[Here's the story: She's a recent MBA graduate working as a corporate sustainability consultant. He's a roaming eco-warrior dodging bullets from rhino poachers in Africa and pursuing illegal loggers in the Amazon. Whose job is more treacherous?
To find out, sneak a peek at her front-line communiqués, which have mysteriously fallen into the hands of Context America President Peter T. Knight, who has decided to share them with us. Can our earnest heroine survive in the corporate jungle with her career -- and ideals -- intact? Follow her adventures here.]
Hey Jeff,
Wow, that YouTube video of your scrape with the rhino horn poachers was really scary. AK47s! Hope you’re in one piece.
I’m saving the world by using my MBA, one client at a time. It’s not as scary as yours – all that hiding behind the baobabs – but at least my life itself is not threatened. Not yet, anyway.
I’m not sure if I’m being very effective. Take last week when we were dealing with key sustainability messages with our manufacturing client. I must admit that this was my first brush with these things called Key Messages – sets of statements they repeat ad infinitum in press releases, on their Facebook page and so on.
At first glance they look really simple – horribly full of jargon and very corporate, but simple. I thought you could dash them off in an afternoon. But you would not believe the amount of time it’s taken to write them, and rewrite them, and then rewrite them again.
My boss – he’s been at this quite a while – politely suggested that the existing messages were a bit old and could do with a rework. The Client was skeptical, probably because she knew how long it took to produce the moldy set. She got a bit annoyed when The Boss said some of the moldy messages were not true.
“Are you saying we are lying?” she demanded.
“No, but maybe you’re being a bit economical with the truth,” the boss said.
The Client wanted an example. The Boss pointed to this one: “We are passionate about reducing waste and our innovative U.S. manufacturing sites are all landfill-free.”
It turns out that the company defines that as 90 percent of their waste does not go to landfill. The Boss asked about the missing 10 percent and she said it was common practice to define it that way. She was not impressed with the argument that the stakeholders might not see it her way. I thought he was spot on.
Then we had (well they had) an exceedingly long discussion about the difference between continuous and continual improvement. The Boss said they could, at best, claim continual improvement (you know, progressive, kaizen style) but continuous (all the time) was simply impossible. The Client said she simply disagreed – it was a common term and there was no need to change it. That’s when I put my foot in it when I said I thought the phrase continuous improvement was a bit of a cliché anyway. And why use a cliché?
I expected some appreciation for my contribution but both of them looked at me with the clichéd furrowed brow. I knew The Boss agreed with me – he said so on the plane – but he clearly wanted to put me back in my box and use my impudence as leverage to get all cozy with The Client. I was the enemy now and The Client felt better.
Next Page: I am young, therefore I tweet.
Curious no one wants to
Curious no one wants to reveal who they are, their affiliations, but that aside it seems the plot has been missed . Knight's point , entertainment style aside, is timely and telling. When are companies aside from the truly progressive and courageous ones, going to move away from the same old same old corporate responsibility/sustainability jargon, cliches and hollow and inauthentic messaging and move toward ruggedly and compellingly individualistic and forthright positions.
And when are their consultants going to help move them more motively it his direction?
For those of us who work deeply in these vineyards, as I have too for decades, what's needed, in my view, now more than ever but still sadly and surprisingly so widely lacking, are truly enlightened and enlightening corporate communications.
I can't believe this got
I can't believe this got published. Usually Green Biz provides enightening and thought-provoking material but this peice is pure drivel. The article's attempt at glib, stereotype humor falls way short of its mark and ends up being an insensitive and alienating slant that is painful to read. The piece targets a whole cache of people that should be supported and encouraged rather than mocked; those trying to make change in a business world that is old school and buttoned up, where transitions happen and a snails pace, and those who give up the comforts of their own country to preserve species that future generations may only see in books or re-runs of National Geographic's Big Cats week. So far "Out of Context" belongs "in the garbage."
"I’m saving the world by
"I’m saving the world by using my MBA, "
full stop. total BS. ignore immediately.
As someone with 20+ years in
As someone with 20+ years in the environmental advocacy field for a major US NGO, I can say it is the commenter, not the MBA who should be ignored, full stop. Business puts 80 percent of the 'facts on the ground' and that's where the warriors are needed right now. 'If you want to save the world, get an MBA and start a green business' is the (to them, surprising) career advice I gave to young graduates seeking advice on grad school.