“Lovemarks are brands that inspire loyalty beyond reason. People love them because of what they are, not because of what they do. Their appeal is emotional. Companies may own brands. But Lovemarks are owned by the people who love them.” And Saatchi is in the business of showing companies how to change their products from simple brands into these glorious, sought after, Lovemarks.
As the graph at left (which Roberts admitted to coming up with at two in the morning when he was well into his second bottle of Bordeaux) shows, Lovemarks score high on both love and respect, while brands simply score well on the “respect” factor: you trust them, but you don’t form an emotional attachment to them.
Roberts showed some compelling examples of this lovemark concept in action:
The 2009 World Business Forum kicked off yesterday with a dramatic flair at Radio City Music Hall. 3p was invited to cover the forum in a special “blogger’s balcony” of sorts. The sight below was a non stop parade of top notch speakers on a variety of subjects, but mostly a montage of personal experience and advice – well received by the audience and the press in attendance.
Jen Boynton posted earlier on the remarks of Bill George, former chief executive of Medtronic. George spoke about using the financial crisis as an opportunity, stating “never waste a good crisis”. He was referring to business trouble in general and mentioned many examples of companies who’ve dealt with crises openly and swiftly as a contrast to companies that ignored them or tried to cover them up. That quote got me thinking about environmental and social challenges we face and the the adage that climate change actually represents a huge business opportunity for those willing to take it on.
Most interesting and inspiring - George insisted that people follow their values and stick to them. Quitting a job that had made him miserable was one of the best decisions he ever made and should serve as an example.
Incidentally, I don’t think Bill George was the first to use that quote, it’s been used by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as well, specifically in reference to climate. But I digress…
When 3p covered BBMG earlier this year, the interactive marketing agency had just released their 2009 Conscious Consumer Report, an exploration of consumer attitudes, behaviors, and priorities at a time of perceived great social reset. This morning, in what seems to be a natural extension, BBMG released a white paper on the evolution of philanthropy, building off of much of the logic of their Conscious Consumer Report.
In it, the paper’s author writes, “The new economy has created a reset moment that’s changing how we live and work. And it has profound consequences for philanthropy.”
Trust in our institutions has changed. Entrepreneurship is rising, and from that, a new class of social entrepreneurs, those who break classical boundaries and blur the lines between the traditional roles of for- and non-profits, combining what BBMG calls, “social purpose with financial promise.”
The MIT Sloan Management Review has released a comprehensive survey of sustainability practices and trends in business, including interviews, case studies, and insights into how businesses world-wide view the growing field. Michael Hopkins, editor in chief of the Review, will be a speaker at this year’s Opportunity Green conference in Los Angeles, a partner of Triple Pundit. Hopkins spoke with us about the survey, the differences between “novices” and “thought leaders,” and why sustainability is really about collaboration and transparency.
One of the most baffling results from your survey is that while 92% of respondents said their company was “addressing sustainability in some way,” 70% said they still had not developed a clear business case for it.
That is the contradiction that gets to the heart of the issue, and as we continue with the second round of the survey that is probably where we’re going to do the most digging. It’s one thing for an executive to understand that sustainability is going to have a major impact. It doesn’t mean they understand how to make a case for investing in products that will capitalize on it.
A new report by a health advocacy group calculates a tax on soda and other sugary drinks could raise $10 billion a year, tapping into current fiscal anxiety in state and local governments.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest argues a tax of 7 cents per 12 ounces of soda (a typical can) would fill government coffers in the long-term as well, by lowering health care costs. Several studies have shown a correlation between drinking soda and obesity, a costly health epidemic.
In September, the influential New England Journal of Medicine published a report suggesting a national 1 cent per ounce tax, or 12 cents per can.
When GM launched Saturn in 1985 as its first new brand in 70 years, it seemed to have much promise. Marketed as a “different kind of car company,” Saturn would produce small cars that could compete with imports as a stand-alone company with its own network. Salespeople were paid a salary instead of a commission, so customers were not hounded as they looked at cars. Saturn dealerships were also haggle-free as customers paid the sticker price. Anytime a customer brought their car in for service, they received a free wash.
GM Chairman Roger B. Smith said Saturn would “affirm that American ingenuity, American technology, and American productivity can once again be the model and the inspiration for the rest of the world.” Months after Smith uttered those stirring words, a Memorandum of Understanding between GM and the UAW stated, “We believe that all people want to be involved in decisions that affect them, care about their jobs . . . and want to share in the success of their efforts.”
A new analysis by university economists suggests that we need to start fighting climate change now, while we can still afford it. But if we take the cautious approach advocated by some well-known academics, mitigating climate change will put us in the poor house.
The Economics of 350, a detailed study put forth by Economics for Equity and the Environment (E3), weighed the cost of keeping global CO2 concentrations at 350 parts per million — an ambitious target that’s already in the rearview mirror. And that cost would cut between one and three percent off GDP. That might seem steep, but it’s nothing compared to what’s coming down the turnpike if we fail to act.
President Obama’s aide and top climate and energy official, Carol Browner, confirmed Friday what many already feared: there is virtually no chance Congress will have a climate bill ready in time for the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen in December. Browner’s statement was the administration’s first definitive statement regarding passage of a climate and energy bill (or lack thereof). Delaying the bill will likely have a number of negative implications for the Copenhagen conference.
According to a report by the New York Times, in Browner’s words, the Obama administration would “like to be through the process,” but it’s “not going to happen.” However, the Senate may be able to complete its hearings on the bill before the Conference’s opening talks on December 7th. The administration also announced plans last week for new rules regulating greenhouse gases from large factories. Both gestures are intended to signal the US’s commitment to cutting CO2 emissions – an indication that could be crucial to the Conference’s success.
Several factors have contributed to the climate bill delay, including the healthcare debate, the process by which legislation is introduced and amended prior to passage, and what some would call procrastination. (The climate bill was introduced in the Senate only Wednesday – three months after the House passed its version of the bill.)
Is it possible to establish the overall mood of a nation? Apparently it is–if you’re Facebook (FB). The popular social networking site recently developed a new app by which it aims to determine its users’ “gross national happiness.” By searching public and semi-public FB forums for words and phrases deemed “happy,” “sad,” or “indifferent” by FB engineers, the app charts the overriding sentiments of its 300-million-a-day users. Could FB’s findings be relevant to a study on green business growth?
The app’s results, reported in a fastcompany.com blog entry, are fascinating. Apparently, Americans’ happiness levels are somewhat predictable: they sink on Mondays, rise slowly through the workweek, peak on weekend days (and holidays – especially Thanksgiving), and drop again on Monday. This year, there was a sudden drop in late June, presumably coincident with the death of Michael Jackson.
The world’s business leaders would be remiss if they didn’t acknowledge the financial meltdown of the past 18 months. The opening statements at the World Business Forum were no surprise, with Patricia Meier CEO of HSM, kicking things off by calling the crowd to remember the challenges of the past year. She reminded people to think back to last year’s conference when the Dow Jones went below 10000 for the first time in years. This year, we’re 15 points lower than we were last year, but this time, we’re on the way up– we see opportunity despite the crisis.
With this theme for the conference firmly in hand, Bill George, author of 7 Lessons for Leading in a Crisis, was the perfect keynote. George is the Professor of Management Practice at Harvard Business School, and the former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Medtronic. George’s talk was all about the best ways to get an organization through a crisis, and the talk was peppered with his own personal experiences coming through tough times. (I don’t want to spoil the juicy bits- go ahead and order the book to read them!)
With the Senate releasing their version of climate and energy legislation last week, renewed lobbying efforts from some quarters touting the benefits of more CO2 emissions, and our good friend Senator James Inhofe now saying that CO2 isn’t a “real” pollutant in his ongoing effort to mislead and misinform, I’m not really sure what to make of Exxon chief Rex Tillerson’s recent remarks on climate legislation.
Exxon has been continually linked to funding climate change denial lobby groups, but of course none of that was mentioned when Tillerson gave a speech last week at the Economic Club of Washington D.C. Tillerson talked of the importance of the energy sector, the economic challenges it faces, and how effective policy-making can help bring about the changes needed for the energy economy in a new century.
For Tillerson, the answer to climate change legislation isn’t cap-and-trade, the primary tool in both the House and Senate version, but a carbon tax.
Underlying anxiety over China’s rapid economic advance, including its aggressive moves into clean technology, is an ideological uncertainty: is the Chinese system of government, which is non-democratic, but seemingly capable of moving quickly and unilaterally, fundamentally better than our messy democratic system that sometimes (all of the time?) hobbles its effectiveness with political bickering?
Now there is talk that China could announce a national cap and trade scheme as early as the Copenhagen climate talks in December, leapfrogging over the US.
Meanwhile, Washington’s version of cap and trade, a system to reduce pollution by capping emissions and trading emissions credits on an open market, has been declared DOA at least until next year, a victim of prolonged squabbling over health care and general political malaise.
General Electric (GE) Co. owns 80 percent of NBC Universal and is in talks with Comcast to buy part of its shares, which would give Comcast a controlling stake. Comcast is the largest cable TV provider with 24 million subscribers, about a quarter of the nation’s cable TV subscribers. Comcast also owns cable stations such as E!, Style, and sports channels. NBC Universal owns the Telemundo network, cable channels Bravo, USA Network, and CNBC. Comcast has 5 million subscribers to its broadband internet service, and its Comcast Digital Voice, Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephone service, has 6.5 million customers.
Analysts are worried that if Comcast buys a controlling stake in NBC Universal, free television shows on the internet may become rarer. “Hulu was started by NBC and Fox so they could compete with Comcast. So this is a defensive move to some extent by Comcast,” said Kaufman Bros. analyst Todd Mitchell. “Hulu will just become another choice of Comcast’s pay-TV buffet.”
Cisco DeVries is a man on a mission. He wants to make green building retrofits as affordable and prevalent as iPhones. During his presentation Solving the Upfront Cost Barrier for Retrofits at West Coast Green this past Thursday, he pointed out, “How many of you would be willing to pay $20,000 up front to be able to use your iPhone for the next 20 years? We don’t do that with our iPhones, we don’t do that with our PG&E bills, and there is no reason we should do it with solar power. We should pay as we use the service.”
Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Financing, a powerful new financing model offered by his company Renewable Funding, allows property owners in each city to install solar systems and energy efficiency upgrades with no upfront cost. Similar to Mello-Roos law, PACE is a type of financing well-known to local governments and the bond market. Through this financing program, a city or county pays for the cost for a property owner’s retrofit, allowing property owners to repay the cost of the energy project (plus interest) over 20 years through their twice-yearly property tax bill. Property owners are able to choose their own contractor and installer. When the property is sold, the solar system, retrofits, and the remaining debt stay with the property.
In case you hadn’t noticed, the Green Revolution is fully upon us. Congress is finally discussing limits on CO2 emissions. Clean Tech investments have been one of the few glimmers of hope in an otherwise dark economic climate. Even Exxon Mobil wants to make you believe they’re environmentally friendly. For green-minded businesspeople short on time, it can be hard to cut through the informational noise and find the answers that matter: What can my business do to be both profitable and sustainable? How do I keep on top of the evolving landscape of green business practices? Who can I collaborate with to bring my green innovation to market? What is working successfully in my area and who else is doing it? That’s where a Green Business Camp comes in.
A great example is taking place on October 22 in Santa Cruz, California. The event will provide an all-day forum for businesspeople and entrepreneurs in California to come together and discuss earth-friendly products, operations, resources and innovation. Attendees get ample opportunity to learn, share, collaborate, and network with like-minded leaders working to create a cleaner, greener, more sustainable economy. The conference’s ultimate goal is to increase action, effectiveness, and profitability among green businesses in Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, Monterey, San Benito Counties, and beyond: it’s the type of event that can be replicated in any geographic area.
San Francisco: Jan 21 – Jan 22 Sustainable Food Summit Explore new horizons for eco-labels and sustainability in the food industry by discussing key industry issues. TriplePundit reader discount of 30%. Register here.
TriplePundit.com is published under a creative commons license. You are free to republish only headlines and excerpts of 3p articles except where explicitly permitted by agreement with 3p. We reserve the right to ask any publication to cease syndication. Please Contact Us for details or read more here.