Social Media’s Impact on Brand Sustainable Reputation

Today’s post is inspired by recent reading of Marc Gunther’s always interesting blog www.marcgunther.com.

Few things to note before reading on:

*Marc has great access to folks at leading brands, making his blog a great resource for stories from the front lines.

*Marc is active on the “socnets”  with both his blog and his 4,400+ followers on Twitter.  The information he presents has a wide audience.

First up is Marc’s piece on the recent ousting of Seventh Generation leader Jeffery Hollender.

Notice the comments – multiple folks stated they will reassess their purchasing of Seventh Generation products in the future.  This immediate impact will be multiplied by Marc’s social media presence.  This also makes we wonder if the company understands the size of the social community surrounding the sustainable market and its influence.  As Marc notes in his post, no mention of the news on the company website at the time of posting.  It will be interesting to see how this issue translates to reputation and sales as the word spreads through the social sphere.

Second is this interesting profile of Levis and the motivation behind not washing your jeans. (my mom would cringe – but it’s for the planet mom!)   Levis is publicly owning its part of the process, and is setting clear public goals by which it can be measured.  Unless you’re a hemp fanatic, I can’t imagine too many outside of the sustainable converted thinking about the impact of their clothing.  Levis is making it a significant public issue (making sure to talk to bloggers like Marc and promote on its own blog )and helping to educate users of its products while also making self-improvements.

Two brands – one sustainable by nature and one a fashion stalwart, both being discussed in social media circles.  Who knew the sustainable one, the one at the center of a potential “movement” would be the one not being transparent and social.

For Sustainable Marketers: Stick or Carrot?

In a fascinating piece this week from the Wall Street Journal, the case was made that individuals will only effectively change their behavior in mass based on peer pressure.  The theory, supported by some direct studies and data, is that change takes place on a larger scale when you are made aware of what your neighbors are doing and react to “keep up with the Jones’.”   The article also details how rebate and financial incentives are not the drivers many of us believe they are (or should be).

The implication for marketers is staggering – Should I tout the positive impact my product has on the environment, rolling out statistics to consumers on how their purchase further benefits all of us. (the rising tide theory)

OR, should we subtly shame our customers into making the “right” choice since they will be left out by the crowd?  This is a fine line, and many mass products do this in a very sophisticated way (think the Pepsi Generation, or any Apple advertising, for example)

One of the take-aways I found most interesting was near the end of the piece: Efforts to exploit our keeping-up-with-the-Joneses instinct can also backfire if there’s too much emphasis on competition.

There is this interesting nugget:  Paul Stern, who studies climate change at the National Academy of Sciences, cautions that peer pressure so far has proved effective with “relatively low-impact behaviors” that don’t require individuals to make big sacrifices.

So, we want to be part of the crowd, but will only be motivated by that need for small change?  What’s a company who is asking for a sea change – rewiring your entire house for solar, for example – do to motivate real adoption.

My initial reaction – lead.  And don’t just say you’re going to do it, but commit.  And have a dispassionate understanding of the resources needed to do so.

Google came out last week talking about its plans for an offshore wind pipeline system.  Heady, expensive, long term stuff.  And they have the resources to pull it off.  For the smaller sustainable company without endless cash, this means leading by finding those pockets of enthusiasm and slowly building towards more mass adoption.  It is finding the better nature in the right buyers.  These leaders will have influence in their own spheres.  It will be slower; it will take longer, and it requires smarter investments.  Just because you’re not Google doesn’t mean you can make a difference with a sustainable product – and peer pressure won’t be your magic bullet.

How does reality impact Green and Sustainable Marketing?

Two recent posts from local Boston press got me thinking about how we are going to move forward and effectively market in the sustainability/green space.

First up, Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe, who discusses how according to certain statistics building landfills is more ecological than recycling.  I’ve seen many stories in the past regarding how “green” certain initiatives are, CSAs and local farming along with recycling being the two main examples.  So what’s real?  Does it actually cost us more and is more harmful to recycle?  These programs have been in place for decades now, and we still don’t have a definitive answer for the masses.  I predict we’ll always recycle – it’s now accepted much like an urban myth, and its a catalyst for mass understanding of the potential impact each of us has on the planet.  But that doesn’t necessarily make it true….

Next up is Martin LaMonica at Cnet, who discusses the idea of rapid innovation (like traditional IT approaches) vs. a longer term steady move towards energy reform.  This piece gets to the heart of it – what’s the right approach, investment in new technologies or evolution of existing ones?  Where do we spend our resources, both financially and (from my perspective) marketing-wise?  Which is the right area to promote?  Choosing the right path here is crucial…its commonly accepted that right now we’re already “behind” in the US vs. other countries on the green tech arch.  Making the wrong strategic investment and pushing technologies that aren’t likely to be winners (is solar to capital-intensive?  Does wind bring too little return?) dilutes our ability to succeed in the short and long-term.  What’s the reality of what we have today vs. “potential” solutions?

Marketers play a critical role in shaping which technologies are accepted and valued.  With heavy promotion and awareness behind it, recycling right now is accepted as the “right” thing to do.   For marketers, balancing the truth and doing an effective job for their clients, especially startups in emerging markets like sustainability is a hard balancing act.  Know your facts, they will come back to help or haunt you sooner or later.

Two Brand Marketing Approaches to Touting Green Cred

I’ve had the chance to experience how two very different brands approached touting their green credentials in the past month.  What I found most interesting is how different their marketing around their green efforts took shape, with the more B2B-focused company actually pushing the green angle more openly.

First up is Brother, the fax/printer company.  Unless you are an SMB/SOHO you likely interact with Brother products at the office.  I happen to have an individual printer in my office that recently needed a new toner cartridge.  After opening up the box, along with a new cartridge I was greeted with a leaflet describing how to help Brother keep the old cartridge out of landfills.  Here’s what struck me:

* Clear directions – they provided a 1-2-3 process that was easy and fast.

* No hassle – they provided me with the FedEx shipping label and instructions on how to return the package, providing contact info to help find a drop off or arrange a pickup.

* They answered the question of “why Brother?” – in their short summary (3 sentence, 5 bullets), I know quickly understood why Brother is asking me to participate and was given an appropriate level of detail on the program they have undertaken as an Energy Star partner.

Next up is Left Hand Brewing, the fine Colorado-based providers of a a close buddy of mine’s favorite Milk Stout.   A pure consumer brand, Left Hand interestingly doesn’t tout their green cred as clearly as I think they should on their packaging or their site.  They do have a note on the top label of their bottle describing how the beer was brewed with clean energy from SimpleSolar.com electric systems.  However it was only on one side in small print and I noticed it by accident.

Juxtapose this with another Colorado-based brewery New Belgium, the home of Fat Tire and other beers.  New Belgium talks more openly and in larger print/detail about their sustainable efforts on their site and packaging, with a link to a sustainable sub-page and a front page banner ad about a 1% for the planet initiative.  Pretty stark difference from what I would consider prime competitors.

With sustainable and green marketing still evolving, its interesting to see how these diverse companies approached the issue and how much emphasis they applied given their products and cultures.  It’s clear both B2B and B2C can gain positive customer impression from promoting their bona fides if done in a) a non-obtrusive way that b) supports the overall culture, bringing along with it competitive differentiation as well.

The Power of Analytics for Green Marketing

Imagine being able to tap into undiscovered markets, getting first mover advantage and securing a beachhead on a potentially large revenue stream?  With some deft analysis you’re able to empower your sales team, unleashing them with very targeted areas of focus that turn into bottom line benefit

A marketer’s dream, right?  Being able to tie together distinct threads to create a new mosaic of opportunity is essential to discovering opportunities hidden in the light of day.  All you need is the data!

But where to find it?

We hear a great deal about the promise of clean / green energy for the economy, yet many statistics show that today we’re even more shackled to traditional energy sources than during the 70’s oil crisis.  We get bogged down in looking for the large, sweeping answers, when finding smaller, yet real opportunity is essential to the slog that energy independence will inevitably become.  And that’s where marketers can make a difference.

Take a look at Heather Clancy at Green Tech Pastures piece on solar and more northern cities (think cold & snow) actually present a great opportunity vs. hot climates like Arizona due to the statistical realities of how solar works in hot vs. cold climates.  Who knew it could be “too hot” for solar?  It’s right there in Nature Materials for all to see.

Now take a look at the moves by larger IT vendors like IBM into the analytics space, well documented by ZDNet’s Larry Dignan here.   The “smarter planet” is going to be owned by those that mine data and put it to use.

That data can come from anywhere – scholastic journals, trade blogs, DOE statements.  It’s a marketers challenge and opportunity to find those disparate nuggets, distill the essence and set the direction in both external and internal programs to move sales opportunities forward before the competition.

Green Science Needs PR

Twitter was alive yesterday morning spreading a link to Jeremy Grantham’s 2Q 2010 letter (complete version found here.)  In Grantham’s letter on page seven he outlines “Everything You Need to Know About Global Warming in 5 Minutes,” which for shorter reading can be found here amongst a number of places.

Beyond being a clear minded and thoughtful summary of why global warming is not a hoax (my words), Grantham hit on a very powerful idea – that science needs to up its game PR and marketing wise, even though it goes against their core nature, that of objective presentation of facts and analysis.

This isn’t the first time I’ve seen this argument in the past few months.  The June issue of Wired contains a great essay by Erin Biba on this very topic, titled “Why Science Needs to Step Up Its PR Game.”  Biba does a nice job outlining the issues scientists have with moving into the limelight and some ideas on how celebrity ambassadors can lend a hand to elevate the conversation to larger mass awareness.

Both of these examples hit on what the core need is to make sustainability a longer term mass goal for society –  how to translate these facts into stories that everyone can relate to.   PR has sometimes rightfully gained a reputation for being “spin.”  After ten plus years in the business I’ve seen my fair share of that.   However I’ve also seen how when done well, earned media through PR efforts can lift a brand and an idea to new heights.

The stakes are too high for the scientists to sit on the sidelines – they are the objective resources with the facts whose voices can carry the most weight with the general public.  We need to hear those voices, and PR can absolutely lend a hand.

The Power of Sustainable Choices – Making Marketing Local?

The media brings to light sustainability stories in a variety of ways.  Most times it is national stories like BP that highlight larger issues of the  environmental impact of business, the cost of our dependence on oil, national regulations and standards, etc.  These are all worthy of debate and discussion, however it reminds me that the good stories, the positive stories many times are left on the sidelines.

This isn’t just an issue regarding sustainability and environmental issues – this is a complaint I hear regularly regarding the nightly news.  It’s a sad reality that the public does tend to gravitate towards that which is dramatic.

Which is why I was drawn to a recent video post from Yahoo in their Second Act series.  The particular piece focused on Jay Shafer, who made a lifestyle choice to downsize to an 89 square foot house of his own design and handiwork.  You can check out the video here.

Trathen Heckman, a sustainability educator, is quoted stating that Jay’s house is less than a 10th of the size of a “traditional” US home.  I found it interesting that by turning away from the standard approach to happiness and success (aka home ownership, status, etc.) that Jay has enriched his life while:

* Reducing his utilities to less than $100 per year

* Carrying no mortgage

Although not for everyone, those are powerful motivators that could lead many people to explore their own version of Jay’s lifestyle choice.

The US economy is based largely on services, the consumer index and individuals making the choice over and over again to buy new items, be it clothing, homes or the latest gadget from Apple.  As the economy continues to struggle, I wonder if more people will make similar choices as Jay, and how will the market respond?  Jay grew a business of creating small buildings out of his own experience.  Local farmers are seeing the continued growth of CSAs across the nation.  More and more individuals are making lifestyle choices that don’t blend with traditional purchase patterns.

This is heady stuff for marketers.  A mass media national approach won’t reach these folks.  Marketing is going to have to adjust to being more targeted, more local.  To me, this means social media will increase its importance as more businesses look to connect to those buyers right in their own backyards.

They say all politics are local.  The combination of economy and choice may mean business needs to returns to those roots as well, and marketers need to take notice.

Green Marketing: Going Sour With One Comment…

For a while now my wife has been augmenting our regular food shopping with a trip to Whole Foods.  Initially it was an extension/filler for our meat CSA when we wanted fish.  However as we looked to start a family – and now have our little one to think of-  her theory on shopping at Whole Foods expanded to include the idea that the meat and vegetables there are better  since they are “organic.”  Besides, it’s “good for the environment” since they purport to support local farmers and after watching Food Inc. she was determined to make smarter food choices for our family.

I was willing to take Whole Foods at face value regarding their claims of sustainability efforts, and as long as we selectively shopped there and didn’t spend whole paychecks (pun intended) I was ok with her decision.

That is until last January, when Whole Foods CEO John Mackey famously stated he didn’t believe in climate change.

It seems to me the consensus has moved on this issue and only the most biased claim there isn’t at least some form of climate change going on today.  So I started to think about what Whole Foods was actually claiming in their marketing via in-store and flier materials regarding their sustainable chops.  My wife and I discussed it and we started to somewhat curb our Whole Food shopping, focusing on our local produce wholesaler and our meat CSA more heavily.

Then we became busy as most expectant parents and laxed on our diligence.  More Whole Foods started appearing in our house again, and I didn’t have the will to put up the fight.  However, as my wife came home this past weekend the Whole Foods Market 2010 Spring Magazine was in the bag and what did I find?  A number of small articles discussing how to be more “green”, tips on saving energy (air dry dishes, cool before the fridge, etc) and a whole page on your green home with their EcoCzar Lee Kane.  And I felt…sad.  Sad because I feel most of the folks involved in Whole Foods and at this magazine in particular likely really do care.  Sad because all their hard and honest work was met with skepticism since I was triggered to remember Mackey’s statement.   It made me wonder – how do they rectify their presence in a magazine for an organization fronted by a man that doesn’t believe in one of the core tenants of why the world is changing in the first place?

When an organization claims sustainability, it is hard to support them in the long run if it doesn’t come from the top down through the organization.  It comes off as opportunistic marketing in the worse sense.  I won’t go as far as to say I’ll boycott Whole Foods for life; however the dissonance I feel will certainly limit my support for them and encourage me to let others know as well.  That word of mouth is the worst marketing any company could want, because it’s the silent majority that you’ll never reach.  And it all starts with one loose-lipped comment.

Caveat Emptor – The Cloud is Not Green

If you are an enterprise there are a number of ways you can go about getting sustainable credibility and avoid “greenwashing” and the backlash that companies like BP have been receiving.

* Put your money where your…. – Cut back on your waste and CO2 emissions and forget the cap a trade. Real dollars spent because it is the right thing is credible and measurable.

* Support local sustainable businesses through employee programs. Have the cafeteria use produce from a local CSA. Insist on sourcing supplies from within a 50 mile radius. Its tangible, again its real and you get the benefit of improving your employee’s lives and the local economy. Who knows, maybe you can even leverage it to negotiate a lower health care premium.

These are just two ideas amongst a large variety that are immediate and have real impact. One idea I’ve seen floated around is the idea that going to a cloud technology strategy is “going green.” I’m here to tell you that’s likely not the case. And if you see brands trying to claim that, its in my opinion the tech version of polluters buying carbon credits and saying its ok.

Let’s think about it – everything is going digital and on a worldwide scale.  New device adoption is growing, and new launches like the iPad are just adding to the data growth.  This data has to live somewhere, and the energy and data center space required to manage this growth has a cost.

So organizations think “I’ll just go the cloud, reduce my footprint and electric bill and I’m green.”  Not so fast…Jason Mark does a nice job here detailing the folly of that idea, and the most startling statistic he highlights is this:  “In just 10 years, internet technologies could be eating up more than 50 percent of the electricity we now use in the United States.”

I was talking to a large enterprise prospect last week and they hold sustainability as one of the key internal programs, which is commendable and I was thrilled to see.  However, as we explored it as a possible PR strategy, we collectively realized that in order to claim sustainability as a core cultural differentiators, we had to showcase implemented programs that were measured and maintained over a period of time.  We had to be accountable, and that didn’t mean shuffling responsibility to partners or customers.

I applauded them, and I encourage other brands to hold themselves to the same standard.  Cloud Computing is an IT revolution and well worth the effort, but let’s avoid calling it green….

BP – What’s Next?

With BP taking a well deserved hit on the Gulf oil situation, I won’t recount all of the missteps that have them facing a long-term PR nightmare.  For that you can read here the NYT’s summary here and PR social media pundit Todd Defren here.   (disclaimer: Todd’s my boss, but don’t hold that against him…he’s a savvy guy)

My initial take away is caveat emptor on green marketing – especially for big brands.  This is a clarion call for GE, Cisco, Intel – any multi-national that has been pushing a “green” agenda these past few years is on notice.  I experienced something similar in years working in the IT security space – don’t call anyone out, and be careful what you claim since its more than likely something will happen that shines an unfavorable light on YOU in the future.

So, where does BP go from here, and what can other brands learn from this?

* Be prepared – BP has committed over $125 million annually the past few years on its beyond petroleum branding effort.  All that effort is now wasted since they were left

* Get online and stay online – Like it or not, brand reputation has moved from mass media to online.  BP has been discussing and taking responsibility for issues like the Alabama lawsuit payouts on TV, however why aren’t they responding online to stories like this?  BP needs to expand their communication channels to include all media, not just broadcast and their own web site.

* Don’t deflect – There’s some evidence to suggest oil spills “naturally” into the gulf on a regular basis.  Nobody will care.  BP can’t become defensive in the least.  They put themselves out in the public as a sustainable company, and they need to own their role in this situation and any future situations.

* Continue what they started – BP’s main page is almost fully dedicated to the spill recovery effort, as it should be.  BP has to own that this is now part of their legacy and culture, and can’t move this from their public efforts any time soon.  Establishing a commission on underwater drilling safety with community engagement before any future projects, funneling some of their billions of profit into a foundation for local wildlife – just a few thoughts on long-term commitments BP now needs to consider and execute upon.  It can’t be a quick-fix program that runs out of funding or sunsets in a few years.  This is part of their culture now and they need to embrace it.

As the culture moves to becoming more conscious regarding sustainable living, brands should absolutely embrace this as part of their culture.  The trick is having a plan, understanding your exposure and backing up what you claim.  BP is facing an uphill climb in large part because they had no clear plan…is your brand set up for the same fate?