Don’t jeopardize your reputation through Eco-negligence

In the last few years we have all become more aware of the growing wave of eco-friendly products, eco-friendly initiatives, and claims by politicians of all backgrounds that alternative energy production is what they want to promote in the future.

As early as 10 years ago the US government and the politician running campaigns for election promised to become more eco-friendly. At the same time we saw that individuals who actually wanted to reduce pollution, protect animals or protested against behaviors of companies were painted as extremists with no knowledge of capital markets, technological solutions, and the need to keep the market going while new technologies were developed.

The US government decided to put more than $1 Billion (with a B) Dollars into additional research and development. That’s a number that sounds great on first glance, especially since nobody can really imagine how much money 1 Billion really is. When you realize that the largest oil companies received about 50 Billion in tax cuts and savings in the same time period, it becomes clear that we didn’t really had an eco-friendly environment.

While all this data is publicly available and you might have heard or read about it in the news, you might ask yourself why you should care?

Normally it’s not nice to answer a question with another question. Before I answer your questions, let me put some supporting questions in front of you:

Do you work in a company that could benefit from a ‘greener’, eco-friendly reputation?
Do you have a job that could be eliminated if competitors gain market share because they have a better eco-reputation?

When you purchase products and services in your private life, do you try to get the best value and balance between organic, eco-friendly origins and price?

When you think about it, the answer to your questions why you should care is that fact that the reputation your employer has impacts your livelihood directly.

When you wonder what happens if a company jeopardizes its eco-reputation, a good – or horrible example – depending how you look at it, is the auto industry.

There have been thousands of articles about the success of Toyota and the Prius hybrid car. The idea Toyota realized was the need to come up with new, more fuel efficient technologies to establish a vehicle on the global market. Mainly customers in Europe were craving for a vehicle in a modern appearance with low fuel consumption. In Japan, new technology was always of interest, and in the US it appeared enough eco-conscious individuals, especially along the West Coast would be buyers.

The technology was supported by massive marketing campaigns and for the first few years the sales were slow, the cost high, and profits nowhere to be seen. As oil prices kept increasing, the fuel efficiency of the Prius got more and more attention. Then it benefited form the exhaust regulations, favoring a vehicle that runs partially on electrical power.

Long story short, not only the Prius became an icon of eco-friendliness, but the Toyota brand assimilated this reputation as well. Even though the large majority of all vehicles sold by this Japanese manufacture are non-hybrid vehicles, the new reputation has been successfully established.

Do I hear you say again: “So what?”

Well, the economy and oil prices in 2008 didn’t help, but the brand with the best eco-reputation weathers the current storm much better than all other brands. While GM, Ford and Chrysler report almost monthly that they reduce the workforce by another couple thousand workers and close factories, Toyota has risen to become the largest car manufacturer on the globe.

At the end of October 2008, the representatives of the big three US car makers had this to say when releasing their quarterly results:

“We just released the worst sales numbers in the last 25 years. If you adjust for population growth, this is probably the worst industry sales month in the post-WWII era.” (Mark LaNeve, head of GM sales and marketing)

This is a sobering result of neglecting the signs of demand for eco-friendly vehicles for many many years.

What are you saying? Did I just hear: “Well, that’s the car industry. That’s an old industry anyway. They are connected with oil anyway”

Yes, you are right, but that is not the real reason. Eco-negligence is the real reason that can lead to enormous reductions, and in some cases elimination, form the market place.

I don’t think anybody will reject wind energy as one of the new, modern industries. Same for solar or geo-thermal. All these alternative energy producing methods and the companies that offer their products and services in these markets are considered as modern. What has eco-negligence done to them?

Look who are the world leaders to get a better idea:

o Nuclear power plants: Toshiba (Japan)
o Bio-Gas: Schmack (Germany)
o Wind Energy: Vestas (Denmark)

It’s not a matter of industry, length of time in business, or the technology applied. It’s all a matter of paying attention and avoiding eco-negligence. The green, eco-conscious revolution will not be stopped anymore. Now the questions becomes, how far are you in your life. To the same extent you want to explore how far your company is developed along the eco-developments and initiatives, or if eco-negligence is still the order of the day.

If so, you want to keep an eye out for our coming eco-action plan that will allow you to take practical steps in the right direction.

Don’t jeopardize all your hard work, your ambitions and your dreams through eco-negligence. Get ready, at work and at home, to take action and create a better, more modern and successful environment.

Axel Meierhoefer