Who reads your sustainability report?

I went into the Ethical Corporation CR (corporate responsibility) Reporting and Communications conference last week dead against the idea of integrating sustainability reporting into a company’s annual report. Why? Because I feared it would put people off reading them.

Many CR reports are already huge. But that’s the nature of the beast. Leading the way means reporting on all the GRI indicators relevant to you. And, more importantly, being open and transparent in what you report. So it’s no wonder you get 125-page reports and equally large ‘micro’sites. Integrate all your CR information into your annual financial reporting and it’s going to be like an annual sequel to War and Peace. Who’s going to read that?

Whose job?
As it turns out, CR professionals, socially responsible investors (SRIs) and students are the only ones actually reading sustainability reports, according to the presenters’ research. And according to all the debate, we professionals only read them because it’s our job. None of us does it for fun or a good read. And it’s the ‘job’ of students as well as SRIs to read them. And NGOs whose role it is to see if a company’s telling the truth, covering up or lying about its operations.

But, it transpired, other stakeholders – employees, customers, suppliers and community partners – are not reading them. You can’t blame them. For me,it’s like expecting everyone who uses a PC to read an annual 100-page report on the latest Microsoft operating software. It’s not going to happen. We expect our IT experts to do that for us and then ‘translate’ the really relevant bits into something we can easily digest and make use of. The same holds true for sustainability reporting: we experts need to translate it into something relevant for non-specialists.

Audience. Audience. Audience.
The conference had several good examples of companies who understood this – ‘X-Factor’ winner BAA Heathrow most notably. I loved the idea of their single issue regular(ish) briefings that were short and to the point and more appealing to employees, customers and their local community. They haven’t got it 100% right just yet, and I’m not convinced it was right to replace their annual CR report with these leaflets, but it was a brave step. I personally think the briefings should be in addition to a full report.

Coloplast have started to take this approach, producing tailored mini reports for key stakeholders who they knew weren’t reading their main CR report. The presenter told me it’d started an internal marketing craze, with everyone wanting mini reports for their customers. Who’d have thought a CR spin off could start a trend!

There were plenty of other examples of bespoke communications and initiatives to engage employees. One that caught my eye was Enel’s sustainability e-learning course. And, as you might expect, companies continue to work and communicate in very tailored ways with community partners. It’s all horses for courses. Audience. Audience. Audience.

Integrated strategy
So, getting back to where I started. On digesting all the experiences, I realise that integrated reporting actually has its place – for the investment audience. For listed companies, investors are a key stakeholder and sustainability information needs to be presented to them in the way they want it. There wasn’t anyone from an SRI company at the conference to confirm it, but the consensus is that this particular audience wants integrated reports. On reflection, I’m now happy with that. Give your audience what they want. Just as long as you remember all your audiences....

That means CR and comms professionals need to work even harder. It means continuing to collect and publish all the relevant annual CR performance data. As an open, honest and transparent reference document. Nothing fancy, just there for those who need to scrutinise it. Complemented by bespoke communications to suit your stakeholders. So, an annual integrated report for investors and regular bite-sized comms and stories for everyone else.

In short, it’s not just about integrated reporting, it’s about integrating all of a company’s stakeholders into a much broader sustainability communications strategy.

Debbie Griffiths www.idealCSR.co.uk

Is officials: meerkat marketing works

I’m now the very proud owner of Maiya – meerkat teacher from Meerkovo. I was secretly hoping for Sergei or Aleksandr, but Maiya is much more apt for someone like me who loves education.

The seed for considering switching car insurance through ComparetheMarket.com was planted by brilliant advertising – on TV, radio and billboards. Actually, the latter nearly caused me to prang the car, but anyways …

Congratulations, as Aleksandr says, to the marketers who came up with the idea to give away limited edition meerkat toys and more congratulations to the clever advertising execs who built up the desire to get my hands on one.

When the insurance came up for renewal, I had to give it a go. I didn’t go for the cheapest quote, but I did get a Which? Recommended insurer at 30 quid less than our existing supplier. Which? + £30 + meerkat toy = no brainer. I’d been seduced and switched.

Then came the really clever part. First, the online video with the Meerkovo meerkats personally thanking me ‘for knowing difference between meerkat and market’. With links to share my movie on Twitter and Facebook. How cool.

Next, the ‘Postkat tracker’ where I could track delivery from Yakov’s workshop to my door. What a fantastic way to keep your new customer engaged with the brand. Excellents!

It took a while - until the penny dropped and I read the smallprint – to actually get my meerkat. Of course, it wouldn’t actually arrive until the policy started and I’d gone past the cooling off period. But fair dos, they kept me smiling with the occasional email and made the wait both fun and a hot topic of conversation with family members following Postkat’s ‘journey’ across Europe.

When my meerkat arrived is was surprisingly top quality and came with ‘officials certificate’ and a lovely on-brand letter from Aleksandr.

All told, it is a brilliant piece of marketing - executed to perfection and completely living up to the brand offer in the ads and carried through 100% on-brand in every detail of the ensuing comms and collateral.

I read an article the other day saying that CTM won’t be able to take the meerkat brand much further. I disagree. The creativity to date has been top drawer (love the new Susie Dixon ad). And the brand affinity built up with customers has surely converted more than yours truly.

The only thing I’d suggest would be to add some cause-related marketing into the mix. Meerkats are, afterall, community spirited and it would be a natural brand extension for Alexsandr to appear in a campaign that benefitted a good cause. I could just see him in his own version of a Red Nose or Pudsey spotted hanky with some simples method to donate to charity!


Debbie Griffiths www.idealconsulting.co.uk

Why I haven't got the energy to switch

I’m not the only one worried about way-above-inflation rises in energy costs. I heard it all from an old dear who stopped me in the street the other day. Family and friends complain about it. You read about it in the news. Every week, a different supplier comes out with a press release saying they’ve had to put up their prices.

So when I calculated our energy consumption for the past year, I thought it was time to look into switching. Despite the good news that we’ve cut our gas consumption by 12%, our electricity usage increased by 4%.

We’re with Scottish Power on their H2O dual fuel tariff. We switched to them four years ago, specifically for their green energy tariff. Believing there would be more competition in the market now, I was confident I could get a better deal while sticking to our eco-credentials. I was wrong.

According to SwitchwithWhich, I could save hundreds of pound a year – as long as I didn’t want green electricity. Insisting on that was bad news: they could only find me suppliers that would cost me more.

Good Energy was 20% more expensive than Scottish Power. I know they source 100% renewable energy, but their costs are unaffordable to the mainstream. Ecotricity was even higher.

I’d read about Ovo in a Which? Report – a fairly new, small and independent player who offers two simple options, one of which is a green tariff. Their site said they could save me money, but they didn’t show up on the Which comparison. They featured on the USwitch one, but the savings were much smaller than claimed by the supplier. And then there was the small print about fixed contract and cancellation fees. Plus negative user reviews online…

My interest was raised by LoCO2 Energy. They have a range of very novel tariffs to suit deep greens as well as those wanting fairly-priced electricity that is 100% renewable or low carbon. According to USwitch, they can save me money, so why haven’t I switched?

At £1 a week less for the year, it’s not worth it – for now at least. The company’s only been around a couple of years and while I’m all for diversity and supporting independents trying to do things differently, we’re also very cautious and great believers in recommendations. And I can’t find any customer reviews about them.

So, we’ll stick with what we have at the moment, but only for temporary peace of mind. We’ll review again next year and if I hear positive news about the smaller independents with the sensible prices, we’ll seriously consider switching.

In the meantime, the emphasis for us has to be on reducing our consumption of electricity. As 10:10 and the Mayday Network remind us, reduced use really is the key to cutting costs and environmental impacts.


Debbie Griffiths www.idealCSR.co.uk

Ryanair goes eco? I doubt it

So, if we’re to believe the news this week, Ryanair is going green. I can’t wait to see the adverts. Given the remarks Mr O’Leary has spouted in the past against environmentalists, it will be fascinating to see how they try and reposition the brand to appeal to all the people he’s pissed off over many years.

It sounds like the latest marketing gimmick to me, based on the fact that they’ve updated their aircraft. All credit to them, having an up-to-date efficiently functioning fleet is a very important step in the right direction.

Ideal was thrilled to be profiled by 10:10 this week for reducing our travel-related carbon emissions. Our main reason for buying a hybrid car was to reduce CO2, but its fuel and cost savings are an added bonus.

But when it comes to Ryanair, I can’t help believing their new fleet was actually purchased to keep fuel costs rather than CO2 emissions low. This is fine in itself, but isn’t enough to support overblown claims about being the greenest airline out there.

Sustainability is about balancing social, economic and environmental impacts – areas where the company has lots of history to work on.

Where’s Ryanair’s social responsibility in disrespecting the EU protection afforded to passengers whose flights are delayed or cancelled? And making pilots and air crew pay for their own drinking water? O’Leary’s hardly an advert for an employer of choice. This is also a man who prefers to land 70km outside a main city because he can push these suppliers right down on price, instead of creating sustainable relationships, built on trust, with the airports people actually want to reach without emitting more CO2 from a taxi or hire car.

People who fly with Ryanair do so because it’s cheap. The new fleet will keep costs low and so they should be able to retain existing customers. But it’s going to take much more than low emissions to persuade anyone with a conscience to overturn their boycott of the most unethical businessman in the industry.

Debbie Griffiths www.idealCSR.co.uk

Save our Picture House...

...from irresponsible town planning and weeks’ worth of Harry Potter!!

Plans are underway for a multiplex cinema to be built as part of the redevelopment of the hapless Stratford Town Square.

Now, in Stratford on Avon Picture House, this town already has a good two-screen cinema, which shows a great variety of films from around the world. It would undoubtedly suffer if a big, mainstream cinema came in. It’s arguable whether a town the size of Stratford needs a multiplex cinema. While our council is determined to increase the size of the town and blight the lives of existing residents for years by building on Bordon Hill, Stratford certainly can’t sustain two cinemas.

Now, we understand that, in order to pay the way to put on art films from around the world, Stratford Picture House has to screen the likes of Harry Potter. But, for a whole week or two, to the exclusion of everything else? OK, the kids are off school and they’ll pack it to the rafters. Who can argue with that? Well, we can. Won’t this kind of blanket approach provide the evidence that Stratford does need a multiplex that shows blockbusters?

All in all, we don’t want a second cinema in Stratford. We like the one we’ve got, despite the odd fortnightly diversion into blockbuster world that pays the bills. Maybe this is the start of a campaign the 4N Stratford Daily could support.

Mark Griffiths www.idealconsulting.co.uk

Beware the wounded monster

It’s not all over. The monster isn’t dead, merely wounded. At the eleventh hour, it’s the unlikely victory of the first battle in a long war – a war that will actually continue long after the monster is dead, which can’t be long away now. There are very many equerries of evil ready to do his bidding, through alternative strategies that are already in place as we rejoice...

Anyway, enough of the cod psycho-mythological-speak. Basically, many people are gloating over a struggle that has not been and may never be won – assuring that British media and broadcasting remains as plural and diverse as possible.

History shows that tyrants destroy what they cannot have. Those who seek to protect BSkyB and the BBC may be relieved today, but they should remain very worried about the next campaign in the destructive career of this businessman from beyond.

Having controlled our media for 40 years, Murdoch is hell-bent on bringing down the BBC, the last great British institution we have. There’s no point in protecting an institution just because it is one. But there is no better broadcaster in the world than the BBC. Despite its recent troubles, its quality remains untouchable today. It is the envy of the world and I want to protect that quality.

Due to the rarity of success, we have a tendency in this country to gloat over victories, something that the rest of the world knows how to take advantage of. This is no time to gloat. Heave a sigh of relief at a close-run thing, yes, but let’s not put this subject away just yet. Our politicians almost let us down big time on this one. Only a week or so ago they were all at the parties and taking the phone calls. If we have scared and frightened politicians, how can we protect what is really valuable in our lives?

The power of social media today is such that it’s very hard to believe that Tony Blair would’ve been able to take this country into disastrous war in Iraq, had that digital power been available back in 2003. Indeed, Tony Blair was very lucky that he governed when the power of the public to intervene and put pressure on politicians was in its infancy.

Cameron must be shocked. He can’t have foreseen this. Great. It means that there is no longer any subject on which politicians can take the electorate for granted, at any time in the electoral cycle, however strong their majority in Parliament.

Digital pressure group, 38 Degrees, is asking its membership right now whether to sustain the anti-Murdoch game or move on to something else. They must press on. There are new dangers ahead.

Who can now believe that one man has influenced UK political life so closely for 40 years? It cannot happen again. Freedom and democracy in this country depend on keeping Murdoch out of power here. But the real battles over the continuing success and honesty of our media institutions do not recognise national boundaries.

13th July 2011 has been a great day as far as the goals of Ideal are concerned. In one day, we’ve seen Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall take the wishes of millions of Europeans with him to politicians in charge of Fisheries policy in the EU. And we’ve seen an angry monster accept he’s lost a big battle.

But the war is not won. As Gordon Brown has said, lawbreaking on an industrial scale has taken place. Politicians – the people whom we elect to defend our interests - must continue to be held to account. When he was in power himself, Gordon Brown did nothing.

We here at Ideal will continue supporting organisations like 38 Degrees and Avaaz and urge everyone who cares about important issues of freedom and democracy to do the same.

Mark Griffiths www.idealconsulting.co.uk

Action on branding loss

The jury inside my head was out. So I gave it a few weeks. I wanted my left brain to provide a counter thought to what my right brain was saying. I’ve waited in vain. My mind still does not like the RNID name change, launched for the charity’s 100th anniversary.

I had thought that Action On Hearing Loss was a good strapline. I’m no fan of acronyms, but if you’ve got one that has some equity, why throw it away in favour of...well, something that sounds like a start-up charity in the backwaters of Birmingham?

It’s as if the charity said to itself: “We look too swanky and sophisticated. We need to get back to our roots and look and sound like a hard-edge, warts-and-all campaigning charity for people who are hard of hearing.”

The charity can point to research that told it that the RNID initials were often confused by the public with RNIB, or even RNLI. So, was the best course of action to leave the ‘RN’ field to these other charities, or to work harder at creating a context so that the public would not be confused?

I don’t doubt that what the charity calls its new ‘underline-strikethrough’ logo addresses the need to point to the negative effects of hearing loss. But if the whole idea was to emphasise that the charity is not just about deafness, but varying degrees of hearing loss, does the new name really serve the purpose? Am I splitting hairs when I say that ‘hearing loss’ sends the same meaning as ‘deafness’?

It seems that there’s a lot of politics behind a name change that leaves some deaf people wondering whether they’ve been left behind, now that the focus is on the varying stages of hearing loss that precede deafness. As anyone who has worked with charities or organisations in this part of the disability sector will know, deaf people are anything but quiet when it comes to airing their views. Is it harder to raise money for people who are already deaf? Harder than it is to raise money and awareness with people who are in danger of losing their hearing? Which, in the end, is so many of us.

The thing is, I don’t like the new name now, but I may come to like it soon. The reason for this is that I never said I didn’t like the rebrand – the change of focus and attempt to become more relevant to people who, literally, need to hear the message. And that new message is probably a lot clearer than the old message.

Action On Hearing Loss wants people to acknowledge their hearing loss and take action. It wants to create more support for people with hearing loss. It believes that no-one should be isolated through varying degrees of hearing loss. It wants people to protect themselves against hearing loss and tinnitus. Ultimately, it wants to cure hearing loss and tinnitus.

I can’t argue with any of this. In the end, an organisation’s name acquires the meaning that all the brand activity gives to it. So, I’ll be left admiring all this, but still disliking the logo.

Mark Griffiths www.idealconsulting.co.uk