Filed under: Corporate Citizenship, Pepsi, Social Enterprise, Uncategorized | Tags: Apple, Cooperative, Corporate Citizenship, John Lewis, Microsoft, Nike, Ocado, Pepsi, Post Office
John Grant made an interesting comment a couple of weeks ago, in a talk to launch his book Co-opportunity. He said: “the line between ‘for-profit’ and ‘not-for-profit’ is being blurred. People are going, well, it’s either doing good or it’s not doing good”.
It makes sense. Profit is not longer a dirty word for consumers. The question has shifted from “is this company making too much profit” to “is it making the world a better place?”. Nobody blinked when Apple announced their most recent results – an astonishing gross margin of 40.9%. Why? Because it feels like Apple enriches the world we live in.
In the UK, there are plenty of brands that people are happy to see commercially thriving: John Lewis, Post Office, Ocado, Cooperative. And there are plenty of brands that get slammed for making profits; the utilities and the banks. The difference? People think the former are making a positive social contribution.
Profit, or not for profit…? The question reminds me of Bill Gates’ famous “Creative Capitalism” speech at Davos. He said, “as I see it, there are two great forces of human nature: self-interest, and caring for others”. History has been largely been a struggle between these two forces; Gates’ wants to bring them together into a force for change.
That was in 2008. Since then, the vision of St. Gates is slowly becoming a reality. At mega-corp level, the likes of Nike, Microsoft and Pepsi are increasingly engaged in pro-social ventures (see earlier post), with initiatives like Girl Hub, Unlimited Potential and Refresh Everything. Early days, but a far cry from sweat shops and Britney Spears.
Then there’s the boom in social enterprise – a sector that deliberately blurs the line between profit and not-for-profit. Interesting to see the tug-of-war over social enterprise in the current UK election, with Labour’s proposed Social Investment Bank, and the Conservatives’ Big Society Network.
It’s a beautifully mixed-up picture: big corporates adopting some NGO-like behaviours, not-for-profits adopting the methods of market capitalism. But what’s it all got to do with us?
Last week I was invited to speak at the annual away-day of corporate communications firm Brunswick. They’re the leader in their field: managing corporate reputation, investor and press relations. I had a pretty simple theme: there was a time when big corporates could manage their key relationships in convenient silos – investors, employees, governments, regulators, consumers, customers – but that doesn’t work any more. Big corporates need to think about managing heir relationships to society as a whole.
This seemed to get a pretty positive reaction. I think people liked the challenge: society as a whole doesn’t care if companies make profit; all that matters is that a company makes a positive impact. Maybe our clients will like the challenge too.
Image from Psalm.
Filed under: Advertising, Coca-Cola, Corporate Citizenship, Happiness, Pepsi, Youth | Tags: Advertising, charity, Coca-Cola, Corporate Citizenship, Happiness, Pepsi
No it’s not a flashback to the Obama election – it’s Pepsi’s Refresh Everything campaign. Instead of a big-bucks 30 second Superbowl spot this year, Pepsi decided to give $1.3 million to good causes, allowing consumers to vote on who should get what. The results are announced on March 1st.
Pepsi follows the example of TripAdvisor: in 2008, more than a million people voted on how they should give away $1 million in their More Than Footprints campaign.
It’s a big move for a brand like Pepsi – very different from the usual big budget Britney ad. It could be the latest sign of a shift in society’s attitudes around advertising. The think-tank Compass published a report this week called The Advertising Effect, the latest to argue that advertising fuels our voracious consumerism – which doesn’t really make us happy.
It’s the old AdBuster’s thought, but it’s gaining academic weight: the report pulls together Dr. David Myer’s studies on happiness, as well as work by Prof. Richard Layard and of course Oliver James. There’s also interesting input from organizations such as The Children’s Society:
One factor that may be leading to rising mental health problems is the increasing degree to which children and young people are preoccupied with possessions; the latest in fashionable clothes and electronic equipment… Evidence both from the United States and from the UK suggests that those most influenced by commercial pressures also show higher rates of mental health problems.
Against this background, Pepsi’s decision to ditch Superbowl looks progressive – let’s hope the new approach delivers the sales volumes. It challenges all of us to find positive ways to drive sales for our clients. Interesting that all this coincides with some very encouraging comments by PepsiCo’s Chairman and CEO Indra Nooyi talking to the FT about the company’s “license from society”:
“We’re constantly watching the changing societal trends and looking at the interplay between corporations and societies… [in] Davos, both this year and last, everybody is talking about the new rules of capitalism, [which] are, don’t just think about the company within the four walls of the company, think about your obligations to society.”
The Compass report starts from a marketing-is-evil presumption. They want to ban lots of advertising. That’s just a lack of imagination. The answer isn’t no advertising, but good advertising. The real challenge is to find positive ways to engage consumers, which enhances their lives and builds business for our clients.
