Overcoming the communication challenge of sustainability

January 27th, 2010

Once again I would like to take this opportunity to wish you the best start to 2010. I feel, and many of the people I talk to do too, that this year will be the start of a new more positive trend. How about you? Do you feel the same way? Please let me know!

Since it is my job to stay updated on what challenges companies experience in regard to sustainability, I try to ask this very question every opportunity I get. What I seem to be reading in the pattern of answers I get, is that communication seem to be an obvious challenge. Companies are becoming more sustainable in their behaviour but fail to communicate the results.  I’d like to share with you a the story of how MAX (a swedish competitor to McDonald’s) tackled the issue.

Just recently I held a short presentation (for Swedish designers), on the importance of stakeholder engagement in creating a business enhancing sustainability effort. At this event one of the co-speakers from The Natural Step told the story of how MAX has approached sustainability. MAX is a family owned hamburger chain that currently is enjoying a lot of positive PR for being a very entrepreneurial and CSR conscious organization. They claim to be the first restaurant chain in the world to publish CO2 emissions on its menu.

What separates MAX’s approach to sustainability from many other actors, is that they begin their work with communication – What! I guess many of you might say. That completely goes against every recommendation you have ever heard. I know. However, they do not actually communicate before they act. They begin by envisioning what they would like to communicate about their sustainability. Then they set of to brake down that vision to activities that they need to do in order to achieve that vision – does this method sound familiar? If you ever heard about Kaplan, Norton and Balanced Scorecard, it probably does.

So could this method be the solution to this challenge many CSR-managers speak of? I think it just might. In all honesty I do not know whether or not MAX utilize the teachings of Kaplan, Norton in their sustainability effort. But since my company (Relation Capital Partners) are a big proponent of applying BSC on sustainability I’d like to recommend that CSR-managers consider this possibility.

Happy new year

December 31st, 2009

I’d like to wish all of you a very happy ending to this year and decennial and a great start to 2010.

I’m currently in Thailand visiting relatives. Spending our first night in Bangkok, before moving up country to Khao Yai where my parents live, we (me and my girlfriend) decided to end our first evening by enjoying a movie at the shopping mall “Siam Paragon“. Since there was a lot of fuzz about the movie “Avatar” back home in Sweden we agreed on seeing that one.

Besides standing up to honor the king during the commercials, I was surprised to see how much advertising was communicating green and sustainable values. Trying to have an open mind about everything I admit to having preconceptions about sustainability not to be very high on the daily agenda here. Of course I was wrong about this (to my delight).

As for the movie, Avatar, this picture clearly picks up on our current global worries. There was an abundance of references to things like the war in Iraq, corporate greed and environmental challenges. Both of us enjoyed the movie and the 3D effects that supported the experience of the dreamlike environments of the planet “Pandora” on which the plot is set.

Trying to catch up on my reading I’m half way through the book “The Speed of Trust” by the Author and CEO, Stephen MR Covey. This book takes up the importance for individuals as well as organizations to achieve high-trust relationships. Covey effectively transforms the intangible “trust” into measurable tangibles as speed and cost. Stephen argues that low trust equals slower transactions and higher costs for everyone in the relationship.

To achieve high trust, individuals and organizations must posses high integrity, good intent, mission-critical capabilities and a track record of good results. I argue that corporate responsibility is an important part of any organizations attempt to build trust in their stakeholder relationships. Wouldn’t you agree?

Now I’m off to have a new year’s dinner – Thai-style. Sawadee Kap!

Inability to sufficiently measure sustainability initiatives

December 15th, 2009

In a recent study by Crowe Horwath LLP, The Center for Business Excellence at the Farmer School of Business at Miami University, executives identified the inability to sufficiently measure sustainability initiatives as their biggest challenge.

This correlates well with our experience when we are out meeting executives here in Sweden. Many ask us the same question – How can we measure the financial value of sustainability efforts? Within the financial sector this question has been especially highlighted. The Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, professor David Vogel writes

“In fact, the financial performance of many firms with relatively positive CSR reputations such as Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury, Merck, Levi Strauss, Hewlett-Packard, Chiquita, Shell, Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, and the Body Shop has recently been poorer than that of their less responsible competitors. These companies did not perform more poorly because they were more responsible. Rather, as is true for almost all firms, CSR was largely irrelevant to their profitability.

Of course, any environmental activist would answer that measuring financial value from sustainability efforts is irrelevant since it is hard to create any financial value what so ever, when you are missing a planet to conduct your business on. That is true but that argument apparently doesn’t seem to bite on everyone running a business today. Hence, we need to find a better answer.

My experience, from listening in on the academic debate, is that it is somewhat unclear if it is possible to prove a direct link between sustainability efforts and increased financial value. However, the academia seems to be in consensus about the soft values of sustainability, i.e. talent attraction & retention, brand loyalty, PR, business innovation etc., all which are indirectly linked to the value creation capability of an organization. The very readable European Competitiveness Report 2008 express it like this

“CSR can contribute to cost savings in certain circumstances. It is difficult to draw general conclusions about the cost-saving effects of CSR because they are highly dependent on the nature of the CSR measure taken. The example of the environmental dimension of CSR shows evidence of both positive and negative relationships between CSR and cost structure. In addition to cost savings from environmental measures, CSR may also contribute to cost savings in other ways, for example in the field of human resources, risk management or access to finance
.”

Coming from a marketing background, it seems to me that the challenge of finding a measurable link between sustainability efforts and financial value creation are somewhat similar to those of marketing. Just as marketing metrics was developed in order to start discerning what type of initiatives that was actually creating value, I believe sustainability academics and practitioners must also create good metrics to help companies/executives find their path to profitable sustainability or rather sustainable profits if you like. What is your opinion?

CR, CSR, Sustainability…

December 10th, 2009

How do you communicate seemingly complex services in a simple language?

complexajax

Here is a post discussing the matter some more.

Do we always have to feel the pain before we act?

December 1st, 2009

Do we always have to feel the pain before we act? Wise men of the world tell us that we must start going about our business in new ways, if we are to enjoy the same benefits tomorrow as we are today. This is not likely something new. I’m fairly certain wise men has been telling us that since ancient times.

I just read a interesting article, by Marc Gunther, about how water shortage will sail up as one of the next big challenges for the world. It got me thinking about how interdependent we all are becoming of each other.

Why is it that we do not act on brewing problems before we feel the consequences of them? My prediction is that we will not change our ways regarding our water consumption until we start feel the consequences of “water refugees“, huge migrations from areas no longer able to supply them with the necessities of life.

In a couple of days COP15 (Climate Conference) will gather all the important policy makers of the world. The aim is to find a solution to how we are going to solve the problem with green house gas (GHG) emissions. Few people think that the conference will actually result in any major changes.

My concern is that COP15 will show that we, as world citizens, will not be able reach agreements on issues concerning sustainability. CO2 is already a top of mind issue globally, and has been for some time now, yet we do not seem ready to take the cost of transition to a low carbon economy globally. So my question is, do we always have to feel the effects before we act?

Come 7/12, I wish I am proved wrong. What do you think?