#RaytheonCSR: Addressing the STEM Crisis, Empowering Veterans, Contextualizing Sustainability

14 Monday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR reporting, CSRwire

Tags

#raytheonCSR, aman singh, Business, CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, diversity, Environment, pam wickham, raytheon, Social Responsibility, stakeholder engagement, stem, Sustainability, sustainability, triple pundit, Twitter, veterans, Volunteerism, women

Last week I facilitated a Twitter chat in partnership with Nick Aster at TriplePundit on how defense and aerospace behemoth Raytheon contextualizes corporate social responsibility [CSR]. On the podium answering questions was VP for Corporate Affairs and Communications Pam Wickham [@PamWickham1].

The conversation, which saw 147 participants and generated over five million impressions, traversed through a number of topics and invited many interesting questions from the audience.

Some of the questions:

How does the defense company associate itself with being a “green” company?
How is the company leveraging its reach and footprint to address the growing decline in students pursuing science, technology, engineering and math [STEM] subjects?
How is it expanding its social responsibility efforts to reach a global audience?
What were Raytheon’s priorities for its $29M budget for operational sustainability?
Why doesn’t the company disclose its recruitment/retention numbers on women – and how does it attract a diverse workforce without this disclosure?
Does the company see sustainability as a competitive advantage?

While we weren’t able to get to all the questions in the hour, Wickham was prompt and enthusiastic with her responses. Grab the recap on Storify and stay tuned for more.

Climate Denial, Chauvinism and Making Integrated Reports Readable: SAP, BSR and CDP Respond

11 Friday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in Capitalism 2.0, CSR, CSRwire

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aman singh, Brand Management, BSR, Business, Capitalism 2.0, carbon pricing, cdp, CEO Network, climate change, corporate citizenship, corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, CSR, CSRwire, Disclosure & Transparency, employee engagement, Environment, Ethics, integrated reporting, Leadership, materiality, sap, Social Media, Stakeholder Engagement, Supply chain management, Sustainability, sustainability, Sustainability Report, sustainable business practices, sustybiz, transparency, Work culture

In a recent conversation with SAP’s Sustainability Chief Peter Graf about the company’s second Integrated Report, the conundrum between sustainability goals and economic growth kept coming up. Were the two diametrically opposed? Was the ‘conundrum’ a red herring as Henk Campher recently put it?

Working with the SAP team, we decided to turn it into a live discussion. And along with Graf, BSR CEO Aron Cramer, CDP’s Executive Director Nigel Topping and our partner Triple Pundit, we took to Twitter. For one hour, we discussed the trials and tribulations of pursuing sustainability featuring 232 participants contributing 1,388 tweets and over nine million impressions.

But as is often the case, our panelists were not able to respond to all the questions in the hour. Here then are their responses to all the questions we were unable to answer – some questions have been modified for grammatical purposes.

How does a company reconcile a clear need in the realm of sustainability when it’s not a $$$ win for the company? What mechanisms can be used to overcome this barrier? [from @bradzarnett, @beltwits,@thesustoolkit]

Nigel Topping: “Ultimately sustainability issues are business issues and thus addressing them must change the value story. If it changes the story short term you get a P+L benefit, if long-term then through enhanced quality of earnings, talent retention, market share or some other metric, which can also be converted into an economic measure.

“Sometimes this is easy – reducing energy waste saves money so the GHG reduction may just be sustainability icing on the cake. But this same action may be making the company more resilient in the face of likely regulation. Remember that value creation is part science part art.”

Aron Cramer: “”As things stand today, market structures and incentives don’t make it easy for companies to make the long-term investments that are often needed to work towards sustainability. We all know that for publicly traded companies, markets often push decisions towards the short-term. As such, emerging efforts to redefine financial success with more attention to long term value, such as integrated reporting, are crucial.”

Peter Graf: “If company itself has no economic reason to do so then the only levers I know of are consumer/customer pressure, public pressure or legislative pressure. If those are applied, then what seemed like an ‘externality’ again becomes revenue and cost relevant.”

Most companies see CSR as taxation without representation. What can companies do to circumvent this view and start acting now? [from @Odyamvid]

Topping: “Companies who see CSR in this way are most likely right! And at the same time leaving value on the table precisely because they are stuck in a mindset, which starts with the assumption that CSR is nothing to do with business. We really do need to see the back of woolly CSR initiatives where no one knows why they exist. There must be a value creation story – it could be direct via resource efficiency or risk mitigation or it could be indirect via brand value enhancement, talent retention, building capacity early to respond to expected consumer trends.

“If you can’t find those plausible stories, which you can tell with conviction to your front line staff, then best just to save your money – you are creating a bigger risk by acting in-authentically. Shareholders can rightly criticize you for wasting their money and NGOs can rightly criticize you for not taking issues seriously.”

Cramer: “This reflects an outdated and discredited understanding of CSR. Indeed, sustainability is about aligning strategy with changing operating conditions and not “taxation.” That said, there are issues where companies should be more active in promoting public policy frameworks that create the right kinds of incentives. One great example has to do with supply chain labor issues, on which governments have de facto outsourced the responsibility to enforce labor laws to the private sector.”

Graf: “CSR needs to be perfectly aligned with the strategy and how the company creates value. At SAP we focus on education and entrepreneurship in our CSR projects, because they help us drive long-term success as a business. If CSR is not focused on this type of shared value (value to the company and value to society), then it is only a brand building exercise with little substance.”

How can a corporation reconcile short-term needs of shareholders and longer-term sustainability objectives? [from @greengageEnv]

Graf: “Short and long-term value creation do not need to be in conflict. In essence, it’s a balancing act, like always in business. For example, companies have always balanced investments into the future and current revenues to manage their margin.”

Topping: “Companies need a portfolio of innovation to address different time cycles of the dynamics which exist in markets.”

What role do business leaders have regarding climate denialism by other businesses like the stand taken by the U.S. Chamber? [from @kayakmediatweet]

Topping: “Very few business leaders are climate deniers. Even if they don’t believe the science, they have to respond to the growing level of regulation (22% of global emissions are now subject to a price). Leaders have a responsibility to see major change coming and to get out ahead of it, but not too far ahead!

“Climate change is rewriting the rules in many industries – just look at Tesla outselling BMW in California and with a market cap half of General Motor’s already! Leaders also have a responsibility to manage risk. As Bob Litterman, former Chief Risk Officer at Goldman Sachs keeps reminding us – there is an inevitability about the coming price signal on carbon and the less a company is prepared the harder it will be hit. This is already starting to play out in the oil and gas sector with investors pushing dividend returns instead of risky exploration expenditure.”

Cramer: “Businesses very often see further out than governments do. Businesses also like to innovate. Organized business associations, more often than not, take a lowest common denominator approach that is in fact inconsistent with business interests. Leading companies should use their voice to call for smart regulation and then innovate and compete to succeed. There is a huge opportunity for just such efforts in the run-up to COP-21 in Paris in late 2015: the business voice should be heard, and if it is, companies will help lead the way to low carbon prosperity. Leaders recognize the importance of this step.”

Graf: “I have personally never used climate change as part of the business case for any sustainability project. Not at SAP. Not with customers. Unless you’re in an industry that depends on climate to be stable (e.g., agriculture), the much better way to argue is the cost of energy, and not the implications and risk of climate change. Energy cost is something I have to deal with today, tomorrow and every day thereafter. There’s zero argument around the probability around that.”

Is the biggest challenge for Integrated Reporting adoption around SME supply chains to ensure sustainable business? [from @mbauerc]

Topping: “No, integrated reporting will impact large listed companies primarily – and the way their integrated thinking leads to changed supply chain engagement will impact the SMEs. In many cases this will allow for disruptive innovations from the savvy small guys.”

Graf: “SME’s adopt more sustainable practices because their customers are expecting it from them. The push is coming from the mega-buyers like the retail giants and trickles down the supply chain from there.”

Integrated reporting is great but how do you get people to read it? [from @angryafrican]

Topping: “Make it the story of your business. I hear more and more business leaders explaining how new graduates are interviewing the companies for evidence of integrated thinking, awareness of the systemic challenges faced by society and a coherent company approach that uses the power of the corporation to make good money by adding real value to society. Telling the integrated story starts at recruitment and goes all the way to analyst calls – it will need to become the same story.”

Cramer: “This challenge affects ALL forms of reporting. But a more broad-minded report is likeliest to attract attention: Integrated reporting could ‘save’ reports.”

Graf: “You need a great overarching story (one story, not many), and use video, interactive charts, etc. to make it interesting. Moreover, use social media to promote it.”

When reporting on energy, carbon, GHG, how can we make it relevant and benchmarked? Standalone figures too abstract to mean much? [from @miamiaki,@jackwysocki]

Topping: “At CDP, we help companies benchmark many environmental indicators and practices against their peers – that’s just good practice but of course it requires good data. Benchmarking process as well as output is important to drive learning and change – for example, what percentage of capex is committed to energy efficiency, does this get same or better payback than average? This also helps overcome any lagging perceptions that these metrics are not business-relevant.”

Graf: “We always like to talk in visual explanations. Like ‘SAP consumes the same amount of electricity as a 250,000 people city.’ Or ‘Our customers collectively emit at least one sixth of the world’s man made emissions.’

How has the cloud affected our lives besides our ability to reduce environmental impact? [from @orange_harp]

Graf: “In all the ways that we all experience every day, from music, video, smartphones, millions of apps, social media, social platforms, etc.”

Where do we stand on CSR across the tech industry? Is our personal info staying private? [from @mr_rosenwald]

Graf: “Let me put it this way: I am very conservative about which information I am sharing on the web. The industry is running the risk of losing customer trust. We have to work together to ensure that’s not happening.”

Cramer: “While attention has so far focused on tech companies, almost every business has access to personal information. Companies can look to the principles established via the Global Network Initiative to ensure that this information is treated properly.”

Is part of the gender gap problem that the tech sector is too much of a chauvinistic culture? [How can we] attract women through culture change? [From @angryafrican]

Graf: “I am very proud that SAP has set a target to increase the ratio of women in management positions to 25% by 2017. We have gone up about 3.5% over the last years.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on May 12, 2014.

When Sustainability Ambitions Become a Living Plan: Unilever Expands, Deepens Commitments

11 Friday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in Capitalism 2.0, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

#iwashmyhands, #sustliving, #toilets4all, agriculture, aman singh, Business, Capitalism 2.0, CEO Network, children, climate change, CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, deforestation, Disclosure & Transparency, entrepreneurship, Environment, ESG, food security, keith weed, Leadership, lifebuoy, marketing, project sunlight, Social Enterprise, Social Media, Stakeholder Engagement, stakeholder engagement, supply chain, Supply chain management, Sustainability, sustainability, sustainable living plan, Twitter, unilever, women

Yesterday, Unilever released the latest refresh to its Sustainable Living Plan with yet another subtle headline [don’t blame them for being European]: Unilever Expands Sustainable Living Ambition.

And once again it is seeking to set a mindset shift.

Besides a metrics update that started at the beginning of the month with the announcement that the company had successfully reduced the rate of diarrhea among children from 36 percent to five percent through its Lifebuoy branded handwashing campaign ‘Help A Child Reach 5,’ the company announced its decision to step away from calling the Plan, well, a Report.

A Plan That Is Meant to Evolve

As Chief Marketing Officer Keith Weed told me:

“The Living Plan is meant to evolve. Today, we’re engaging more, we’re collaborating more. We’re not writing a separate report any longer. And I’m proud to say that we’re moving toward an integrated report in our effort show how this is now integrated in our overall plan…why we closed down our CSR department. Sustainability [for us is] integrated, truly embedded across our value chain.”

The company also hosted a live by-invitation-only event in London with 100 senior sustainability influencers to discuss the next iteration of the Plan: an expansion to include three specific social targets:

Fairness in the workplace [“We have been working with Oxfam on the condition of factory workers in our extended supply chain in Vietnam – and the lessons we have learned we’re taking global, including a new sourcing policy, which makes clear basic levels of human rights that suppliers must adhere to.“]
Opportunities for women [“By 2020, we want to help empower five million women. They’re a key part of our international supply chain.”]
Developing inclusive business [“Like our Shakti model in India“]

And a re-emphasis of what it considers its most critical challenges:

Helping combat climate change by working to eliminate deforestation, which accounts for up to 15 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions
Improving food security by championing sustainable agriculture, and improving the livelihoods of smallholder farmers who produce 80 percent of the food in Asia and Sub Saharan Africa
Improving health and well-being by helping more than a billion people gain access to safe drinking water, proper sanitation and good hygiene habits.

The Rarity of Receiving Honest Feedback

I was catching up with Weed – who was among the initial creators of the USLP and continues to lead it across the organization today – right after the live event. And he was in a good mood. “In its early days, everyone was genuinely impressed [with the USLP] and were always polite in giving us feedback. They were probably also scared of scaring us off. But now, three years in, they’re more open with their feedback,” he told me.

The company is making good progress.

Besides good results from its #Iwashmyhands and #toilets4all campaigns, for example, some of the reported highlights include:

Over 75 percent of its factories have achieved zero non-hazardous waste to landfill
A new technology would reduce plastic in its Dove body wash packaging by 15 percent
Forty eight percent of agricultural raw materials are now from sustainable sources, up from 14 percent in 2010,
It completed training over 570,000 smallholder farmers and increased the number of Shakti women micro-entrepreneurs in India from 48,000 in 2012 to 65,000 in 2013
Avoided costs of €350million since 2008 in reducing raw materials and implementing eco-efficiency measures in factories on energy, water and waste
Launched compressed versions of its Sure, Dove, Vaseline deodorants across the U.K., which equal to 25 percent of CO₂ savings per can.

As Weed counted off, “We’ve integrated USLP into our core business, brands like Lifebuoy are experiencing double-digit growth signifying that integrating sustainability in the core of your brand works, we’re creating less waste, saving money, creating eco efficiencies across our value chain, and if positioned right, can have everyone involved engaged.”

Demonstrating the [Sustainability] Case Internally

“But perhaps the most important highlight is that we are starting to show progress against our commitments and core belief [about integrated sustainability into our business] internally,” he added.

But other challenges emerged.

“Although water usage across our manufacturing facilities was down, when you take into account our entire value chain, it actually went up as did our greenhouse gas emissions. Also scale is tough.”

And the need for good partners.

“We’re stepping up working with others on transformational change. We’ve learned a lot in the last three years. We need to work with others. For example, deforestation contributes 15 percent of GHG – we’ve been doing a lot of work on palm oil by ourselves. Now [we want to] expand the efforts to government and civil society so that we can get to zero net deforestation by 2020,” he added.

Challenges: Finding Partners, Changing Habits

For a brand as diversified and exposed as Unilever, finding partners that share ideologies are critical as is changing consumer behavior.

Last year, we collaborated with the Unilever team on a communication strategy that told the USLP story as well as helped the company engage in critical dialogue with its diverse audience. Besides a detailed blog series penned by Sustainability Chief Gail Klintworth that took us behind the scenes and on the ground with the USLP goals – and a live Twitter chat that generated hundreds of questions – one of the toughest challenges that emerged was influencing consumer behavior.

And some things are finally starting to shift.

Like the 180 million people who now know how to wash their hands properly. Or the 55 million who now have access to safe drinking water. Or the 70 million people who have already watched/engaged with Unilever’s innovative Project Sunlight.

“The point is to make sustainable living commonplace. We’re an optimistic company – if you get engaged, let’s work together,” said Weed. “Stakeholders are telling us they felt this was very much a part of our business. People are sitting up and talking.”

Numbers aside, changing habits is hard – and it remains the company’s toughest challenge. “We’re using everything we can from celebrities to local partners and rewards. They say it takes 30 days to change a habit. Initiatives like Project Sunlight are important because of this,” he said.

Or the decision to replace current deodorants with compressed versions. “People see smaller cans and think it’s not value for money,” Weed offered. “But if there is any company that has the resolve to take on these challenges, it’s us. We know markets, scale, know how.”

So what’s next?

Engagement, engagement and more engagement. As the marketing chief put it, “We need to engage more people to think beyond their own communities and families. It will happen.”

More about the USLP Refresh here.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on April 29, 2014.

#SodexoCR: A Conversation on Integrated Reporting, Responsible Supply Chain Management, Values, Ethics & More…

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSR reporting, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aman singh, Brand Management, community development, CSR, CSR reporting, Disclosure & Transparency, diversity, employee engagement, Environment, ESG, ethics, integrated reporting, marketing, Social Media, social media, sodexo, stakeholder engagement, supply chain, Sustainability, sustainability, Sustainability Report, Twitter

https://storify.com/AmanSinghCSR/sodexocr-a-conversation-on-integrated-reporting

Carbon Policy: Inside Microsoft’s Efforts to Integrate Sustainability into its Financial Model

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Accountability, Business, carbon finance, carbon offsets, carbon offsetting, careers, climate change, CSR, CSRwire, Disclosure & Transparency, emissions, Environment, ESG, management, microsoft, renewable energy, Social Enterprise, social impact, Supply chain management, Sustainability, sustainability, technology, tj dicaprio, transparency

On July 1, 2012, Microsoft issued a new corporate policy across 14 business divisions in over 100 countries: Every division would now be accountable for its carbon emissions.

Under the Carbon Neutral and Carbon Free Policies, the company put an internal price on carbon, where the divisions pay an incremental price linked with the carbon emissions associated with energy consumption and business air travel. The funds are then used to invest internally in energy efficiency, renewable energy and carbon offset projects globally.

A tad ambitious?

Not at all, believes TJ DiCaprio, Senior Director of Environmental Sustainability at Microsoft.

“We’re following three pillars to achieve carbon neutrality: 1) Be lean through reducing our energy consumption by driving radical efficiency through use of technology, and reduce air travel to internal meetings. Our primary emissions, for example, come from our data centers’ energy consumption. We also monitor and reduce energy consumption from our offices and software development labs. That’s roughly 30 million square feet worldwide,” she explains.

The other two pillars: 2) Be green by investing in renewable energy and carbon offset projects; and 3) Be accountable through cascading an internal price on carbon globally.

The policies also help Microsoft employees band together beyond the usual. “By internalizing the otherwise external cost of pollution, the price of carbon is now part of the profit and loss statement across business divisions. We have now integrated this across the financial structure and engaged the executives and employees on our commitment to mitigating climate change and investing the funds appropriately,” she says.

From Innovation & Efficiency to Sustainability

For a long time, the marketplace has associated the technology giant with innovation and efficiency. Now, the company is vying for a third accolade: sustainability.

Acknowledging the impact the company can have in swaying the entire marketplace, DiCaprio says: “We’re constantly asking how we can lean and green our operations. Where can we not only drive efficiency, but also increase the percentage of renewable energy we purchase. How can we support the supply and demand and how can we drive progress through long-term renewable energy purchase agreements.”

Of course, there are other ways Microsoft is becoming greener. For instance, how can the company that reaches over 100 countries support carbon sequestration in developing countries? “When there is sustainability, education, and jobs – all of these tie together when we’re discussing carbon offsets and supporting low-carbon economic development around the world. In fact, offsets are significantly important in extending our reach and value globally,” she emphasizes.

Carbon Offsets: The Allure for Microsoft

In the last two weeks, I had heard similar sentiments from Barclays and Allianz, both financial institutions with global footprints – and investing significantly in carbon offsets. Why then was offsetting not spreading across more organizations? DiCaprio believes there are multiple factors, not least, a challenge in transparency.

“The market is maturing and we are seeing a more professional approach to using technology to manage and store data as well as established standards. There is a growing confidence in the ability of these projects to meet stiff criteria and standards, and to continue to meet these standards over time as cloud services allows for data to be managed and stored, demonstrating lower leakage. We employ a rigorous approach to our investments,” she says.

And herein comes the alignment, i.e., how DiCaprio’s team is managing its carbon reduction policies as a lever to align its business priorities around how technology can enable transparency, education and sustainable economic development. One of the offset providers Microsoft works with is Wildlife Works – who run the Kasigau project in Kenya– with an emphasis on carbon sequestration, social enterprise, and wildlife preservation. “We have been working with them for a year now. We believe that climate change is a serious challenge, and supporting carbon sequestration through carbon finance supports local jobs and provides new educational opportunities for the youth – making a huge difference in improving lives.”

Scale: Impact Through Leadership

Her only worry: without more private sector involvement, Microsoft’s efforts will remain insular.

“This is an exciting time for the private sector to work across our stakeholders and create corporate policies that make sense for business and help support low-carbon economic development. One of the benefits of setting a carbon neutral policy and an internal carbon fee is to set an example for how a business can run more efficiently, reduce waste and carbon, and address its environmental footprint,” she says.

“The model we have designed is simple and repeatable. The more organizations that adopt a similar model, the better off we will all be. The model is built to align with an organization’s priorities and business strategy while supporting the demand and supply of renewable energy and a low-carbon economy,” she added.

Having recently celebrated the one-year anniversary of the carbon fee implementation, DiCaprio believes it is fulfilling its purpose of bringing together the business mission and a priority of driving efficiency and developing low-carbon economies. While the first year was focused on building the necessary infrastructure to flow through a financial cycle and get the price associated with emissions charged to business units, now DiCaprio also sees the importance of communicating the benefits of the successful model.

“The more we can communicate that carbon finance is a very effective way to integrate the cost of pollution into our economic structure, the more we can help others integrate carbon pricing and the impact of climate change into long-term business planning,” she says.

After all, it’s about taking into account the true cost of doing business.

And DiCaprio’s aspiration speaks to a global sentiment awaiting global acceptance: “We must understand quickly how to tie managerial accounting and the real cost of doing business with traditional financial models. For example, Microsoft pays for energy consumption but it also pays for the cost of offsetting the pollution associated with it. This is the direction we need to follow.”

As the technology company continues its journey, DiCaprio hopes many more organizations will pivot and begin to leverage the “magic of creating and supporting new markets that support sustainability on a global basis.” Only time will tell if once again Microsoft can attract some followers.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on September 12, 2013.

Campbell Becomes America’s First Public Company to Acquire a Public Benefit Corporation: In Conversation with Plum Organics’ Cofounder

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSRwire

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

beechnut, benefit corporation, Brand Management, Business, Campbell Soup, CEO Network, clif bar, community development, corporate citizenship, CSR, CSRwire, delaware, Disclosure & Transparency, Environment, hunger, impact, Leadership, leadership, Management, organic food, philanthropy, plum organics, Sustainability, sustainability, Work culture

Redefining corporate law. Targeting the node of enterprise to shift capitalism.

Those were some of the thoughts running through Neil Grimmer’s mind as he joined eight other businesses to welcome Benefit Corporations in Delaware in July, 2013.

As cofounder and President of Plum Organics – along with a small group of parents – Grimmer’s philosophy has been pretty straightforward: Every kid deserves the best nutrition and no child deserves to go hungry.

The result: an organic food line that prioritizes nutrition, environmental conservation, reduced packaging [a supply chain assessment of the traditional glass jar vs. the Plum pouch was undertaken that showed energy consumption for the latter was much less, fossil fuel consumption for their transportation was a ninth, and they’re 14 times less likely to end up in landfills even with aggressive recycling of the glass jars] and an accompanied mission to target child hunger.

Sound like a lot to take on?

Grimmer’s conviction came from experience. As the former VP of strategy and innovation with Clif Bar, he knew a thing or two about product development that infuses innovation with sustainable practices. “At Clif, I looked at sustainability as a journey, not a method. We’ve adopted that here at Plum,” he says.

Plum Organics went from recording $800,000 in sales in its first year [2008] to $93 million in 2012.

Consider these statistics:

60 percent of retailers in the U.S. carried Plum in the latest quarter
The No. 3 baby food brand in the U.S. after Gerber and Beechnut
The top growing brand in the baby food category by actual dollars and percent growth this year, with 135% growth vs. a year ago

While the numbers tell their own story, here’s the kicker.

A Public Benefit Corporation: The Implications

Plum Organics is a certified Benefit Corporation. And now with Delaware’s recognition of the legal status, parent company Campbell Soup Company – who announced plans to acquire Plum in May 2013 – becomes the only company in the U.S. with a fully owned subsidiary that is also a Public Benefit Corporation.

“Our business success at Plum has been based on creating a great product in a way that respects the highest levels of corporate citizenship. It is actually good business to be a good corporate citizen – and our success speaks to that belief,” says Grimmer.

Grimmer is excited – about the notoriety as well as joining hands with an iconic American brand, well-known for its altruistic actions and social causes.

“We have a mission centric core: nutrition and solving hunger with our benefit corporation status our secret sauce and innovation driving the entire process. Campbell has a dual mandate: strengthen the core Campbell business while driving new consumers and innovation. It’s a perfect marriage,” he explains.

With global aspirations [“Hunger and health are global issues.”] and a lofty ambition [“Make sure our products get into every high chair and lunch box globally.”], Grimmer “wanted a partner who would drive both [our goals] with us and help us pave the way to address a more global need that kids have. We have innovation driving our core – we launched over 150 products in the last six years specifically addressing nutritional needs of young families.”

Aligning Ambition With Impact

After spending some time with Campbell Soup Company CEO Denise Morrison, Grimmer’s search came to an end.

“As our company grew, so did our ability to impact the world,” says Grimmer. And being a benefit corporation meant the added leverage of a model that places impact and profits in the same sentence. Like The Full Effect program, which was launched this year to target 16 million kids who go without daily meals every day.

“We now had the scale and capability built into the business to make an impact. So we designed a Super Smoothie jam-packed with nutrients,” he says.

So far, Plum has committed to producing and distributing half a million Super Smoothies in 2013. Sound familiar? In 2012, Campbell led a similar one-of-a-kind campaign to produce more than 40,000 jars of “Just Peachy” salsa exclusively for the Food Bank of South Jersey, using fresh, local New Jersey peaches that were not able to be sold because of blemishes but were fine to eat. The initial run from last year’s harvest generated $100,000 for the Food Bank of South Jersey through retail sales.

“Collaborating with Plum made sense for us on several levels. They’re a mission-based organization and their focus on eradicating childhood hunger is strongly aligned with our work nationally and in Camden, N.J. – where Campbell is headquartered. That helps build the collective impact we can have.”

“Plum and Campbell are both consumer-centric companies, and we share a focus on innovation, a critical component of success as we continue to marry our citizenship commitments with the Campbell business model,” responded Dave Stangis, Campbell’s Vice President, Public Affairs and Corporate Responsibility.

Side Effects of An Acquisition

Clearly, the stars align for the two companies but at the end of the day, Campbell is a public company with shareholders and the pressures of satisfying quarterly balance sheets. Will the acquisition bring along with it the familiar headaches of layoffs, change in management and perhaps even a shift in models?

“Plum is a standalone business and will remain so. I will continue to lead Plum Organics and our team is staying intact,” says Grimmer, who plans on remaining an active member of the recently established Plum board of directors. The company will also continue to headquarter in California.

Stangis who has been leading the iconic company’s CSR efforts since 2008 was also quick to cut to the chase about the two organizations’ merged path going forward. “We’re in the process of structuring the Board for Plum. We’re proud to say one of our subsidiaries is a founding member of the Public Benefit Corporation league.”

“We have already begun working with Neil and the Plum team. We are connecting on joint priorities and sharing Campbell’s CSR and sustainability resources,” he added.

“We’re looking forward to leveraging Campbell’s capabilities and skills to grow the Plum brand. As we dig into these opportunities, we will also be looking to focus on aligning our public benefit corporation with Campbell’s mission, model and culture. They have such a strong CSR program that the opportunities to target hunger are endless,” Grimmer explained.

And this is where Grimmer believes the conversation needs to shift.

“There is a new economy emerging of consumers who are looking to purchase from companies with a mission. They’re building a virtuous circle. When consumers support a business, you end up growing quickly with more exposure and higher impact,” he says.

Of course, being a public benefit corporation is but one element of Plum Organics’ success. It’s an exciting business story.

But the bigger story here is about being able to make an impact by combining a good product with sustainable attributes and an associated social and environmental cause. And that is where Grimmer wants to push his colleagues across corporate America further.

“The business community needs to look at how they are creating values alignment with their core consumers in a marketplace where loyalty is getting scarce. Let’s create many more of those virtuous circles.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on May 1, 2013.

Insurance Giant Allianz Targets Climate Change Risk: Expending “Unavoidable Emissions”

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSRwire, ESG

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

allianz, barclays, biodiversity, carbon offsetting, climate change, CSRwire, deforestation, energy, Environment, ESG, greenhouse gas emissions, impact investing, insurance, Nonprofits, Philanthropy, redd, regulation, renewable energy, social enterprise, Social Enterprise, Social Entrepreneurship, Social Impact, Sustainability, sustainability, wildlife works

After chatting with Barclays’ Director of Citizenship Jillian Fransen on the financial institution’s allegiance to carbon offsetting and how she is leveraging the increasingly popular mechanism to not only offset its unavoidable carbon footprint, I turned to insurance giant Allianz who has also chosen to use carbon offsetting to target deforestation and reduce its environmental footprint.

Excerpts from my conversation with Martin Ewald, Head of Investment Strategy and Renewable Energy/Infrastructure Equity with Allianz Global Investors.

—————-

Describe your emissions reduction program and goals.

Allianz has set itself the target of avoiding, substituting and reducing its own CO₂ emissions and is 100 percent climate-neutral since 2012. This means that all remaining emissions are being neutralized – in particular through direct investments in climate protection projects.

By 2015, Allianz aims to reduce its carbon footprint per employee by 35 percent compared to 2006.

What are “unavoidable emissions”?

Unavoidable emissions are CO₂ emissions that are intrinsically linked to our business activity, like business travel, that we cannot always avoid or only avoid at very high expense. These emissions are still harmful to the climate. Corporates can take a leadership role in offsetting emissions related to their business activity by investing in responsible sustainability projects – this is not required by regulation in our sector.

But it is responsible behavior and makes good business sense. In fact, we have identified climate change as one of the three most critical sustainability challenges for Allianz (alongside demographic change and access to finance).

Where does offsetting fit into your sustainability strategy?

In addition to our carbon reduction target, being a carbon neutral business is the second pillar of our commitment and contribution to achieving a low-carbon economy.

In 2012, 175,000 credits, each accounting for one metric ton of carbon avoided, were sourced and retired from projects we support – retiring credits means that CO₂certificates, each representing one ton of avoided emissions, are taken off the market. Our remaining carbon footprint was neutralized by credits bought from the carbon market, which underwent a stringent sustainability screening to ensure they met the same high standards as the credits from projects we invest in.

The quality of the underlying projects determines the value of each and every credit in the voluntary sector, and REDD+ rate amongst the highest valued carbon credits.

Why did you choose REDD+ as one of the preferred offsets?

Our investment in REDD+ is consistent with our strategy of supporting effective climate projects in emerging and developing countries. We have invested in forest protection in Kenya with Wildlife Works, one of the leading developers of REDD+ projects. These projects don’t simply protect threatened forests; they also involve the local population and provide them with a source of livelihood.

REDD+ will also raise awareness of how to deal with resources in a responsible manner, besides helping preserve the habitat of the local population. Due to the considerable impact generated, we plan to continue investing in the REDD+ sector.

How has supporting REDD+ benefitted your company – and its stakeholders?

For the CO₂ stored by the forests we receive certificates, which we can then use to offset business-related CO₂ emissions. This way we ensure our climate neutrality and at the same time make a worthwhile investment. For us the yield also includes enhancing climate protection and biodiversity. We may also benefit from positive branding, but it is too early to tell since 2012 was the first year that we were carbon neutral.

As a financial institution, what is Allianz’s most challenging source of carbon emissions?

Ninety eight percent of our emissions stem from energy, travel and paper. So, the focus is on reducing CO₂ emissions in these three areas.

In times of growing business, this is a challenge but we managed to reduce emissions across all three key areas in 2012, i.e. by sourcing lower-carbon energy or by making better use of video conferencing rather than traveling to business meetings.

How are these programs hallmarks of “responsible corporations”?

Since our business activity is not very carbon intensive, investing in REDD+ and similar projects today allow us to lock-in emission reductions over many years. We consider this to be responsible corporate practice: leveraging our capital base to build up the low-carbon infrastructure of tomorrow – be it forest protection or renewable energy, railways or electricity grids. This strategy also pays off, which is important to meet the expectations of our clients and shareholders. And this is a good basis to expand on our sustainable leadership agenda.

What role do you prescribe to Allianz in addressing climate change globally and locally?

We have introduced a group-wide strategy, which commits us to play a lead role in addressing climate change. For us it is about addressing the risks, e.g., the uptake in insurance loss from natural catastrophes, and making use of the opportunities. We have invested about EUR 1.7 billion in renewable energy projects, for instance, and set up a renewable energy fund, which has already attracted significant financial interest from our clients.

Moreover, we offer around 130 green products and services to our customers, including renewable energy home insurance, advisory services related to renewable energy and insurance premium discounts for drivers of electric/hybrid cars. The aim is to integrate climate change into our business model, step by step building the business case for a climate friendly economy.

How can the private sector play an important role in reversing/addressing climate change?

By understanding the climate issue as an investment case. Protecting forests is the cheapest way of saving carbon. To speak bluntly: if we first cut down the forest and then try to reduce the same amount of carbon we emitted, it would be much more expensive than just avoiding deforestation.

But as stated before, the most distinguishing factor about REDD+ is the opportunity to carry out investments that help improve social livelihoods and support local communities as well. Therefore supporting projects like the pioneering activities of Wildlife Works are appropriate activities that corporations need to support.

As long as there is no internationally binding climate protection agreement and as long as national regulation lacks teeth, the REDD+ market allows us to participate in voluntary projects around the world to address climate change. Consequently we have just carried out an additional REDD+ transaction in Indonesia.

What do you expect from policy makers to help expand your clean investments?

We stand at a critical juncture. We can continue business as usual with a small but dynamic niche of renewable energy projects and a reliance on fossil fuels for the big chunk of our economy. But this will not prevent dangerous levels of global warming.

Or we embark on a trend change, as we hopefully are seeing right now in Germany.

For this, we need a clear and reliable regulatory framework that gives investors appropriate incentives and the necessary regulatory certainty to finance clean technologies rather than coal or oil.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on September 5, 2013.

The Social & Environmental Case for Carbon Offsetting: In Conversation with Barclays

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSRwire

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Accountability, barclays, carbon, carbon offsetting, climate change, CSR, CSRwire, deforestation, Environment, ghg, governance, jillian fransen, leadership, lending practices, redd, social enterprise, Social Enterprise, Social Entrepreneurship, Social Responsibility, Supply chain management, Sustainability, sustainability, wildlife works

This is Part 1 of a series examining how leading companies are leveraging carbon offsetting and REDD+ to sustain their environmental footprint and target climate change.

“Our vision is about having a proportionate social impact on society.”

That’s how Jillian Fransen, Barclays’ director of Citizenship describes the bank’s elevated – and recently refreshed – sustainability agenda. Among the new elements: a three-year CSR strategy released last year, new stretch environmental targets, supporting growth among the SME sector, and a new Balance Scorecard, which benchmarks remuneration for the bank’s top 125 executives according to four Cs – one of which is Citizenship.

Fransen’s team is also on the cusp of launching an industry-leading Code of Conduct, besides managing and maintaining a 60 million-pound Community Investment Fund and a 20 million-pound Social Innovation Fund, created specifically to seed projects and partnerships that really push the needle on sustainability.

But, of all the things Barclays is doing, what piqued my interest was a core concentration on reducing its unavoidable emissions through carbon offsetting in the company’s climate program.

Carbon Offsetting: Need vs. Efficacy

Now while carbon offsetting has suffered from its share of misconceptions – and remains a relatively new idea in the U.S. – there is a critical need today to get past the debate and begin addressing unavoidable emissions.

Because despite the most robust plans in place that curb air travel and other activities, commerce requires both energy and fuel. And with the growth, availability – not to mention supporting infrastructure – of renewables relatively slow, it becomes a question of operating with what’s available. That is the reality for businesses. And Barclays is no exception.

Calling them “unavoidable emissions,” Fransen explained:

“We buy offsets for the footprint we incur outside our minimization program. We are doing everything we can to minimize emissions but there are those unavoidable emissions that we just cannot remove – like air travel. So to minimize their impact, offsetting fits quite well in our Climate Program.”

The Program focuses on three areas: climate change, developing products for low carbon economies and risk management services for clients with low carbon opportunities.

The firm, which wants to minimize its environmental footprint by 10 percent by 2015, works with Wildlife Works and Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation [REDD+] projects for its offsets strategy. According to the United Nations website, REDD+ “is an effort to create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests, offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-carbon paths to sustainable development.”

As Sibilia decoded in his article, the intended impact of the offsetting (emission reductions) leads to not only forest conservation but also a parallel movement to create self-sustaining social enterprises that recuperate the local economies and build social independence. Therein lies the true impact of offsetting, he concluded.

For Fransen, similarly, the appeal of working with REDD+ lay in Wildlife Works’ expertise and experience in protecting threatened forests – and its track record with local communities. “Twenty percent of emissions come from deforestation so it made sense for us to partner with organizations that could help us find areas where forests were being destroyed. That way we can have direct impact where it is most needed,” she said.

Then there is the added advantage of targeting local communities in key markets where Barclays operates. “We wanted to take accountability for our footprint. Additionally, Wildlife Works operates in Kenya, which is a key market for us. We are in 13 African countries – the oldest bank across eastern Africa — so having an on-the-ground partner there was key for us. ”

The real impact of implementing a carbon offsetting strategy then for Barclays?

“Create accountability for a footprint that the firm is otherwise unable to get rid of. That wakes people up. When we can have localized impact, it’s a win for us,” she responded.

Climate Change: Decoding the Impact of a Bank

Besides what seems to be the main area – air travel – what is Barclays most challenging source of carbon emissions?

“We have a network of hundreds of small branches. Our biggest challenge is availability and collection of relevant data about our water and paper use as well as waste. Not all our operations have the same level of management and facility support. Especially in Africa, it is very hard to ensure commitment to some of the improvements that are required in this year,” she said.

Another challenging area is the bank’s indirect impacts through its lending practices. “Where we choose to lend and what impact that has on the environment is critical. We need to hit this on a macro level. When you go to lend to an oil and gas company, we need to stand up to our commitment. They work with a minimum of 16 banks – we’re one piece of a large network,” she explained.

The Need For “Some Serious Leadership”

While our conversation mostly focused on Barclays’ carbon reduction strategy, it was hard to contextualize that without questioning what role Fransen’s contemporaries in the financial sector needed to play to sensibly address climate change.

Could Barclays continue to make progress without reciprocation from a sector busy repairing tarnished reputations from the financial crisis?

“There is a major shift going on toward a realistic understanding of what we need to do to adapt to climate change. In my opinion, none of this is happening quickly enough though. We need some serious leadership within our industry in the next five years to change gears on climate change,” she emphasized.

“Our biggest challenge is making it real for everyone in the organization. We have 142,000 employees that manage a matrix of clients and customers. The [impact they can have] is profound. I’d like to see us capitalize on this matrix much more. There’s a feeling, not limited to banking, that we’re doing our bit and everyone else will do theirs – and we’ll be okay.”

“Fact is, the issues are way more pressing for us to rest on that assumption.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on August 28, 2013.

Significant Challenges & Opportunities as The Sustainability Consortium Takes Standardization to China

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

BSR, china, CSR, CSRwire, Disclosure & Transparency, Environment, ESG, human rights, manufacturing, nanjing university, ngo, nonprofit, supply chain, Sustainability, sustainability, sustainability measurement, sustainability standards, the sustainability consortium, tsc, wei dong zhou

Last week, The Sustainability Consortium [TSC] announced its expansion to China.

Still in its infancy years, the group has successfully stayed under the radar as it worked with its influential member base and academic partners to evolve the tools and methodologies it seeks to create with the hope of standardizing consumer products sustainability.

With research partners playing a critical role in its global ambitions, the group has decided to partner with Nanjing University, one of the top five universities in China, to expand the scope and the testing ground for its research. The Consortium also announced the appointment of a new executive director.

Wei Dong Zhou, who will be responsible for setting the strategic direction of the Consortium’s projects in China, has worked in the field of CSR and sustainability across multiple sectors for over 20 years, including stints with the Chinese government, Business for Social Responsibility [BSR], nonprofit organizations, as well as managing CSR and sustainability strategy for the private sector.

I caught up with the new director to get a preview of the Consortium’s immediate plans, insights into the state of sustainability in China as well as how he plans to align his organization’s ambitions with the economic targets of the Chinese private sector.

Why did you decide to switch from a well-established group like BSR to a research-based – and much younger – organization like the Consortium?

The Consortium provides a great platform for developing product-based sustainability. Also, TSC offers a new approach to use scientific methodology to develop useful tools for companies. This is a very tangible opportunity for business. I am also attracted by the idea of using the combination of academic research and private sector leverage to grow sustainability.

What can you tell us about the state of sustainability in China? And what opportunities do you see for the Consortium?

The Consortium is entering China at a very good time. The Chinese government is new and busy with its 12^th Five Year Plan, which involves several goals related to sustainability. Lots of these goals will require masterful collaboration between the government and Chinese business, making the need for a medium like TSC critical.

Also, the need for standardized measurement is significant, especially for China’s widespread manufacturing sector. TSC’s tools can be the perfect solution for Chinese manufacturers since a lot of their Western customers are already TSC members. It will be in both parties’ benefit to implement these standards and begin measuring apples to apples.

In other words, TSC meets a crucial marketing demand of China’s manufacturing sector.

Then, of course, there is the lack of standardization. With companies using several different measurement systems and internal software currently, TSC’s system will provide a great way to integrate these systems and help Chinese companies manage their sustainability performance.

Which sectors will you be targeting for immediate collaboration?

China’s manufacturing output, as a percentage of global totals, looks something like this: we produce 65 percent of the world’s fiber, 70 percent of the world’s toys, 40 percent of apparel, 34 percent of the total garments imported by the U.S., and over 100 million air conditioners and 65 million washing machines annually.

With that large a manufacturing footprint, we will initially target the clothing and textile, electronics, toys and general merchandise industries for immediate partnerships. That is where TSC can have the most impact. Many of our members sell these products in the west. They want their Chinese manufacturers to tackle sustainability the “TSC way.”

Earlier this year, we published a series with The Conference Board on the state of the NGO sector in China. The findings were alarming. They pointed to a sector in disarray, a misplaced emphasis on public perception and growing pains for the business community. How do you plan on navigating that in coming months?

NGOs, unfortunately, are still in their early years in China, partially because of limited funding opportunities and government restrictions. Most NGOs in China, for example, still cannot register as non-profit organization due to the complex approval process.

But there are some NGOs – IPE, SEE, Earth Village, and Friend of Nature – that have been active in environment protection, philanthropy and social justice. International NGOs are also playing active roles in areas like women’s health, bio-diversity, HIV-AIDS, nature conservation and human rights.

We want to learn from their successes. This means demonstrating how our work on product sustainability can support China’s new Five Year Plan and help Chinese manufacturers cut costs, reduce business risks and improve relationships with their business customers.

What about the private sector?

The private sector has played a much more important role in the growth of the Chinese economy, contributing nearly 60 percent of GDP, 50 percent of gross taxation and creating 80 percent of the employment opportunities in 2012.

This is particularly true for industries like textiles, electronics, toys and general merchandise. The leaders within these industries are, therefore, active collaborators and prioritize stakeholder engagement. This is a huge market for us to develop localized tools and systems that standardize sustainability performance while meeting the needs of Chinese business. By helping these companies cut costs, reduce business risks and improve relationships with their business customers, we will help them grow.

Another sector that has been rapidly growing ever since the Sichuan Earthquake four years ago is private foundations. Already, there are 1,900 private foundations across the country versus 1,350 public foundations. The cumulative impact and creditability of these private foundations is growing much more quickly and credibly than their public counterparts primarily because they are more transparent about their activities.

But these represent a much longer-term target for us as they remain in development phase despite their rapid growth.

Is China’s business sector, especially manufacturing, ready for standardized sustainability standards?

Sustainability standards are at the beginning stages of development here in China. There are a few labeling programs, mostly initiated by government-affiliated agencies and industry associations, that companies have started to use but there is a clear lack of enforcement as well as consistency.

The public is starting to show concern about the credibility of these standards, however, particularly in food products – like the recent melamine milk scandals and toxic capsule incident. Chinese consumers lack the necessary understanding and awareness to drive their purchasing decisions according to sustainability concerns.

At the same time, some large manufacturers are paying more attention to the sustainability of their products as a way of increasing their market competitiveness, reducing their risk-profile and reducing cost through efficiency. For TSC, standardization isn’t about adding another layer to the process. It is a cost-effective way for companies to improve the sustainability of their products and a consistent way for them to communicate that to their business customers.

Since a large focus of TSC in China will be on decoding complex supply chains, what challenges do you anticipate ahead?

A large challenge will be applying sustainability standards developed predominantly in the West in China. Our challenge will be to determine how TSC tools and systems can be localized to meet the needs and standards of the Chinese market. The partnership with NanJing University will play a critical role in answering this question. They will also act as a neutral hub for us to connect with other stakeholders, particularly in the Chinese government.

Another challenge will be getting buy-in from the small and medium-size enterprise sector [SME]. How can we convince Chinese suppliers and manufacturers to buy into the concept of sustainability and offer practical tools and solutions to improve their performance? This will be challenging mainly because sustainability issues still remain a very ad hoc topic for small companies. We can overcome this by helping them become better businesses: cutting costs, reducing risks and building customer relationships.

My priority will be to convey our support to the Chinese suppliers of TSC members and international business. That is where TSC can play an instrumental role – leveraging business incentives to encourage Chinese suppliers to lead with sustainability.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on August 26, 2013.

Life Technologies: When the Search for Sustainability Becomes a Radical Overhaul

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

agriculture, Brand Management, climate change, cristina amorim, cso, CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, Disclosure & Transparency, energy, environment, Environment, ESG, genetic sequencing, ghg, kimberly-clark, life technologies, lifecycle analysis, oil, packaging, recycling, supply chain, Supply chain management, Sustainability, sustainability, terracycle, thermo fisher scientific, zero waste

For Cristina Amorim, sustainability has been an evolutionary journey.

Having spent almost a decade with Life Technologies – a life sciences company that produces a wide range of medical and research science products – which quadrupled in size through a series of mergers and acquisitions in that time, the company’s chief sustainability officer has seen multiple renditions of sustainability evolving to the next level.

“I’ve spent a decade looking at opportunities and getting sustainability initiatives off the ground that engage every employee, from the copy room to the board room,” she says. On the heels of the announcement that Thermo Fisher Scientific, a giant in life sciences research, is acquiring Life Technologies, I caught up with Amorim on what the past decade has taught her – and her employer – about setting a sustainability strategy that is evolutionary—moving from being good to being smart business.

Evaluating Sustainability: Asking the Right Question

From 2008 to 2012, the company cut energy use by 22 percent, water use by 52 percent, hazardous waste by 13 percent and CO₂ emissions by 21 percent, according to its latest sustainability report. With greater growth on the horizon, can Life Technologies continue its sustainability march?

According to Amorim, that’s the wrong question.

“We’re well positioned to harvest the smart business prophecies of sustainability. There is a lot to do to reach a closed loop system and position ourselves in the circular economy. The question is: when do you know you’ve gotten there?”

“I think this is a continuous spiral with no particular end point, but constantly looking for the new frontier that the sustainability lens brings. This is not about creeping incrementalism; it’s about radical change. It’s about turning a moment into a movement, and fostering multiple movements to effect real change”

“Five years ago, no one was talking about zero waste. The economy has changed, allowing zero waste to be a financially viable undertaking. We now have five certified zero waste sites, and the movement goes on. And what would come next?” she continued. “After zero waste, we would envision a zero emissions site—one that has no emissions to air, water, or landfill.”

Now in her fifth year of sustainability reporting, Amorim has spent the better part of the last decade in an environment, health and safety role and understands the complex dynamics of Life Technologies’ mainstream products. Acknowledging that her journey has been more about challenging the status quo, she explains:

“We constantly ask questions to challenge what we have been doing. For example, can we source raw materials that are less toxic? That would create a less permitted and safer operational environment with less waste to dispose of. This in turn leads to products that are simpler and cheaper to ship, as they require less packaging, less regulated storage and fewer transportation fees. As a result, our customers will have less packaging and hazardous waste to deal with, reducing their total cost of ownership.”

When Complex Challenges of the 21^st Century Meet Genetic Sequencing

So how did Amorim, who was recognized by Ethical Corporation in 2012 as Sustainability Executive of the Year and is Life Technologies’ first CSO, initiate a sustainability strategy that leverages the company’s technology in the markets it serves?

“As I see it, the entire company is the epitome of sustainability. Our genetic sequencing technology has the potential to address some of the world’s most pressing challenges. Just like in the 20^th century, computing science turned a mainframe computer into an iPhone, in this century, life sciences is increasingly putting more DNA sequencing power into smaller devices at a lower cost – making it accessible to every scientist in the world. As sequencing is becoming democratized, scientists increasingly have the tools to transform life as we know it.”

In a world where 70 percent of available freshwater is used for agricultural irrigation, Life Technologies products have the potential to transform food economics. By re-engineering seeds, scientists can create higher-yield and drought-resistant crops.

Amorim continues, “As scientists leverage DNA sequencing technology to harvest oil from algae, biofuels will free us from extracting petroleum from the earth and tackle climate change
simultaneously. The significantly decreasing cost of sequencing the genome hastens the development of more effective medicines, vaccines and clinical solutions that alleviate the health and economic burdens on society.”

Embedding a Cultural Shift: A Decade in the Making

As a biotechnology company, Life Technologies manufactures temperature-sensitive products requiring storage and shipment conditions ranging from -80° Celsius to ambient. Cold shipping requires expanded polystyrene (EPS) coolers and refrigerants like dry ice and gel packs, to maintain specific conditions during transport.

As the U.S.’ largest shipper of dry ice with FedEx, each year we ship 800,000 EPS coolers (equivalent to 105 truckloads) and consume 4500 metric tons of dry ice, costing $15 million in packing, refrigerant and freight. Given the poor recyclability of EPS, energy intensity of refrigerants and package weight, this represents our largest environmental impact and opportunity.

How is Life Technologies turning this challenge into an opportunity? Amorim explains, “Our strategy includes eliminating the need for coolers by converting products from cold to ambient shipping, piloting cooler reuse options, and investigating alternative materials to expanded polystyrene.”

Through a robust stability testing program, we have proven that some of our products can safely withstand ambient transport conditions. Just like transporting ice cream from the supermarket to your home freezer– we don’t carry a cooler or dry ice in our trunk.

“So far we’ve converted genetic analysis, sequencing, cell culture and molecular biology reagents, top-selling capillary electrophoresis and transfection reagents. The impact has been significant—each year, we now ship 250,000 fewer EPS coolers (33 fewer truckloads), use 2400 fewer metric tons of refrigerant, and save $4 million in operational costs globally. Most importantly, we know our packaging becomes our customers’ waste. These product conversions help us leave less branded garbage in their hallways.

Of course, the effort requires engagement across multiple functions. “From R&D to distribution and sales & marketing, everyone has a part to play. We tapped into natural leaders across these functions to become ambassadors for these initiatives. It provided them with visibility and career growth opportunities. They are delivering cost savings, protecting the environment and feeling good about it,” she added.

The Externalities: Collaborating with Suppliers

While these examples prove a significant point about how sustainability thinking can shift mindsets on profit, purpose and business value across organizations, what about Life Technologies’ external supply chain? With over 50,000 products and complex transportation cycles, how is the company addressing sustainability in its supply chain?

“I have a hard time understanding the traditional concept of ‘greening the supply chain.’ Asking hundreds of suppliers to fill out forms and check boxes provides no tangible value. We could never understand how to take action on that supplier data,” Amorim explained. “Instead, we find more value in partnering with key suppliers.”

One example is Kimberly-Clark. On the path to zero waste, Amorim and her team went dumpster diving one morning to understand their waste streams. What they found was a sea of blue and
purple latex gloves.

We approached the glove supplier, Kimberly-Clark, who partnered with us to implement a glove take-back program. It started in one location and has today expanded to five. We segregate the gloves at the point of use and Kimberly-Clark sends them to TerraCycle, who turn them into purple park benches. This partnership provides true value—glove take-back helped us achieve our zero waste goal and helped Kimberly-Clark increase their revenue by becoming our sole glove supplier globally.

Take Back: Turning Obligation into Opportunity

The circular economy has arrived. That is what excites Amorim, one of very few female CSOs in the private sector. “The regulatory environment is also helping us close the loop. The WEEE [Waste Electric Electronic Equipment] legislation in Europe is one example,” says Amorim.

WEEE institutionalizes the cradle-to-cradle concept as a means of keeping electronic equipment containing heavy metals out of landfills. “Wouldn’t you like it if Maytag removed your dishwasher at the end of its life? I can’t move it and it doesn’t fit in my trashcan. In Europe, we now have to set up a take-back scheme for all of our instruments. How can this be done profitably?”

“We realized that by taking instruments back only to recycle the parts was a cost burden. Instead we bring them back to refurbish certain product lines for resale, harvest high-value parts to be used on service calls, and responsibly recycle what’s left.”

For Life Technologies and other companies, refurbished instruments open up an entire new market. At a lower price point, instruments such as DNA sequencers are more accessible to more scientists. And with increased revenue, the WEEE obligation becomes an opportunity.

While issues like cold chain shipment, waste, and regulatory compliance present thorns on the way to the gilded goal of a closed-loop model for Life Technologies, triangular connections in its supply chain and their appetite for cutting-edge innovation leads one to believe the opportunities are endless for Amorim and her team.

As the exuberant sustainability chief concludes, “We’re aiming for radical.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on July 22, 2013.

In Good Company: Singh on CSR

~ Connecting the dots between Business, Society & the Environment

Tag Archives: Environment

Campbell Becomes America’s First Public Company to Acquire a Public Benefit Corporation: In Conversation with Plum Organics’ Cofounder