Home » How We Think » Three Ps
March 09, 2010 by Gregg
I am pleased to report that introduction of the term greenblushing continues to generate national and international attention.
That tells me it’s a significant challenge and deserves mention in the same breath as greenwashing. Neither is sustainable.
It has also sparked a broader discussion about other kinds of challenges companies face when attempting to communicate about sustainability. For example, one blog reader, Chris Farage, VP of Communications & External Affairs for Parker Hannifin Corporation, a multinational manufacturer of motion and control technologies and systems, offers this term: “greenbashing.”
I like his definition: “the motivation of some activists in the green movement to attack companies for their environmental performance,” even if they are making progress and being transparent in their communication. These naysayers are the people who look at the Three Ps, and place the “P” for Planet ahead of the other two. In fact, some of them don’t even acknowledge the other two.
Chris is right on and rightly concerned about greenwashing, greenblushing and greenbashing. Here again, none of them are sustainable – and deserve to be called out, addressed and prevented, don’t you agree?
March 03, 2010 by Gregg
In my new Emerging Trends article about sustainability communications, I make the case that “well-run organizations should be able to walk and talk – and clear hurdles – at the same time.”
Do you agree that you can walk the walk and talk the talk of sustainability at the same time, and that they can feed off of each other successfully?
Or is greenblushing – which I define as walking the walk but being too unsure and shy to talk the talk – too much to overcome? Are fears about greenwashing getting in the way of good communications and audience engagement?
February 23, 2010 by Gregg
In an October 26, 2009 post, I introduced the concept of greenblushing. Since then, a number of people have confirmed for me that it’s real and growing.
And it can have serious repercussions – limiting companies’ ability to capitalize on investment intangibles, market and customer acceptance, and employee goodwill that are inherent in their sustainability efforts.
As a reminder, I’ve defined greenblushing as “limited or no information disseminated by an organization so as to understate or ignore its commitment to and actions on environmental responsibility.” It’s walking the walk but being too unsure and shy to talk the talk. It’s roughly the opposite of greenwashing.
Symptoms include downplaying or not communicating your sustainability achievements, and believing you need “all the answers” before you can talk about your progress and the ongoing journey. The fact is full-fledged participation in sustainability indexes and sustainability reporting is a high hurdle that is dominated by large, high-profile, public companies.
Proactive communications on such an important issue should not be a high hurdle. And I don’t think companies should be deterred by people who question their motives (e.g. profiting from their efforts). In fact, shouldn’t we be celebrating the cases that enrich all Three Ps?
Next week, to continue to try to get the word out, I’ll be at the Sustainability Symposium sponsored by Baldwin-Wallace College in suburban Cleveland. The March 1-2 event is free and open to the public and I hope to see you there. If not, I hope to see you here and @ThreePs on Twitter, helping to keep this conversation going.
February 16, 2010 by Gregg
An uneventful Copenhagen summit, the sluggish economy, and lingering questions about the propriety of data collection and analysis have turned concerns about global warming into more of a punch line than a national priority. For some people, the series of snowstorms to hit the Southeast is the clincher.
Opponents of stricter greenhouse gas emissions rules say the totality of negative forces proves that global warming, and the euphemistic climate change, is not worthy of serious national attention. Supporters of new regulations and international treaties say climate change is still serious business and must be addressed, and not derailed by weather patterns or scientific outliers.
As for me, I find the extremes on both sides of the debate amusing, somewhat misguided, and more than a little dangerous. The all or nothing approach is never sustainable, and that should be the test for any national agenda item, especially this one.
For the latest thinking on the topic, and probably some heated discussion, attend Baldwin-Wallace College’s Sustainability Symposium (free and open to the public) March 1-2 in suburban Cleveland. Featured speakers will include Sen. Sherrod Brown, NOAA senior scientist Dr. Susan Solomon, and Sherwin-Williams CEO Chris Conner. Dix & Eaton is a sponsor.
February 08, 2010 by Gregg
Super Bowl commercials have a reputation for being funny. Or thought-provoking. Or misguided.
So where does last night’s “Green Police” commercial from Audi fit in? How about outrageous and perhaps dangerous to the very mindset it is trying to benefit from?
In 60 seconds, with millions and millions of people watching, Audi made all environmentalists look like wackos. Ordinary citizens were arrested for crimes such as choosing plastic over paper in the supermarket, throwing batteries and food waste in the trash, and using incandescent light bulbs, plastic bottles and foam cups. For those worried about environmental extremism, this commercial reflects their worst fears.
By the end of the 60 seconds, only the driver of the Audi A3 TDI clean diesel car avoided the Green Police. It’s the “Green Car of the Year” awarded by Green Car Journal.
USA Today readers have rated the commercial the sixth-best out of 63 commercials – yes, it even finished ahead of the E-Trade babies.
Sure, it’s just a fleeting commercial, and perhaps people thought it was creative, entertaining and memorable. But I think a good part of its success comes from us perceiving, and being concerned about, environmental extremism – and this commercial gives the police an eco-Nazi persona. I’m not sure how stirring up that sentiment helps the Green Car of the Year. And at least one other blogger, the UK’s Faye Sunderland, agrees with me.
January 31, 2010 by Gregg
Two recent studies – one a professional marketing study and the other a college honors thesis – make a strong case for the value of green marketing.
In the professional study, 33 percent of respondents said green marketing was more effective than their normal marketing efforts, with just 7 percent saying it was less effective, according to a study of 370 marketing executives for Environmental Leader. Other findings include smaller firms tend to spend more, on a proportional basis, on green marketing, and the Internet is by far the most popular green marketing medium. The full study is available for $479.
In the college study, Wittenberg University student Lukas Treu (currently an intern here at Dix & Eaton) found that Chevron’s green marketing (its Untapped Energy commercial) is paying off in building the Company’s trustworthiness, goodwill on the environment and overall credibility. Lukas also found that environmentally involved people are more likely to believe and trust Chevron than those who are not as interested in environmental issues. His psychoanalysis of the results is enlightening: People who care most about the environment have an increased motivation to process the messages. The more they care about a topic, the more attention they pay; the more attention they pay, the more a message can persuade them. This study is available here for free.
Interesting findings all the way around. If you have a story to tell, and you tell it well, the people who matter most will believe and trust you. And probably reward you with their business.
January 18, 2010 by Gregg
I see a lot of good in the economic benefits of sustainable products and policies – the Three Ps at their best. Unfortunately, some of the disincentives are just as compelling – as when water rates rise because the water department has to make up for lost revenue from declining volumes.
And now this, as reported by the January 18, 2010 Environmental Leader and the January 14, 2010 Vancouver Sun: “British Columbia Industrial Companies Waste Electricity for Lower Rates.” The Sun has reported that some of BC Hydro’s largest industrial customers in British Columbia are wasting electricity, including running idle equipment and leaving lights on, so they can get cheaper power rates for the following year. Power usage from the previous year determines how much power can be purchased at “base load” rates, while anything above that is charged a premium rate.
The two-tier rate was designed to encourage industrial customers to invest in energy-efficient technology so they can reduce the amount of power they must buy at the higher, second-tier rate. At least in the short term, the unintended consequences are canceling out some of the good intentions and the work of BC Hydro’s Power Smart Programs, which provide energy efficiency incentives.
It’s not sustainable when the Three Ps are reduced to a P, an uh-oh, and an oh-no.
January 11, 2010 by Gregg
More than any other industry, the advanced energy industry seems to have found a way to advance all Three Ps of sustainability.
On the People side, the jobs are starting to come – and, last week, President Obama announced $2.3 billion in Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credits, which is aimed at creating 17,000 jobs. The administration estimates that private firms are investing an additional $5.4 billion, which will create 41,000 more jobs.
For the Planet, advanced energy is designed to be cleaner and more renewable than traditional fossil fuels. The move to renewable energy is being positioned globally as one of the best ways to reduce carbon emissions. Many leaders, including President Obama, have embraced a goal of 20 percent of the nation’s power supply from renewable sources by 2020.
And the Profit potential seems to be real and growing. In the January 11, 2010 Akron Beacon-Journal, energy expert Richard Stuebi of the Cleveland Foundation says the wind industry is booming as a $40-billion-a-year industry that is growing at 30 percent a year. He says it’s the “fastest-growing industry on the planet … and everyone wants to be a part of it.” More than 500 companies in Ohio alone are part of the supply chain for wind turbines, which utilize approximately 2,000 parts. Traditional manufacturers are salivating about the possibilities, but the retraining of workers, re-engineering of factories and quality controls are no small hurdles.
Critics will say the advanced energy space is being propped up by tax credits and hyper-sensitivity to climate pressures. What happens if and when those subside? That will be the true test of the industry and its ability to balance the Three Ps.
For more on the subject, check out this article on CNNMoney.com.
January 04, 2010 by Gregg
It’s new year’s resolution time, and you know what that means: lots of people intent on losing 20 pounds or quitting smoking. And, in 2010, there will be plenty of people committing to “go green.”
Like those other resolutions that seldom become reality, the “go green” folks will quickly find themselves having over-promised and under-delivering. It’s just not sustainable.
So, for a truly sustainable commitment, resolve to balance the Three Ps in your life:
People – be kinder and more patient with your family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, customers, and treat yourself better, with at least three additional “healthy” meals per week
Planet – use less packaging, reuse and recycle more, walk or bike for short trips, and use energy wisely
Profit – ride the wave of economic turnaround, buy only what you need and really want, save at least a little, and explore lower-cost hobbies and vacations
It’s not any one person’s responsibility to save the world or the world economy, but resolving to address and balance the Three Ps is a decent place to start. Happy new year!
December 21, 2009 by Gregg
Look back at the December 6 New York Times Sunday Opinion section and you’ll find this headline, “Will Big Business Save the Earth?”
The author, Jared Diamond, op-ed contributor to The New York Times and UCLA Professor of Geography, answers with a resounding “yes” and to make his point, he profiles three companies, Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola and Chevron, which he admits “many critics of business love to hate.” Today, he says, companies such as these are “among the world’s strongest positive forces for environmental sustainability.”
Among his specific comments:
- Wal-Mart is changing procedures, working to double the fuel efficiency of its truck fleet, pursuing a goal of zero packaging waste, and buying from sustainability-managed sources.
- Coca-Cola is committed to fresh water conservation and protection, recycling plastic bottles, and reducing energy consumption.
- Regarding Chevron, he says, “Not even in any national park have I seen such rigorous environmental protection as I encountered in five visits to new Chevron-managed oil fields in Papua, New Guinea.
Whether you’re pro-business or anti-business, it’s an interesting read. It confirms sentiment I heard at the “Business as an Agent of World Benefit” Global Forum at Case Western Reserve University earlier this year.
Business is saying and doing the right things, and it’s making a difference. Even in tough economic times, doing well by doing good is working. Sustainability = Attainability.
« Older Posts
