As featured in the Boulder County Business Report:
Consider this before jumping on ‘green’ bandwagon
By David Heitman
Beware the Wearin’ o’ the Green
You wear green on St Patrick’s Day so no one will pinch you. But try wearing “green” as a business and you just might get pinched.
While thousands of companies are now jumping on the green bandwagon, it might be worthwhile to hit the pause button and think this one through. It sort of reminds me of the 1990s, when everyone announced that they had a web strategy even though corporate leaders had no idea what the Internet was all about.
Virtually every major corporation, and countless mid-sized and small businesses, today feel compelled to embrace some sort of green—that is, environmentally responsible—policy. This is the result of the sea change taking place in corporate culture whereby environmental responsibility is being included in values or mission statements. The pressure, of course, is coming from consumers, special interest groups and in some cases, a company’s own employees. Fueled by media coverage, the result is that ideas that were once on the fringe have become mainstream.
One form this new focus on being green takes is attempting to achieve carbon neutrality. (The term “carbon neutral” was named by The Oxford American Dictionary as the Word of the Year for 2006.) This concept suggests that a company can offset its carbon footprint—the amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses it emits through its use of fossil fuel energy—by investing in green energy sources, planting trees and the like. Fuel consumption, recycling, zero-landfill and similar practices round out an environmentally responsible role in the global community.
But here’s the warning label: “Blindly committing to green policies before really counting the cost can be hazardous to a company’s health.”
To begin with, a commitment to environmental responsibility is best made when the company’s leadership really believes that its morally imperative to do so. That sincerity will trickle down through the organization. Here’s the ultimate test: if a company can honestly say it would pursue the same environmentally responsible policies whether it was known to the public or not, then it is authentic. In the long run, consumers tend to reward authentic brands more than inauthentic ones, so if the commitment to greening is sincere, the prospects are good for success. People also tend to recognize and shun the me-too brands that jump on the latest bandwagon.
One approach to consider would be to go a full year under new environmental guidelines without making the company’s green stance public. That would give the new policies a chance to be embraced, adjusted and confirmed to find the proper policy fit. Before going public with your green stance, it might also be good to really think through its long-term ramifications. Committing solidly to a few things is better than a shallow commitment to broad, sweeping reforms that get shelved at the first sign of lower earnings.
It’s vital to remember that no matter what you do, you could always do more. That can be used against you by over-zealous employees, activist customers or watchdog groups wanting to make an example out of you. This was evidenced by the recent expose that showed Al Gore hopping the country in his private jet rather than taking his own advice to fly a scheduled commercial airline. Now there’s an inconvenient truth. The hypocrisy of Gore’s stance may not reach beyond FOX News’ conservative audience, but eventually Gore’s own fans will call him to task for this one.
Perhaps an honest and authentic approach would be for companies to say, “We’re doing better than we have in the past. We intend to do better in the future. We’re open to your ideas.” That kind of refreshing honesty should win a few fans and also keep companies out of the shark-infested waters of competing for the mantle of “most environmentally responsible” in the industry.
