It's Not Easy Being Green

Spiraling fuel prices and global warming fears have once again made environmental issues fashionable, especially in advertising. But branding experts warn that as more companies adopt slick image campaigns, consumers are growing increasingly confused over what it means to be "green," making it harder to create effective environmental marketing efforts.In a study released last month by brand consultancy Landor, the recent spate of environment-themed campaigns, from General Electric's "Ecomagination" effort to Dow Chemical's new "Human Element" initiative, has left the consumer unsure of what a company means when it touts eco-friendly credentials."Is it about the environment, organic food or 'good-for-you' living? ...[I]t could be about all of those things," said Landor managing director Allen Adamson. "It is easy to say you are green, but consumers are skeptical. And because everyone wants to jump on the green bandwagon, all of a sudden it is noisy in this space, and it is hard to break through."The study—which gauged consumer perceptions of green marketing—found that 64 percent of the general population can't name a green brand, and even 51 percent of respondents who see themselves as environmentally conscious are unable to name one. "As much as the term has been tossed around, many people, even those who consider themselves green, are unclear as to what it means," the study said. "Other terms like eco-friendly, fuel efficient, biodegradeable, natural and organic are used in different categories to emphasize green, but can confuse and cloud the mind of consumers."At the same time, consumer concern (and pessimism) about the enviroment seems to be growing. In a Gallup poll taken in March, 67 percent of respondents said the quality of the environment is "getting worse" versus 25 percent who felt it was getting better. And a Time/ABC News/Stanford University poll in April found that 49 percent of Americans rank the environment as "extremely" or "very" important compared with 31 percent in 1998. The noise in the green marketing space has grown louder in the past month alone as well. Dow Chemical's "Human Element" campaign addresses environmental concerns in the "global community." Thirty- and 90-second spots from FCB, Chicago, aired during NBC's coverage of the U.S. Open golf tournament. And Shell Oil launched a $30 million marketing campaign in June that trumpets its higher quality fuel, which it says emits less pollution. One side effect of all the chatter seems to be a more jaded, wary consumer. Branding experts now consider green marketing tricky, because the public seems poised to accuse disingenuous companies of "greenwashing." Ford has been tagged with that claim by a number of green activists groups, who decry the automaker's low overall mpg as it embarks on ad campaigns that promote energy independence and use of alternative fuels.Ford didn't help stem such accusations when it recently rescinded a promise to produce 250,000 hybrid vehicles annually by 2010. Last month, Ford retracted that vow in favor of building flexible-fuel vehicles and models that run on alternative power.The public reaction on blogs was swift and furious. "… It seems Ford is content to throw that all away in favor of some token greenwashing in the form of a promise to build more flexible-fueled vehicles (FFVs)," read an entry at Hybridblog.John Stauber, cofounder of the Center for Media and Democracy, which studies the claims of advertising and marketing for truthfulness, said he is seeing more so-called greenwashing campaigns. "These industries, especially the auto and the oil industries, don't want to be caught not talking about these issues, because they are a key part of them," he said.Hence advertisers are eagerly seeking new ways to prove their green credentials to the consumer. Some companies are partnering with local governments through nontraditional media programs to achieve that. Take the June launch of EcoZone, a public/private partnership in which companies like DaimlerChrysler, Alcoa and AbTech, a green technology firm, pay up to $5,000 per sign to put their logos on billboards carrying environmental messages that will be posted around Washington, D.C. The city—the first of about 15 to host the public educational effort—will then use a portion of the money raised from corporate sponsorships to address environmental clean-up problems at no additional cost to the taxpayer. Company logos are also placed on two paid spots that will air in the specific city markets.Companies said they like the program because it allows them to introduce new technologies to local and state governments that must meet federal environmental clean-up deadlines. So AbTech, which makes a sponge that can remove oil and other debris from water, can show its product to cities that must meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water cleanup rules.Glenn Rink, AbTech's president and CEO, said EcoZone officials have smartly aligned themselves with government regulators, a move that bolsters the effort's credibility and gives companies like his the confidence to invest in the program. The program also helps cities meet their obligations under the Clean Water Act to educate the public about pollution abatement.Paul Polizzotto, CEO and founder of EcoMedia, a New York-based media company that created the EcoZone program, calls his effort "media with meaning and strategy with substance." "I understand that the only way for us to truly attract corporate sponsorships is we have to help them sell their products and services," he said. With EcoZone, DaimlerChrysler can show how its hybrid electric bus could be a good environmental alternative for cities seeking to update their public transportation fleets. "EcoZone is an innovative approach that allows us to continue to converse with our customers about our desire to be good neighbors, save energy and work to improve the environment," said John Bozzella, Daimler's vp of external affairs and public policy. "It also meets our desire to communicate with cities, regions and states which purchase the services and technology that we make."Compare that with British Petroleum, credited with being one of the first companies to make a significant grab for the green title, starting with its 2003 "Beyond Petroleum" campaign emphasizing wind power and solar energy. Adamson, who helped BP develop its branding effort, said it would take another five years to determine if the company would be successful getting the public to think of it as more than just an oil company. "You can be an energy company and call yourself green," Adamson said. "It is harder to be an oil company and totally do it. But branding is a long-term game. BP has a holistic approach by aligning the business plans with the marketing promise. They also have the first-mover advantage."But others are less sanguine, noting that the stats belie the hype. "I respect BP a lot, but I am concerned that the amount of ads they have done around green initiatives, like 'Beyond Petroleum,' is going to backfire," said Joel Makower, a senior consultant at GreenOrder, a New York-based marketing strategy firm specializing in eco-themes. "It's not that they are not committed, but when you look at their books, so much of their revenue comes from petroleum."BP's global solar division accounted for around $500 million of its $295 billion in sales in 2005 amidst company promises to double its investment in renewable and alternative energy. And no amount of advertising may be able to overcome the damage done to its reputation from problems BP has experienced in North America, which include an oil spill in Alaska, a refinery explosion that killed 15 workers, and allegations that BP traders manipulated propane prices. BP disputes the charges.When GM needed a green image tune-up because it was perceived as lagging in hybrid technology and had a fleet that had a reputation—not completely deserved—for being oversized and gas-slurping, it called on Makower and GreenOrder."Live green, go yellow" was born, a campaign that launched earlier this year proclaiming the company's considerable sales of flexible-fuel vehicles and its support of ethanol-based gasoline.Makower said that companies must be cautious about leading the public to believe they are greener than they truly are. "The biggest problem here is when perception gets ahead of reality," Makower said. "If you give the public the perception that you are doing more than you really are, they will sniff it out pronto." So far, the GM campaign has driven traffic to its Web site, which has averaged 100,000 visits a day in its first two weeks. Even now, GM research finds average consumers are spending 30 percent more time at the site than they do at other GM sites. GM said it's satisfied with the initial data. "We find those to be very healthy results," said Bob Kraut, director, GM brand marketing. "And in tracking studies, we see . . . among people familiar with the advertisements we have run for the campaign, there are attitude shifts and the perception that GM is leading in this arena. And in tracking data for purchase intentions, it appears that the campaign is making people more likely to consider a GM vehicle."Of course, no matter how genuinely concerned about the environment these companies might be, it's unlikely they'd be pursuing this angle if there weren't profit to be had. "Green is green as in the color of money," said Judy Hu, global executive director of advertising and branding at General Electric, whose "Ecomagination" campaign, which launched last year with work done by BBDO, New York, pushes the company's commitment to research and development and reducing greenhouse gases. "It is about a business opportunity, and we believe we can increase our revenue behind these Ecomagination products and services."Last year, GE revenue from Ecomagination products reached $10.1 billion, with orders and commitments nearly doubling to $17 billion, according to a company report about the campaign. GE even sent out alerts about the report on biodegradable paper embedded with flower seeds. The alerts directed people to a Web site to download it, because the company wasn't going to print the report. They were then encouraged to soak the seed paper in water and plant it to grow marigolds and cosmos. Although some image experts think it remains to be seen just how effective such campaigns will be, they argue that advertisers can't afford to wait if their competitors are trumpeting a commitment to the environment. "We will not wait and see, but act and see," said David Smith, svp and creative director of Santa Monica, Calif.-based RPA, which created Honda's "Environmentology" campaign. The effort pushes Honda's commitment to using technology to improve the environment.Still, public tastes are fickle and maybe companies like BP don't need to worry so much about being green. A key finding in the Landor study of consumer behavior noted that "the green-motivated segment favors green brands within the grocery, beauty and personal care categories, but will purchase brands that are not considered green in categories like fast food and petroleum." In the end, what matters is what the consumer is willing to spend money on. Todd Turner, president of Car Concepts, a market research firm in Thousand Oaks, California, blames the lack of a national consensus on what energy policies to pursue for contributing to a general misunderstanding of what it means for a company to be green. "Everyone is pushing the hot-button issue, but the problem is the consumer in this country hasn't been educated at all on what green is," Turner said. Turner thinks consumers are more likely to respond to high gas prices than image campaigns. Up until the recent spike in gas prices, consumers were still willing to pay for a gas-guzzling SUV if it fit their lifestyle. But Turner predicts that if gas prices hit $5 or $6 dollars a gallon, not only will consumers change the type of vehicles they drive, they will change their lifestyle by moving closer to where they work.This growing concern only highlights the endemic PR problem big energy utilities, car makers and oil companies have, because the very nature of their businesses often pollute the environment. Predictably, companies respond by seeing a need to polish their public image on environmental issues.But such efforts clearly take time to gain a foothold with consumers. Still, public tastes are fickle and maybe companies like BP don't need to worry so much about being green. A key finding in the Landor study of consumer behavior noted that "the green motivated segment favors green brands within the grocery, beauty and personal care categories, but will purchase brands that are not considered green in categories like fast food and petroleum." In the end, what matters is what the consumer is willing to spend money on.

Brand Marketing

It's Not Easy Being Green

Wendy Melillo

About

Subscriptions

Events

Publications

WORK SMARTER - LEARN, GROW AND BE INSPIRED.

Subscribe today!

Wendy Melillo