By Rutu Mody-Kamdar
Whose responsibility is it to be responsible? Is it the job of the government? Or large conglomerates? Or the general public, maybe? Definitions of sustainability have often been so broad and vague that it rarely attributes the job to anyone in particular.
As a marketer, I’ve often wondered if sustainability is a conversation that can be woven into our highly profit and revenue-driven world. Marketing has always been a tainted child in the world of the more woke generation who’s shifting gears and building narratives around conservation and minimalism. Marketing is, in fact, the antithesis of minimalism. As marketers, we’ve been accused of creating false needs, encouraging greed and overconsumption and materialism, and using several psychological hacks to sell products that in turn, generate huge profits.
However, several brands have jumped onto the bandwagon of sustainability campaigning. These campaigns are fit to win awards and pats on the back, but do they end up changing behaviour? Do they encourage a cut-down mindset, or are they only paying lip service to the mysterious world of sustainability, conservation, and minimalism?
There are two sides to the coin. While organisations are half-heartedly trying to do their bit to save the planet, consumers are also equally laggard in adopting a woke mindset regarding consumption. While the current generation’s needs are different from previous generations, and activism is rife, thanks to social media, there seems to be a distinct value-action gap that exists. One where we see consumers actively participating in debate and discussion, but rarely any significant action.
While making any purchase, consumers have a simple value-equation- “What am I getting vs. what I am paying.” While wearing a shoe that’s been made using ocean waste is great for the environment- how good is that shoe for me? Does it look good on me? Does it fit well? And does it match up with my value-equation of paying so much more? Until organisations don’t crack that code, all sustainability-driven campaigns will continue to be elitist and perfunctory. Collective planetary benefits are vague and ambiguous for consumers to understand.
Brands believe they are doing their bit by guilt-tripping consumers by adding cheeky messages that cajole them into being more environmentally conscious. While choosing a brand of washing detergent to recycling the towel in a hotel room, there is a passive-aggressive message that leads to existential angst- one where consumers often feel disconnected from the entire purpose of being conscious.
Today’s marketing must play an active role in converting consumers into aware citizens and building a dialogue on sustainability and conservation. But these messages need to go deeper.
To start with, marketers need to understand behaviour around sustainability. And add functional and personable benefits to products, rather than things that consumers can’t often grapple with. Guilt-tripping consumers rarely have any lasting benefits. So rather than market a shampoo on the fact that it sources from natural products and uses recycled water, try talking about how gentle it smells and is less harmful to the scalp. Get consumers to understand what sustainability can do for them rather than what they can do for sustainability.
The author is founder, Jigsaw Brand Consultants
Read Also: FIFS names Joy Bhattacharjya as director-general