Who'd have thought my background in marketing to women could be so helpful in understanding the mistakes many brands are now making in the sustainability realm?
Take the "green silo" versus integrated sustainability topic, for one. Within a recent Inspired Economist post by Emili DeMasi about green MBA programs, specifically, lies what I see as a broader truth. In most cases, brands and organizations -- like colleges -- are displaying their green label, rather than actually integrating sustainability throughout.
Just as was the big point in "Don’t Think Pink," the book I co-authored on marketing to women, I could now write a book called “Don’t Think Green.” With both titles, and upon first bookstore glance, readers might think: “Well, that’s counter-intuitive. Why’s a sustainability (marketing to women) expert writing about NOT thinking green (pink)?” Because these are cultural transitions, not just static situations that will never change.
Think about it: Most businesses have gone from seeing women as this separate, oddly “new” or “emerging” market (!) to understanding that they are the market for the most part. Now companies are a lot better at transparently reaching them. Women expect that brands will serve their needs and ways of buying without a pink or “for women” label.
We now seem to be reaching that same historic point in the sustainability realm, whereby the consumers most brands want to reach are savvy to “greenwash”( a la special packaging or corporate reports that talk, but don’t necessarily walk sustainability). Instead, these folks may soon expect sustainability from brands, and from all angles (product design and marketing to facilities, fleet management and community relations, etc).
That being the case, rather than helping a brand, hypervisible “look at me” green marketing may actually hurt it. If you need to shout about it, will your customers believe you are taking steps to fully integrate sustainability throughout your corporation? Maybe not. A squeaky green wheel does, initially, help call attention to your company’s shift and let sustainably minded consumers know they’ve been heard. Still, at some point the wise brand oils that wheel, stops the shouting and makes sustainability a fluid and integral part of their every function.
Universities can’t teach all the traditional MBA classes and then offer a sustainability seminar on the side. It doesn’t make sense. In the same way, brands can’t do everything else the way they always have, but slap a green label on it. It reminds me of the early days of marketing active sports to women, where a snowboard or bike might be painted a pastel color and tagged “for women,” without any real design change. Don’t let the green version of this happen to you!
Whether for an MBA program or on a brand, green labels may “feel” like a step toward sustainability by those who cleverly thought them up. However, they can distract from and potentially delay more intentional and committed integration of true sustainability.
Why give prospective students or consumers anything to be suspicious of? Instead, truly serve the rising and serious green expectations of all your stakeholders, and leave the “we’re so green” label behind.
Andrea Learned is founder and president of Learned On, LLC, a consultancy focused on sustainable organizational and consumer behavior. The original version of this post appeared on Andrea's "Learned On" blog and is reprinted with permission.


Browse
Engage
Research










Driving change from Within?
I work for an industry that has a hard time not color-coding their consumers - both pink and green.
When put in charge of the green marketing for the company, I tried to include the pros and the cons of each alternative, and the trade-offs in choosing one product over another.
It also seems that I'm the one - me, the marketer/ PR person - who has to spearhead cultural change to create a more sustainable business. I am overwhelmed trying to convince these guys of the need to make changes in the way they do business in order to effectively sell anything as green. They need to make it a pervasive cultural change, and here I am screaming for help when no one seems to "get it".
As a green consumer, I look at the supply chain and ingredients lists, etc. and I know what I'm looking for. Therefore as a marketer charged with making things green, I know what I need to provide - the whole picture, even if it isn't pretty.
As the only person in my entire company who takes mass transit, I feel like an ant trying to move a house.
We're not even there yet
Andrea, this was a great article. It definitely rings true for many of us in the "know." I think many of us are tired of reading the same articles on the same news outlets claiming to be more and more green. The sad truth is that we are far from motivating the masses. "Green" services and products should not only continue to say that they are green, but provide more proof and education. We haven't come close to critical mass yet and the competition with cheap crappy products seems to be at an all time high.
The reality is that people still consider green products expensive and they don't work as well. When that change finally happens are consumers going to be looking for familiar brands or be ready to move on. It seems that products or services who are positioned and ready to welcome new green consumers, will be the ones that thrive.
Those of us in the
Those of us in the environmental/sustainability profession do sometimes find it difficult to reach outside of our own "green silos". We tend to be a passionate bunch, seeing our work as a very real solution to an issue that is growing. One problem that has become very clear - most environmental/sustainability folks don't have direct experience with a wide range of business activities that would provide greater perspective on when sustainability initiatives are appropriate, when they may not be, and how to calculate the ROI on such investments.
I am not arguing against sustainability - actually quite the opposite. As Andrea points out, consumers have become highly aware of greenwashing and cynical of sustainability certifications/claims. Management within manufacturers are also in this same boat. And there is sound basis for their views.
How can these negative perceptions be overcome? Well, I don't think that pushing more green/sustainability claims out the door is the answer. Indeed, that only worsens the situation by putting additional tenuous green claims in front of already cynical consumers. Kind of throwing gasoline on the fire (or perhaps bio-diesel to keep the metaphor relevant).
I suggest that folks interested in making sustainability valuable, relevant and REAL should look far beyond the green silo. Understand corporate investment ROI and hurdle rate requirements. Pretend that your compensation program is directly tied to production and profitability: your goal is to make more product - make it faster, better and cheaper; you have limited capital you can invest and many competing projects - all of which relate DIRECTLY to making product faster/better/cheaper using performance measures you are familiar with. Then (we are still role playing here) you have someone come present a sustainability idea to you that - if you choose to implement - requires you to divert capital from a "faster/better/cheaper" project. Maybe this sustainability project is presented using terms and metrics you don't understand because they are different from what you know in the "faster/better/cheaper" context.
Of course, the production floor is only one area of the company. Reach into "old fashioned" marketing perspectives and see how sustainability concepts align with those. Here is an excellent article on exactly that. http://elmconsultinggroup.wordpress.com/2010/08/17/seriously-consumers-d...
Sure, there are exceptions to this. But I would argue they are exactly that - exceptions to the rule.
There are also customer requirements relating to sustainability. From management's perspective, that is all about retaining the customer's business, which drives sales, revenue and profit. Sustainability is simply the label given to that initiative, like "quality" was in the 80s/90s.
If you are a WalMart supplier, you may already be evaluating your strategy for responding to their sustainability requirements. Of course, suppliers are responding to WalMart's requirements because WalMart is generally responsible for a significant amount of revenue for their suppliers - of course you want to keep that revenue stream. But you should be aware of the whole financial picture - there is more below the green surface. http://elmconsultinggroup.wordpress.com/2010/08/06/walmarts-hot-air/
In sum, sustainability can be a powerful business driver, but if used or presented improperly, can actually dilute the movement and its impact by continuing to support the views of the cynics. Being commercially successful - and tackling traditional business management head on - is the best way to silence the cynicism.