Sustainability Perspective via Appreciative Inquiry
Much has been written recently about what makes a “sustainable brand,” which brands can and can’t claim that label, and why it is important. This topic has likely been on the minds of a lot of people in the marketing world for a while, but the upcoming Sustainable Brands 2010 conference seems to be lending the discussion urgency and pointedness. It’s been some time since I’ve come across such deeper thinking about a business topic, and, in my mind, this all bodes well for what we all hope to see: the sustainability of the sustainability movement.
The complexities of sustainability – and what that means for every company and consumer – demand that our thinking get more responsible and involved. While a few of us likely wished this had happened a while ago, the conversations about business on the whole are finally shifting to the more philosophical and intellectual. If we are trying to develop more holistic and systemic operations and interactions among our businesses, the environment and our citizens/consumers, we have no option but to do the same as we even begin to ponder it. To achieve that sustainable state, company leaders need to think more holistically-and beyond sales numbers alone-about the purpose and reason for business altogether.
Because this would mean a bigger, more “meta” scale of thinking, we’ve got to start with an organizational framework that feels “safe” (to use a self-help term that actually works in this context). To me, a good place to start is Appreciative Inquiry (AI), where the major assumption is that: “…in every organization something works and changes can be managed through identification of what works, and the analysis of how to do more of what works. ” While I have not studied AI, as such, or been trained in all of its ins and outs, the basic philosophy of starting with what works just feels like common sense.
With particular regard to our more recent “engaged” conversations about sustainable brands and sustainable consuming, starting from what works seems especially worth consideration. To that end, some of the huge, traditional corporations might start their sustainability engagement with what they think works – a public relations move or small marketing initiative put into play long before there’s any understanding or commitment to the holistic truth of the sustainability pursuit. This could easily look like greenwash to that corporation’s more sophisticated stakeholders. On the other hand, less tradition-entrenched and smaller organizations may have been originally founded on more responsible views of life and business, and so be able to integrate their existing sustainable practices and marketing without the greenwash disconnect. Of course, there are many variations on the scale from greenwash to authentic sustainable development.
My point: what has worked in the past for the big corporations entering into some new paradigm is that they do a “tester,” and that may well come across as a superficial “wash.” In the case of sustainability, the executives at such companies apparently have not yet felt the “social pressure” from both competitors and consumers that they would need to really follow through. Before they re-tool their factories, products and marketing messages, what has worked in the past is this toe in the water approach. What those companies will likely find in the sustainable realm, however, is very different from previous business paradigm shifts. In sustainability, a tester/toe in the water only works as a proclamation of interest. And, competitors and consumers alike will very quickly expect much more. If traditional corporations don’t jump more wholly into sustainability integration, no matter how many Sustainable Brand conferences they attend or sponsor, for instance, they will not be trusted. And, they will lose any advantage they thought they could hold onto due to size/sales. No corporation is too big to fail to sustainability!
2010 may be a pivotal year on this front.
As it is – there is a sea of companies in full market view at various steps along the sustainability engagement path. What has worked in the past for big corporations will not go far. They’ll have to build rapidly beyond any greenwash-y public relations move, and give more thorough analysis to what works and why, if they want to continue to thrive in a new sustainability-oriented marketplace. The onus is on the big guys this time, not the smaller players who were founded and built on more sustainably-minded ideals and daily practices. And, as the conversations online and on Twitter show, a lot of us are watching.
Sustainable brands can be built from the very core of “what worked” in a previous conventional incarnation. It’s just a much more complex and arduous proposition. The optimist in many of us likely hopes to see that happen with the big name brands. But at this point, such a transformation needs to occur quickly – and visibly. The scales are definitely shifting as I type – with emerging sustainability-integrated companies, teeny as their products and logos look in comparison, becoming today’s big business fish. (I expect to see and feel that play out in the conversations and presentations at Sustainable Brands 2010.)
To be innovative now, corporations need to invite sustainability right on in, and use a little Appreciative Inquiry. Elements of what has worked for a company pre-sustainability can, in fact, be built on. But it needs to happen today (or yesterday). Market power and brand awareness is noticeably shifting to the smart, sustainability-advantaged companies. They are much appreciated.
