Tag Archives: packaging

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

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


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’ Cristina Amorimmainstream 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 21st 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 20th 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 theLifeTech_2012 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.

Advertisement

#SharedValue & Sustainability: In Conversation with Nestlé Waters North America

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, CSR reporting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


 

A conversation with North America's largest seller of bottled water on how they define Shared Value, their take on what's often critiqued as an "unsustainable business model," their drive for modernizing recycling infrastructure and much more more!

[View the story “#SharedValue: A Chat with Nestle Waters North America” on Storify]

Decoding Nestlé Waters North America’s Sustainability Journey: Environmental Villain or Facts vs. Emotions?

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


When a company labels its Annual CSR Report as Creating Shared Value, you have to stop and wonder if they’re responding to the latest buzzword in the market or leveraging its potential by truly embedding it into their reporting and cultural framework.

In its third cycle, Nestlé Waters North America’s [NWNA] latest Creating Shared Value Report attempts to accomplish the latter. Among its headlines:

  • What the company is doing to advance recycling in the U.S.
  • The company’s path to achieving a zero-waste future
  • Its continued efforts to be the most efficient user of water within the beverage industry

To gain some firsthand perspective and background on these goals and the accompanying challenges for North America’s largest seller of bottled water, I reached out to EVP for Corporate Affairs Heidi Paul [Join us for a Twitter Chat today, June 18th, at 1:00pm ET to connect with Paul directly at #SharedValue!].

NWNA_2012_CSR_Report_coverAmong my questions: how does the company balance criticism for selling bottled water while promoting healthy choices, what it is doing to shift its supply chain and use of plastic, its  well-acknowledged work in the area of Extended Producer Responsibility, and how her team plans on including consumers in its drive for sustainability.

Defining “Shared Value”

Paul started the conversation by setting the record straight on the company’s definition of what’s quickly gained momentum as a replacement for CSR: Creating Shared Value.

“We define CSV as a strategic way to achieve triple bottom line sustainability. In other words, be financially, environmentally and socially sustainable.  At the end of the day, Nestlé seeks to create shared value in those areas where we can make the most impact and that are material to our business. Globally, that is in the areas of Nutrition, Water and Rural Development. For our bottled water business in North America, our focus is on healthy hydration, packaging responsibility and watershed management.”

Has the terminology helped NWNA’s citizenship team – 28 people strong across the company – integrate its sustainability goals more effectively within its business units?

“It has done wonders. When you’re looking at philanthropy unconnected to business, it is not really sustainable. CSV focuses our engagement on the three critical topics and asks the whole company to see what can be improved for society and ourselves. We get the benefit of input from our supply chain, employee groups, community partners, etc.,” she said.

Coding the Impact of Bottled Water

Let’s get to NWNA’s main product then: bottled water. Does it feel the twinge of irony every time that is said in the same sentence as “shared value”? Paul chose to answer that with some data:

“Seventy percent of what Americans drink – according to the Beverage Marketing Corporation – today comes from a package, not from a cup or the tap. In fact, our research indicates that if people don’t have access to bottled water, 63 percent say they will buy some other beverage from a package instead, often a sugared or caloric drink with a greater environmental impact.”

“We play a key role in increasing Americans’ consumption of water, which is the healthiest beverage choice. As the data indicates, there is a crucial role that bottled water plays in consumer choice. Everywhere there is a high-calorie sugary, packaged drink available; we want to make sure there is water as well,” she emphasized.

Does the company’s sales data support Paul’s emphasis? “The volume sales increase for 2012 for the bottled water industry was 6.2 percent. And per capita consumption reached nearly 31 gallons, up more than 5 percent from 2011. Further, 51 percent of people who stop drinking sugared soft drinks are switching to bottled water. In fact, bottled water is outselling sugared soft drinks in grocery stores in eight major markets across the country,” she supplied.

At the end of the day, Paul believes, the company’s job is to talk about why bottled water is a choice – nestle waters north america brandsan amply available one – and why it should be available anywhere packaged beverages are being sold.

Is Nestlé Waters North America’s Business Model Sustainable?

That brought us to the next obvious thread: the plastic being used to produce the bottles. Recalling a keynote given by former NWNA CEO Kim Jeffery at a Net Impact conference years ago, I asked Paul how the company handles its fiercest critics regarding its use of plastic.

In a jungle of facts, fiction and emotions around environmental issues, Jeffery confronted the audience back in 2009 with a firm and resolute stand: we sell bottled water and we are doing everything we can to make that process sustainable.

Where there was a finality of “take it or leave it” to Jeffery’s remarks four years ago, Paul took a more nuanced approach to respond.

“Limited resources need to be used again and again. We have taken the mantle of becoming part of that solution. The larger point is there are billions of servings of beverages being sold everyday in some sort of package. Some populations are getting most of their calories from bottled drinks. And every time they choose water over a different drink, they’re making a more healthy and environmentally friendly choice,” she said.

And is a goal of reaching 60 percent recycling ambitious enough considering the climate and environmental challenges we face?

“At the time we were setting the goals, the nation was at a 28 percent recycling rate for PET plastic and thought that a goal to double that rate was ambitious and would require big changes. We had a lot to learn. We began to study recycling programs and the patchwork of policies and systems that were in place but were not moving overall recycling rates very much. There are big opportunities for increasing recycling by improving collection in public places, business and industry and in urban residential buildings. Today, however, there is no money going to fund this expansion of infrastructure.”

“There is also the issue of competing systems. Bottle bills for example do raise the recycling rates for bottles and cans, but actually reduce the efficiency of curbside because it is taking the most valuable commodities, which reduce the revenue, potential from curbside. Our goal was to work with others and find the most efficient system with the highest impact,” she emphasized. “

Environmental Villain or a Case of Facts vs. Emotions?

Of course the plastic of the bottled water we consume is bad for the environment. But so is almost every other product and consumer packaging we use in our day-to-day lives as study after study has shown.

Turning the argument on its head though, would we be wasting as much or filling up landfills as quickly as we are if we didn’t have the choice of bottled water to begin with? Where does consumer choice end and producer responsibility kick in?

Identifying that as another area for impact, Paul picked up:

“If bottled water isn’t available, people routinely purchase another packaged drink, one with calories and with a heavier environmental footprint. The availability of bottled water in times of natural disasters, where often tap water can be compromised, also creates a role for bottled water that goes beyond most product categories. Bottled water provides a reliable second source of water in these situations – that’s something everyone in our company is proud of.”

So when your business model is set around selling a product that is healthy and encourages nutrition while understanding and targeting its impacts through a well laid out sustainability strategy NWNA_priorities– as  Jeffery succinctly put it in his exit interview with Greenbiz Publisher Joel Makower earlier this year – is it fair to be labeled an environmental villain?

Perhaps, perhaps not.

The Challenges of Sustainability

As Paul reiterated, the journey of tackling facts vs. reality has been full of challenges and continues to be an uphill task. “Like anything else, our work in the area of recycling, water conservation and reducing our social and environmental footprint has been a constant education,” she said, citing the lack of modern and efficient recycling system as one of the company’s top challenges.

“Not too many people understand the current system in place. There are numerous questions like who is funding what, how does it work, who are the middle men, how do we get to the next stage, where can we build in efficiencies, etc. And if the goal is to accept our responsibility as a producer to recycle efficiently toward a goal of zero waste, then we need answers to these questions.”

“We’ve always said we’re open to options, and so far the option that we have seen with the highest potential to be low-cost and efficient is a well-constructed EPR system, run by industry. What makes this complicated is there are a dozen different ways EPR has been implemented globally. Many of those are not efficient. This uncertainty about the ability to do it “right” makes others in the dialogue want to take more of a “wait and see” approach. Even if you convince people who, done well, EPR in the form being proposed is the best solution, there are doubts about implementation across the board,” she said.

Other challenges?

Consumer vs. Producer Responsibility

Paul cited the potential of collaboration in building more sources for wind and solar energy, as well [“we’re not there yet but this is definitely on our radar”].

There is also a need for collaboration in the area of water stewardship. “Improving watersheds will require collaborations among the various stakeholders within a watershed, be that users, scientists, environmental groups or government. Nestlé Waters North America manages the watershed areas around the 40 springs we use that are overseen by our 10 Natural Resource Managers. We have also made a commitment to collaborate on two watershed projects per year,” Paul said.

And what about NWNA’s consumers? How does the company leverage its brand to shift consumer behavior?

“In the 1970s, recycling meant ‘putting it in the bin.’ Today, this is old news. What motivates people now is when they understand its benefits. If a consumer recycles a water bottle after use, the greenhouse gas impact of that bottle is estimated to be reduced by more than 15 percent.”

“Also, we need to close the loop on what happens to the bottles after they are recycled. They are not trash; they are a resource that can be used again and again. Right now our 50 percent r-pet bottles in our Arrowhead, Deer Park and Resource brands shows consumers what happens when they recycle. It becomes a new bottle. The visibility of this message on our bottles helps us tell the story that we need much better recycling to become a more sustainable world.”

The company’s top challenge moving forward?

“At the end of the day, you want zero impact, but is that possible? Our challenge is to keep finding those ways to improve when it feels like you’ve reduced the impact to the minimum,” she said, finishing with a flourish: “You need to find the next frontier every time – that’s the goal. And the challenge.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on June 18, 2013.

Connecting the Dots Between Consumers, Consumption & Sustainability: The External Face of Unilever’s Sustainable Living Plan

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


What role does a consumer-facing sustainability strategy play in an ambitious plan like the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan? That’s where I left off in my interview with Marketing Chief Keith Weed last week in our review of the ambitious Plan two years since launch.

From Desire to Habit: Unilever’s Five Levers for Change

He chose to respond by explaining a framework called the “Five Levers for Change” that his team developed to solve exactly this dilemma. An excerpt:

  1. Make it understood. Sometimes people don’t know about a behavior and why they should do it. This Lever raises awareness and encourages acceptance.
  2. Make it easy. People are likely to take action if it’s easy, but not if it requires extra effort.  This Lever establishes convenience and confidence.
  3. Make it desirable. The new behavior needs to fit with how people like to think of themselves, and how they like others to think of them.  This Lever is about self and society.
  4. Make it rewarding. New behaviors need to articulate the tangible benefits that people care about.  This Lever demonstrates the proof and payoff.
  5. Make it a habit.  Once consumers have changed, it is important to create a strategy to help hold the behavior in place over time. This Lever is about reinforcing and reminding.

“We need to continue to work with others to drive this change. If we achieve the Sustainable Living  Five_Levers_of_Change_unileverPlan, and it doesn’t change business at scale, ultimately that’s a fail. Unilever’s impact is huge but we’re still a drop in the ocean. We need a movement going for businesses to help address this,” he explained.

“We are already working with organizations like the World Toilet Organization, UNICEF and others on sanitation, for example, which is a very important issue for us. Two million children die every year from pneumonia or diarrhoea. In a world where there are more mobile phones than toilets or toothbrushes, our work ahead is sure cut out for us,” he added.

The fact is Unilever cannot do it alone. None of it.

And Weed and team have understood that since launching the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan. While scale is a huge factor, organizations require individual and mass power to change consumer behavior and habits. And that is where the Five Levers for Change along with creative partnerships like the kind Weed referred to can help.

Making Sustainability Personal…

“I was in Brazil recently speaking to a lady in Sao Paulo about the environment and the city’s pollution. For her this meant dust from the nearby construction and the tainted flavor of her water supply. These were her immediate challenges – not deforestation or climate change. People view the world through the prism of my world – family, friends, and community. Our world is a step bigger: the city you live in, the supermarket, the local dump, etc. And the final level, ‘the world’ is the rainforest, the ice melting in the Arctic,” Weed continued.

His point: We need to connect “my world” with “the world” for consumers. “Right now we’re at level one. When I asked the lady what she thought would solve the issues, she suggested stopping the
littering because it would stop the drains from getting clogged and therefore avoid local floods. Level One,” he said.

What companies need to do is create a movement and work with people to drive change. A natural question then: Is Unilever working with other companies on its initiatives or primarily with nonprofits?

… and a Business Driver

One example Weed offered was palm oil.

“We purchase a lot of palm oil but it still makes only for three percent of the world’s palm oil. We started our journey by promising to source 100 percent of our palm oil sustainably by 2020. It’s a clear signal to the entire palm oil supply chain that that is the future we are working toward.”

“But this goal would be impossible to reach across the value chain without working with other purchasers of palm oil. So we work with other businesses and NGOs on the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil to do this collectively.”

In fact, Weed says Unilever managed to reach the 100 percent goal last year because of this collective effort. The next step: To make the supply chain of sustainable palm oil easier and connected by 2020. “Right now procuring sustainable palm oil means weaving through a very complex supply chain,” he added.

Another example: the work of the Consumer Goods Forum, which includes 650 members including manufacturers, competitors, retailers and NGOs, responsible for over $2.5 trillion in sales. And Weed is pretty positive about the goals and work of the Forum: “There are a lot of companies getting behind the need to address the negative impacts of deforestation, and momentum is starting to build,” he said.

While momentum is starting to build – with several companies announcing new initiatives and collaborations – the issue did bring us back full circle to where we started: how do we connect these overarching partnerships with the average consumer?

Subtle Messaging & Cause Marketing

And what role does cause marketing play in Unilever’s 2020 plan? Should we expect more nuanced advertising on the lines of the Dove campaign, for example? Or go full throttle like Patagonia’s Sourcing_unilever“Don’t  Buy This Jacket” campaign?

It’s going to be subtler, says Weed. “For example, for our Tomato soup in Germany or our Ketchup in India, we talk about sourcing tomatoes sustainably. With our Lipton tea, we talk about sourcing all our tea and tea bags sustainably by 2020,” Weed explained.

“Consumers comprehend these messages differently though. When we talk about sourcing our tea sustainably, customers see the Rainforest Alliance logo as a sign of better quality and taste, not necessarily sustainability. With our Hellman’s mayonnaise we discuss cage-free eggs. Consumers perceive that as an indication of better food: animals are better looked after therefore they’re getting better food. However, it’s still early days,” he added.

Work Culture: Participating in Change

Early days also for Unilever’s employees, who are witnessing – and participating – in a significant shift culturally at a company that has left behind decades of “doing things one way” to a more complex ideology. How has the company’s culture evolved since 2010?

According to Weed, the greater purpose espoused by the Sustainable Living Plan has been significant for employees – kind of like Performance with Purpose over at competitor PepsiCo. “The notion that you can work for a business to earn money, build a career and also do it in a better way is significant. We need new ways of doing business in the future – our generation has stolen from our children’s
generation financially and environmentally – so we ‘re going out and saying we want our employees to innovate and encourage new ways of doing business,” Weed said.

In fact, the marketing chief, who also leads internal and external communications for Unilever, says despite the many crises facing our world today engagement levels among employees have gone up consistently every year.

A sentiment that resonated in an email I received this week from Kam Erik Fierstine, a project delivery manager in Unilever Engineering Services at the company’s Henderson, Nev.-based ice cream plant. Here’s what he wrote when I asked him about the culture at his company:

“The Sustainable Living Plan is something that is quite apparent to those of us that live in a desert-like area where we are very conscious of water usage. It has shown our employees that Unilever has the same values that we were raised with. Our employees would not put up with a leaky faucet at home, and now they have the backing of management to proactively fix these simple issues at work.”

“We all agree that we want to leave a healthy planet for future generations and we can help do that by conserving our resources. Our employees see the management team walking the talk and that empowers them to escalate issues and voice new ideas. They will now do small things to make a larger impact like pick up things from the floor or switch off conveyors or equipment when not in use.”

The Henderson, Nev.-based ice cream plant was recently honored by the Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy for its sustainability practices.

“They see us taking on challenges in a positive way and that’s inspiring,” Weed wraps up.

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

Corporate Social Responsibility at Target: Behind the Red Bullseye

07 Monday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Target released four new corporate responsibility goals in 2011:

  • Increase sustainable seafood selection
  • Improve owned-brand packaging sustainability
  • Increase diabetes HbA1c testing compliance
  • Increase reading proficiency

Now, Target’s 2011 CSR Report offers pages of graphs measuring the Minneapolis-based retailer’s progress against these goals. While the graphs look promising and underscore the challenges of operating in a competitive market with multiple layers of stakeholders, I wanted to understand the context behind these goals and what the execution would look like.

I sat down with Tim Baer, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary with Target, for a conversation about the goals and how his team plans to demystify complicated supply chains and motivate its employees and customers toward healthy and sustainable choices.

Aman Singh: While the PDF of goals and progress gave me a sense of exactly that, i.e., progress, it didn’t give me a sense of Target’s mission/values. Can you elaborate?

Tim Baer: At Target, we’re committed to positively impacting the lives of our guests and team members. Since 1946, our legacy of giving and service has been reflected in a commitment that today totals more than $3 million a week to our communities.

Tim_Baer_TargetAnd at the end of the day, by continuing to  serve our team members and communities, we ensure our future success. As a result of our giving model, we benefit from being a workplace and shopping destination of choice for our team members and guests. Not only do our guests value our commitment to communities and giving, but our team members do as well.

To bring our vision of strong, healthy and safe communities to life — which we can’t do alone — we work with community, business and civic partners who inform and share in our approach. We know we can make a meaningful impact, so we set goals to guide our work in three focus areas — helping to put more U.S. children on the path to graduation, reducing our impact on the environment and helping Target team members live healthy, balanced lives.

Why is education such a big goal for Target?

Education, specifically K-3 literacy, is important to Target for three primary reasons. First, we believe that every child deserves the opportunity to reach his or her full potential. And, we’re compelled to do our part to address the education challenge in America, putting more kids on the path to high school graduation.

Second, based on guest surveys, we know that our guests care about education more than any other social issue, and we’re committed to giving to communities in a way that positively impacts our guests and their families.

Third, we know that reading proficiently by the end of third grade is a significant milestone on the path to graduation. This is the time when a child transitions from learning to read, to reading to learn. A child who cannot read proficiently by the end of third grade is four times more likely to drop out of high school when compared with a child who can.

Ultimately, education is critically important to the success of our children and our economy. By supporting education, we are investing in developing an educated workforce that is prepared for today’s and tomorrow’s challenging work environment. At Target, our team is our competitive advantage, and preparing future team members with a quality education today makes good business sense.

CSR_Education_Target

Your data shows that you were not able to achieve your water reduction goals? Can you give us a sense of the challenges and where improvements need to be made?

To recap the report, Target used 3.45 billion gallons of water, representing a 0.3 percent reduction in water use per square foot from our 2009 baseline. Although our absolute water use exceeded our initial baseline, we also increased our total real estate square footage, which led to a decrease in water use per square foot.

The most significant challenges we faced in 2011 were drought-like conditions in some of our mature markets like Texas, Minnesota and Iowa, where we have a relatively high concentration of stores requiring increased irrigation. This negative impact was modestly softened by our rollout of several water-saving initiatives, which we estimate will contribute a reduction of 1.4 percent annually starting this year.

A few examples of our water-saving initiatives include:

  • Expanded installation of smart irrigation controllers that irrigate based on real-time local weather data in lieu of set times,
  • Use of ultra-low flow urinals and water closets, and
  • Elimination of continuously running dipper wells for ice cream and coffee stations at Target Café and Starbucks locations in our stores.

We’re also in the process of installing real-time water submeters in a number of stores to pinpoint the quantity of water a typical store uses for various operations. This will help improve our evaluation of water-saving opportunities moving forward.

Environment_CSR_Target

You have a goal of reducing owned-brand product packaging for at least 50 product designs by 2016. Is that aggressive enough?

While we’ve targeted 50 packaging designs, these changes will be implemented for a much larger number of items that use the same packaging.

We know environmental stewardship is important to Target guests, and our sustainable packaging designs will let them know that Target’s commitment to reducing our environmental impact begins before our products hit shelves.

Over the next five years, Target will be developing sustainable packaging designs that yield at least a 10 percent improvement in one of several attributes of our existing owned-brand packaging. We’ll do this in several ways, including reducing overall packaging, using more recycled or renewable content, and reducing product waste. We’ll also look to use more recyclable materials in our packaging, Sustainable Packaging at Targetcounting these improvements toward our goal only if the updated packaging is 100 percent recyclable.

The goals indicated regarding packaging are limited to your owned-brand products. Are there any plans to push your suppliers and CPG partners into more responsible, transparent and environmentally friendly actions?

We believe in leading by example and hope that by creating more sustainable packaging for our owned brands, we can inspire our suppliers, CPG partners and peers to implement more sustainable packages in their own products.

The report indicates strong progress toward empowering employees to be more health-conscious. Can you discuss some of the challenges behind the numbers?

For us, 2011 was a year of learning in regards to team member wellbeing.

We recognized goals specific to preventive service utilization rates were difficult to measure consistently and accurately, so we adopted HEDIS [National Committee for Quality Assurance’s Health Effectiveness Data and Information Set] measures. By doing so, we can support our wellbeing efforts by comparing our utilization rates to those of other employers or healthcare entities like medical groups or health plans.

The size and geographic distribution of the Target team member population reaches across 49 states, 1,700 stores, 37 distribution centers and nine domestic headquarters locations. We employ more than 365,000 team members and know they have varying degrees of health engagement, variable disease prevalence and differing perspectives on healthcare services. This is an opportunity for us to develop tailored programs that address these differences, more effectively reaching every team member, regardless of where and how they live and work.

Can you summarize the key highlights of the report?

All of Target’s corporate responsibility objectives ladder up to our larger goal of creating a brighter future for our team members, our communities and the world we live in. Target is here for good. Through all of these initiatives, we’re committed to positively impacting the lives of our guests and team members.

Additionally, Target’s 2011 Corporate Responsibility Report is the most transparent corporate responsibility report we’ve ever released. It represents the first time Target declared a GRI Application Level and obtained a GRI Application Level Check. [For more information, Target’s GRI Application Level/Check Statement from GRI were posted on www.Target.com/hereforgood on July 13, 2012.]

Why bother reporting on this set of internal goals? How do you measure the “success” of your CSR report?

Our commitment to our guest extends far beyond our stores, and we believe truly great service includes supporting the communities where we live and work. In business, Target collaborates and innovates to drive results. Key to that collaboration is transparency when it comes to measuring and reporting progress toward goals, allowing us to grow as a company.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on August  6, 2012.