Sustainability is getting boring… Let’s re-brand!
Noone really seems to have grasped what sustainability really stands for. One of those concepts that is so broad that anything could fit in and so complex that noone really knows how to transform it into something practical.
Especially corporates seem to be struggling in making sense of it and putting the topic in a context that speaks to the individual, to management and serves the company purpose. Let’s be honest here – it’s a real challenge. There’s no off-the-shelf solution on how to turn a successful corpoate business into a successful sustainable one. And it’s surely not about the process but much more about the indivudual that drives change in the organization.
Boston University has built their concept around ‘Corporate Citizenship’. They recently released a report on Leadership Competencies for Community Involvement that shows what it takes to be a change agent in driving a big organization towards taking an active role in corporate citizenship. Have a look it’s an interesting read.
Best wishes, Mira
Loading ...
March 9th, 2010 at 9:57 pm
Sustainability should be the norm. So you should rebrand ‘normal’ into ‘pollutive’…
March 10th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
[...] role in corporate citizenship. Have a look it’s an interesting read. Best wishes, Mira (This is a cross-post from ideaplants.org) Share and [...]
March 12th, 2010 at 9:16 am
Mira, you’re right: ‘sustainability’ is self-defeating jargon. The word suggests the question: what are we sustaining? And what does ‘sustain’ really mean? It’s easy to confuse by non-native English speakers. And don’t get me started on those six syllables.
But I thought ‘green [insert noun]‘ was supposed to be precisely that rebranding that your post calls for. It’s short, clear, visual and a universal concept. It’s a cliche, of course, but still useful and valid today.
Change the packaging too many times and no-one will care about what’s underneath….
March 13th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
Hi MK, hi Marko,
Interesting thought, Marko. I just wonder if it will really change anything to simply rebrand…
I actually do like MK’s idea of calling everything ‘green xxx’. But I’d be afraid that we start taking a too narrow approach by doing that. What would be a ‘green airline’? Or a ‘green car’? Don’t we have to re-think the concept of certain products first before we try to make them green?
Sustainability takes a more broad approach. Ideally it means that you look at the balance of different interests and influences of an environmental decision making situation before taking action. The result might be that you decide to not use airplanes anymore or take the bike to go to work instead of your car rather than trying to ‘green’ your airplanes and cars.
Curious to hear what you think about this
Cheers,
Mira
March 15th, 2010 at 11:38 am
Mira, IMO the problem at this stage is still one of branding. I take your point that today ‘sustainability’ is a broader term, but this is mostly because it’s a noun and not an adjective.
The broad approach you describe could also be expressed with the word ‘green’. For example, not using airplanes could be called a ‘green lifestyle’.
Ultimately, words are just a vehicle. It’s up to us to fill them with meaning. They are also dynamic – their meanings change over time.
If in 2010 we think a ‘green car’ should mean a hybrid vehicle, or consider a ‘green airline’ as a hand-gliding outfit, it’s our responsibility to inform and educate the public so that they too make those connections. That requires consensus and hard comms work, but it’s achievable.
March 27th, 2010 at 9:31 pm
To me sustainability has a fairly clear definition and is essentially about affording future generations the chance to enjoy the wonders of our planet as we can. Green is a colour and has been hijacked by numerous organisations for good and bad. Putting the word “green” before something is usually done for “greenwashing”.
The problem in my view is that most people do not understand what our actions today affect. The answer is the human race. That is where sustainability comes in Corporate Social Responsibility or whatever name the corporation comes up with is a good thing but essentially used for PR more than anything else. To them “Profit, people, planet but the greatest of these is profit”.
April 22nd, 2010 at 12:47 pm
It’s an interesting discussion. Especially to these ‘volcanic times’ where most passengers are worried about getting their flight tickets reimbursed (I admint I’m one of them). I do believe that the way people brand something says a lot about the level of understanding that has been generated around the topic.
I do see much potential about corporate citizenship where corporates look at their impact and role in their community and stakeholder environment. However, in order to make it something real it is important to connect giving activity to a set of clear KPIs and to compare with existing performance standards to be able to show real progress.