If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now

Consumer Engagement: Gaining Customers or Mitigating Risk?

I’m ashamed to say that there is one phrase in particular that makes me lose all measure of diplomacy and tactful behavior suitable to business meetings. When I hear “consumer engagement,” aka “customer engagement,” it makes my blood rise. It has become a trend in the sustainability field for consumer products companies. It’s not that I’m particularly against these activities; on the contrary, I think they’re a vital part of a successful sustainable business. And, if done correctly, engagement can build long-term relationships to alleviate a number of wasteful and unsustainable business practices. However, I do not believe that consumer engagement should be the primary motivation for a sustainability strategy. And many companies that claim consumer engagement as their reason for implementing sustainability are being coy about their real reasons. If it really is their primary motivation then I venture to say they have been misguided, possibly wasting valuable resources, and more importantly, could be driving the debate in the wrong direction. Luckily, more often than not, they are benefitting much more from backend work, such as sustainable product innovation and creating supply chain efficiencies, than they’re admitting publically.

Less than 5 Percent of Consumers Really Care

Research varies depending on who you ask (and what story they want to tell you), however the common wisdom is that less than 5 percent of consumers change their purchasing behavior based on labels or the ethics of the manufacturing company. On average, a consumer takes two seconds to read what’s on the pack – including the logo, the nutrition information, the labels, the price, the smiling children, etc. So, when the person in charge of sustainability (or CSR) at a manufacturing company tells me that they’re focused on consumer engagement as the primary goal of their sustainability strategy, I try to react calmly and push them to explain the real reasons for saying this is indeed their top sustainability priority.

Of course, I understand what they’re trying to say: “Consumer engagement” is the new way of saying “public relations.” Companies are engaging with consumers to spread the word about all the good they are doing in an effort to get on the green bandwagon and be seen as a forward-thinking and caring company. The term “consumer engagement” emerged as the phrase “greenwashing” was at its height and companies had to try and find a way to market their businesses and products without seeming like they were just pulling the wool over the consumer’s eyes. Engagement implies give and take, listening to feedback, open to suggestions, and other great ways to make consumers feel like they’re doing their part by buying these products.

It’s About Mitigating Risks

The problem with all of this is that it masks the truth. The true objective driving consumer engagement (that many companies will admit to, if pressed) is “risk mitigation.”

Risks to a business are everywhere. Many companies have managers and directors whose entire jobs and departments are dedicated to mitigating their business risks. Up until recently, those risks have been things like compliance with standards and regulation, health and safety, and quality control. Also implied in among the financial risks are risks to the brand’s reputation, which can affect everything from the long term financial health of the business to customer loyalty and employee productivity.

And now sustainability has become part of the risk reduction focus. The risks that are being mitigated are the possibility that competitors are genuinely greener, consumers not believing green claims, losing customers because they don’t believe your claims or for lack thereof, and risks to the brand’s reputation. By engaging with consumers whether in reality or in words alone, companies are attempting to reduce these real risks to their business and brand. And there is nothing wrong with that – let’s just be clear about it.

Real Stories to Tell

There are many leading companies who are taking a quieter approach. Some could argue that they’re not getting the appropriate kudos and boost to their sales and reputations. However, it’s likely that the boost to their bottom line is thanks enough; at least until their programs are fully mature. This more conservative approach, in my mind, is much more legitimate and profitable. Not only do these companies enjoy the financial rewards that their internal work brings, but they also will have very real stories to tell when they are ready to start spreading the word. The risks are not growing by choosing to not communicate widely. In fact, the real risks are being mitigated because they’re taking out waste and cost in their supply chain, building more sustainable relationships with their suppliers, and likely with their employees, too.

Sara Pax is the president of Bluehorse Associates, a developer of environmental sustainability metrics solutions specialized in the food and beverages industry that includes the web-based, lifecycle assessment and product carbon footprinting tool Carbonostics. www.carbonostics.com

Sara Pax
Sara Pax is the president of Bluehorse Associates, a developer of sustainability metrics specialized in the food and beverages industry with its smart product-level lifecycle assessment solution, Carbonostics (cost + carbon + nutrition). www.carbonostics.com
Avoid the RFP Trap: The Smart Guide to Purchasing EHS Software
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS

Staying Ahead of the Curve: Strategies for Managing Emerging Regulations (NAEM)
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS

Become a More Effective EHS Leader for Your Retail Business
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS

OSHA Written HazCom Plan Template
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS


4 thoughts on “Consumer Engagement: Gaining Customers or Mitigating Risk?

  1. Exceptional perspective, wish more brands, mfgs would approach sustainability in this manner. the real work is in our supply chains, in our products. effecting sustainability all the way back to raw material feedstocks thru to manufacturing is where the dial should be focused.

  2. Technology is at the intersection of sustainable production and sustainable consumption – and you are absolutely right – consumers dont have time to absorb the clutter of communications, although they do care about being good and doing good at no cost to themselves.

    Digital marketplaces are the obvious place to allow consumers to discover that some of the brands that they love are socially and environmentally responsible.

    Positive Luxury’s People Planet Trust Mark makes shopping easy, it’s a special seal of approval awarded to brands that have passed a rigorous sustainability assessment carried out by the PositiveLuxury.com board of directors.
    Scrolling over the People Planet Trust Mark on a page gives you a drop down menu listing transparent and concise information on the outstanding efforts made by a brand to ensure they are producing high-quality goods without compromising the planet or the people in it.

  3. Thank you for your efforts.

    Yes, after analysing their customers psyche, needs and behaviour for a century now, many corporation and marketing gurus now try to put the responsibility of “being a green consumer” on there customers; The message they send is: “You are not green enough – We can help you alleviate this guilt – Follow us; Buy our product and you’ll perceive yourself and be perceived as a ecological consumer – And shame on you if you don’t”.

    In these cases, many efforts are spend clinging to old marketing and business practices; They simply add a coat of green paint on there still toxic product while keeping their customers ignorant and play/control the perception they have of themselves and of they enterprises.

    Ironically this approach stands at the opposite of sustainable practices; As most eco-thinkers have realized by now, green/sustainable/eco-approaches are primarily respectful, educational and empowering in the short as well as in the long term.

    There is still much education to do in order to bring the collective minds to understand the difference between a green looking perception and an empowering sustainable behaviour. Between being used by corporations and being served by them/involved in a sustainable relationship. But we are getting there, one blog at a time…

    Thank you for your concern about the ecological entity we belong to.
    After all, it’s only a matter of life.

  4. yes, sara, while i share your frustration at the more grossly disingenuous program implementations — frankly, i don’t care if their initiative is from their CEO’s recent ayahuasca experience, or whether it’s to assuage greenpeace from climbing their building(s) — regardless of the program’s wrapping, how well the net results are achieved is what matters to the earth, and its present/future inhabitants.

Leave a Comment

Translate »