This ad for the Audi A3 was shown during the Superbowl in the US and has kicked up a real kerfuffle. I can't decide whether it is reprehensible or genius. It has certainly got the green lobby's nose out of joint with its satire on the perceived self-righteousness of the "eco-police", but going back to John Grant's definition of Green Marketing - it's about making green look normal. This ad is aimed at people who are in the middle third of the green market segments - those who might buy green, but not as a default - by trying to persuade them that this green product is a good product full stop. From this point of view it works.
I was quite harsh on John Grant's Green Marketing Manifesto when I reviewed it, but while I'm doing the zillionith edit to The Green Executive, I've been having a think about his main maxim:
"Green Marketing is about making green stuff seem normal, not about making normal stuff seem green"
The first part is really quite powerful and chimes with the need to aim green products at the mass market rather than the green niche to get any worthwhile impact from and environmental point of view. And the second part really skewers greenwash - that if you want to be green, you've really got to break from the norm, not put a green prism in front of what business does as a matter of course.
On Friday I had a lovely, warming lunch in Blackfriars cafe in Newcastle. I was very taken with their placemats that showed the local suppliers they use. This is a fantastic piece of green branding.
First of all, it doesn't scream green which would be out of place in a mid-market eatery. But it gets across a key message - "we source locally and from a lot of organic farms".
Secondly, it demonstrates green rather than claiming green. It says "here are the facts - you make up your mind".
Thirdly, it grabs your attention in the time between ordering and being served, providing a conversation piece. Restaurants which put food sources on the menu are competing for attention when customers are trying to choose a dish.
Running a green business is tough. I have seen many people get bitten by the green bug and then just get bitten. I have seen green product manufacturers use self (badly) printed labels on their products and not understand why they break into the mainstream. I've seen a recycling technology developer wonder why local authorities wouldn't buy his hugely expensive sorting machine. I've seen a recycling company try to jump ahead of the pack with a new processing line then lose money when the Government delayed a piece of legislation.
US green marketing guru Jacquelyn Ottman talks about the 'Green Graveyard' where poorly thought out products go to die. It is a repository for all ideas that aren't rooted in the real world. In the real world:
Mainstream consumers want smart looking products in smart looking packaging.
Local authorities want cheap, reliable technologies.
Political pressures can lead to unexpected changes.
A smart businessman or woman knows they have to work in the real world, acknowledges the realities, and plans accordingly. Being green won't cover up for poor business acumen. But add green and strong entrepreneurial skills together and you're on to a winner.
Yesterday, I interviewed Richard Gillies, Director of CSR, Plan A and Sustainable Business at Marks & Spencers for my second book. He gave some really great insights into how and why they're delivering Plan A (because there is no Plan B), including their first eco-factory in Sri Lanka, which you can see on the Telegraph TV video above.
The company is somewhat coy about what return they have got on their initial £200m five year programme of improvements. The official line is that it has been "cost-neutral, moving into being cost negative". The main reason why they don't want to be candid on this is that the main driver for Plan A is to reinforce the 'trusted brand image' of M&S, rather than deliver cost savings, and they don't want to appear to be mercenary by trumpeting financial savings. But it goes to show that, if you do it properly, green business won't cost you, but save you money.
Richard said that he saw Plan A as a change management programme, but of all the change programmes he has delivered before, this has been the easiest one to sell to stakeholders both within and outside the business. However there still was a language barrier between the 'CSR junkies' and the 'commercial animals' even though their interests were aligned.
His prime piece of advice was "seeing is believing - show people examples to get them on board".
Have you noticed these new ads for Marks & Spencers? Normally green marketing is cuddly, twee and/or semi-apologetic in nature, but this is one of the first macho takes on it that I've seen - "we're so tough we're not phased by a mere recession, like our wimpy competitors". This is great stuff - positive, confident and competitive. Of course it helps that M&S's Plan A has given the company a bigger return than its £200m budget.
I'll be interviewing the man in charge of Plan A at the end of July, so will be able to provide some insights then.
Of all the industries in trouble, the car industry seems closer to the edge of the cliff than any other. Yet the Geneva Car Show had almost every major motor manufacturer showing off their latest green options. From the new Prius hybrid to Peugeot's diesel hybrid to GM's new electric vehicle (oh, the irony) to VW's Eco-motion options, it is very clear that they see green as a route to survival.
There are a number of image benefits for the car companies:
- to be seen to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem - to be seen to be part of the future rather than a relic of the past - to try and corner new and future markets however small they are at present - to tap into the 'new frugality' public feeling that has come with the recession - to sweeten the pill of Government intervention by demonstrating 'societal' benefits
But whatever the motives, there is a clear message that 'green' won't only survive the economic crisis, but it may even be a lifeboat for this and, by extension, many other business sectors.
This is the latest of a series of tips extracted from the Green Business Bible e-book:
Avoid the following while making green claims:
Lying: don’t be tempted.
Manipulating life cycle data: WYGIWYN - the What You Get Is What You Need syndrome.
Selective reporting: OK, so your new product may be made from 100% recycled material, but if it is also highly toxic, it would be a bit naughty to suggest it is ‘green’.
Irrelevance: stating CFC-free on a product which is never likely to contain CFCs.
Overstating the case: Shell recently got in trouble with the Advertising Standards Agency for implying that all of their CO2 emissions were used to grow flowers when only 0.325% were used in this way.
Being vague: simply saying you are green is not good enough. Prove it!
This is the latest of a series of tips extracted from the forthcoming Green Business Bible e-book:
The worst kind of greenwash is the vague 'kind to the planet' type statement. If you want to present yourself as green, you must back up your claims. Your website is the ideal place for publishing data to back up slogans made elsewhere.
The book is crammed with practical examples and genuine make-you-think moments, such as the dissection of BP's Beyond Petroleum blunder (they were doing very well environmentally for an oil company, but then decided to make a proclamation they could never live up to).
Unfortunately, instead of developing the 5Is, Grant presents a 3x3 grid of concepts versus green-ness and then for each of the squares, he presents two different strategies - 18 in all. This complexity would be OK in a text book, but Grant can never decide whether he is writing an academic treatise, a how-to, or a polemic. There are a number of factual errors (eg Jedi wasn't adopted as an official religion after the 2001 census) and in my opinion Grant bestows green blogs with too much influence - OK, Treehugger.com is important in Green circles, but the average Joe in the street won't have heard of it, let alone have read its criticisms of Anya Hindmarsh's I am not a plastic bag, er, bag. Towards the end, he gets sidetracked into inventing examples of more innovative products/services, but fails to describe how these innovations would be sold to the consumer. The surplus of exclamation marks suggests the book needs a good edit! And the cover (plain card with a drab green hand stencilled text) goes against his own advice by being more hairshirt than inviting.
I would have much rather he stuck with the 5I's and showed how they could/have been applied to a series of green products and services. Instead we have a very clever book which has got rather too caught up in its own cleverness.
Despite all these criticisms, I still really enjoyed most of it, learnt loads, and would recommend it as there is nothing else better out there. Let's just hope that the second edition is simpler, better edited and that the facts have been checked.
This is the latest of a series of tips extracted from the forthcoming Green Business Bible e-book:
Don't overestimate the demand for green products in businesses - buyers are risk adverse and may see green=shoddy. Focus first on business benefits such as reduced costs.
I was at a climate change conference last week, where one of the few diamonds in the dross was a presentation by IPSOS MORI on their research into consumer attitudes on climate change and low carbon lifestyles. One pair of questions really summed up the dichotomy that we have to face in the green economy. The research hasn't been published yet and I didn't scribble the statistics down fast enough on the day, but here's the gist of it:
Q. "Would you buy a solar panel for your house, no matter what they cost?" A. Yeah, sure!
Q. "Would you pay £5000 to get a solar panel put on your house?" A. HOW MUCH???!!! (much swearing under breath)
I think this demonstrates that while green markets are expanding fast, for most is from a very small base. While the mainstream may think they are green, they're not going to queue outside the bank to get a loan to invest in the lifestyle. Only in markets where there is a clear benefit (or perceived benefit) to the consumer do green products out perform the traditional, eg A/A+ rated white goods (money saving and kudos - who wants a C rated anything?) and organic baby food (we don't like the thought of feeding crap to our kids).
So if you're working on a green product or service don't forget that quality and price will be just as important as green credentials.
In yet another survey of green/ethical brands, this time of 3000 UK adults by GfK NOP, the Co-op, Body Shop and M&S held onto the top three spots, but Sainsbury's lost out to Tesco at the foot of the table.
Rank 2008 Rank 2007
1 Co-op 1 Co-op
2 Body Shop 2 Body Shop
3 M&S 3 M&S
4 Green & Blacks4 Traidcraft
5 Ecover 5 Cafédirect
6 Traidcraft 6 Ecover
7 Cafédirect 7= Green & Blacks & Tesco
8 Innocent
9 Divine 9 Oxfam
10 Tesco 10 Sainsbury’s
The surprises for me are:
1. The Body Shop's brand has survived the loss of founder Anita Roddick, who, even though she had sold the organisation to l'Oreal, was still associated with it in the press.
2. The position of Tesco on the table given the recent controversies over landbanking, competition and treatment of suppliers by the Big Four supermarkets. I wonder how much their position relates to their huge market share of the retail sector - does anyone want to admit they shop at an unethical store?
Update: Low Carbon Business Seminar - 26 June 2008
Just a quick update on the low carbon business seminar I posted about last week:
1. I have secured the early bird discount in perpetuity (hurrah!);
2. You can see full details and register directly here - much more easily than the link last week;
3. It will be brilliant - learn everything you need to know about developing, marketing and selling low carbon products and services in one morning, then structured networking and roundtable discussions all afternoon. What more could you want?
Here's feedback from previous workshops:
"The workshops were punchy, provocative and held the audience rapt." Nick Devitt, Programme Director, Dott07
I'm giving a seminar on developing, marketing and selling low carbon products and services in London next month. The seminar is part of the Low Carbon Innovation Exchange which is a fantastic forum for sharing knowledge with the low carbon business community.
If you register for my seminar in the morning, you will:
- discover the business case for going beyond compliance.
- learn what makes a product or service a low carbon product or service.
- discover which markets are booming and why.
- learn how to market and sell your low carbon products & services.
- find out what the risks are, and how to avoid them.
Plus you will benefit from one-to-one meetings and round table discussions all afternoon in the Exchange.
There's a 25% early bird discount, so click here now for more details and to register on-line.
This is the eleventh in a series of tips extracted from the forthcoming Green Business Bible e-book:
When promoting green products to a mass market, resist the temptation to go overboard on the ‘green look’. Focus on cost & performance benefits first, environmental performance second, and use third party accreditation where possible for those green claims.
Before Christmas I mentioned that I hated the 'hands cupping a sapling' image used by so many green businesses. Then I admitted our corporate Christmas cards featured a polar bear rolling in the snow (v. cute - drop me a line and I'll send you one next year). Well, Getty Images has done some research that suggests these eco-clichés are a turn off to the average punter.
This is a perennial problem for promoting green businesses - what images manage to use to communicate their ethos and values without the sappiness of the clichés. For the Terra Infirma masthead, we went for a picture of Kalundborg, the home of industrial symbiosis because a. we work with industry, b. Kalundborg is an exemplar of the type of solution we present to clients (waste is a resource), and c. we had a picture of Kalundborg. Of course few people recognise the picture and its significance and one reader described it as 'dark satanic mills'. Ho hum. I'll keep looking.
The small print that people put under their e-mail signature has always baffled me. If you did get an e-mail by accident that by some miracle would be juicy enough for you to want to read it, never mind keep it, would you be put off by being told not to by the authoritarian instructions at the bottom?
Well, what's really amusing me at the minute is the dozen or so exhortations I receive daily not to print this e-mail unless it's really necessary. Let's be clear, if it is not important enough to print, I ain't going to print it whether or not the sender asks me not to. What do they take me for, some kind of idiot? And if I WAS dumb enough to print off every message I receive, I don't think a little message at the bottom would make a damn bit of difference.
So why do it? I think it's a "I'm much greener than yeeew!" statement - trying subliminally to get some environmental kudos without actually having to do anything other than type a few words. Well, they'll have to work harder than that to impress me.
And how long before some smart-alec points out that the extra joules required to send those additional bits of information could power a lightbulb for 32 nano-seconds?