The Globe and Mail
The Go-green Argument
By HARVEY SCHACHTER
In 1997, Bob Willard was working for International Business Machines Corp. in leadership development and, through his involvement in a campaign over a water-treatment plant in his community of Ajax, Ont., he became increasingly concerned about the environment.
So he wrote a letter to CEO Lou Gerstner asking him to embed sustainable development principles into IBM's strategies to benefit both the company and the planet.
His effort bombed.
It was suggested he discuss his ideas with the company's community affairs director, indicating the top brass viewed sustainability as a philanthropic issue rather than a strategic business matter.
In part, he realized that was because he embellished his letter with rhetoric about improving the planet rather than cutting to the chase: "Dear Lou: I have some thoughts on how IBM could increase its profits by 38%. Interested?"
The lesson was that when you are proposing your company pay more attention to its ecological and social responsibilities — whether you are a CEO, director or member of the rank and file — you must choose your words carefully.
"Just broaching the subject risks your credibility as a corporate leader who has the best interests of the bottom line at heart. It could be a career-limiting conversation."
To arm you for that conversation, he has written "The NEXT Sustainability Wave," which makes the case — indeed, hammers home the case — that sustainability can increase profits, substantially, while also helping the planet.
That, he argues, requires moving from simply complying with the laws to pro-actively looking for ways to improve your company's processes through environmental consciousness or even rebranding the firm to be seen as a sustainability leader.
In the past, companies have acted on sustainability either because of the founder's personal passion, as with Anita Roddick's The Body Shop; a public relations crisis, as with Royal Dutch/Shell Group when it faced opposition to disposal of the Brent Spar oil platform; or because of regulatory pressure.
In the future, he expects two pressures to drive companies toward the next wave of environmental responsibility:
A Perfect Storm of Threats. Five global forces will cluster together into a tempest that will threaten many companies: climate change, pollution and its effects on health, the backlash to globalization, the energy crunch, and the erosion of trust in institutions.
Compelling Business Value. Companies that commit themselves to sustainability benefit economically in seven ways:
- It's easier to hire top talent who prefer to work in such companies.
- It's easier to retain talent.
- Productivity is boosted as employees are energized by contributing to the
success of a firm doing work that is good for the planet. - Manufacturing costs drop due to eco-efficiencies, such as reducing and re-
using materials. - Energy and water costs at the company's sites are decreased.
- Revenue increases as green consumers are attracted to the firm.
- Financial risk goes down and easier financing is obtained through risk
avoidance when using more socially responsible practices that lower insurance
costs.
Using conservative estimates, he comes up with a 38% increase in profits for a typical high tech company — the figure that may have caught Lou Gerstner's interest, if used in that letter.
But even if you list the benefits to your company, you will face objections. So a portion of the book is what he calls an objection handling clinic, in which he presents all the arguments senior executives will raise and the arguments to overcome those concerns.
To those who respond his figures are too good to be true, he says he was also surprised. But the best way to find out is to apply the examples from which they are drawn to your own firm. "Try it," he urges.
The book is level-headed, written for business people by a businessman. It is also a handy and extensive primer on sustainability for those who haven't followed the issue closely. Mr. Willard also uses an unusual but highly successful format, making his arguments on right hand pages in short, one-page bursts, while the left hand pages are reserved for supporting quotes, statistics and cartoons.