Filed under: Apple, Coca-Cola, Corporate Citizenship, Ethical Consumerism, Google | Tags: Apple, Coca-Cola, Corporate Citizenship, Google
This killer chart comes from Business In The Community – it shows that companies in their CR Index outperform the FTSE-350. If you’re a shareholder in one of these companies, you’d be getting an average of 10 percentage points higher shareholder return.
Good business is better business – we’ve been banging on about this for a while now, and this seems like pretty good evidence. There are three possible reasons for this.
- Strong pro-social performance suggests forward-thinking management. These companies are probably better managed overall, and better able to bounce back.
- These companies have already embedded sustainability into their operations – and are probably reaping cost efficiencies already.
- They’re also embedding pro-social objectives into their core business development – companies like Unilever and M&S using it to engage consumers and grow new markets.
So, being good is a predictor of business performance. Last week also saw the release of the fifth annual ImagePower Green Brands Survey (as if “green” were all that mattered). It surveyed 9,000 consumers in eight countries – and some familiar names topped the list: Microsoft, Intel, Nokia, Ikea and Apple were among the brands considered among the greenest alongside Google and grocery retailer Whole Foods.
You can bet there are some gaps between perception against reality here: some brands aren’t nearly as green as people might think (e.g., Apple), and others are more pro-social than you might imagine (e.g., Coca-Cola). Understanding these differences might unlock some interesting ideas.
Filed under: Advocacy, Avaaz, collaboration, Environment, Ethical Consumerism, Politics, Social Media | Tags: Activism, Advocacy, collaboration, digital, gaming, Politics, Social Media
Games designer Jane McGonigal gave a recent TED talk called gaming can make a better world. It’s slightly crazy, but very watchable. Apparently the average young American will spend 10,000 hours playing online games by age 21 – the same amount of time they spend in class.
She throws about some great concepts, such as “urgent optimism” (the dominant gaming state of mind) and “epic meaning” (the desire to be attached to something bigger) – all of which, she says, can be harnessed as a force for change.
It made me think it was about time to revisit the first post of this blog, about how social media and “digital” are making the world a better place.
1. Mass collaboration
It’s the coder’s maxim: “to enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow” – in other words, anything can be fixed by a crowd. Dell’s IdeaStorm led the way on “open innovation”, and the same approach can be applied to social issues. For example, Slate magazine recently launched The Hive to tap the “collective intelligence” of its readers. Open Green Map and Project NOAH are other examples of crowdsourced projects.
2. Mass advocacy
People sometimes say that social media is self-absorbed, narcissistic – but social media can also be part of a powerful collective force. Recent examples include Fuck Cancer and the NoH8 anti-homophobia campaign – and thanks to the Twibbon, these things can spread fast. Avaaz.org is the biggest advocacy movement, with over 4.5 million users across the world.
3. Crowd funding
Ever since the Age Of Stupid film raised £450,000 from crowd-funding, it’s been the holy grail of social enterprise. Sites like Kickstarter and Pledge Bank connect ventures to micro-funding, and Go Fund Me works on a slightly bigger scale. We Pay helps organizations manage their funding, and White Label Crowd Funding – well, does what it says.
4. Asset Sharing
The web makes it possible to easily organize resource sharing – the result is initiatives such as LandShare and FreeCycle, and businesses such as ZipCar in the US and Street Car in the UK.
5. Consumer Power
Sites like Group On allow people to buy in bulk – collective buying power. Consumer power can be harnessed by activists – either negatively, such as Greenpeace’s Nestle campaign, or positively – what John Grant refers to as Joycotting, such as Greenpeace’s Green My Apple campaign.
6. Informed choices
Using the web to find the best deals is now part of mainstream life. There are also plenty of ethical comparison sites, such as EcoSwitch and Your Ethical Money in the UK, and Think 2010 in the US. Brand Karma tries to harness user feedback on brands, but none of these sites yet has a full social dimension. Maybe people want to think about planet and price together, not separately.
7. Taking the piss
There was much chat about how the recent election would be all about social media. It wasn’t, really – but social media did make a critical contribution: taking the piss. Satire by the people (maybe with a little help from the parties) – such as the brilliant My David Cameron, or the Cameron Anecdote Generator:
“Last week, I met a lesbian miner, who told me that left-wing extremists in the Labour Party was no substitute for a proper married relationship.”
“Last week, I met a young baker, who told me that anti-capitalists needed to get a proper job.”
“Last week, I met a disenfranchised gentleman, who told me that teenagers high on meow meow were stopping first-time buyers getting onto the property ladder.”
Well, he who laughs last, and all that…. So although social media wasn’t as decisive as people expected in the election, it’s probably changed the landscape for good. Last word to Alistair Campbell, talking to The Times:
“…public resistance to heavy messaging has grown, and for politics in particular there is no guarantee that the rewards of a well-funded, well-crafted and well-executed ad concept will outweigh the risks. The internet and, in particular, social networking have changed the terms of the relationship between the parties, the media and the public, taking at least some of the power to influence away from parties and media, to the benefit of the public.”
Filed under: Climate Change, Economics, Ethical Consumerism, Happiness, Innovation, Mother, Public Opinion, Uncategorized | Tags: Advertising, Climate Change, Environment, Happiness, health, Innovation, Mother, New Economics Foundation, Public Opinion
Yesterday Nic Marks from the New Economics Foundation came in to Mother and talked to the strategists. Nic works on well-being and how to measure it, and he started by telling us that he thought people like us – advertising types – fuel the false belief that stuff can make us happy. In fact, Nic wasn’t initially at all keen to come and talk to us – a reminder that to many people, we’re the problem.
I was digging around on their website and found this, in a report called A Bit Rich, which calculates the “Social Return On Investment” of different jobs:
The impact of the [advertising] industry has always been a point of controversy. It encourages high consumer spending and indebtedness. It can create insatiable aspirations, fuelling feelings of dissatisfaction, inadequacy and stress. In our economic model we estimate the share of social and environmental damage caused by overconsumption that is attributable to advertising. For a salary of between £50,000 and £12 million, top advertising executives destroy £11 of value for every pound in value they generate.
Reminds me of the famous Bill Hicks line, “by the way, if anyone here tonight is in advertising or marketing… kill yourselves. Just a little thought”. In fact, I just watched it again. It’s really old now, but great to see again:
Yeah, well. It’s not like we sell arms to children or anything. Of course there’s nothing intrinsically evil about marketing, but the collective indifference of our industry is impressive. Still, I’m convinced this is changing for the better. A few people yesterday pointed out NEF’s slogan, “Economics As If People and the Planet Mattered” – something to think about for us.
So there was a bit of a cultural tension going on. Despite this (or maybe because of it), it was a great talk. Plenty of good nerdy discussion on indices, measurement, systems theory, psychology – finishing with the beautifully practical Five Ways To Wellbeing: Connect, Be Active (physically), Take Notice (smelling coffee, etc), Keep Learning, and Give (compassion, Dalai Lama style). If this all sounds a bit “self-help”, there’s some solid evidence behind this stuff. And some good heart too. It would be nice to figure out some ways we can do some projects with these guys.
And if you’re interested, here’s the full presentation:
Filed under: Advertising, Climate Change, Coca-Cola, Corporate Citizenship, Ethical Consumerism, Uncategorized, WWF | Tags: Advertising, Climate Change, Coca-Cola, Corporate Citizenship, Ethical Consumerism, Mother, WWF
Will this be the year that social moves to the centre of corporate strategy? Corporate Social Opportunity, not just CSR window dressing? Coca-Cola is one of our biggest clients at Mother – and an example of the enlightened self-interest dawning in many boardrooms.
Above is an image of a defaced Mother ad for Coke – it sums up the ambivalent position that the brand occupies in our culture: the sunny optimistic pop icon, and the exploitative corporate. However, in a New York Times article called “WIll Big Business Save The Earth?”, Jarod Diamond argues that Coke is one of many corporates becoming increasingly interested in making a change:
The embrace of environmental concerns by chief executives has accelerated recently for several reasons. Lower consumption of environmental resources saves money in the short run. Maintaining sustainable resource levels and not polluting saves money in the long run. And a clean image — one attained by, say, avoiding oil spills and other environmental disasters — reduces criticism from employees, consumers and government.
He gives as an example Coke’s partnership with WWF on water sustainability, working on seven of the world’s river basins, including the Rio Grande, Yangtze, Mekong and Danube — all major environmental concerns. Why? Has Jonathan Mildenhall taken up fly-fishing?
Coke has bottling plants in around 200 countries – and water is the main ingredient. But water supplies are under pressure from growing populations, agriculture and climate change. No water, no Coke: the company’s new love affair with WWF isn’t just a PR position, it’s about protecting the business’ future.
Bruce Mau talks about his work with Coke in last month’s Wired UK. He says that “the potential for Coca-Cola to create a powerful social movement and to change the world is enormous”. But getting that to happen, he adds, is “like a turning around a very big ship”. It’s turning: in 2009 Coke launched plant-based recyclable bottles, and also committed to cut carbon emissions by 15% by 2020.
This isn’t just about neutralizing the negative effects of doing business: Coke has considerable reach, and this can be a force for good. Coke employs around 1 million people globally, and has a formidable distribution network: organizations like ColaLife are campaigning for the company to make more of this.
Ultimately, companies like Coke will only grow through a positive social agenda. Shareholder activism, citizen journalism, competition for talent, ethical consumerism – the pressures on corporates to be good citizens has never been greater.
As 2010 begins, the forward-thinking corporates will already be planning for the upturn: reassessing, regrouping, doing their wargaming and scenario planning. They’ll be busy looking for the threats and opportunities – and the smart ones will be having an important realization: their future is all about the societies they operate in, and the planet we live on.
