10 Sustainable Business Stories Too Important to Miss

by Andrew Winston

Somehow it’s already year-end, a time to look back and try to make sense of what’s happened. Creating any “top” list of stories from 12 months is nearly impossible. But as I’ve done for the last 4 years, I’ll attempt to summarize some of the latest stories about the big environmental and social pressures on business, and how some innovative companies are dealing with them.

This year, like recent years, saw some continuation of big trends: with a few exceptions, the international policy community keeps failing to come to a meaningful agreement on climate change; carbon emissions just keep rising; transparency is increasingly unavoidable and keeps gaining technology-enabled traction; pressure from big companies on their suppliers keeps going up.

So what’s really new this year? Let’s dive in.

The Big Picture

1. The science of climate change gets clearer: the IPCC lowers our carbon “budget.”
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its wonky, but readable, Summary for Policymakers (a precursor to the full 2014 report). The report expresses “near certainty” that humans are causing climate change and calculates how much more carbon we can “safely” put in the atmosphere and hold to the 2-degree warming threshold that the world’s leaders have agreed to (and some scientists are suggesting that even the 2-degree threshold is too high).

The short story is that we have less room than before. PwC’s annual Low Carbon Economy Index report concluded that we must lower global carbon intensity (the amount of carbon produced for every dollar of GDP) by 6% per year until 2100, a percentage point lower than last year’s report recommended.  On the upside, similar calculations from WWF and McKinsey suggests that this pace of change –they endorse a 3% reduction in absolute emissions per year through 2020 – will actually be very profitable.

2. The reality of climate change and pollution get scarier: Australian heat, Philippine devastation, and Chinese air pollution all break records.
The models and carbon budgets aside, the weather this year got even more extreme, helping make the case for action in a more visceral way. In January, Australia’s meteorologists had to add new colors to weather maps to deal with temperatures ranging up to 54 degrees Celsius (129 degrees Fahrenheit). And in November, after the Philippines faced the most powerful storm ever recorded to hit land, some climatologists suggested we add a “Category 6” to the top end of the storm scale.

While it’s impossible to tie any single weather event to climate change, the complicated correlation got clearer this year. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration concluded that “high temperatures, such as those experienced in the U.S. in 2012, are now likely to occur four times as frequently due to ­human-induced climate change.”

In parallel, China’s air became, at times, dangerous and unbreathable. Several cities experienced days with small-particle air pollution running 25 to 40 times higher than the World Health Organization’s recommended limit.  This may seem like a regional story, but it has global ramifications for manufacturing, consumer goods, the energy industry, and much more.  The world’s most populous country is taking increasingly drastic action, such as slashing Beijing’s new sales quota for cars by 40%.

3. The clean tech markets keep growing fast: three of the world’s biggest economies — the U.S., Germany, and Walmart — add lots more renewable energy.
In October, 99% of the new energy added to the grid in the U.S. came from renewables (solar alone was 72%). Germany keeps breaking its own records, with wind and solar providing 59% of the country’s energy one sunny day in October. And America’s wind power has quadrupled over the last 5 years; wind is now generating enough electricity to power the state of Georgia.

In addition, electric and hybrid cars are about 4% of US auto sales now, a doubling of market share in the last couple of years. Companies are increasing investments as well. Walmart, already the largest private sector buyer of solar power in the US (with more solar capacity than 38 U.S. states), committed to a 600% increase in renewable energy by 2020.

4. Deep concerns about labor conditions, wages, and equity take root: From tragedies in Bangladeshi apparel factories to minimum wages in the U.S.
Travesties like the death of more than 1100 workers at the Rana Plaza apparel factory in Bangladesh are increasingly unacceptable to the buying public. And it’s getting harder to hide how connected we all are to these workers. When the news hit about the loss of life, front pages around the world included the names of major brands that depended on the factory to make their goods. A startup called Labor Voices is now collecting information on working conditions in Bangladesh and elsewhere in a shockingly simple way: by giving workers a number to call from their cell phones, which everybody now has.

European companies are doing more than U.S. peers, at least publicly, to commit to higher safety standards. Swedish retailer H&M recently said it would pay a “living wage” to 850,000 workers in its supply chain by 2018 – a somewhat vague, but important announcement.  And to be fair, while U.S. companies haven’t been as clear, Walmart has contracted with Labor Voices to gather data on its 300+ Bangladeshi suppliers and subcontractors.

On the other side of the ocean, though, Walmart, McDonald’s, and many others are facing increasing challenges about minimum wages. Watch this space, as it seems unlikely that this debate will go away.

5. Food and food waste gets more attention, debate, and innovation: Can cows save the world, or should we make meat in labs?
The level of concern about how we’re going to feed 9 billion people by 2050 is rising. Food waste also got more attention: a UN report estimated that the world throws out $750 billion worth of food annually.  Food is too big a topic to summarize, but a few stories grabbed my eye this year. Fenugreen, a smart startup that won the Sustainable Brands Innovation Open in June, sells sheets of paper made with natural ingredients that fight food decay – they can keep fruit and veggies from going bad 2 to 4 times longer than they would last normally.

On a different front, Biologist Allen Savory made a splash with a much viewed TED talk about how grazing cattle in a way that fertilizes land and sequesters carbon can fight desertification and climate change. His theory is under attack, at least to the extent that his method could make a significant dent in our climate problem. Wherever the science on this ends up, it’s an important discussion that brings more focus to systems thinking and to the nexus of food, energy, and water.  Finally, a quirky, totally different meat story was fascinating. Billionaires Bill Gates and Sergey Brin are funding experiments to grow meat in labs, a process that – once people get past any “ick” factor – could greatly reduce the footprint of producing meat-based protein.

What Companies Are Doing

6. (Some) businesses get off the sidelines in the climate policy fight: Hundreds of companies sign onto the Climate Declaration.
Started by the NGO Ceres, as part of its Business for Innovative Climate & Energy Policy (BICEP) initiative, the Climate Declaration is a broad statement of intent that acting on climate will be good for our economy and society.  A large range of leading companies have signed on including Diageo, ebay, EMC, Gap, GM, IKEA, Intel, Microsoft, Nestle, Nike, Portland Trailblazers, Starbucks, Swiss Re, Unilever, and many more.  The Declaration itself is directional and not as specific as what Ceres and a subset of these signatories advocate for as part of BICEP’s work (like pricing carbon and aggressive energy efficiency programs). But it’s a very good start and demonstrates that the business community is not against tackling climate change.

In related news, Accenture produced a fascinating survey of 1000 CEOs around the world, in which a surprising 83% agreed that government should play a critical role in enabling the private sector to advance sustainability. And 31% even supported “intervention through taxation.” In a world where business generally fights all regulations and government interventions, it’s astonishing that one third of global CEOs basically said, “tax us.”

7. Companies are aiming higher, for themselves and their partners: Dell, Coca-Cola, Lego, and many more set very aggressive environmental and social goals.
Goals are not the same as outcomes but they matter a lot – they set the bar within sectors, driving competition and performance.  As part of its 2020 Legacy of Good Plan, Dell said that it’s aiming to get a 10-fold multiple of good (reduced footprint, for example) from its technologies versus the impacts of making them (mimicking BT’s earlier 3:1 “Net Good” goal).  More specifically, the company pledged to reduce its greenhouse gases by 50% and product energy intensity by 80%.

Coca-Cola launched its own 2020 goals including reducing value chain carbon emissions by 25% (per drink), recovering 75% of bottles and cans, and replenishing 100% of the water the company uses. And Lego just announced its intention to use 100% renewable energy by 2016.  A few companies have already made incredible progress, including Diageo, which, I reported earlier this year, cut its North American GHG emissions by nearly 80%.

In fact, 75% of the world’s largest companies now have multiple environmental and social goals in place (see my new website, www.pivotgoals.com, a searchable database of 2500 environmental and social goals set by the world’s largest companies). In addition, my research shows that more than 50 of the top 200 companies have even set carbon goals in line with PwC’s 6% per year reduction recommendation.

A few companies have begun to extend their goals to their suppliers, a form of what I’m calling “de facto regulation.” Walmart is phasing out 10 toxic chemicals in the products on its shelves, and HP set a carbon reduction goal of 20% for its supply chain.

8. Sustainable companies are winning the talent wars: Unilever ranks 3rd in LinkedIn’s list of in-demand employers.
Just consider LinkedIn’s top 20 most in demand companies (in order): Google, Apple, Unilever, P&G, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, PepsiCo, Shell, McKinsey, Nestlé, Johnson & Johnson, BP, GE, Nike, Pfizer, Disney, Coca-Cola, Chevron, and L’Oréal. The tech companies make sense given the platform (and they’re cool brands). But the rest are perennially in-demand employers, such as big consumer brands and top destinations for MBAs (McKinsey) and engineers (Shell).

But what’s surprising is Unilever’s rank — for a company not nearly as well known as the others, it came in just behind two of the hottest, most valuable companies in the world, and ahead of much better known brands like Disney, Nike, and Coca-Cola. Executives at Unilever credit their ranking to the company’s known leadership on sustainability. It’s hard to argue the point.

9. Systems innovation starts to take root: NIKE, NASA, USAID, and the Department of State create LAUNCH.
LAUNCH is an initiative to identify and accelerate innovations that help solve global problems with water, health, energy, waste, and systems. This program is new so it’s unclear what the impact will be, but it’s an interesting and indicative story for two reasons. 

First, look at the partners — what a weird, wonderful mix of business, government, and scientific organizations. Second, the goal is really systems change, and if we’re going to solve the mega challenges in our midst, we need to work across value chains and traditional lines.

10. Better tools for companies to assess “materiality” get closer: SASB releases its first sustainability accounting standards.
The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board has been plugging away, drawing together executives from the world’s largest companies to develop the right sets of questions – specific to each sector – that will help leaders identify which environmental and social issues are really material to their business. We’re very early in this journey, but SASB produced the first set of guidelines for one sector (health care). Watch this space.

2014 and Beyond

• Will the divestment movement continue to gather steam and put significant pressure, either financial (unlikely) or moral (much more intriguing), on fossil fuel companies?
• Will all the talk about building a circular economy gain mainstream acceptance?
• Will we get better at valuing natural capital (and will companies and markets care)? It certainly garnered lots of attention this year, with new estimates of the damage the global economy does to natural assets (trillions), new tools to measure natural capital, and an important new book from former Goldman partner and CEO of The Nature Conservancy, Mark Tercek.
• Can challenges to our consumption-driven model go gain currency? Patagonia continues to launch programs like its Responsible Economy initiative and a backlash to Black Friday, “Worn Wear,” which suggests that we should enjoy what we already own.
• Will the resilience push take hold? New York City released a $20 billion plan to get the city ready for more extreme weather — will companies embrace the risk-reduction benefits of different thinking and planning?
• Finally, why haven’t more companies followed some of the recent sustainability leaders? Paul Polman at Unilever stopped providing quarterly guidance a few years ago so the company could focus on real value creation. And Microsfot and Disney remain really the only two big companies charging their own divisions a carbon fee (yes, as CDP recently reported, and the New York Times put on the front page, 29 large companies now use some kind of internal pricing for carbon. But most of these are “shadow prices,” in use for years, not actual fees. Why has the pace of change lagged the urgency of our mega challenges? Will more than a small number of companies embrace a much deeper change to business as usual?

So it’s been a mixed year, as I suppose all years are, but I remain optimistic that greater stories of change are coming. Have a very happy, healthy, and sustainable 2014!

Andrew Winston

Andrew Winston is the co-author of the best-seller Green to Gold and the author of Green Recovery. His forthcoming book, The Big Pivot, will be released in April. He advises some of the world’s biggest companies on environmental strategy. 

The DNA of Innovative Companies

I recently read a great article called the ‘The Innovator's DNA’, written by Jeffrey H. Dyer, Hal B. Gregersen, and Clayton M. Christensen.

 

The article presents the findings and conclusions from a six-year study in which the authors looked into what habits and skills distinguish the most innovative entrepreneurs from other executives. These successful innovators include: Steve Jobs, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, eBay’s Pierre Omidyar, and P&G’s A.G. Lafley.

 

Their conclusions are the most innovative companies are led by innovative entrepreneurs, who unlike CEOs of other companies, do not delegate innovation. They do it themselves.

In other words, innovative CEOs and leaders create a culture of innovation within their companies (most often these are companies that they have founded).

 

This makes perfect sense. Leaders define the culture of their organizations. Their personalities, behavior, priorities, and values set the tone and example for others to follow.

But what about companies that are not led by innovator geniuses? Can’t they also become innovative?

I would like to argue that they can. However, unlike companies where innovation comes from the top, like Apple, Google and Amazon.com, they need a different approach to create a culture of innovation.

Based on lessons from innovative companies, as well as my own experience, I believe there are several key elements that are critical for creating an environment of innovation. 
 

It's important to remember that innovation can be initiated by anyone, and it can occur anywhere and anytime. Additionally, innovation should not be directed only to new products. Some great companies created their success through process and business model innovations (Southwest Airlines, Dell).

Great ideas can come from anyone inside, as well as outside the organization, including customers, suppliers, and partners. Therefore the key is to create a culture where everyone is encouraged and empowered to come up with, and share new ideas.

Thus, I believe that the main elements of an innovative company are:

1.   Leadership and Culture: there needs to be a company culture that encourages risk taking, doesn't punish failure (rather uses it as a learning experience), encourages and facilitates sharing of ideas and information. People need to be able to experiment with new ideas without the fear of failure.
Innovation is often a product of genuine curiosity, of questioning status quo and hypotheses. New ideas can come from networking with and learning from people outside our industry, our country, and our profession. These habits and behaviors need to be part of the company’s culture.
This is where the CEO’s own DNA can have a major influence. And yet, even if she is not already an innovator, she can still develop innovation skills and habits (as suggested by Dyer, Gregersen, and Christensen), and in doing so, set an example for the rest of the company.

Also, leaders can complement their own weakness in this area by infusing innovation to the company’s DNA through a dedicated recruiting process, and the empowerment of innovative managers within the company.

2.   Customers and Suppliers: A company needs to be close to its customers and users; know and understand their problems, challenges and needs. Observe the “jobs” that they are trying to get done. Ask them questions like “why?”, “why do you do that?”, and “what if?”

Most great ideas are not born in research labs, engineers’ cubicles, or conference rooms. They often come from observing and studying what users are trying to do. How can it be done better, simpler? How can new technologies be applied to solve these problems differently?

Companies need to establish relationships with their customers, suppliers, and partners that are based on trust, respect, and open communication. And listen, really listen to them.

3.   Process and Criteria: there needs to be a simple process that regularly collects, reviews, and selects ideas from all of the above sources.
It needs to be simple for people to submit, share and present their ideas. There needs to be a clear set of criteria by which ideas are reviewed and ranked. People that submit ideas should get prompt feedback and recognition.
Of course, there needs to be a predefined budget for funding those ideas that were selected. Time and budget should also be allocated for conducting multiple experiments around these new ideas.
Such a process, supported by the above culture, will encourage and motivate people throughout the company to create innovative ideas, even if they do not always get implemented into a new product/service, or new business model.

Innovation, much like strategic thinking and customer service, cannot be left to one person in the company, not even the CEO. To truly become an innovative company, it needs to be a skill and a habit of everyone in the organization.

Who do you consider to be an innovative company? Why?

 by: Ziv Azmanov

Which Ecommerce Platform Is Right For Me? [Infographic]

by Eric Lyday

For today’s infographic, we have some info on the world of ecommerce. What is ecommerce you say? Well, essentially it’s the method by which you choose to sell your junk on the internet (aside from ebay and craigslist). Sites like Ebay and Craigslist are ecommerce strategies, but the following platforms will give you the resources to build and manage an online store of your very own. There are many possible platforms for you to choose from, but here Brightpearl compares three of the biggest names. They have their own pros and cons, depending on your tech-savviness or payment preference. Magento seems to be the most customizable due to it being an open-source platform. Bigcommerce and Shopify on the other hand will box you into prebuilt features. As far as the differences in payment for these various platforms is concerned, Bigcommerce requires an all-in cost, while Shopify lets you have a lower starting cost and then pay as you use add-ons later. Also, it should be noted that if you also use ebay, amazon, or another store, you should invest in a central management system so that the various branches of your business may be more manageable.

All in all, despite this infographic’s confusing nature (needs some arrows and a typo/grammar edit) it is quite useful for figuring out how to start your online business off on the right foot.

[via]