BP: Brand Perfidious?

Perfidious – deliberately faithless, treacherous, deceitful. Of, relating to, or marked by perfidy. Synonyms: false, disloyal, unfaithful, traitorous, faithless.

Perfidious is the word that leaped to my mind when I read this opening paragraph in a post on the Fast Company web site:

“There’s no question that BP has lied extensively over the past few months about the growing Gulf oil disaster. The company has bullied journalists, fudged numbers, and even deployed fake journalists to the Gulf to write about how everything is fine. Now BP may be literally trying to cover up oiled beaches by dumping sand on top of them.”

Over the weekend, the Financial Times (FT) and CNN were reporting that BP is bracing for a shake-up at the top, with both the Chairman and the CEO expected to be replaced within weeks.

However, unbelievably, the CNN story reports that the Chairman is being “singled out for criticism by shareholders for his perceived lack of decisive leadership during the crisis and his failure to support Tony Hayward, the embattled chief executive.”

I guess these shareholders have their heads stuck in the same sand that BP apparently is using to cover up the oil-stained beaches in Louisiana.

Mr. Hayward’s performance before the U.S. Congress, in which he tried to handball blame for this disaster to BP’s subcontractors, did nothing to enhance trust in the BP brand or its leadership. Neither did early reports that soon after this disaster BP was offering US$5000 payments to residents affected by the oil spill if they waived their rights to sue for any damages.

The high-powered institutional investors in the UK that own the majority of the BP shares apparently do not have a clue about Corporate Image Management and the impact of the corporate image on share prices.

Both these investors and the BP Board need to understand this finding from the PriceWaterhouseCoopers report Reputation Assurance: The Value of a Good Name:

A single-minded focus that seeks only to satisfy shareholders may ultimately lead to crises and erosion of shareholder value.

Looks like an updated definition of the word perfidious might need to include “can lead to crises and erosion of shareholder value.”

Green Collar Economy to Feature at Singapore’s National Sustainability Conference

The Green Collar Economy and Environmental Up-Skilling are the two themes for the inaugural Singapore National Sustainability Conference on July 29-30.

The two-day conference is jointly organized by the Office of Environmental Sustainability at the National University of Singapore and the Workplace Research Centre at the University of Sydney.

All registered delegates will receive a complimentary copy of Ken Hickson’s iconic book The ABC of Carbon.  Hickson is one of the keynote speakers at the conference and has become a leading consultant on climate change and sustainability in the workplace.

Details on the program and registration are found on the National Sustainability Conference web site.

Is Shell Trying to Fill the “Beyond Petroleum” Void?

Deja Vu?

Into the “Beyond Petroleum” branding void steps Shell Oil.

This multi-national major oil industry player now has an aggressive new ad campaign, in which Shell is claiming to “unlock” a future world powered by new and numerous energy sources and cleaner fossil fuels.

Now where have we heard that one before?

The campaign, which launched just about a month ago, includes television commercials, print ads, online advertising, outdoor executions and two web sites — www.energygalaxy.com and www.shell.us/letsgo.

In the campaign, Shell informs us that the wolrd will soon be on the road to sustainable mobility and that the good guys and gals at Shell are “ready to help tackle the challenges of the new energy future.”

Not one to kick a fellow petroleum dog when it’s down, Shell’s spokesperson told Advertising Age that the campaign had been in the pipeline for almost a year and that the company felt releasing it now was “the right thing to do.”

BP’s Brand Hyprocrisy

The Beyond Petroleum positioning of BP may have been little more than hundreds of millions of dollars spent in greenwashing.

According to The Power Grid column in yesterday’s New York magazine, BP’s investment in hydrogen, wind, solar, and biofuels amounts to just 6 percent of its overall capital expenditures.

While this is certainly a significant amount in terms of dollars (or pounds) spent, it pales in comparison to what BP spends annually on oil exploration and production.

And this does not include, writes John Heilemann, “the tens of millions of dollars that BP has spent on lobbying against safety regulations, even as it’s compiled the most abysmal safety record of any major oil company.”

One key point in the article: safety violations by BP over the past five years totaled 760, as compared to only one for Exxon Mobil.

As we wrote yesterday, media monitoring firm General sentiment calculates that BP has lost $1 billion in brand value since the Gulf Oil spill.

It’s not the fact that BP had an accident that makes this brand suspect; it’s the manner in which they have tried to pass off blame and responsibility that bothers most.

Add to the above the 700,000 “friends” who have signed on to one of the three Boycott BP pages on Facebook, and you have a brand that is approaching free fall.

Sadly, the BP Board doesn’t seem to get this yet. By the time they do, it will be too late. (Another reason why Marketing needs to be brought into Corporate Boardrooms.)

The tombstone for the BP brand is being readied, and the graveyard of Enron, WorldCom, HIH Insurance, and myriad others awaits.

National Green Brands Forum

The third annual National Green Brands Forum, produced by 3 Pillars Network, will be held in Melbourne on 17 June.

Over 80 small business and corporate executives are expected to attend and hear speakers from Unilever, Origin Energy, Australian Paper, Cadbury, SENSIS, Orange Power and other organisations discuss creating innovation, value, and authenticity through marketing sustainable brands.

“There’s a very real concern across Australia about doing the right thing, communicating it in the right manner, and conveying it in a credible way,” conference produce Cheryl Samarasinghe told me yesterday in a phone conversation. Thus, the conference program has been designed around sharing of world-leading marketing strategies, the latest directions from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), and an introduction to Australia’s National Carbon Offset Standard.

For new players, businesses and marketers entering the green marketing space, this looks like an excellent forum for learning new tools, best practices, and how to avoid having one’s marketing efforts come across as mere greenwashing.

Program and registration details are available online, and there is also an event blog for those who want to preview some of the key issues that will undoubtedly be discussed and debated at this industry leading event.

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.

The Green Marketing Landscape: Ratings, Labels, and Certifications

GreenBiz.com is hosting a free webinar on October 15th featuring a panel of experts covering the topic The Green Marketing Landscape: Ratings, Labels, and Certificates.

With the field of Green Marketing in constant flux, many marketers are confused on how their organizations’ “green” marketing messages need to comply with changing customer expectations and legal requirements.

Moderated by GreenBiz.com executive editor Joel Makower, this webinar is designed to address “how to navigate the ins and outs of green marketing effectively and  legally in today’s world.”

Topics to be discussed include:

* How to avoid issues surrounding false or deceptive advertising allegations related to environmental or green messages.
* How to motivate mainstream consumers to make sustainable choices.
* The latest developments in green claims validation and product certification.

While this webinar will undoubtedly come from a U.S.-centric perspective, it should nevertheless be informative and useful to marketers around the globe.

For more details and to register for this free webinar, click here.

If you attend and want to share your thoughts, please add your comments below for all to read.

Understanding the Green Consumer — Part 3

In the last two blog posts we have discussed the six so-called Myths of Green Consumers and how these have been “busted” by the recent Green Living Pulse study of over 30,000 consumers in the USA.

Let’s now take a look at some of the key insights into the mindset of Green Consumers that this study has unveiled.

1. Green Consumers are more concerned about saving money than saving the planet. We can quibble over the extent of the word “more” all day, but the fact remains that most consumers care more about their own pocketbooks than about altruistic concerns for Mother Earth. The good news here is that marketing campaigns that combine messages about saving money while simultaneously helping to save the planet will win out over messages than focus on only one of these benefits.

Thus, a fuel efficient car not only saves the buyer money in reduced petrol bills, but also reduces his / her nation’s dependency on imported oil while also reducing his / her carbon footprint. This multiple benefit message has far stronger appeal to the Green Consumer.

2. Green Consumers are motivated by different wants, needs, desires, like and dislikes.No surprises here that there is no “one size fits all” marketing message that will motivate the buying behavior of Green Consumers. As in any strong marketing campaign, psychographic profiles are just as important as demographic profiles when determining what will motivate buying behavior. Simply labeling your product “green” or sticking some sort of industry accreditation icon on your packaging will not be enough to stimulate strong Green Consumer desires.

3. There are two Green Consumer mindsets. Actually, there are probably many Green Consumer mindsets, but the Shelton Group has decided to segment these into just two, which they call the Engaged Green Mindset and the Mainstream Green Mindset.

The Engaged Green Mindset consumer is “marked by optimism, extroversion and a propensity to try new things,” according to the study report. These consumers are “more likely to respond to themes of innovation and possibility” claims the Shelton Group.

Meanwhile, the Mainstream Green Mindset” consumer is reportedly “more pessimistic, introverted and apt to like things known and tried.” These consumers, say the report authors, will “respond to themes of security and reliability.”

While I cannot agree 100% with these descriptions, I would agree with the conclusion from the report that “green engagement is less about demographics and more about mindset.” Of course, that’s pretty much true for any successful marketing program, green or not.

The bottom line remains, whether you are targeting Green Consumers or not, understanding what motivates the buying behaviors of your prospective and current customers — combined with fully understanding their needs, wants, desires, likes and dislikes — is the only way to build a successful marketing program.