published work
How green is my factory?
“Greenwashing” is a familiar term to most corporate communicators. Of course few, if any, would condone a greenwashing program let alone support one within their own organization.
Unfortunately, greenwashing is not only a common practice across a wide range of businesses, particularly in the resource sectors, in some cases it has taken a sinister turn.
In essence, greenwashing is when organizations use corporate communications and advertising to convince key audiences that they far more environmentally responsible than they actually are. Often they are companies that have sophisticated corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs and multi-million dollar budgets for feel-good ad campaigns intended to create an exaggerated impression of how green they are.
But as the public has cottoned on to greenwashing and the media has become more aggressive in exposing companies that use it, a new twist has been added to the practice. Increasingly, companies that are being exposed as less green than they pretend to be are attacking their critics by proxy through ostensibly credible sources and “independent” research organizations.
This new approach is no more evident than in the debate over climate change. While there is overwhelming scientific consensus that the burning of carbon-based fuels is rapidly destroying the atmosphere, a small but influential group of industry-sponsored climate change sceptics continue to use their credentials as scientists and politicians to deny or question the validity of the causes of climate change.
How this all relates to corporate communications has been painstakingly documented by Vancouver PR veteran, Jim Hoggan, whose blog – http://www.desmogblog.com/ – is an eye-opener for anyone interested in learning more about how PR is being used to manipulate public perception of the climate change debate.
The lessons in this for smaller organizations that may be confused about how to communicate their own commitment to environmentally responsible practices are very simple: don’t overstate what you are doing and be honest about how you are doing it.
Toronto-based publisher, Green Living Enterprises, has just launched Eco Options magazine for retailer Home Depot. Green Living Enterprises President, Laurie Simmonds, says credibility is the key to successfully positioning an organization as truly green.
She says corporations increasingly understand the need to reduce their footprint and communicate their green initiatives to their stakeholders. But they must do so with credibility by having the green content and eco-friendly processes to support their position.
Of course a publication like Eco Options is typically just one element of a broader CSR program for a big organization and it’s not something that every company needs or has the resources to produce.
Nevertheless, a CSR program of some sort should be a key component of every organization’s corporate communications strategy. It’s true that smaller companies are sometimes intimidated by the complexities of resource-hungry CSR programs developed by big corporations, but they needn’t be.
An effective CSR program does not have to be headed by a vice president with an entourage of specialists to do the work. In fact in many cases smallcompanies already practice the basics of good CSR: they are ethical, fair, honest, treat their staff with respect, honour their clients and customers and don’t damage the environment.
All they really need to do is write it all down, commit to it formally, and communicate it to their stakeholders. The development and implementation of a successful CSR program is as much about communication and commitment as it is about process and administration.
And CSR is good for business. Research has shown repeatedly that people like to do business with suppliers they feel comfortable with and whose business practices are seen to be above reproach.
So while it can’t be ignored, CSR need not become a 600 pound gorilla in the corner of the boardroom.
For a company staring out on the CSR path finding a definition of CSR that suits its needs is important. There are hundreds of definitions, but they all mean more or less the same thing. The key is for companies to decide for themselves what CSR means to them. They need to have a vigorous internal debate to agree on their interpretation of CSR and they need to ensure that there is buy-in by all employees.
The corporate communications planning process should include key messages and positions on CSR issues, including aspects outside of the immediate business. For example, what does the company know about the business practices of its suppliers? Are they ethical, honest, eco-friendly, respectful of employee rights? If not, they need to consider whether they want to continue doing business with them.
The return on investment for CSR is difficult to measure in dollars and cents, but the intangible value is obvious: reputational capital is now widely accepted as a corporate asset, and undermining it through inadequate CSR planning and response can be as damaging as losing market share.