The New York Times this past weekend included an article describing the World Cup soccer jerseys as an example of a green product that is not from a green company (Nike).
My fellow Forbes blogger Gregory Unruh recently delved deeper into this topic, asking if green and brown (e.g. not sustainable) products can exist within the same company, citing several pertinent examples including Unilever’s debacle with its opposing Dove and Axe brands. Based on quite a bit of interaction with CSR leaders, his conclusion was a non-committal “I’ll let you know.”
A Promising Example
But if we dig deeper into Unruh’s Unilever example, we’ll find a ray of hope. When Unilever purchased the cult-status ice cream favorite Ben & Jerry’s, it did so with the understanding that the B&J Board would continue meeting as advisers and B&J would be owned in a hands-off fashion, allowing B&J executives the freedom needed to continue meeting the high expectations of its constituency.
It has recently announced a commitment to source 100% of its ice cream as Fair Trade Certified; no small feat when you consider the complexity of those ingredient supply chains. This is a green brand now incorporating social justice in its business model, moving rapidly towards true sustainability. And thriving within the larger Unilever framework.
Progress is Progress
But let’s take Unruh’s question one step beyond “can” these green and brown brands exist together to “should” they? The answer is a resounding yes. If we cannot encourage and reward the largest of our corporations to begin dipping their toes in the world of sustainability, then the movement is doomed. We should be encouraging other product groups within Unilever to look to the Ben & Jerry’s team for internal leadership.
We should reward Nike for producing a World Cup kit made entirely of recycled soda bottles. The boycotting activists that call for Nike to be dismantled are unrealistic and counter-productive to the CSR movement. As the world’s #1 brand, Nike is not going to go away.
The Purpose of Transparency
Another fellow Forbes blogger, Avril David, recently critiqued hip detergent manufacturer Method for refusing to reduce the plastic content of its containers. But the article misses the point. If you want the authentic story behind Method, look at its B-Corporation certification, with its complete transparency about its entire business model. Fellow blogger Andrew Kassoy recently wrote about the importance of B-Corp certification.
Compare this authenticity to the giants in the cleaning products industry. These corporations might have an initial green product or two, but have not yet moved to a level of transparency that B-Corporations require. Just as Nike deserves accolades for going green with one of its products, and encouragement to take the next step to include social justice and transparency, Method deserves accolades for publicly disclosing the gritty details of its entire company to a third-party certification system.
In a recent conversation with Adam Lowry, Method Co-Founder, he told me sustainable business is predicated on complete transparency and a commitment to progress. Good point. Transparency invites both customers and prospects to dig deeper into how our companies work and creates useful feedback loops that help us improve our businesses, our products, and our world.
Scott James has also contributed a post on the soccer ball industry.
Scott James is an entrepreneur, instructor, advisor and investor in the world of sustainability. He is the founder of Fair Trade Sports, offering the world’s first line of sports balls for soccer, football, basketball (and more) that are Eco-Certified and Fair Trade Certified. Like the Newman’s Own brand, all after-tax profits are designated for charity.
This piece was originally posted at Forbes.com
Recent Comments