Tag

Social

Browsing

By CLIFF ETTRIDGE

Despite world temperatures rising and extreme weather instances growing, many governments and politicians are taking the unfortunate step of rowing back on their ESG (environmental, social, and governance) commitments.

This past autumn, Rishi Sunak announced a watering down of the UK’s net-zero pledges, while the recent COP28 saw huge debate about how far countries must go in their commitments to phasing out fossil fuels. At the same time, states such as Florida in the US are pulling back on social equality promises, particularly around LGBTQ+ and women’s rights.

While governments are seen easing off on their promises, brands seeking to protect their reputation in the marketplace should resist following suit. The interconnected world of business, economics, and politics can seem a complicated landscape, but it’s crucial that brands keep their heads above the mess.

Think about this: Only 38% of respondents surveyed globally for the 2023 Edelman Trust Barometer believe in their government’s vision for the future. Meanwhile, there was an overwhelming consensus that CEOs need to take a stand on important issues.

The contradiction–and opportunity–is clear. Brands are built by people, so even in our technology-driven world, there will still be people curating ideas, products, and services, along with making crucial decisions about how a brand goes to market. To call those best decision makers co-workers, brands need to demonstrate that they aren’t just serious about supporting ESG targets, they’re serious about putting them into action.

The first step? Setting out intent and commitment. For many organizations, this can be done under the pillars of people (employees/clients), partners (i.e., companies in the supply chain), and planet (environmental aspects). The next step involves undertaking a qual and quant assessment of the current situation under each pillar. This–combined with a time-bound target such as achieving net zero by 2050–creates a roadmap with relevant goals.

It’s vital to remember that this is not an activity that has a start or end point. It’s continuous and evolving. So, without moving the ultimate target, goals must adapt as the organization progresses.

Brand reputation amidst the anti-ESG movement

An anti-ESG movement is at play around the world, led in no small part by politicians grandstanding for short-term votes and a reaction against perceived liberal thinking: the “anti-woke” movement. However, let’s be honest, democratic leaders have a few years to do meaningful work before they’re out on the campaign trail. They’ve become performers first, thinkers second.

Compare that to CEOs, where the average tenure was 7.2 years in 2022 (albeit a dropping metric if you look at the past ten years). CEOs can and should outlast the shifting sands of politics. It’s why they need to think of the big picture and act accordingly. There are long-term existential threats to business–a functioning planet is needed to survive–and they are deemed responsible.

Commitment to long-term visions contribute not only to immediate reputation management but also to sustained brand value and customer loyalty, as well as attracting top talent. In February of 2023, Paul Polman (the ex-CEO of Unilever) warned of employees quitting–either quietly or with their feet–if brands did not live up to their ESG commitments. Our own research shows that a significant 88% of employees claim to know what a brand’s stated purpose is.

The takeaway? Employees are watching carefully, so start by living up to your promises.

Commitment can come through exploring new ways of engaging employees on these matters–initiatives such as forums, surveys, mentorship programs, or volunteer opportunities that align with the company’s ESG goals. The strategy doesn’t need to be perfect straight away, but clear and consistent communication will foster trust and empower employees to make meaningful contributions. Not to mention it reassures them that their company is committed to a better future.

Brands mustn’t be afraid to publish their targets and, vitally, their progress because it shows accountability. Most brands will have an ESG segment within their annual reports, but they shouldn’t be too concerned about missing targets–so long as they can show they are working to rectify the situation. Honesty combined with action reflects well on an organization. Every mature person understands this is hard to get right, so sharing learnings, as well as intent, is part of the journey.

What do employee-led ESG strategies look like?

There are, of course, some very real issues driving a lack of transparency in this area. Some companies are resisting setting and sharing ESG plans–both externally and internally–for fear of failure. Not only in terms of missing their targets, but also in terms of falling prey to onerous legislation or accusations of greenwashing.

But it’s a trap because, ultimately, businesses are driven by their people.

If CEOs want to recruit and retain the best employees, then they have no choice but to lead with their ESG efforts. Why? The numbers are overwhelmingly clear. One IBM study concluded that almost three out of four employees find employers with sustainability programs more attractive. Meanwhile, a whopping four out of five look forward to contributing to their employer’s climate or ESG targets.

And workers are willing to vote with their feet. A 2023 KPMG study found that one in five workers say they’ve turned down a job because of a brand’s ESG credentials, while two in five say they’ll quit if an employer fails them in integrity, ethics, or environmental performance. This is where governance plays an essential role: It’s a strong benchmark for employees to know how well their organization is run. Things like amount of tax paid and other metrics are nods toward their company’s social responsibility commitments.

Many people mistakenly believe that this “sensitivity” is all due to changing demographics and the values of younger members of the workforce. However, according to the recruitment firm Resource Solutions, two in five over 55’s say they’ve snubbed an employer who wasn’t taking their ESG commitments seriously–which shows, once again, why governance is so important.

At board level, ESG has to be a key topic; it has to be part of every board meeting, so that the organization remains accountable at the highest level. ESG should be integrated across any and every aspect of a business, from policies to daily practices, and this will only happen if everyone is clear on what they need to do, why they need to do it, and how.

Luckily, many brands have begun training themselves to think differently and are much more open to diverse views and talents. They recognize that it makes them far more competitive when pulling in talent from all walks of life, and that corporate reputation is better protected when horizons are expanded and employees are not only heard but listened to.

Feature Image Credit: everettovrk

By CLIFF ETTRIDGE

Cliff Ettridge is Partner at creative branding and communications agency The Team. Since joining the agency in 2002, Cliff has led their employee experience strand, delivering projects for brands such as IBM, RBS, Three and the BBC. With over 25 years’ experience in developing employee engagement strategies, Cliff’s expertise lies in developing ideas that bring basic business concepts to life and attract and retain talent. Today he leads a team delivering work for BP, the Open University and Centrica. He designs employer brands, creates internal communication plans and develops campaigns to bring business strategy and messages to life.

Sourced from Brandingmag

By

The social network paid people to monitor their phone activity and Apple was not happy

Facebook and Apple are in another fight over privacy and data after reports surfaced on Wednesday that Facebook built a consumer research app that opened a backdoor to iPhones. The phonemaker, which disabled the app, has accused the social network of violating its app rules.

Apple and Facebook have had a contentious relationship since Apple CEO Tim Cook took a hardline stance against data-collection practices of internet ad giants, calling for more regulations in the industry. Facebook then hired a public relations firm to push back against the criticism of its business model.

The latest episode in the saga is a bit hard to follow. To help, here’s our guide to what happened.

The Facebook Research App
Facebook recruited phone users to install a consumer research app that tracked their web traffic, messaging, app usage and more. About 5 percent of the participants were younger than 18, according to Facebook. (Minors were prompted to get permission from parents during the download process, for what that’s worth.) The app program was managed by third party companies uTest, BetaBound and Applause, which helped distribute the app.

Quick cash for consumers
People who participated in the consumer research typically received $5 to $10 to download the app and up to $20 a month to keep it active. It was almost like a multilevel data marketing deal because people could also make money for each person they referred, and then extra money each month that those people kept the app active. According to online commenters who say they participated in the program, people could potentially even make hundreds of dollars a month. (Facebook did not respond to a request for comment.)

Why does Apple care?
In August, amid a privacy backlash against Facebook, Apple shut down a similar app from Facebook called Onavu, which also collected details about people’s phone usage. Apple said it violated its App Store policies, and no apps should collect data about other apps people have on their phones.

Facebook’s workaround
The new research app avoided Apple’s App Store by using a program that Apple created for enterprise customers. Companies like Facebook use the enterprise program to build internal company apps, apps for communication, transportation and other logistics useful to employees. However, the apps in the enterprise program are only for employees.

Who the fallout is affecting
Perhaps the people most affected at this point are Facebook employees. Apple not only disabled the research app, it shut down all of Facebook’s other utility apps for employees, reportedly leading to some chaos at the office. Facebook has said it’s talking to Apple about getting its internal apps back online.

Without the internal app program, Facebook will have trouble beta testing changes to its main apps, as well, like when it tries out a new design on Instagram or a new feature on WhatsApp, but only among employees.

Also on the case: lawmakers
Lawkmakers have added this issue to the host of others that led Congress to call CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg to testify before them last year. On Wednesday, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, issued a statement that said, “I have concerns that users were not appropriately informed about the extent of Facebook’s data-gathering and the commercial purposes of this data collection.”

What about those consumers?
Everyone who participated were aware they were participating in market research, according to Facebook. Also, Google and other companies have similar research programs. Nielsen employs thousands of everyday Americans to share their TV viewing habits for market research.

On the other hand, it’s hard to tell if Facebook adhered to the strictest standards of disclosure, and how well-informed participants were. And Facebook already has been under a microscope for privacy and data-sharing issues, most notably the Cambridge Analytica scandal. There have also been questions raised about how Facebook handled user privacy and data, especially in its early days.

Bottom line
No advertiser will pull their money from Facebook over this, but they will call their ad agency and ask what the hell is happening, again.

Feature Image Credit: Bloomberg

By

Sourced from AdAge