Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Stakeholder

Best Global Green Brands of 2012

toyota prius green brandThe 2012 list of the Best Global Green Brands was released by Interbrand this week, and nearly 40% are automotive brands. Considering that automobiles are one of the biggest environmental problems and consumers are demanding fuel-efficient vehicles more than ever, it’s not surprising that 8 of the 21 brands on Interbrand’s list of the Best Global Green Brands are automotive brands.

The automotive brands that made the 2012 list include Toyota (#1), Honda (#3), Volkswagen (#4), BMW (#10), Ford (#15), Mercedes-Benz (#16), Hyundai (#17), and Nissan (#21). These are companies that invest a lot of money into promoting their green initiatives. Since a significant part of the Interbrand scoring methodology relies on consumer perceptions of brands, automotive brands are rewarded for their green marketing investments.

Highlights from the 2012 Best Global Green Brands report include the following:

  • Industry: Automotive and technology brands dominate the list.
  • Newcomers: Brands appearing on the list for the first time include Nissan (#21), H&M (#46), and UBS (#50).
  • Biggest Position Jumps: Brands seeing the biggest jumps from 2011 to 2012 include: Danone (up 5 spots to #9), Ford (up 5 spots to #15), Starbucks (up 6 spots to #36), and UPS (up 6 spots to #43).
  • Biggest Position Drops: Brands experiencing the biggest drops from 2011 to 2012 include: 3M (down 10 spots to #11), Nike (down 9 spots to #26), and Allianz (down 9 spots to #30.
  • Countries: Countries that lead the list in terms of manufacturing and managing green brands are the United States (22 brands on the list), Japan (7 brands on the list), and Germany (7 brands on the list).

In 2012, corporate sustainability is no longer an option or a differentiator. It’s a necessity. Consumers don’t just want companies and brands to be green, they expect them to be green. As Jez Frampton, Global Chief Executive Officer of Interbrand, explains, “Sustainability has proven to be a strategic and profitable aspect of business and a brand-strengthening asset. It is crucial that consumers’ impressions of a brand are in close alignment with that brand’s actual environmental performance. Otherwise, a brand’s efforts in this area could serve as an under-utilized asset, or conversely, suffer due to accusations of ‘greenwashing.’”

The 2012 report shows that companies are focusing more efforts and budget dollars into sustainability, and they’re doing a better job of promoting those efforts, too. It’s very possible that there are other brands that could be considered greener than the ones on the Interbrand list, but they might not be reporting those efforts externally in a manner that changes consumers’ perceptions.

Are consumers aware of the green efforts your company and brand are doing? If not, it’s time to let them know!

Image: Autoviva

Digital Champions and the Digital Divide

rural CheshireThe county I live in, Cheshire—a large county in the north of the UK—has ambitious plans: aiming for 100% coverage of superfast broadband by 2015.

For some of you, who live in big cities or in other countries, this won’t seem much. Apparently 50% or more of European households already have a connection of over 100 Mbps, and the EU definition of superfast is only 30 Mbps.

But Cheshire is a rural county: 60% is classified as rural, and the settlements are small and dispersed. That is, a lot of us live in tiny villages that are scattered across the green countryside. Yes, that is an image of Cheshire countryside to the right.

For two-thirds of the geographical area of the county it is simply not viable for telecommunications companies to roll out superfast broadband without financial subsidies.

A challenge, in these straitened times.

I went to a Connecting Cheshire Digital Champions event last week, representing the tiny village I live in, and was struck by two things that follow from the statistics they shared:

  • Your web visitor is struggling to see your pages

    Over 5% of Cheshire inhabitants can only get a maximum broadband speed of less than 2 Mbps

    And yet the size of web pages continues to grow. The average web page is now 1 MB. Even if your rural visitor could actually achieve the maximum of 2 Mbps, it takes a significant time to download your 1 MB page.

  • And there is still a potential audience you haven’t reached online

    15% of Cheshire inhabitants have never used the internet.

    How easy is it for someone who is unfamiliar with internet convention to understand and use your website? This group may well include some of your stakeholders, such as shareholders; a rush to e-communications is not going to serve a group who don’t use the internet, or whose connection isn’t good.

One more thing: you’re not alright, Jack

There is a digital divide. And it is one that affects most of us, even if you are lucky enough to live and work in a high-speed area. Because if there are consumers and businesses that can’t make equal use of the internet, those are potential customers, clients, shareholders and job-seekers of yours that would struggle to find your business online.

It’s not just Cheshire.

Email and Social Media Marketing Tricks Marketers are Missing

twitter iphoneMarketers are missing big opportunities for digital marketing. According to a new report from Yesmail Interactive, Using Digital Market Intelligence to Drive Multi-Channel Success, many email campaigns and social media marketing efforts don’t align with consumers’ usage or behavior patterns.

The study tracked retailers’ Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and email campaigns over a three month period and analyzed the companies’ marketing efforts during that time to evaluate how successful the campaigns were in increasing consumer engagement. Retailers that were included in the study were Abercrombie & Fitch, Aeropostale, American Apparel, American Eagle, Ann Taylor, Banana Republic, Diesel, Eddie Bauer, Express, Forever 21, The Gap, Guess, H &M, J Crew, Kenneth Cole, The Limited, Old Navy, Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger and Urban Outfitters.

The study results highlighted a few significant opportunities that marketers are missing in their email and social media campaigns. Specifically, companies are running campaigns on the wrong days and at the wrong times. They’re also not integrating email and social media marketing effectively. Following are some findings that can help guide marketers in boosting the success of email and social media marketing campaigns in the future:

  • Study Finding: Facebook campaigns get the most engagement on Tuesdays. Current Reality: That’s the fourth most popular day that the companies in this study deployed campaigns.
  • Study Finding: Facebook campaigns reach the  highest levels of interaction between 10:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. EST. Current Reality: That’s the time period when the fewest campaigns are launched. The most commonly used time to launch campaigns on Facebook is 11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. EST.
  • Study Finding: The worst day to launch a Twitter campaign (in terms of engagement) is Friday. Current Reality: That’s the day when most campaigns are deployed.
  • Study Finding: The time period with the most customer engagement on Twitter is 5:00 a.m. – 8:00 a.m. EST. Current Reality: More than 4 out of 5 (84%) of Twitter campaigns launch during traditional work hours (9:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m. EST).
  • Study Finding: Monday is the day when YouTube sees the most interaction. Current Reality: Monday is the least often used weekday for companies to launch campaigns on YouTube.

The study also found that email campaigns should launch with social media campaigns rather than sending emails out before a social campaign starts. Specifically, the report explains that Facebook engagement grows by approximately 50% when an email campaign is sent on the same day as a Facebook campaign is launched. Engagement doubles when two emails are sent on the same day as the Facebook campaign is launched. Similar results were discovered on Twitter. One email campaign sent on the same day as a Twitter campaign is launched boosts engagement by 35%, and two emails increases engagement by 50%.

An integrated marketing approach that includes various media is always going to be the most effective plan, but the results from this study reveal some interesting tricks related to timing that many marketers aren’t leveraging yet. Use them and get a jump on the competition!

Image: William Hook

From Paper to the Cloud via Green IT


When companies first started moving information online, it seemed like an environmentalist’s dream, with the “paperless office” saving the rainforests. In fact running a website carries an environmental cost because of the power demands: not just for the site visitors, but on the servers that host and deliver the website, and the cooling mechanisms needed to keep this equipment from overheating.

So how can you reduce the environmental footprint of your site? In theory at least, cutting the time it takes somebody to visit your site and get the information they need will make a difference. A combination of clearer layout and more concise language will cut reading time, while optimizing the code on your site can cut the amount of data that has to be downloaded.

However, even shaving seconds off download time, while delighting your visitors (and Google) won’t save a huge quantity of power, and the server hosting your site remains active whether or not you have any visitors.

The reality is that the most effective change a business can make is to opt for more environmentally responsible hosting, whether that be through an outsourced service or with its own equipment. To put this into context, Apple says that one of their data centres uses the same power as 20,000 homes (20 megawatts). There’s been some discussion about the numbers, and obviously Apple may be a significantly larger power-consumer than your own company; nevertheless, your website will be contributing to the demands for power.

Given the overall move to digital, that’s a lot of power used by us all online…

Communicating the green journey

There are two main ‘greening’ questions to ask the company that hosts your website: what source of energy do they use to power their data centres and how efficiently do they use that energy: the answers to these questions matter to your audience and their perception of your company. For example, Greenpeace recently praised some web giants for using data centres located in cool places and using hydroelectric power, while criticizing other firms for using data centres that rely on “dirty” coal burning.

And then, of course, you’ll need to communicate your actions to your audience.


Click to enlarge viewHave a look at how Apple do it, using graphics and easy-to-read text (do scroll to see the whole page).

Other companies discuss ‘greening’ their data centres too—see, for instance:

  • highlighting success: First Group, who discuss how they’ve worked with their suppliers to cut energy usage and move to sustainable power, winning an internal award
  • indicating size and significance: Vodafone, who reveal that their data centres are responsible for 10% of their network’s carbon emissions.
  • external verification/assurance: Thomson Reuters, who list external organisations they’re working with on data centre efficiency
  • providing detail and results: EMC, who discuss their “journey to the cloud”—the virtualisation of their IT infrastructure, and who highlight the headline numbers
  • helping people understand the results: AT&T, who explain their overall energy savings by saying they were the equivalent of the electricity use of 13,367 homes for a year. This helps people visualise the scale of the savings.

There definitely seems to be a movement afoot…

10 Brands that Will Die in 2013 – Does Anyone Care?

Each year, 24/7 Wall St. creates a list of 10 well-known American brands that the site’s analysts and writers believe will die within 18 months. The list of brands with will disappear in 2013 includes brands that failed to innovate, brands that ignored competitors, and brands that lost track of what consumers actually want and need. The brands come from a variety of industries, each with its own reasons for impending death.

First, let’s take a look at the methodology 24/7 Wall St. uses to creates its annual list of brands that will die within 18 months. Brands are evaluated based on seven primary criteria:

  • The brand has experienced a quick drop in sales and large losses.
  • The parent company of the brand has disclosed information that the brand might go out of business.
  • Fast rising costs that cannot be recouped through higher prices.
  • Companies that are sold.
  • Companies that go into bankruptcy.
  • Companies that have lost the majority of their customers.
  • Brand operations that have quickly deteriorating market share.

Here is the list of the 10 brands 24/7 Wall St. predicts will disappear in 2013:

1. American Airlines

American Airlines is one of the last big brand holdouts from the recent mergers in the airline industry. After filing bankruptcy, parent company AMR claims the airline brand will prosper in the future, but as Douglas A. McIntyre of 24/7 Wall St. explains:

“US Airways has made it clear that it wants to buy American’s assets. US Airways has much to gain from the transaction, as its position in the carrier marekt has been eroded by the mergers of Northwest and Delta and the later combination of United and Continental.”

2. Talbots

Talbots is suffering not only from the recession but also from a line of products that is outdated and out of touch with consumers. Walk into a Talbots store and it’s hard not to feel like you’ve gone back in time by a couple of decades. McIntyre writes:

“Talbots’ revenue was $2.3 billion in fiscal 2008, a figure on which it lost money. Annual sales are barely half that now. With the exception of a tiny profit last year, the retailer has lost money every year in the past five.”

3. Current TV

Current TV is Al Gore’s project, but it’s also a brand that relies heavily on celebrity brands. Without big name celebrity brands that appeal to viewers, Current TV has little chance of survival. McIntyre explains:

“Current TV was on life support even before it fired its only bankable star, Keith Olbermann. He was replaced by Eliot Spitzer. Compared to Olbermann’s March figures, Spitzer’s ratings in April were down nearly 70% according to TV audience measurement firm Nielsen.”

4. Research in Motion (RIM)

Seeing RIM on the list of brands that will die within 18 months shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. RIM is a brand that will appear in business textbooks for many years to come as the brand that failed to innovate, keep up with competitors, and recognize consumers’ changing needs. McIntyre shares some numbers that tell the RIM story:

“The pace at which the company fell apart once the process began was even more extraordinary than its rise. Revenue and net income jumped from $6 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively, in fiscal 2008 to $20 billion and $3.4 billion in fiscal 2011. The best measurement of the swiftness of RIM’s fall is the change of its share of the U.S. smartphone market. Research group NPD recently reported that RIM’s U.S. market share was 44% in 2009 but only 10% last year. Data from research group Comscore shows that share has fallen further this year. The net effect on RIM’s stock price has been devastating, taking it down from $144 four years ago to $11 recently. RIM cannot survive as a standalone operation in the face of these trends.”

5. Pacific Sunwear

Pacific Sunwear offers “California-style” sunglasses, clothing, and other accessories. Unfortunately, they’re not distinctive and the brand is easily replaced with dozens of others. McIntyre writes:

“Why is the company in so much trouble? It is too small and is in a commoditized business. Nearly every major department store chain sells products similar to those Pacific Sunwear offers, and so do many niche retailers. Pacific Sunwear, meanwhile, has only 729 small stores.”

6. Suzuki

I’m going to hazard a guess that many people think Suzuki already died, but it’s still hanging on. An automotive brand has no chance of competing in the crowded auto market with a terrible reputation for quality — as Suzuki has. It’s even harder for a brand to succeed when it targets the lower price point, that Hyundai already owns. McIntyre explains:

“In the 2012 JD Power survey of U.S. vehicle dependability, Suzuki’s scores in power-trains, body and materials, and features and accessories were below those of almost every other brand. Most of its cars sell for less than $20,000 and its trucks and SUVs for under $25,000. Almost every other manufacturer with a broad range of vehicles has flooded this end of the market with cheap, fuel-efficient models. Arguably the most successful car company in the U.S. based on growth — Hyundai — does particularly well in this segment.”

7. Salon.com

Salon.com is a news and commentary site that launched in 1995. Over the years, it’s been outpaced by competitor sites and has lost money and traffic. The value of Salon.com, however, is in its vast content archives — something a buyer is likely to be very interested in. McIntyre writes:

“In recent years, Salon.com has been eclipsed by larger and better financed sites such as The Atlantic and Washington Post-owned Slate. Of course, today there are thousands of websites that comment on the news each day.”

8. Oakland Raiders

These days, professional sports teams in the United States show little loyalty to the local fans that support them. It’s all about where they can get the best stadium for the money, and teams could move at anytime. The Oakland Raiders is one such team, and this wouldn’t be the first time the team moved to a different city for a better stadium. McIntyre explains:

“Current team managing owner Mike Davis already has said he may move the Raiders back to LA to get a better stadium deal. The current Oakland stadium contract expires next year. Davis recently told the San Francisco Chronicle, ‘Yeah, Los Angeles is a possibility. Wherever’s a possibility. We need a stadium.'”

9. MetroPCS

Like Suzuki, MetroPCS is likely to be a brand that most consumers think is already dead. With market leaders like Verizon Wireless and AT&T and smaller players like Sprint and T-Mobile in the United States mobile carrier market, it’s nearly impossible for a brand like MetroPCS to live much longer. McIntyre shares:

“Sprint and T-Mobile both continue to struggle because of their modest subscriber bases compared to AT&T and Verizon. Each needs more customers. While MetroPCS is too small to survive on its own, its buyout would give either company the additional customer critical mass it needs.”

10. Avon

Avon might be struggling as far as investors are concerned, but this brand has a huge amount of equity. Letting it die would be a waste, which is why a takeover is more likely. McIntyre explains:

“The market has no confidence in Avon, but with its brand and revenue, it is an ideal takeover target.”

What do you think of the 24/7 Wall St. list of brands that will disappear in 2013? Do you agree? Which brands do you think should or should not have made the list? Leave a comment and share your opinion.

Image: stevenafc

The Big 3 of Luxury Brands

Did you know that Belvedere Vodka, Guerlain, Fendi, Bvlgari, Moet & Chandon, and De Beers are owned by the same company? The world of luxury brands is smaller than you might think.

In an infographic from Infographic Labs, the luxury brand landscape is displayed visually, and the leaders have broader reaches and more power and influence than most consumers are likely to realize. For example, as the infographic explains, there is a good chance that your favorite luxury brand is owned by one of the Big 3 luxury brand giants — LVMH, PPR, or Richemont.

If you mentioned one of the Big 3 company names, the majority of consumers might not recognize them, but you can bet that consumers will recognize one or more of the brands the Big 3 own. Take a look at the infographic to see which companies own which luxury brands. The infographic also shows you which luxury brands are owned by Prada, a minor player in comparison to the Big 3, and which luxury brands are still independent (for now).

Click the image to view it full size.

luxury brands infographic

The Big 3 companies do an excellent job of marketing luxury brands as individual entities with unique brand promises. It’s unlikely that many consumers would know that Cartier, Mont Blanc, and Chloe are owned by the same company, Richemont, but they are likely to recognize one or more of those brand names and the promises associated with the brands they recognize.

A decentralized brand strategy is particularly important for luxury brands where protecting individual brand images is so critical. One brand should never have the opportunity to taint another in the luxury marketplace, and the Big 3 luxury brand companies know it and live it.

Which company owns your favorite luxury brand? Do you know?