Comments on: The corporation strikes back.

By: Ashley alsup | Platformblog

Ashley alsup | Platformblog — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:13:39 +0000

[...] The corporation strikes back. | Zeus Jones [...]

By: Modern brands 2.0: revenge of the corporation. / what consumes me, bud caddell

Modern brands 2.0: revenge of the corporation. / what consumes me, bud caddell — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 06:30:53 +0000

[...] mentioned a while back that I thought big corporations were starting to adopt Modern Brand strategies with a twist. Since then, we’ve found some more examples of innovation from big companies that [...]

By: Modern brands 2.0: revenge of the corporation. | From The Head Of Zeus Jones

Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:09:55 +0000

By: adrianho

adrianho — Tue, 04 May 2010 19:14:05 +0000

I agree, it's another data point to what Ashley says below that the agenda is: “still being defined and led by the specialist or 'passion' sector.” This is a reversal of influence that I think is also interesting and could be another post!

By: DavidJHawksworth

DavidJHawksworth — Tue, 04 May 2010 17:43:36 +0000

I can't add any solid evidence but can add an opinion on why this might be happening. Generally companies are pretty risk averse. Being disliked and derided, as well as being placed under more scrutiny with many more ways of being 'found out,' is a big risk. There has been such a full public adoption of the idea of the big bad company, that we are now seeing their response. In the sustainability space the most forward thinking companies tend to be the giants – you mentioned Walmart, but I would add P&G, Mcdonalds, Unilever and Coke to that list. When the big brands come under fire they are best placed to respond. I think we are starting to see that now.

By: Setting the agenda. | From The Head Of Zeus Jones

Setting the agenda. | From The Head Of Zeus Jones — Tue, 04 May 2010 15:20:52 +0000

[...] was inspired by one of Ashley’s comments in my last post. She [...]

By: adrianho

adrianho — Tue, 04 May 2010 14:14:00 +0000

I agree, it’s another data point to what Ashley says below that the agenda is: “still being defined and led by the specialist or ‘passion’ sector.” This is a reversal of influence that I think is also interesting and could be another post!

By: David Hawksworth

David Hawksworth — Tue, 04 May 2010 12:43:00 +0000

I can’t add any solid evidence but can add an opinion on why this might be happening. Generally companies are pretty risk averse. Being disliked and derided, as well as being placed under more scrutiny with many more ways of being ‘found out,’ is a big risk. There has been such a full public adoption of the idea of the big bad company, that we are now seeing their response. In the sustainability space the most forward thinking companies tend to be the giants – you mentioned Walmart, but I would add P&G, Mcdonalds, Unilever and Coke to that list. When the big brands come under fire they are best placed to respond. I think we are starting to see that now.

By: theothertexan

theothertexan — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:44:02 +0000

Yes, the only good thing is that everyone will be much more skeptical when big companies claim to be 'green,' with even Haynes underwear launching a new line of eco pants.

On a side note, do you not think that 'green' is one of the worst marketing words ever invented? Will be interesting to see the language that big companies have to use when consumers beg never to hear the word again.

Here is a link to a McDonald's Germany logo that is so bad, I thought it had to be a joke. http://popsop.com/30345

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:44:00 +0000

Yes, the only good thing is that everyone will be much more skeptical when big companies claim to be ‘green,’ with even Haynes underwear launching a new line of eco pants.

On a side note, do you not think that ‘green’ is one of the worst marketing words ever invented? Will be interesting to see the language that big companies have to use when consumers beg never to hear the word again.

Here is a link to a McDonald’s Germany logo that is so bad, I thought it had to be a joke. http://popsop.com/30345

By: adrianho

adrianho — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 03:11:17 +0000

No, thank you for engaging Adam! I am an idealist too and love sentiments like Vaynerchuk's but I think that, forced to chose between impact on the side of the big companies and authenticity on the part of small companies, the majority will vote for impact most of the time.

I am also biased towards wanting the underdog to win – we are an underdog! but I am also pragmatic. I think small companies need to find a new game to play because big companies are learning the rules very quickly.

By: adrianho

adrianho — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 03:06:45 +0000

Good point(s), agree that the agenda is still being set by smaller companies who are embedding cause more centrally into their businesses, however I think that's going to change too. A great example for me is GreenXchange (http://greenxchange.force.com/) which is definitely about big business establishing the green agenda at a very fundamental level. I don't think the thought-leadership that small companies have enjoyed can last when big companies have decided it's strategic for them to compete. I'm not sure I'm happy about it.

By: Ashley Alsup

Ashley Alsup — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 02:38:58 +0000

What's interesting about Walmart is that they are communicating their sustainability agenda largely to Wall Street and social critics. When they talk to their customers, they talk about 'rollbacks' and cost-savings. This movement is neither led by nor marketed to their actual customer, but to the people who might otherwise consider Walmart yesterday's (evil) big box concept.

I think there is a growing need for 'editor brands' in our culture now that there are so many 'specialist brands.' Walmart at its best could become a Whole Foods for the people across multiple categories. The pressure they are exerting on all of their suppliers is forcing the suppliers to change in order to remain in good stead. So they are using their scale to bully change at a (theoretically) unprecedented scale, something Method could never do.

But the criteria of what makes something 'good' (design, social, health, energy use) is still being defined and led by the specialist or 'passion' sector. Big brands are more in the position to enforce and execute.

By: adrianho

adrianho — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 22:11:00 +0000

No, thank you for engaging Adam! I am an idealist too and love sentiments like Vaynerchuk’s but I think that, forced to chose between impact on the side of the big companies and authenticity on the part of small companies, the majority will vote for impact most of the time.

By: adrianho

adrianho — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 22:06:00 +0000

Good point(s), agree that the agenda is still being set by smaller companies who are embedding cause more centrally into their businesses, however I think that’s going to change too. A great example for me is GreenXchange (http://greenxchange.force.com/) which is definitely about big business establishing the green agenda at a very fundamental level. I don’t think the thought-leadership that small companies have enjoyed can last when big companies have decided it’s strategic for them to compete. I’m not sure I’m happy about it.