Vanity Fair’s July issue is devoted to raising awareness in Africa. Guest edited by Bono, the magazine has 20 different covers featuring celebrities and cultural figures like Brad Pitt, Madonna, Maya Angelou, Oprah and President Bush involved in a game of telephone.

The magazine has been debated because it naturally raises the question of whether the use of celebrities in social campaigns raises awareness or trivializes the issue. Some see it as a positive step – some awareness is better than nothing while others are less optimistic. I personally tend to fall into the former camp. Bono has clearly made the business decision of using celebrities to sell the magazine, but he has also equally given attention to both creating awareness about issues afflicting Africa like AIDs and civil war while celebrating and focusing on progress.

What bothers me about the issue isn’t the issue itself but what comes packaged in the UK edition of Vanity Fair. If you live in the UK or happen to spend the £3.80 at the airport, you will open up the plastic wrapper and find nestled in between the Africa issue and an advertisement to buy all twenty covers an additional issue of Vanity Fair entitled, Fire and Ice: “72 pages of ravishing rocks, ginormous gems and fancy fripperies”.

Now most people who are somewhat socially conscious or have even seen the movie Blood Diamonds would know that the gem trade in Africa has lead to many social and environmental problems in parts of the continent. The decision to package the two magazines together – with no mention anywhere of the gems issue on the Africa issue – seems at the very least, tacky and even offensive.

What could the UK editorial staff at Vanity Fair be thinking? Given that it’s competitive and a high-end publication, it’s very hard to believe nobody flagged this as a dubious editorial decision. It seems that the only reason Vanity Fair would have made the decision was for business reasons.

Was this the right decision? I haven’t seen online any major response to the decision, and I’m sure the issue is selling well. However, I believe packaging a diamond issue alongside an Africa issue of Vanity Fair puts the magazine’s credibility up for question. It shows disrespect to the thoughtfulness used to create the Africa issue. Worse, it puts the credibility of participating celebrities who have spoken out against the diamond trade like Oprah in question. Hopefully, as the issue makes its way into the households of Vanity Fair readers in the UK, we will begin to see some response. This is after all a world where consumers now have a greater voice. It’s now up to us to exercise it.

Vanity Fair Africa

Indra K. Nooyi: Image source: Sivacracy.netBusinessWeek next week has a few articles on PepsiCo’s Chairwoman and CEO Indra Nooyi’s vision of “performance with purpose”. It focuses on Nooyi’s earnest passion to fundamentally transform the company into a sustaining portfolio strategy:

The slogan may sound like the kind of marketing ploy that’s in vogue these days, especially coming from a company that’s best known for making soda and potato chips. But Nooyi says that by emphasizing baked whole-grain snacks and vitamin-enhanced water, Pepsi can lead the industry’s push toward better nutrition. That, she argues, would benefit not just consumers, but investors, too.

While the charismatic Nooyi seems to have won the hearts and minds of BusinessWeek and the few people who have commented, I wonder if her well intentioned message will ever reach the global mass of consumers her “performance” requires. Steering a goliath of modernity into the 21st century is no easy task and simply providing a better portfolio and digging some wells in India is more of an expectation than a consumer strategy.

We are not advocating Nooyi set the consumer strategy – it’s hardly not the traditional role of a CEO. However, she needs to provide some point-of-view, some framework and some rallying cry to help bring such a global organization together. She needs to spell out how PepsiCo, beyond providing a functionally healthier portfolio, enrich the world.

Now many sustainability experts I speak with say this is a risky idea. It sets PepsiCo and Nooyi up for further criticism and distrust from consumers. Since sustainability is a learning process and programs are filled with risks and rewards equally, it’s better to hold back than make large public pronouncements.

But I am not suggesting unrolling a creative consumer strategy to the tune of fireworks and a marching band here. I am advocating PepsiCo step up to the plate and inspire a new world. I am advocating setting the tone and spirit for what PepsiCo aspires to be in a much more visceral way. I am advocating providing sites for real engagement and education. PepsiCo’s focus areas of obesity and water for example should be significantly more compelling than they are today. Decreasing obesity and improving water are noble goals but hardly a rallying cry for consumers. Who is pro-obesity, pro-water contamination and pro-drought?

Beyond survival, what is PepsiCo’s real agenda? What would a sustainable world with PepsiCo in it look like? Why should consumers believe PepsiCo, care or feel involved with any products within the portfolio?

These are tough questions admittedly, but PepsiCo has a far reaching global footprint and frankly sustainable behavior isn’t universal. What is culturally accepted in China will not necessarily be seen as “ethical” behavior in Germany. Dealing with these questions and providing a real point-of-view helps PepsiCo provides a central dialog within and outside of the organization for better integration. Contradictions can be discussed and addressed. Differences and similarities can be equally celebrated. Strategy can be richer and more dynamic.

Luckily for PepsiCo, Nooyi is already doing this from a personal perspective. She is proud of her cultural heritage and celebrates it. As much as she is comfortable both in a business suit and a sari, her childhood experiences genuinely drive her to change the world with more than profitability:

Although she describes her family as “very middle class,” they still had to rise every morning between three and five—the only hours that the valves to the municipal water supply were turned on—and fill every bucket in the house. Two buckets were set aside for cooking, and two each would go to Nooyi, her older sister, and her younger brother. “You had to think about whether to take a bath,” says Nooyi, matter-of-factly. “You learned to live your life off those two buckets.”

We only hope she takes the license to, over time, transform a culturally conservative and competitive organization like PepsiCo into a change agent in the new economy. We at The Eightfold are not taking her commitment to change the food industry lightly. As we watch what she does for her company and communities, it will be interesting to see how she uses these experiences to build awareness and create profound change amongst consumers at mass. That is the mark of a truly socially purposeful and progressive organization.

BusinessWeek

Whole Foods LondonThe Brits have never been known for their culinary instincts, but Whole Foods is putting this to the test. The mega retailer opened its doors last week to lots of eager consumers and a flood of press. Everyone has a point of view of Whole Foods’ impact on the ethical consumer, true level of sustainability and “Whole Paycheck” pricing. The big question is how Whole Foods will fare in a country where the standard dietary guidelines of meat and two veg translate to potatoes with potatoes on the side.

In March, I wrote Whole Foods would usher in “trickle-down organics”. By emphasizing the luxury in eco luxury, Whole Foods would only encourage growth in the growing organics sections of Marks and Spenser, Tesco and Sainsbury. Within public dialog, we are seeing this. However, it’s not necessarily being seen as an elevation of non-ethical supermarkets. As one reporter from the Times pointed out, it’s more about the downfall of Whole Foods and other social entrepreneurs:

But however socially responsible these entrepreneurs remain as individuals, we can’t pretend that, once a critical mass has been reached, and they go public, that their companies are that different from say, Wal-Mart or Tesco (especially now that Sir Terry (Leahy) is so competitive, I mean so green, that he is carbon-labelling and has copyrighted the Tesco Wholefoods brand).

This could all be semantics you say, but we think it’s indicative of a larger issue amongst at least Londoners. At the moment, the ethical consumption world looks quite rosy. The Daily Mail reported last week, spending is on the rise:

The report, by analysts Mintel, shows an increasing number of shoppers are prepared to pay extra. The proportion agreeing with the statement "it's worth paying more for organic food"; has risen from 24.3 per cent in 2002 to 33.4 per cent this year.

Spending on organic food has soared from £849 million in 2004 to £1.23 billion last year, and is forecast to hit £1.7 billion this year.

The proportion of people buying Fairtrade products "whenever possible"; has increased from 26 per cent to 34.7 per cent. The study found attitudes to recycling were changing. In 2002, 64.5 per cent felt it was their "duty" to recycle rubbish such as packaging, compared with 75.6 per cent.

However, Whole Foods’ model in the store alone is daunting as the Observer reports:

It is, says food critic AA Gill, 'a very American approach to food'. I know this, because I encounter him and his girlfriend, Nicola Formby, stalking around the top floor. 'I'm slightly daunted by the sheer volume of products,' Gill says. 'That's very American, though. Americans like volume. I find it slightly off-putting. Who's going to eat all that? And what happens to the waste? There must be piles at the end of the day. Kensington is going to have the best-fed tramps in London.'

So while it might seem like semantics, the sheer scale of an organic world seems overwhelming. Added to that is recent media speculation of “good” labels like the fair trade and organic. In May Channel 4 produced a report on the Fair Trade’s true merits, while the British Soil Association recently launched a campaign to better understand the ecological impact of freight shipping on the virtues of buying organic.

This doesn’t mean either label is bad or either label will be rejected in the near future. It does mean that at the same time the mainstream British public is gaining greater awareness (these labels have been popular in the UK for over 10 years), it is also learning these labels are complex and difficult to scale at mass.

The result? As demand is soon to exceed supply, we might see the growing green bubble burst. Best case scenario is a renewed focus on government to begin developing better incentives, standards and regulation to help scale these operations. Worst case scenario is an exacerbation of the status quo: a hyper polarized world where true organic products are sold at an even greater premium followed by hybrids which border on “greenwash” and arguably bad products for the poor.

Just for the record, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. What goes up must go down. Hopefully we will learn moderation in time and arrive at a more considered and culturally natural strategy for addressing global warming.

The Eightfold: Trickle Down Organics

The Times

The Daily Mail

The Observer

Channel 4 Fair Trade

British Soil Association

Sustainability is a work in progress, so it’s impossible to have all the information to know whether a company’s activities are green enough. However, you can learn whom to trust simply by testing whether a company will genuinely respond to you.

Last Friday, I wrote a piece on The Eightfold on the opportunity for theme parks to green the customer experience. In it I mentioned Bearfire Resort, a year round outdoor ski resort to be built in Dallas, Texas in 2009. Since Texas summers are resource intense, I questioned the value of building a 650,000 square foot ski resort.

Typically when you question a their practices, companies have three standard reactions to potential criticism 1. Manage the situation with PR 2. Ignore it 3. Take the bull by the horns and interact with you. Now the third reaction is pretty rare because it exposes the company to a trial by fire. So I was surprised when Bearfire’s CEO Charlie Aaron commented on The Eightfold to explain not only his commitment to making Bearfire sustainable but also his desire to chart a new course for the leisure industry.

I called Bearfire yesterday to lean more and left a message on Aaron’s direct line. When Aaron called me back last night, I asked him a simple question: what do you aspire to be? I learned Aaron isn’t pursuing a gimmick. He is driven by conviction and vision to keep winter culture alive despite global warming. Why in Texas? Three reasons: to provide a new opportunity to ski, to educate people about winter and create awareness about the environment.

Now Aaron may have been giving me his PR speech, but it seemed unlikely. People who are open are fearless. They are propelled forward by passion and conviction, and I felt Aaron’s willingness to personally return my call promptly and despite being in transit is telling. I finished our half hour conversation open for further dialog and slightly less cynical.

Does this mean I believe skiing in Texas’ sweltering August is a good idea? I haven’t decided. I don’t have the research and science to conclusively reason either way. But I do believe good business has always been and will always be about relationships and trust. We might never conclusively have all the facts, especially since sustainability is a work in progress. But when you’re not sure which companies are worthwhile, ask yourself: who would you rather trust — a gated press department, a non responsive company or a CEO who takes the time to explain his vision to you? My bet’s on the last one.

http://www.bearfireresorts.com/
http://theeightfold.com/?p=278

Before we kick off summer with Memorial Day barbeques this weekend, it’s important to remember Spring 2007 was when the incubating third wave of environmentalism finally hatched in pop culture.

If you passed by any newsstand in April magazines from Elle to Sports Illustrated had green issues giving quick tips and tricks on how we could play our part. TV got in on “doing good” in May with the amazing Planet Earth, Sundance Channel’s The Green and even American Idol’s own charity-themed show. Just as our heartstrings and conscious seem to have been pulled enough, companies are declaring their greenness in droves.

Where does this leave ordinary people whom just want to go about their lives, avoid cancer and feel like responsible citizens? It should leave us hyper aware and charged up to change the world. For some “conscious consumers”, it does. For the rest of us, it might make us replace a few light bulbs and recycle more frequently, but it will ultimately leave us overwhelmed by green clutter and ready to give up.

If you are part of this group, you probably are enduring “Green Fatigue”. The whole idea of green fatigue comes from the world of consumer electronics. As James Surowiecki points out in next week’s New Yorker, when we buy cell phones, cameras or even toasters these days, we are often seduced by choice and information but in practice prefer simplicity:

When the subjects were given the chance to customize their product, choosing from twenty-five features, they behaved like kids in a candy store. (Twenty features was the average.) But, when they were asked to use the digital device, so-called “feature fatigue” set in. They became frustrated with the plethora of options they had created, and ended up happier with a simpler product.

With all the buzz around going green, it seems like a million options exist whether its organic cotton or hemp clothes, local organic foods, energy efficient light bulbs or hybrid vehicles. Frankly we can’t necessarily afford to take all of them now. Even if we did, we wouldn’t necessarily have the carbon footprint of an eco acetic.

So what’s the answer? Whether it’s technology or greening our lives, we feel overwhelmed when we stop asking why and start accepting everything we’ve been told. However, simplicity requires being able to decipher what’s worth hearing. It requires looking to the plethora of green products and services and asking why. Why is one option necessary or better than another? Why is the process for consuming something the way it is? Why doesn’t a service exist?

Now this might seem silly. But it takes five minutes to send a clever email, and the processes can be empowering. I’ve found in writing The Eightfold that asking questions can often reveal more about a company than I ever expected. For example, I recently emailed Apple regarding its environmental policy after a visit to the SOHO store. That day was particularly hot and the air conditioning was on with the doors open.

While I understand this is standard retail practice, it still seemed like a terrible waste of energy. I emailed the store manager and was told it wouldn’t happen again. Still he hadn’t told me why it happened in the first place. So, I emailed Apple’s corporate headquarters and followed up with two phone calls. It’s been a month, and I’ve not received a response.

My lesson? Apple may make environmental statements when Greenpeace twists its arm, but that doesn’t mean it’s ready or is able to explain them to consumers willing to ask why. If I ever was overwhelmed by green proclamations I now know how far Apple is willing to go to defend its position – not very.

The point here isn’t to attack Apple. It’s to demonstrate that we no longer have to accept green marketing at face value. Companies will not necessarily provide the perfect green solution, but good green companies should be willing if not enthusiastic and passionate to share their thoughts and hear your ideas. Once you start asking why, you will quickly be able to cut through the clutter to find your personal green pathway to a simply green clutter-free world.

New Yorker on Feature Creep

The Eightfold Apple Experience

Karma Capitalism

Editor's note: We're pleased to welcome Hemal Vasavada Gill to the writing team. Hemal is founder and editor-in-chief at The Eightfold, and also works as a freelance trend and marketing strategist. We've invited her on board to take a look at how companies are positioning themselves as green and sustainable, and to help you separate the hype from the real deal.

So you’ve changed your light bulbs, recycle, started buying local organic produce and are considering a hybrid. Now what? There are a million different other things you can be doing to reduce your carbon footprint, but how do you know your efforts are enough? How do you know this push to be green isn’t a phase?

Trend experts believe we are at the inception of a completely new economic system. Dubbed Karma Capitalism, this system ties economic progress to social and environmental progress so “doing good” is not just about looking green or sounding green or even acting green. It’s about companies living and breathing sustainability and working with every day people to make progress possible.

The theory is nice, but what does it look like? To answer this question, I flew to the day-long Trend Buero Karma Capitalism Trend Day in Germany last week to cover what leading Trend thinkers in Europe were saying for my blog: theeightfold.com. Here's a bit of what I learned to help you understand how you can shape the future of sustainability.

People are Key – We Have the Potential to Shape Progress

Karma Capitalism begins with the belief that we as humans are not only creative but also filled with limitless potential. In the current system, all the philanthropy and aid in the world hasn’t been able to solve problems of poverty, disease or global warming. Karma Capitalism involves businesses working with us as consumers and NGOs to design market solutions that will empower those in need.

This is possible because each one of us has the capacity to care and the potential to make a difference. We also have tools today to meet other like-minded people, create our own products and content and market our own ideas through digital media. But will we want to do this?

Trend experts believe we are at a critical turning point. We are tired of being treated like just consumers. Although economic figures like GDP continue to go up, our level of happiness has gone down. As we wake up to a world with increasing economic polarization, terrorism and natural disasters, we are looking for meaning, we are looking for hope, and we are looking for change. People are already doing this.

Take Muhammad Yunus, Nobel Prize Laureate and founder of the Grameen bank. Yunus created a system of micro lending in the seventies and eighties. He challenged the traditional institutions of lending by providing affordable loans to Bangladesh’s poorest, even if they didn’t have collateral. Today he’s helped lift millions of people around the world out of poverty and is starting to work with major businesses like Nestle to create a new system of social businesses.

Companies Need Us to Develop Creative Solutions

The amazing thing about Yunus is that he started as an economics professor with a simple idea. He wasn’t necessarily special; he just started asking the right questions and little by little experimenting with solutions. Even more assuring is that today we have an additional advantage that Yunus didn’t have. Companies are getting involved. While traditional banks scoffed at Yunus, pioneering companies are looking for visionary people willing to experiment.

This might seem odd, but it’s because being sustainable and being “good” is incredibly difficult. Companies know something has been done, but they don’t have the traditional benchmarks, guides or even regulations to necessarily get them there. Like Yunus, they are learning by doing, but they are also learning they can’t change the system alone.

At the same time, companies learned from sites like YouTube and MySpace that they are no longer setting our social and cultural agenda. People have reclaimed their values and are determining what’s important in the world. Smart companies not only see this but also are learning. P&G for example has a consumer-lead innovation network called Vocalpoint, which moves outside of traditional focus group settings to engage real women to deliver better solutions for their lives. Why can’t it apply this strategy to doing good?

In a Karma Capitalist system, it will. The result will be a revolution in the way we consume products and the way we see the world. No longer will we simply buy products for products sake. The things we consume will have purpose – they will be “products as substance”. It could be as simple as being locally grown or as profound as Product Red has tried to do in helping solve the AIDs crisis in Africa.

Change is Real, Change is Here

The key to this future is in being active today. We need to continue using our creativity and potential to not only demand transparency and accountability from the brands we consume. We also need to start asking questions and sharing creative solutions with earnest companies who are trying to make a difference. While at one point this might have been seen as radical, today experts believe it is an expected reality. Why not then take the opportunity to help engineer a better economy and ecology through Karma Capitalism?

Links:

Trendbuero — Trendtag (in German)

MuhammedYunus.org

VocalPoint.com