Earth Day Turns 40 Next Year

Hard as it is to believe, next year will be the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, first celebrated in the USA on April 22, 1970.

That event, conceptualized as a nationwide grassroots demonstration on behalf of the environment, drew over 20 million participants at thousands of schools and local communities.

Today, while environmental concerns are a global phenomena with widespread grassroots support, a universal respect for our planet’s fragile environment and a deep-seated sense of sustainability are not yet what anyone could call natural human traits or tendencies.

However, there can be little doubt that the momentum for sustainable business practices and individual actions is escalating. Here are some statistics and data that I have come across recently worth sharing with you:

• there are 63 millions consumers in the USA eating organics, driving hybrids, and ordering fair-trade coffees. This represents 30% of the American market, a group which has proven willing to spend a good premium (usually over 20%) on clean, green products over non-sustainable alternatives.
• Baby Boomers and Millennials are twice as likely to associate their own personal values with companies and brands (that’s good for Green Marketing initiatives).
• Perceptions of environmental, ethical, and social stewardship are the fastest growing contributors to conssumer brand values (Z+ Partners).
• The market for “all natural” cleaning products is over $100 million per annum and is escalating rapidly (Forbes.com)
• Sales of organic and all natural products have increased 18% to 25% per year for five consecutive years.

No wonder marketers see Green as the “New Black” for today’s shoppers!

BUSVZ4F6VB46

Is Green the “New Black” for Women Shoppers?

As stated in the previous blog post, Green Marketing is no passing fad. In fact, to some observers, including me, Environmental Marketing looks like the New Black for women shoppers.

According to a recent study by the marketing consulting firm Frank About Women, one-quarter of all products in a woman’s shopping cart are environmentally friendly. (Note: this is data from the USA, unfortunately our shopping carts here in Australia have no current way of achieving such lofty green levels.)

The study also shows, according to an article in Ad Week, that “women are less likely than men to scoff at ecological concerns.” Most importantly, “if they feel they are getting a comparable product with green benefits, 69% are game to buy it.”

Another study, being released this week at the Good and Green Marketing Conference, will reportedly show that 80% of adult women in the USA believe very strongly that individuals can affect the environment, but that almost 60% believe that they are personally not doing enough to protect it.

It’s no wonder why Procter & Gamble has announced it will embark on a multi-brand initiative in the USA to educate and encourage consumers (read: women) to “make sustainable choices.” Called Future Friendly, this new platform from P&G includes a line of “green” Pampers disposable diapers and a pledge to provide 4 billion liters of clean drinking water in the developing world.

Modeled on previously successful initiatives in Canada and the UK, P&G is attempting to differentiate itself by claiming their existing products use less waste, energy and packaging, rather than by creating new “green” brand extensions. P&G is targeting its loyal customer base, hoping these consumers will be more likely to remain with their trusted brands if these are shown to be sustainable products.

“We are targeting the mainstream consumer - rather than the ‘environmental’ consumer - who does not want to give up on the brands that they like, but wants to use them in a sustainable way,” explained Glenn Williams, a P&G official, in the Financial Times.

While P&G is a late entrant to the green household products market, the company is sending a clear message that corporations must adopt sustainable practices in order to stay competitive. Of course, P&G also has a bottom-line target for this program, which reportedly includes placing 30 million of the company’s sustainable products into U.S. households by the end of next year and achieving total sales of $50 billion in sustainable products by 2012.

Interestingly, this “future friendly” program from P&G was announced (at the Clinton Global Initiative) while the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is voicing opposition to the climate change legislation before Congress. It appears that P&G, unlike the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, understands the need to align their business practices – and their brands – with the growing environmental concerns of consumers.

P&G also understands that Green Marketing is the New Black for women shoppers in America.

Green Marketing Messages Not Getting Through To Green Consumers

A new survey from Grail Research reveals that 85% of consumers are either unaware of, or cannot recall, the green messages and green programs from companies considered to be at the forefront of sustainability initiatives.

Importantly, the research study also showed that consumers rely on product labels (63%) and word of mouth (45%) as their primary sources of information about green companies and their products. Advertising (38%) and corporate web sites (18%) are well behind as sources of information regarding green credentials.

Released in late September,  The Green Revolution report is based on a nationwide survey of U.S. consumers.

Key findings include:

· 84% of consumers currently purchase at least some green products.

· Price is the main reason cited (69%) by non-green consumers for not purchasing green products.

· Green consumption has penetratged all demographic segments, but the majority of green consumers are married women with no children under 18 in the home (57%).

· The vast majority (93%) of consumers feel that a company’s “greenness” is at least somewhat important to their purchase decision.

Most importantly, consumners expect green products to be on par or superior to their non-green counterparts with regards to safety (72%), healthiness (70%), quality (66%) and price (65%).

Significantly for marketers, across all product categories almost all consumers who buy green expect to remain green. Plus, those who don’t buy certain categories of green products intend to do so in the future.

It certainly looks like green is the “new black.” This is no passing fad.

What do you think? Add your comments below.

Trust Is An Issue For Brands

I don’t put much stock in the annual 100 Best Global Brands report from BusinessWeek for two reasons: the valuations by Interbrand never seem to have any relevance and the list is too U.S. centric to truly be called a global brand ranking.

Nevertheless, there is one interesting and pertinent point made in the BusinessWeek article accompanying this annual listing. This concerns the element of trust, or what the article’s two writers refer to as “the most perishable of assets.”

According to the article, recent polling (in the USA) shows that distrust amongst consumers for business as a whole is growing. Citing a phone survey by public relations firm Edelman, only 44% of Americans say they trusted business, a significant decline from the 58% level recorded two years ago.

This point got me to dust off a posting from The Reputation Garage Blog from October 2008 that I had filed.

In that post, a reprint from an article that appeared in HR Leaders magazine, trust is called “one of the defining issues of the emerging century.”

Public trust in big business, governments, and even non-profit organizations has been declining throughout the 21st century. Here are some “fun” statistics that I gleaned from The Reputation Garage Blog:

* As few as 13% of all Americans place their trust in big business (and it’s not much higher for other mature consumer societies!).
* Only 39% of employees in a Watson Wyatt survey said they trusted senior leadership.
* Some three-quarters of US consumers feel that companies don’t tell the truth in advertising.
* Three-quarters of employees in big companies observed violations of the law or company standards in a 12-month period.

As economies start to rebound, marketers and organizational leaders have an important task in front of them: re-establishing their torn and tattered brands and re-building trust with all constituencies.

Failure to do so is not an option. Unless you want the tombstone for your organization’s brand to read “died of trust-related causes.”

Li Ning: First Global Chinese Brand?

According to Fast Company, Chinese Olympian Li Ning wants to build the first truly global brand to emanate from China.

In an in-depth article, the magazine touts how Li Ning (the company) is China’s largest domestic manufacturer of athletic footwear and sports apparel, with revenues over $1 billion from 6300 outlets.

While Fast Company focuses on the design of the Li Ning product line, the article fails to convince how this company is likely to take on Nike, adidas, Puma and others in the international arena.

I can think of only one athlete who has ever successfully launched a brand with their own name (Michael Jordan’s Air Jordans footwear line in partnership with Nike).

Can Li Ning build an entire global brand spectrum around his own name? Time will tell, but I have my doubts.

What do you think?

China Now 5th Largest Consumer Market

China has become the world’s fifth largest consumer market, according to an online Advertising Age article.

With consumer spending at $890 billion, the Chinese consumer market trails only the U.S., Japan, the U.K., and Germany. China reportedly now also has a larger car market than the USA. McKinsey & Company, the global consultancy, predicts that China will become the third largest consumer market by 2020, moving ahead of both the U.K. and Germany, with an estimated consumer expenditure of $2.5 trillion.

With personal consumer consumption currently accounting for only 36% of China’s GDP, which is half the U.S. figure and approximately two-thirds of the ratio for the other top four consumer markets, it is obvious that consumer spending in China has tremendous growth potential.

With the World Bank recently upgrading China’s 2009 economic growth forecast from 7.2 percent to 8.4 percent and predicting an enhanced 8.7 growth rate for 2010, China is expected to surpass Japan as early as next year to become the world’s second largest economy.

In another measure of the strength of the Chinese economy, China became the world’s largest exporter for the first time, surpassing previous leader Germany in the first half of 2009.

If you are not doing business in China, you need to ask yourself why not.

Telstra Backflips on Fee for Paying Bills

Telstra, Australia’s largest telecommunications provider, has withdrawn a controversial A$2.20 fee imposed in September for customer payments made over-the-counter or by mail for monthly phone bills.

“This decision has been taken because it is the right thing to do by our customers,” a Telstra spokesman said. Telstra CEO David Thodey announced the decision to cancel the deeply unpopular fee at the company’s annual general meeting last week.

In our Monday Morning Marketing Memo dated 7 September, we wrote “If Mr. Thodey and his colleagues at Telstra are truly serious about improving customer satisfaction across the company, they need to have a serious look at the fees and surcharges that are not only driving customers crazy, but are also driving customers like me away.”

It appears that the senior management of Telstra has listened to customers like me, who spoke out vociferously against the imposition of this new fee, particularly at a time when Telstra’s corporate reputation and customer service levels are both being hammered.

One leading journalist in Australia referred to “the friendless Telstra” in an article last month, while the headline in an article last week read “Telstra arrogance towards customers exposed as Thodey moves on admin fee.”

As Mr. Thodey told the Telstra annual meeting audience, “We tried to impose this charge without first listening to the people it would affect.” He also admitted that the payment fee has caused customers to defect. [Nothing surprising in that!]

Removing this fee is a major first step in renewing customer preference for the Telstra brand. Hopefully Telstra has learned a great lesson about the need to listen to customers and engage its customer base in a proactive, two-way dialogue.

The other critical lesson here is the need for Marketing to have a presence in the Corporate Boardroom. Telstra’s Board is stocked with lawyers, accountants, financial managers and technical experts. Someone with a marketing focus could have easily advised the Telstra Board that this payment fee was not going to be readily accepted by the company’s customer base.