The following is an amended version of the original post, changed at the request of the author.
Immerse yourself in the sustainability movement for a little while and you’ll hear a lot of consternation about how big our environmental problems are, how little we’re doing about them and how little we're spending to solve them.
There was a lot of that last week at the Sustainable Brands conference. Several of the main stage speakers spent the first five minutes of their 15-minute presentations telling the audience some variation of, “The future is bleak if we don't change our ways.” I found myself wanting to shout out, “We get it. Tell us what you’re doing about it!” Which, at the end of the day, is what consumers want from us as well. We know we can’t scare them into becoming more sustainable – we’ve tested all the gloom and doom scenarios with the 48 percent of the American population who don’t believe global warming is real and caused by man. Half of those non-believers would not be moved to change by any of the gloom and doom scenarios. So we don’t need to focus on the problem; we need to focus on solutions.
So why did so many Sustainable Brands speakers feel compelled to remind us of the bleak scenarios? The answer may lie in the LOHAS Forum, which I’m attending this week.
The difference between the tone of the presentations at the LOHAS Forum vs. those at Sustainable Brands is dramatic. Each speaker here so far has been focused on how bright the future could be. We’ve seen lots of presentations about projects, campaigns, movements and communication strategies all geared towards doing something to change the future without any focus on the "or else" piece of the equation – and the tone of the presentations is hopeful, upbeat. Check out lexiconofsustainability.com (from filmmaker Douglas Gayeton) and bestrawfree.org (created and presented by 10-year-old Milo Cress) – both geared towards creating positive change.
So why the difference?
My hypothesis is that the Big Brands who make up the SB audience feel a greater weight, sense of guilt or challenge. They regularly touch millions (if not billions) of consumers and they’re all essentially tasked with figuring out how to sell less stuff while still growing their businesses (and satisfying Wall Street). It’s a seemingly impossible problem – no wonder they’re carrying a dark cloud over their heads. Further, the call to action in the SB community this year is that the Revolution Will Be Branded and brands have to take over where government is failing us and Solve The Problems. That’s a lot of pressure.
The LOHAS crowd, by contrast, is mostly small, independent brands and entrepreneurs. They don’t have to satisfy shareholders and maintain a monster sales volume. Their task is taking on the Big Brands and challenging the status quo. Which, if you’re an entrepreneur, sounds like a lot of fun. Also, by contrast, the message from the LOHAS community was Tools for a Better Tomorrow, and they tasked each of us individually to Solve the Problem. Less pressure.
So is our future bleak or bright? It depends on whether you ask a Big Brand or a little one. And it makes me wonder what would happen if they worked together -- what could they learn from each other?














































Hi Suzanne — We've had some
Hi Suzanne — We've had some back and forth on this piece which you posted a couple of weeks ago on your blog. I feel compelled to repost my first response here, and would encourage anyone interested to follow the rest of the conversation on your blog, here: http://sheltongrp.com/blog/?p=4296
I’m somewhat surprised by this post which seems to suggest that the overarching take away from Sustainable Brands last week was of doom and gloom. I’d be interested in hearing others who were there chime in on this as my perception may be completely off base. There is no doubt global corporations have a tough row to hoe, and that the task of turning these enormously impactful ships is weighty. That said, we continue to see meaningful innovation happening inside our global brand community *in addition to* that terrific and sometimes disruptive innovation being driven by entrepreneurs. We do feel it’s important to keep ‘present’ to what progress we’re making as a global community of change makers (the great folks in the LOHAS community included!) and the reality is, we have more work to do. One can see this as doom and gloom, or simply a reality check as we do. Regardless, as I know you know, our commitment is, as it has always been, to amplifying and celebrating the great work that is being done to drive change, wherever it is found, and our sense is that the majority of folks coming out of last week felt challenged, yes, but also inspired and encouraged to keep moving forward. We’ll have formal results compiled and available to share shortly, and will let you know more definitively what we hear back! In the meantime, all best to our friends and partners in change at LOHAS. Wish I could be there with you!
Hi Koann -- I'm posting the
Hi Koann -- I'm posting the remainder of our conversation here...my apologies that this whole string didn't get ported over with my post. To everyone -- I'd love your feedback/comments if you happened to attend both shows, what struck you as the differences? And if you represent a small brand or a big brand, what's the difference in how you feel about your responsiblity to drive change -- optimistic or in a pressure cooker?
Hi Koann — thanks for the feedback! I totally agree the whole tone of SB ’12 was not gloom and doom…but I was struck that so many presenters started by reminding the audience of how big and urgent the problem is, while the presenters at the LOHAS conference did none of that and jumped right into what they’re doing about the problems. My takeaway was that the speakers and audiences at the two conferences are coming at this from two entirely different places — the big brands at SB seem to feel a very real weight of responsibility and frustration with systems that make it hard to change business models and fully commit to sustainability…whereas the presenters and attendees at LOHAS are operating on a much smaller scale and don’t feel that same weight and frustration. I think both perspectives are valuable…and maybe if the LOHAS community felt a little more burden of responsibility there would be more results attached to the presentations, and if the SB community could set aside some of the pressure and weight there might be a few more lighthearted ideas. ONe last point: if the conferences hadn’t literally been a few days apart and if I hadn’t attended them both, I’m not sure I would have noticed the differences…really a valuable experience for me in noting that there are multiple lenses through which we can view the problems and solutions of sustainability.
By SShelton on Jun 15, 2012 | Edit
Thanks, Suzanne — I’m sure you are exactly right — the big brands that attend SB DO feel the weight of both responsibility, and challenge associated with changing the system within which they operate — as it should be, frankly. I’m sure you’ll remember that last year we led the way in the conversation about Play as a key aspect of sustainability and behavior change — a topic that was picked up on and echoed by many many outlets in the months following. This year, we felt the a significant global uptick in citizen lead revolt against our current systems and institutions needed acknowledgement. It has been a sobering year looking back, and there ARE in fact dark clouds looming under the surface that we must continue to be present to if we are to find the proper motivation to create needed response. It is completely inspiring to know that at the same time our global corporations, each of who’s impact, even with small changes, dwarfs that which can be ever made at the independent business level (for good or for bad) continue to wrestle with how to apply their strengths to the task of turning our global economic ship to the right, there are countless entrepreneurs in our community (like Christiaan Maatz at Oat Shoes, Chris Yura at Sustain U, the good folks at AirBnB, Zip Car, Practically Green, the Mutual, and all our Innovation Open finalists (to name a few in our community) are able to, and are starting from scratch with a fresh look at how we can get outside the box. From my perspective, it’s not that both perspectives are valuable — its that both perspectives exist in reality, and need to be nurtured forward. Reflecting back to the theme of our conversation in 2010 — “The Power of And”, my view is not that the view is “bleak or bright”, but that it is both bleak AND bright. This is a tough concept for us all to get used to, but i do think being able to ‘hold the whole’ is am important skill set for us to develop as individuals, and as society going forward. Hope you have a great trip home from the Rockies, and I envy your opportunity to have been able to spend time in both San Diego and Boulder for both SB and LOHAS, and hope to both enjoy being part of the LOHAS conversation some day, and to welcoming Ted to SB as well. In the meantime, I rest better knowing there are many working from various perspectives to craft a better future for our kids…
By Koann Vikoren Skrzyniarz on Jun 16, 2012 | Edit