Green Haze: How Consumer Goods Companies Can Make the Message Count | S Dialogue

As consumer product companies deploy green marketing for everything from disposable pens (made from 62 percent recycled material) to fair trade toys, the messaging landscape from the consumer’s perspective is getting quite cloudy.

At SDialogue, we like to call it a “Green Smog.” Indeed, it’s hard for many companies to differentiate their wares in such a cluttered market. Still, research shows that some firms are benefiting from their green marketing efforts – especially when their approach is successfully employed. Moreover, companies that are able to “walk their talk” have the most success as the marketplace is quick weed out inauthentic messages and products.

Successful green marketing stories includes Clorox’s Green Works brand. About a year after launch, the company’s environmentally friendly cleaning products garnered over 40 percent of the market segment for this type of product. Amazingly, the brand did it while not taking market share from existing green brands in the segment such as Seventh Generation and Method.

Key to Clorox’s home run rested in a consumer realization that – given the choice – toxic cleaners are better off not used in their homes. But the products have to work, and Clorox made sure in its messaging that the Green Works brand are effective cleaners while also being comparably priced. The lesson here is that when price and function are comparable, does touting a green message truly make sense.

The main takeaway for consumer goods companies is that your communication strategy requires careful thought and planning. Before marketing the green aspect of your product, there are some assessments that need to be made, and includes:

• Seeing whether your company and product has the credibility to make your green claims. This needs to be backed up with facts and data

• Ask yourself if your messages are relevant and aligned with your business

• Make sure you can translate your facts and data has meaning, and that consumers can relate to it. Moreover, make sure the messaging relates to a consumer’s values

Effective green marketing requires going back to the basics, which centers on knowing your target market as well as making sure the product or service meets the needs of the market. Of course, the pricing has to be competitive and the product should be aligned with the values of your target consumer.

Modern-Day Robofish School Humans on How to Detect Water Pollution | 3BL Media

Many of us remember the 1987 science fiction film RoboCop, which is about a cop who is recreated as a human cyborg to fight crime in Detroit. Well it’s 2010, and instead of focusing on recreating humans, scientists will go deep into the murky depths of the ocean to recreate schools of robofish.

I’m not making this up, even if it does sound like the premise of a B-rated horror movie. Scientists from the University of Essex in Colchester, England have developed schools of robotic fish that look exactly like real fish. Except that real fish don’t have built-in GPS tracking systems and wi-fi sensors that detect areas of pollution in the water. These fish do, and they also feature fins and tails that are propelled by motors.

The robotic fish are being used to detect particular pollutants in the depths of the River Thames. Once they detect a pollutant, they send signals to other “members” of their school to come to the scene of action. The robofish take detailed reading of the area, and then they back signals to us humans. We in return create real time 3-D maps of pollutants in the water. We use this information to figure out how to rid the Thames of pollution.

Once again I ask your opinion on these robofish. Are they super cool science fiction gadgets that are going to rid our ocean of pollution, or should they be made bigger so that they don’t get eaten by bigger fish? That’s what I was thinking. What about you?

One commenter on the GoodCleanTech website said, “I believe that this is an incredible use of current technology. Why is it that there are those that think all technology somehow will scare you, idiots. To now be able to send several remote “fish” into a school and learn “whatever there is to learn” is fantastic.” Another commenter on Mail Online said, “There will be nowhere to hide, under water, under ground, even in outer space. Big brother is here, and sharpening his tool kit. Look up Darpa.gov and learn!”

I did look up Darpa.gov. It’s a research and development office for the US Department of Defense. Their mission is to “maintain the technological superiority of the U.S. military and prevent technological surprise from harming our national security.” So now I’m confused. Are robofish going to be used to detect pollutants in our water, or are they some sort of super secret military experiment?

I guess I’ll just have to wait and sea. I meant see.

Greenopolis.com is dedicated to our users. We focus our attention on changing the world through recycling, waste-to-energy and conservation. We reward our users for their sustainable behaviors on our website, through our Greenopolis Tracking Stations and with curbside recycling programs.

GREENOP4603

Seeing Choices, Choosing to Lead: Wise Companies Get Ahead the Curve

Nike faced a choice back in the 1990’s with issues arising around working conditions in Asian factories, large amount of waste in product manufacturing, and the raw materials consumption involved in making and shipping and selling shoes all over the world. Sarah Severn, at the time head of Sustainable Development for Nike said “We faced a choice, of either complying with the minimums and staying out of trouble, or becoming a leader in our industry. They chose the latter, setting new standards for labor practices, waste and CO2 reduction. They’ve been voted the top Corporate Social Responsibility firm for several years running.

Photo: Toyota

Around that same time, Toyota faced a similar choice, continue to base their future on internal combustions engine and just tinker with fuel efficiency, or strike out in a different direction, acknowledging the looming end of “gas to burn”, tighter emissions restriction and waste CO2 issues. We all know what they did- introduce the Prius and a new generation of gas-electric vehicles, which have been popular enough to pave the way for all electric and hydrogen vehicles.

Once companies see clearly that they have simple choice to make—lead the way or shift the burden to someone else—they can start to make serious investments.

The little drawing above represents the choices facing so many companies today. The upper loop represents the decision to do as little as possible and avoid the impact of your choices by shifting the burden to nature, which is really onto our collective air, water, soils, forests, etc. The problem might be fixed for the company in the short term, but it doesn’t go away, and comes back harder in the long run. Companies try ignoring the issue whatever it is, believing that damage to a watershed, greenhouse gas emis¬sions, or increasing waste is not their problem. Because this may give the organization a negative public image, companies often also try “green¬washing,” or improving their image through public relations campaigns, lobbying, minimal waste reduction programs, or making minor product changes (like hybrid SUVs that get poorer gas mileage than conventional cars of a decade ago). They continue to choose to operate in the upper loop because they think it will be easier, cheaper, and faster. But all the while the real problems are growing—as are the risks associated with unsustainable business practices.

But there is another choice. The lower loop, in which we create funda¬mental solutions, means investing in sustainable solutions that are regen¬erative- really fix the problem. In this “innovation and leadership loop” you take responsibility for your impact on the larger world.

The Impact is cumulative.

As Sarah Severn says, the choice to lead becomes crucial. While no one organization can be accused of causing a whole problem, the effects of many indi¬vidual companies choosing the upper loop have that impact. On the other hand, when one or more companies in an industry stops blaming others or “the system” and take responsibility for being part of the problem, they can play a pivotal role in becoming part of the solu¬tion, and influencing others to do likewise.

Consumers can help the companies make the right choice. By selecting products with less packaging, and waste, that use little energy, or emit less waste into our air, water and soils, we can vote with our dollars. Those votes are always counted. So find out who the leaders are, on these pages or elsewhere, and support the companies leading the way to a cradle to cradle economy.

Greenopolis.com is dedicated to our users. We focus our attention on changing the world through recycling, waste-to-energy and conservation. We reward our users for their sustainable behaviors on our website, through our Greenopolis Tracking Stations and with curbside recycling programs.

GREENOP4622

Beware of Whole Foods’ Healthy Employee Discount | 3BL Media

In Drive, Daniel H. Pink explores “The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us.” The intro concepts break down the broad types of motivation — Motivation 1.0 covers our striving to satisfy survival needs. Motivation 2.0 covers our responses to external rewards and punishments — carrots and sticks.

Motivation 3.0 covers what intrinsically motivates us where there are no external rewards, no concrete personal “carrots.” For example, people spend much time and effort on Wikipedia; or people stop to help a stranger; or someone who spends hours practicing violin with no interest in a professional career.

Ironically, when someone does something for its intrinsic motivation — say, for interest or fun — the application of an extrinsic reward can often ruin it, “transform[ing] an interesting task into a drudge. [Extrinisic rewards] can turn play into work. And by diminishing intrinsic motivation, they can send performance, creativity, and even upstanding behavior toppling like dominoes.”

With Drive in mind, I read about Whole Foods’ new Team Member Healthy Discount Incentive Program as reported by Jezebel.com. This program offers employee discounts beyond the normal 20% for non-smoking employees who opt-in and demonstrate qualifying cholesterol levels, blood pressure, and body weight as measured by BMI.

Applying extrinsic rewards and punishments (like a discount) to what is otherwise intrinsically motivated (like healthy lifestyle pursuit) — that’s a motivation killer. Maybe that’ll be no problem for those who already score at a 30% discount, but for those who have been struggling with weight, this program is a motivation killer.

What were they thinking?

But perhaps John Mackey and the other execs at Whole Foods did consider the studies of Motivation 3.0 in designing this program. Maybe this program is NOT intended to motivate weight loss, etc.; perhaps it’s intended to accomplish something else entirely. Warning: Whole Foods employees beware.

Read more here.

ER4614

CSR Trends: “Consumer Driven Aid” For Haiti

Remember Haiti? Okay, good. Just checking. While it’s been hardly 4 weeks since the 7.0 magnitude earthquake rocked Port-Au-Prince, destroying over 200,000 lives and an entire capital city, the media cycle has already seemed to move on. It’s back to health care, elections, tea parties, and the economy.

Lives have been lost, families torn apart, people displaced, and now what? As the first massive wave of relief has passed, and corporations have pledged their initial aid (over $130 million thus far),  I’m sure some might be planning their next move to help in the reconstruction efforts by offering more financial, technological, and expertise-based assistance. Yet some might have moved on to their next “Socially Responsible” initiative. Some may be returning to business as usual, patting themselves on the back for being able to give $1 million to Haiti in a (post?) recession time.

Many Americans and the companies they work for immediately pitched in resources to help Haiti, and with every catastrophic event that becomes a catalyst for widespread giving, it’s worth stepping back and examining the trends.

In the case of Haiti, we saw the growth of a corporate social responsibility strategy that intertwines the interests and efforts of both individuals and corporations- we’ll call it Consumer Driven Aid.  Once upon a time, people would give for the sake of giving, out of compassion for those in truly desperate situations. Companies would give because they felt it was their responsibility to society to set an example (or they just wanted to look good.) While the incredible outpour of support for Haiti is testament to the fact that giving for the sake of giving certainly hasn’t vanished, corporations and consumers are engineering new ways to mutually benefit from corporate philanthropy.

To put it bluntly, we’re all starting to get a better ROI (Return on Investment) on our donations.

The rise of Consumer Driven Aid highlights an increasingly popular model of corporate philanthropy; one that creates a co-dependent, cause-based relationship between brands and consumers, with the end result being consumers helping nonprofits and receiving something tangible in return from a brand. The more consumers engage, the more money is given.

Let’s examine one of the most recent example of Consumer Driven Aid:

Ralph Lauren created a polo called the “Haiti Relief Polo”, of which 100% of the proceeds go directly to relief efforts in Haiti through United Way Worldwide Disaster Fund. The Polo, which is offered in 5 styles and multiple colors for men and women, sells for $98.00.

Brand Benefit

• The Haiti Relief Polo can effectively be tagged a good CSR campaign for Ralph Lauren, since they are donating 100% of the proceeds to charity. Needless to say, this makes them look like a “responsible” brand and reinforces a positive brand image.
• The shirt probably only costs a couple of dollars to make, so while Ralph Lauren isn’t giving much out of pocket, it appears to be a significant amount since the markup for a “Ralph Lauren” product  is so high. I’m sure this also comes in handy for tax write offs.
• Ralph Lauren doesn’t dictate the amount given; it’s up to the consumers. So if no one buys the product, they can at least say they tried.

Consumer Benefit

• If a consumer is going to make a $100 donation to a cause, they might as well get something for it, right? By purchasing items in which 100% of the proceeds go to charity, consumers basically see it as getting a (sweet) return on their donation. Or, if they were going to get a polo anyways, now they can feel good that it went to charity as well.
• The polo says “Haiti Relief” on it, so they get the conversational value of explaining that their purchase went to help Haiti. This also benefits Ralph Lauren.
• The only downside is that consumers don’t get a tax write off- it is passed on to the corporation.

Nonprofit Benefit

• The brand helps raise attention to the organization (United Way) and its efforts.
• They get a much needed fiscal contribution, that was generated from a collaborative consumer-brand interaction.

Consumer Driven Aid creates a very interesting new dynamic between Consumer, Company, and Cause. The consumer essentially makes a donation to the brand-vetted nonprofit, and gets rewarded for doing so. It wouldn’t be a stretch to call this brand-incentivized donations, or rewards based donations.

What Consumer Driven Aid effectively does is turn a brand into a donation clearinghouse for consumers- which is a pretty interesting paradigm shift. It’s wonderful for companies to be using their power and influence to help bring attention to and raise money for a particular cause, nonprofit, or humanitarian crisis. However it’s an entirely different story if consumers begin looking towards brands when making important decisions regarding their charitable contributions. What happens to smaller nonprofits? What happens to the personal feeling of connection to a single organization?

Lastly, will people begin to feel the need to be rewarded every time they make a donation? Will “consumer giving”  become a primary force for giving, putting brands at the forefront of orchestrating philanthropic dollars?

I would love to hear readers thoughts……

CAUSE INTEGRATION, powered by Causecast, brings you the latest news, information, and trends in Corporate Social Responsibility, Cause Marketing, Cause Campaigns, and Cause Branding.

Wasteland to Resources: New Orleans rises from Katrina and Saints win Super Bowl XLIV! | 3BL Media

If the New Orleans Saints win last night in Super Bowl XLIV is an indicator for what a turnaround can be, there might be hope for our blue green planet after all.

New Orleans became the unhappy poster child for environmental catastrophe back in 2005 when Hurricane Katrina devastated the city and burst levees that put it underwater. The place was literally a wasteland. The Saint’s showcase home, the Superdome, was a trashed refugee shelter. The team nearly left town.

But the Big Easy is rising from the watery grave. Not just restoration here folks, but regeneration, just like nature does. New Orleans is talking revitalization fueled by hurricane-force idealism embodied in this year’s stunning Super Bowl win.

Young workers in the not for profit sector see the city becoming a model for innovative schools, 21st century urban planning and a Mecca for green buildings as the city is rebuilt. Small entrepreneurs are starting green energy companies. Not only the pioneering spirit of these folks but recovery money is flowing to give the city a once in a lifetime chance to regenerate a better future from the old. Groups like Women of the Storm are educating leaders on coastal restoration. Restoring Louisiana’s saltwater wetlands would capture huge amounts of CO2 and help prevent the kind of damage that Katrina caused in the future.

Tourists are back and booming, unemployment is more than 2 points below the national average. City residents and recovery organizations are translating their hard earned experience to help earthquake victims in Haiti.

So if there was ever a question that an entire city can be recycled, reused, renewed, if a wasteland can become a champion – The Saints put that to rest last night – and New Orleans is doing it every day. It’s got to give you hope that we can solve the same puzzle on this blue green ball of ours.

Greenopolis.com is dedicated to our users. We focus our attention on changing the world through recycling, waste-to-energy and conservation. We reward our users for their sustainable behaviors on our website, through our Greenopolis Tracking Stations and with curbside recycling programs.

GREENOP4611

How much do I really matter in a democracy?

With last month’s Supreme Court ruling that corporations (with much deeper pockets than yours and mine) are now able to directly support specific political candidates and issues without spending limits or disclosure, we’ve seen the upending of decades of bipartisan support for the regulation of corporate and individual campaign contributions. President Obama addressed this new ruling directly in his first State of the Union address when he argued the decision would “open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.”
Let’s step back and digest this for a moment. 2009 has come and gone and one year into a “new” Washington, we are still facing a U.S. Chamber of Commerce that this past year contributed close to $100 million dollars lobbying against climate legislation. These dollars – which came from a sometimes unaware corporate membership – contributed to the stalling of any momentum the legislation was gaining prior to Copenhagen. Those dollar counteract the concerns of many Americans who believe such policy is necessary to change our energy and environmental future. But everyday Americans simply don’t have the kind of money of the Chamber or some of its members have to effectively “sponsor” senators.
Yes, we have voices. Yes, we have votes. But with the Supreme Court’s decision, our democracy is showing its preference for favoring corporate dollars which more often than not greatly outweigh our influence on the political process.

Still, even though the decision threatens our direct role in our democracy, the power we have as individuals is incredible. Too often we fail to realize the real power that we can have over the companies that now stand to wield such an excess of influence on our government. So in a kind of roundabout way, we can still engage in our democracy by making it clear to big corporations that big global issues – climate change and climate justice, access to clean drinking water, and poverty and disaster relief, to name a few – truly matter to us.

Every time we shop, we’re voting. Every time we eat, we vote. Every time we watch TV, we vote. The list goes on and on. So why not vote for our future? Corporations know where you shop, they know what you eat, and they know what you watch. Their business revolves around what consumers want or they fail. If we are truly committed to a more sustainable world, we should support companies that are making efforts to reduce their impact on the environment, supporting strong public policy on climate change, and engaging with us openly on their efforts to be good corporate citizens. It actually becomes a quite simple equation. If those companies know we care about the environment and climate change and demonstrate our willingness to reward them for their meaningful action, those companies will naturally become the most outspoken forces for aggressive climate action in their interactions with our government. In short, our money talks and will motivate deep-pocketed corporations to put their money to use for good.

This is all about making lemonade out of the Supreme Court’s ruling. Let’s make it work to the advantage of us, the consumers of the products and services marketed by these “corporate persons.” Let’s put increasing pressure on the world’s most well-known companies – many of them some of the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases – to put their money towards the issues that matter to us.

The key is making them realize our support for their businesses is contingent upon how responsive they are to our very real concerns about global challenges like water scarcity, poverty, and, yes, climate change.

A Smart New Way to Segment Green Consumers

When you target customers, it helps to know if they’re “dark green”, “light green” or “basic brown” in their attitudes, but, with so many green issues, products, and labels out there, it may be more relevant to your branding and communications to understand their personal green interests.

Ask: To which environmental organizations do members of our target audience belong (The Appalachian Mountain Club or Greenpeace)? Which types of vacations do they take (hiking or the beach)? Which environmental magazines and websites do they read or visit? (Sierra or Animal Fair?) Which types of products do they buy? (green fashions or energy-sipping light bulbs)? Which eco-labels do they seek out (“USDA Organic” or “Energy Star”)?

In observing green consumers over the past twenty years my colleagues and I have found that asking questions like these allows companies to distinguish between four subsegments, which we’ve dubbed “Resource Conservers”, “Health Fanatics”, “Animal Lovers” and “Outdoor Enthusiasts.” Of course, there are some overlaps among these groups, but discovering which subsegment your customers mainly fall into can sharpen your marketing. The following descriptions are generalizations, but they capture the spirit of each type of consumer.

Resource Conserving Consumers

Resource Conservers hate waste. (I should know. I am one.) Spot them wearing classically styled clothing, toting cloth shopping bags and sipping from reusable water bottles. Avid recyclers of milk jugs and Tide bottles, they drop off old electronics at Best Buy. They read news on-line to save trees, and are quick to re-use their Reynolds wrap. Ever watchful of saving their “drops” and “watts,” they install low-flow showerheads and compact fluorescent bulbs branded with EPA’s Energy Star and WaterSense labels. Shunning over-packaged products, they only turn on the lights when they have to, and they plug their appliances into power strips for easy shut-off when they leave for work.

Some ways to appeal to resource conservers:

1. Highlight the economical, long-lasting and reusability benefits of products.
2. Offer services that enable them to recycle, compost and save energy.

Health Fanatics Fret Over Toxics

Health Fanatics worry about overexposure to the sun, fear pesticide residues on produce, and fret over contaminants in children’s toys. They apply sunscreen, scout out natural-food stores for the latest in organic foods, buy only natural cosmetics and pet care, and have switched out the toxic cleaning products for the non-toxic ones under the sink. They look for products marked with the “USDA Organic” seal of approval or EPA’s Design for Environment logo.They scrutinize websites like Michigan-based Ecology Center’s HealthyStuff.org and HealthyToys.org to get the skinny on toxic substances on products from school supplies to automobiles. Find them on the memberships rolls of Beyond Pesticides, Organic Consumers Association and to be regular readers of Natural Life Magazine.

Some ways to appeal to health fanatics:

1. Focus on organic aspects, health benefits, trust, transparency and natural ingredients.
2. Cross-promote with organic foods companies or a non-toxic cleaning product or sponsor a website like OrganicConsumers.org, or advertise in Natural Life Magazine.

Animal Lovers Love Animals Near and Far

Animal Lovers are likely to be vegetarian or vegan, belong to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and boycott tuna and products with real fur. They look for products labeled as “cruelty-free”, Salmon Safe, or Dolphin-safe. They seek out synthetic handbags and faux fur jackets, and favor the faux-meat options at restaurants. They perk up to news stories featuring animals in need, from manatees and polar bears to strays in their neighborhood, and are likely to volunteer at the local animal shelter. Out of concern for marine life, they eschew plastic bags. Catch them reading Animal Fair Magazine and Veg News Magazine.

Some ways to appeal to animal lovers:

1. Conduct a cause-related marketing campaign through PETA’s Business Friends program or partner with the ASPCA.
2. Advertise in Animal Fair Magazine and PAWS magazine or online on WWF.org.

Outdoor Enthusiasts Protect the Great Outdoors

Outdoor Enthusiasts spend their free time camping, rock climbing, skiing, and hiking. They vacation in national parks and plan their next adventure using tips from Outdoors Magazine. Whether they’re purchasing Dr. Bronner’s Castile Soap to reduce the impact of washing dishes while camping, or toting reusable bottles like Kleen Kanteen to avoid littering the trail, they seek to minimize the impact of their recreational activities. When shopping, they look for FSC (sustainably harvested) labels on their products, are also likely to purchase outdoor gear made from recycled materials, such as Synchilla PCR (post-consumer recycled polyester) from Patagonia.

Some ways to appeal to outdoor enthusiasts:

1. Conduct a joint promotion with national parks or manufacturers of boots, reusable bottles, and trail mix snacks.
2. Advertise in Sierra Club magazine or online at Backpackers.com.

How do you segment your green customers? And how does that affect your marketing strategy?

This blog was originally published by Harvard Business Press.org. It was excerpted from her latest book on green marketing, due out in 2010. Learn more about it by linking to greenmarketing.com.

Jacquie Ottman is a consultant, author and speaker on green marketing and eco-innovation.  Email her at info@greenmarketing.com

Tickets for Employee LUV | 3BL Media

Today Southwest Airlines announced a new employee volunteer program- Tickets for Time (T4T). T4T puts a unique twist on corporate volunteering programs.  Rather than simply match donations, Southwest is offering their employees the opportunity to “earn” tickets for nonprofit organizations of their choosing.  For every 40 hours an employee volunteers, the benefitting nonprofit organization receives one free roundtrip ticket that can be used for fund-raising or transportation needs.  Each nonprofit can receive up to 6 tickets each year!

This program is interesting for a few reasons:

1. T4T encourages employees to actually engage with nonprofit organizations through hands-on volunteering activities
2. The incentive for volunteering is to pay the reward forward…to the nonprofit (compared to say “volunteer 40 hours and earn a ticket for yourself”)
3. The program aligns with Southwest’s mission to provide their employees “a stable work environment with equal opportunity for learning and personal growth.”

This is not Southwest’s first step into corporate volunteering programs.  The airline maintains the Share the Spirit program that encourages employees to embrace local charities and nonprofits.  In 2008 20,490 volunteer hours were reported.

Interestingly, Southwest also announced last month its 37th consecutive year of profitability.  Despite facing an extremely touch economic environment, Southwest has managed to stay focused on running a profitable and socially responsiblebusiness.  Maybe others in the airline industry (and beyond) can take a page from the Southwest playbook…

 

Courtney Zegarski is an experienced research and communications professional with a passion for corporate social responsibility and social entrepreneurship. Courtney holds a B.A. in Political Science from Washington University in St. Louis and a M.B.A in Leadership & Business Ethics from DePaul, and writes extensively for the Social Endeavors Blog.

Eco-labeling vs. greenmuting: What’s right for you? | 3BL Media

A while ago someone asked me whether my business card was printed on recycled paper. Yes, it is, I replied. Why, then, the response went, is there nowhere on my card a corresponding symbol to be seen? And, What if, when deciding whether to keep the card or do business with my company, a prospect tosses out mine because that sign of my environmental consciousness is missing?

My ultimate response boiled down to this: If a prospect makes her decision to do business with me based on the presence or absence of the recycled-content symbol on my business card, we’re probably not a good fit. My reputation and work, not symbols on my business card, should speak for me.

What are the pros and cons of eco-labeling? Should you greenmute instead? Are there other ways to convey environmental friendliness of your products or services?

Eco-labeling

Eco-labels are marks awarded by third parties to indicate environmental or health attributes of a product and build credibility with receptive consumers.

So many government entities, nonprofits, and corporations issue eco-labels that today there are more than 300 eco-labels in North America alone, in many industries and product categories. The eco-label landscape is confusing, and as a result eco-labeling as a marketing tactic has lost some of its cachet.

In addition, many labels have been misused or downright abused, as when the Smart Choices label adorned sugary cereals. Greenwashing is alive and giving eco-labels or eco-language a bad name. Just prior to writing this post, I read about UK’s advertising watchdog banning a Finnair ad because it called flying “eco-smart”. TerraChoice just added the use of false in-house eco-labels to their list of greenwashing sins.

Eco-labeling and related issues can be quite daunting for a business. Which is why I look forward to attending and reporting on tomorrow’s virtual conference“Sustainable Brands In Focus: Building Credibility, Avoiding Greenwash”*.

Greenmuting

Companies practice greenmuting when they deliberately avoid communicating their work or accomplishments in the environmental realm.

In most cases, the fear of being accused of greenwashing motivates greenmuting. Companies recognize their environmental claims will be subjected to close scrutiny and so they opt to avoid it by not making such claims.

I wouldn’t go as far as some, including TreeHugger, who call greenmuting a sin. While greenmuting has its disadvantages, it’s just a risk management technique (when some authors sell sustainability as a risk management practice, no feathers get ruffled). It’s also one that saves us from a lot of green blabber; if companies greenmute because they fear greenwashing charges, the market deterrent is working.

I see another angle on greenmuting, one that is more relevant to my story. What if you don’t highlight your greenness because you’d prefer not to differentiate yourself that way? Green is a niche strategy with limited reach, at best. Greenmuting because green is irrelevant to your positioning certainly makes sense.

The third way(s)

Jacquie Ottman has suggested a number of alternatives to eco-labels, which fall roughly in two categories: third-party endorsements and credibility. The former use disinterested persons, organizations, or awards to endorse your product’s eco credentials. The latter build green communications on the company’s reputation and transparency.

In my case the absence of eco-symbols on my card is closer to counter-signaling. Think of the last time you heard someone tell you, Trust me. Or how you felt when you saw Ph.D. after an author’s name. Your guard probably went up, and you thought, Well if you have to say it…

I don’t use eco labels for the same reasons I don’t include the acronyms of my graduate degrees behind my name: it’s irrelevant and unnecessary. What others say about me matters more than what I say about myself. My work and its results should speak louder than my eco-labels.

Ultimately, I stand with Adam Werbach, who maintains that eco-labels are unsustainable as a marketing practice because sustainability must come from the organizational core. What use is the label if sustainability isn’t within? And who needs labels if you’re sustainable through and through?

(That’s not to say I’m perfect when it comes to sustainability; it’s an ongoing process for me as it is for every other company.)

What’s right for you?

Use eco-labels if

http://www.semiosiscommunications.com/images/listbutton.jpg);”>
• you can use a well-recognized, meaningful, and credible one, or one from such an institution or other third-party
• you can afford it
• you have nothing to hide or can credibly defend your claim
• you can use a narrow one, describing one significant aspect of your product without greenwashing

Use greenmuting if

http://www.semiosiscommunications.com/images/listbutton.jpg);”>
• you have significant work to do when it comes to sustainability
• you aim for mass appeal
• you care not to differentiate on green

According to Tyler Cowen, of the Marginal Revolution fame, counter-signaling works best for situations when there’s a great potential reward and low downside risk. Many high-margin/low-volume products or services can use counter-signaling to their advantage, as can those that entail narrow, specialized expertise.

What’s your take on eco-labels and greenmuting?

***

* Disclosure: Sustainable Life Media granted me a free press pass for the “Sustainable Brands In Focus: Building Credibility, Avoiding Greenwash” conference – the virtual conference registration costs $295.

This commentary can be found originally at: Sustainable Marketing Blog by Peter Korchnak. Better triple bottom line.