Despite a sometimes-glaring gap between how companies perform on environmental issues and how the public perceives that performance, some firms succeed on both fronts.
At the top of a list that focuses on both are Toyota, 3M and Siemens. Each of these firms have managed to align how they walk the green walk with how they talk the talk, according to "Best Global Green Brands 2011," the inaugural ranking from consultancy Interbrand.
"We really wanted to make sure they are looking at both sides of the coin," said Emma Hrustic, Interbrand's director of strategy.
Top scorer Toyota enjoys positive public perception of its green credentials, largely due to the Prius, but the company has also worked to make its operations more environmentally friendly. Toyota's gap between perception and perception is -7.64, meaning a lightly lower performance score than perception score.
"Overall, environmental sustainability is deeply ingrained in the brand and has been a core management priority since 1992, when Toyota adopted the 'Toyota Earth Charter,'" the report said. "This focus on green has resulted in solid improvements in energy use, water consumption, waste, and toxic emissions."
To calculate the rankings for "Best Global Green Brands 2011," Interbrand relied on two components. First, the company surveyed more than 10,000 consumers in 10 markets on their understanding of each brand's environmental efforts, including factors such as authenticity, relevance and consistency. Interbrand then analyzed performance based on both publicly available data and data from Thomson Reuter’s ASSET4, a business unit that provides environmental, social and governance information to investors. The areas covered by the performance score include supply chain, stakeholder engagement, governance and logistics.
Here is the list of Top 10 companies:
1. Toyota, 64.19 points
2. 3M, 63.33
3. Siemens, 63.08
4. Johnson & Johnson, 59.41
5. HP, 59.41
6. VW, 58.90
7. Honda, 58.90
8. Dell, 58.81
9. Cisco, 57.66
10. Panasonic, 57.66
Some do more walking than talking, and vice versa. Take L'Oréal, the cosmetics giant that ranked 15th in the ranking, with a 22.68 point gap between performance and perception, a sign that the company isn't actively communicating its efforts to consumers.
Interbrand gave L'Oréal kudos for strong stakeholder engagement, using sustainably sourced wood fiber for packaging and its sustainability reporting. "All of these efforts are not necessarily perceived in the marketplace," Hrustic said.
As a sector, the consumer electronics industry is facing the same dilemma.
"We knew consumer electronics companies are doing well, with a fair amount of work, but that's not the perception that is coming through," Hrustic said.
Conversely, the perception scores of some of the biggest household brands significantly exceeded their performance score, including McDonald's, which placed 45th overall in the ranking. The company received a -27.96 point gap between perception and performance.
"The big gap in perception and performance for brands that are closer to the top of Interbrand’s Best Global Brands list suggests that highly visible top 10 brands like McDonald’s, GE, and Coca-Cola enjoy the positive impact of being a well-known, powerful brand, with green perception matching general perception overall," the report said. "It also suggests that McDonald’s use of the color green has given consumers the perception that it is focusing more on environmental sustainability than reality."
The biggest takeaway, according to Hrustic: "Companies need to align their business strategies with their green strategies, which is why we focus on that gap."













*Sigh.* Whenever I read a
*Sigh.* Whenever I read a post that criticizes a good news article, I experience one more time how hard it is to be optimistic. Yet we need many eyes on the problems, and on the solutions. So I guess I'm saying thanks, anonymous.
I appreciate that Toyota gets
I appreciate that Toyota gets the green go ahead, but I have observed their practices while building a new plant in Mississippi including wholesale slaughter of trees and allowing those trees to be BURNED on the side of the highway in piles the size of buildings for months on end. Somehow, that doesn't seem particularly GREEN to me, especially when I am driving through the smoke. I'm also a little miffed that reporters seem to forget that the batteries that run the Prius have created a toxic wasteland in Canada.
See: http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/f22/toyota-factory-turns-landscape-ar...
The article states that:
"However, the environment-saving credentials of the cars are seriously undermined by the disclosure that one of the car's essential components is produced at a factory that has created devastation likened to the arid environment of the moon. So many plants and trees around the factory at Sudbury in Ontario, Canada, have died that astronauts from Nasa practised driving moon buggies on the outskirts of the city because it was considered the closest thing on earth to the rocky lunar landscape."
Whether they have "fixed" this problem or not, the damage is done. It's like the mercury lightbulbs that are going to leave a toxic mess for our grandkids to eat, drink and breathe. Dig deeper reporters.