Tag: Marketing


Audi and Facebook Go for the Green

15
June

On June 22, 2009, Audi announced it will donate $1 to The Nature Conservency’s Facebook Cause for each Facebook member who joins the Conservancy’s on-line program. The German auto maker is known for crafting luxury vehicles, not for combining sustainability and social media. Is this green-washing or just a new method for companies to involve the community in their corporate social responsibility programs? I believe it is the later and think Audi and The Nature Conservency have made a wise move.

This all revolves around Audi rolling out its TDI clean diesel in the United States. What folks around the world have know for years, that unleaded gasoline is less efficient and releases more particulate matter into the atmosphere per mile driven, has never really found a place in the American psyche. We equate diesel with working vehicles; from 18 wheelers that carry our goods across the country to bulldozers that move dirt from here to there. We all agree that no matter what a diesel engine does, one thing is for sure: it belches dirty exhaust into our skies and thus must be bad for the planet. Right? Well, sort of….

Diesel engines release more greenhouse gases than unleaded engines; however, diesel engines have become more efficient than their unleaded cousins. In fact, the 15% increase in greenhouse gases produced by a diesel engine actually turns into a 15 – 25% decrease because a diesel engine uses less gas to move itself from point A to point B. So, Audi’s claims that their TDI clean diesel is similar to hybrid cars  and better for the Earth than unleaded engines is true. I don’t see any green-washing here.

As far as developing a partnership with The Natural Conservancy and providing funding through their Facebook Cause is concerned, I think it a fantastic idea. In fact, I think Audi is one of the first of what will be many companies that join Facebook Causes. Based on my own searching, they appear to the be only car company associated with a Facebook cause. And they choose one of the best respected environmental advocacy and action groups in the world with which to work. For over half a century The Nature Conservancy has worked hard to preserve our planet. To date they have protected 119 million acres of land and 5000 miles of rivers across the globe.

I have heard that Audi capping its donation at $25,000 is proof of its less than sincere commitment to the planet. I believe that the $25,000 is symbolic, a way to drum up support for its TDI system in America as well as an opportunity to explore the new world of social media marketing. The current facts are clear:  a TDI diesel engine is cleaner than a standard unleaded engine.

And now that Audi and The Nature Conservancy have partnered for a green cause using Facebook, I predict that corporate relationships with environmental advocacy organizations which use the ever growing network of social media will become a staple of the sustainability movement. I look forward to watching as this latest chapter in corporate social responsibility is written.

Comment » | Environmental Mission Statement, Green, Marketing, Social Media

ROS Shines a Light in the Dark Days of Sustainability

6
April

These are trying times for the sustainability movement. The economic downturn has forced companies across the globe to slash budgets and let valuable employees go. This is often placing “green” programs on the back burner. Luckily there is a new book, Return on Sustainability (ROS), that provides executives and managers with exactly what they need to do to maintain, grow, and even start, their sustainability initiatives. It provides a logical, step-by-step analysis that allows businesses to asses the cost, marketing potential, impact, and difficulty of  each of their “green” programs.

Reading the headlines, or listening to your favorite pod cast, it is no wonder that many companies have lost their focus on sustainability. In most cases, the funds associated with “going green” have been moved to what are deemed “more appropriate” projects. This is what happens when sustainability is not at the core of an organization’s mission. Patagonia,Timberland, and Stonyfield Farm, would never abandon their green efforts in the face of  difficult economic times. But I realize that most companies were not built as a way to protect the planet like these three icons of sustainable business, so I will give them all some time to get with the program. Sustainability = Good Business and organizations, from AIG and GM to the local non-profit down the road and the small business on the corner, should implement the ROS framework into their management practices so they can start reaping its rewards. 

Kevin Wilhelm, CEO of Sustainable Business Consulting, published the book in February, and built his ROS framework using four pillars:  Financial, Brand, Sustainability, and Ease of Implementation. These are important topics and I have found that all of them eventually come up when I speak with people about their organization’s sustainability goals.

One area in which I think the ROS program excels is showing companies that implementing sustainability efforts is not just an altruistic action which they can only afford when times are good. Yes, reducing one’s greenhouse gases and putting one’s environmental house in good order will help the entire planet. But if applied strategically and then marketed appropriately, sustainability efforts can increase brand awareness and harness the power that truly caring for the Earth as we face climate change can provide.

This idea of brand recognition being based on sustainability is vital when eco-consultants like Kevin and I are hearing that companies today need to make a profit, not support green initiatives that have a questionable ROI. The ability of the ROS framework to illuminate the brand value of sustainability efforts, showing them to be critical components of an overall marketing program, is doing the “green” movement a great service. And the fact that ROS is helping compnaies begin understanding and minimizing the role they play in climate change is fantastic. 

Comment » | Green, Marketing, Sustainability

Green IT – Marketing Versus Measuring

24
March

A recent “green” marketing study has me wondering: assuming that many technology companies are indeed becoming better caretakers of the planet, is it more important for businesses to appear “green” to their consumers or to be leading the way in sustainable practices? I’ll take the thought leaders over the thought manipulators any day.

The recently released Green Factor study surveyed over 3500 IT professionals and found that Dell ranked highest in green technology. Dell has been compiling Corporate Social Responsibility reports since 1998 and should be applauded for the numerous steps they have taken to become more environmentally  sustainable, especially for their robust recycling program. What sparked my interest in their new accolade is that Climate Counts, a non-profit that evaluates the efforts companies take to reduce their role in climate change, ranked Dell 10th out of the 12 electronics companies it researched.

Here are some interesting differences in how the Green Factor survey and the Climate Counts Company Scorecard approach their research and in the results they find. According to its web site, the Green Factor “ is a joint initiative between Strategic Oxygen and Cohn & Wolfe to illuminate ‘green’ marketing opportunities and further ‘green’-focused research on a global scale.” So, they want to help organizations cash in on the current “green” wave. I have no problem with companies promoting themselves based on their sustainable actions but I question a report whose main goal is to “illuminate ‘green’ marketing opportunities.” What does this do for the buyers who are about to buy a new piece of hardware? It shows them how successful marketing campaigns have made companies like Dell and Apple into “green” IT heroes. Hopefully these buyers are digging a little deeper before they make their purchases because not all that claims green is gold.

Climate Counts defines itself as “a collaborative effort to bring consumers and companies together in the fight against global climate change.”  In pursuit of this end, they have a developed 22 questions worth a total of 100 points that evaluate what organizations are doing in four areas: measuring their footprint, reducing their contribution to global warming, supporting tough climate legislation, and publicly announcing their work in relation to climate change. Certainly a lot to live up to but IBM did not have a hard time topping the electronics category with a 77. Cannon was close behind with a 74, and scoring 70, Toshiba came in third. Dell’s score of 47 put it in 10th place, second only to Nokia, at 37, and Apple, 11.

Apple does not need any more attention drawn to their lackluster sustainability efforts, just Google “Apple computers, green,” but they provide such a great example of the difference between what these reports found that I can’t resist talking about them. Participants in the Green Factor placed Apple at number five out of almost 30 companies in terms of their perceived “greenness”. Climate Counts ranked Apple last out of 12 companies, noting that they lacked publicly available information about their efforts to measure their role in climate change.

The drastic difference in rankings is not surprising given the divergent missions of the authors but it highlights the main issue I have with a report like Green Factor. Apple comes out near the top because they have been able to portray themself as hip and green. They are so effective that most consumers believe they are doing all that they can to decrease their carbon footprint, increase manufacturing efficiency, and, in the end, reduce their contribution to global warming. But this is clearly not the case and reading a report that shows Apple near the top of the green IT ladder is perpetuating the sustainability myth they have built.

I guess the Green Factor report helps shine a light on how to capture “green” marketing opportunities, something I fear is becoming more important than being measured by a third party who can truly illuminate the dark shadows and shining examples of real sustainable actions. I urge individuals and companies alike to seek out facts rather than listen to hype. Learn how an organization measures up to clearly defined standards rather than how effective it is in marketing itself using fuzzy imagery.

5 comments » | IT, Marketing

     

↑ Back to top