Home » How We Think » Three Ps » Coca Cola
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.
The September 28, 2009 issue of Newsweek ranks the top 500 “greenest big companies in America.” The listing is also available online.
According to this list, Hewlett-Packard is the greenest big company in America, with Dell #2, Johnson & Johnson #3, Intel #4, and IBM #5. Other notables in the top 100: Nike #7, Starbucks #10, McDonald’s #22, Procter & Gamble #26, Microsoft #31, Coca-Cola #58, Wal-Mart #59, and General Electric #82.
Peabody Energy, the world’s largest private-sector coal company, was #500 on the list with a green score of 1.00, compared with a 100 for H-P.
With literally hundreds of ratings, labels and certifications, it’s not surprising that not every leading company ranks consistently high in everyone’s rankings. The interesting twist in the Newsweek research is that, in addition to the primary measures of environmental impact and “green policies,” companies are rated to a lesser extent based on their “green” reputation.
Reputation has a significant impact for some organizations, as communications-savvy companies such as P&G, Coca-Cola, Wal-Mart and General Electric have much higher Newsweek ratings for their reputation than their environmental impact and green policies – which helps move their overall score into the top 100. What’s confusing, however, is that these companies are often ranked much higher even when reputation is not factored in.
So, again, another sustainability ranking system that raises more questions than it answers. In this rating system, why did these companies “need” reputation to raise their scores? What’s the fairest way to evaluate sustainability performance? And, of course, how many more lists will come out before we realize we need a way to rate the ranking systems?
