucrative; and sustainability improves brand image. The trick is to make the branding real, and better assessment tools for the consumer are needed. It’s going to be hard for consumers to tell the difference between sustainability branding that is greenwashing, or branding that represents an internal core belief that truly parallels the tenets of sustainability. Clorox is a great example that triggered a red flag for me. Just before our debate in our Sustainable Marketing discussion at The Presidio School of Management, I had seen the Clorox green line of products and brushed them off as a thinly veiled attempt to grab business from those just caring enough to want to “go green” but not yet aware of what that really means. But was I wrong to brush them off? Is their new effort downright sincere? How would I know without having done a lot of research? What about the customers – the millions of baby-boomers, for example – who have progressive leanings but haven’t been brought online yet to embrace the ethic of a more sustainable lifestyle? Will they detect greenwashing branding trying to win their purchase; will they roll their eyes and move on to a product they know but which is not at all sustainable?
I think Gap Inc.’s steps to deeply vet their supply chain, and their leash on Banana Republic, are very good signs. I appreciate their humility too. Perhaps they can set the tone in the marketing and branding of sustainability. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is a great tool to bring to the production process and gives a company a substantial, quantitative and qualitative assessment of their line of products – something most companies haven’t pursued but which adds significant credibility. Such an analysis can pinpoint production problems before they escalate.
If we’re really serious about exposing greenwashing, a labeling system akin to the Nutritional Information box on food packaging may be needed. This is not a new idea, and involves a system whereby the consumer can be relatively confident, with minimal effort, that a product is not just green fluff and actually was produced with sustainability in mind. Seventh Generation has embarked on a Show What’s Inside campaign, to help the customer make an informed decision. As Banana Republic has demonstrated, integrating sustainability into product design can be extremely lucrative; and sustainability improves brand image. The trick is to make the branding real, and better assessment tools for the consumer are needed.

]]> By: Mario Vellandi http://www.triplepundit.com/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/comment-page-1/#comment-11513 Mario Vellandi Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:15:59 +0000 http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2008/09/branding-sustainability-do-good-then-talk-about-it/#comment-11513 Sustainable branding is important as a means to provide transparency into aspects of a company's product and internal and external operations in terms of environmental and social responsibility. It's values based. The degree to which it's infused in the company culture will vary. But either way, in our society now people want to know that their purchase makes a difference. If companies have credible existing or upcoming policies/programs, they should definitely integrate that into their brand communications, either from a company (this is who we are CSR wise) or product/service (embodied environmental & social elements) perspective. Sustainable branding is important as a means to provide transparency into aspects of a company’s product and internal and external operations in terms of environmental and social responsibility.
It’s values based. The degree to which it’s infused in the company culture will vary. But either way, in our society now people want to know that their purchase makes a difference. If companies have credible existing or upcoming policies/programs, they should definitely integrate that into their brand communications, either from a company (this is who we are CSR wise) or product/service (embodied environmental & social elements) perspective.

]]>