Why this blog is here

We want to study “green” across Asia and develop an Ogilvy point of view on how companies should successfully manage “green” communications related to corporate reputation, and “green” marketing of brands.

The context
• Companies are rushing to be perceived as more responsible than in the past when it comes to their policies and actions related to the environment, sustainability, and climate change.

• There are pressures from all sides: from analysts who want to see the company’s carbon footprint, to regulators and consumer pressure groups that want all products labeled with their carbon footprints, to research pointing to consumer attitudes that imply they will favor responsible brands and punish irresponsible ones, to their own employees looking to work for a more commendable brand. Some see the need to become more environmentally responsible as normal CSR (corporate social responsibility) work, while others see it as a defensive move to fend off NGOs and activists, while others see it as a new growth opportunity in creating “green” lines of products or services.

• Meanwhile, it seems that as soon as a company takes any action toward becoming more responsible, they face attack as “greenwashers” for making less than fully comprehensive efforts. There are now websites and blogs that talk about the “Sins of Greenwashing” or even rate advertisements on a Greenwashing Index. This leaves companies confused about what their actions and strategies communicating those actions should be. Top executives sometimes say they may not subscribe to a zealot’s view of climate change but feel forced to be seen as sensitive to the issue. Many worry there is a big cost to “going green.” Others fear being accused of hypocrisy if their own company and employees’ actions don’t measure up first. And many feel they frustrated they do not get full credit for their hard work and improvements.


The objective

• To understand the degree to which companies, regulators, consumers and NGOs truly care about environmentally responsible actions versus mere posturing in your country.
• To determine the real link between a brand’s reputation for environmentally responsible, sustainable growth and consumer action. Is the threat of punishing brands that are not “green” enough real? Or just hot air?
• To understand the role of digital influence and social media in driving “green” reputations of brands.
• To understand what is working and what is not in communicating a brand’s responsible behavior. And to identify opportunities for brands in this climate.
• To recommend a strategy for successful “green” communications around corporate reputation and marketing of “green” products.


What is the scope of the project

From primary and secondary sources (published data, the internet and accessible syndicated data, blogs, social networks) understand the following:

a. Logging Cases: attempts at “green” marketing and communications and what has happened with them.

b. Segmentation of consumer and employee attitudes to “green” brand reputations. Identify different attitudes by traditional demographics and by social media micro-interest groups toward corporate reputations related to the climate, environment and sustainability. Have any led to consumer action against brands or on the other hand to champion them or promote them?

c. Green products: have “green” products or services been launched in your market, and if so which have fared well and why? Which have backfired or not gained traction and why?

Please do your best to cover the countries missing in AAC7 (Japan & Thailand) so we can have a regional picture