Search

By Pat Proano, Assistant Deputy Director, County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works

Californians have always been at the forefront of sustainability.

There is no better demonstration of this leadership than here in the County of Los Angeles, where we continue to be recognized with awards for excellence and achievement in the development and restoration of sustainable multi-use eco-systems and capital projects that consistently earn Leadership in Energy and Environmental design (LEED) certification.

We have also become master recyclers and maintain some of the highest recycling rates in the U.S. In Los Angeles alone, we recycle nearly two thirds of our trash. But despite this success, we are now at a critical juncture in how to sustainably manage our waste.

Conversion technology - also known as waste to energy - offers the answer for handling that small percentage of materials that just cannot be recycled.

Put simply, CTs are facilities that convert trash into electricity or biofuels, as well as other useful byproducts. These technologies have been embraced by governments and citizens around the globe, and countries such as Japan, Israel and Spain have relied on them for countless years for the management of municipal waste. Not only would we generate new green collar jobs by constructing these facilities locally, but we would be creating a less environmentally impactful system with increased recycling rates and reduced air emissions.

Seven years ago, the LA County Board of Supervisors saw the need to establish a more sustainable waste management system that reduces our reliance on landfills. Coupled with the imminent closure of Puente Hills Landfill, the country’s largest landfill, and the escalating price of shipping waste to remote parts of California by rail, alternatives had to be found. The Board approved a multi-phased program aimed at promoting the development of sophisticated new CT facilities in the region.

However, state regulations have not kept pace with these local efforts, and have, in fact, hindered development of conversion technologies. Current definitions are confusing and, in some cases, scientifically inaccurate, making it difficult for them to be permitted in this state. If we cannot develop these facilities, we will continue to put trash in the ground—the least desirable option for all Californians.

While we’ve been waiting for a legislative fix, municipalities continue to be left with the same outdated methods for managing waste in our communities.  What does that look like?  Since the year 2000, Californians have thrown away approximately half a billion tons of trash.

In other words, even after reducing, reusing and recycling over half of the waste we generated, over the last decade we threw away enough trash to fill the renowned Pasadena Rose Bowl nearly 2,000 times over.

Recently, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors took a major step forward in developing conversion technologies in California with its unanimous approval of a motion calling on Sacramento to modernize outdated regulations and develop a friendlier attitude to the development of CT facilities in the state.

And Sacramento itself seems to recognize the role conversion technologies can play in the management of waste.

California Governor Jerry Brown’s office recently expressed its support for establishing a “technology neutral, feedstock-based performance standard” to replace the current unscientific definition written into state law and establish a clearer permit pathway for CTs. Also, in August, the governor adopted a comprehensive BioEnergy Action Plan, collaboratively written by nearly a dozen state environmental and regulatory agencies, that calls for accelerating the production of renewable energy and clean burning fuels from solid waste and other biomass sources in the state.

We are enthusiastic about the opportunity to put these technologies into practice locally and throughout the state. We must continue working in good faith with those in Sacramento and statewide to ensure that the benefits of conversion technologies are available to all Californians.

Let’s find a way forward by developing modern definitions. Let’s work from a factually correct understanding of conversion technologies and a clear-eyed assessment of their importance in a modern, efficient system. Only by working together can we create the most sustainable waste system that respects the environment and economy for all Californians.

[image credit: Floyd B. Bariscale: Flickr cc]

Pat Proano is an Assistant Deputy Director at the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, overseeing the Department’s Environmental Programs Division. A 30-year veteran of Los Angeles County, Proano has most recently been at the forefront of the County’s efforts at integrating Conversion Technologies into the municipal waste system.

This is part of a series of articles by MBA students at California College of the Arts dMBA program. Follow along here.

By Alex M. Vazquez

It just happens. Amidst all of the meetings, managing a department, and cutting costs in a struggling economy, a key employee just resigns.   A slight panic ensues as the search begins to find and train a replacement as quickly as possible. And in the meantime, I must take on the extra workload created by the employee’s absence. I find myself asking, “Was there anything I could have done differently to avoid this situation?”

Turnover has high costs that range from 10 to 30 percent of the employee’s annual salary. The costs are both direct expenses such as recruiting and the expense of the loss of productivity and institutional knowledge.

There is a wide array of both articulated and unarticulated reasons why someone leaves their job. Managers who focus on development and training their successors at every opportunity can avoid many of these reasons.  These are the managers who see a thriving employee as someone who can be trusted and trained to take on new responsibilities and potentially move into a management position. They build skills and leadership training into their daily interactions with staff. The impact of this perspective on culture can be immense, as staff will know they are highly valued by both their manager and the company. It enables a culture of ongoing learning, innovation, and teambuilding, which is vital to a sustainable workplace. By empowering staff through training and developing new skills, companies can retain high performing, loyal staff and avoid the high costs of recruiting and training a new employee.

When managers are exposed to this perspective, the first response may be a combination of, “How do I keep my highly trained staff from leaving or what if they take my job?” Of course, there is no way of ensuring that an employee will not leave the company, but by implementing the practice of training your successor, you can ensure the company has a strong pool of employees to pull from, in the event a position becomes available. You will not be left wondering how you are going to fit an entire recruitment and training cycle into your already busy workday, because you will already know of internal candidates that are qualified for the job. As for the concern of someone replacing you – don’t forget that as you train someone in a job or skill that you possess, it allows you to show your ability at developing high functioning staff and opens you up to gaining additional skills as you will have more time to pursue those opportunities, for your own development and for the company’s growth.

What would it look like if your managers had created a culture of training a successor at every opportunity?  What would it have looked like for you in that position and for the company?  This level of investment into staff will be reciprocated either by successful staff performance or by establishing a reputation of a culture of development, which will be highly sought after by job seekers. By training your successor, it will increase the productivity, skill and innovation of your workforce, allow you to better retain top talent, and give you a faster, more effective response mechanism to change

By Gia Machlin

It’s that time of year when we look back and reflect on the past year and make silly lists.  Well this list is far from silly – it is quite sobering news for many of us to accept.  In 2012, climate change came to the forefront.  Here are 5 reasons why:

5) 2012 was the hottest year on record.   

A December 2012 report by the independent non profit organization Climate Central states: “There is a 99.99999999 percent chance that 2012 will be the hottest year ever recorded in the continental 48 states, based on our analysis of 118 years of temperature records through Dec. 10, 2012.”  Not that we won’t see more days with below freezing temperatures and chilling winds, but those days are becoming less frequent.  While this is good news for those that hate the cold, it is bad news for the planet, as sea levels rise and arctic habitats disappear.

4) Politicians are starting to notice.

Other than the quite embarrassing absence of any mention of climate change in the presidential debates this fall, more leaders in business, politics, and the media are bringing this issue to the forefront. Eight out of ten companies are incorporating climate change into their business agenda and organizations including the World Bank, the American Meteorological Society, and even the head of the world’s largest mining company, Australian BHP Billiton, have issued statements regarding the reality and threat of climate change.  Governor Cuomo, Mayor Bloomberg, other political leaders are also making climate change preparation a top policy issue.

3) This summer the US suffered from the worst drought in the last 50 years.

Unfortunately, climate scientists predict that droughts like this one and the ones seen in the last few years around the world will become more common. Thinking beyond the financial impact of the drought on farmers, and our own pockets, the increased crop prices will have “severe consequences on the precarious lives and livelihoods of people in poverty” according to Oxfam.  This will lead to spreading food unrest and ultimately political instability much quicker then we expect, according to the experts.  Sounds pretty grim.

2) The Ski Industry is noticing

A 2012 NRDC report concluded that the U.S. ski industry loses close to $1.7 billion in revenue and 13,000 jobs in years with lower snowfall. This one is very near and dear to my heart.  My 14 year old son and 9 year old daughter participate in the ski teams and training programs at Mount Snow, Vermont (from where I am writing this post).  I’d say just about nothing makes my son happier than his time on the ski slopes.  He is only interested in going to college near a ski resort.  According to this report, the average number of days with snow cover in the Northeast will decrease by 50% to 75% in the coming years.  Will my son move to Alaska?  Are there non-stop flights from NYC?

And the number one reason 2012 was the year that made us pay attention to climate change is:

1) Hurricane Sandy

Hurricane Sandy devastated the mighty Big Apple and made us all stand up and pay attention. Climate scientists have long been warning us that much of Manhattan will be under water by the end of the century.  On October 29, 2012, we saw that begin to unfold in front of our eyes.  And while New Yorkers have a wonderful sense of community and resilience in times of crisis, many of us remain sheltered from the impacts of weather events, living in our high rises and ordering sushi to our hearts’ delight.  In the days after the hurricane, when many people in the tri-state area were without power, suffering from water and wind damage, and much worse, those of us who were lucky enough to remain unscathed watched from our living rooms as our neighbors suffered endlessly.  And excuse me if I sound cynical, but while we felt sadness and did what we could to help those in need, we also had to deal with our own major inconveniences such as no mass transportation, no school, very few restaurants, cars under water at downtown garages, and the like.  Climate change finally hit the 1%, and could no longer be ignored as something that affects “the rest of the world.”

For those passionate about the environment and optimistic about the potential for partnerships between businesses and NGOs, last week’s tragic death of Rebecca Tarbotton marks a tragic start to 2013. The Executive Director of Rainforest Action Network (RAN) died in a freak accident last Wednesday at a beach north of Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. Tarbotton was 39.

For many of the environmental movement’s most passionate advocates and true believers, Tarbotton’s ascent to head of RAN was inspirational. While young women have long been in the trenches fighting for environmental justice, climate change awareness and the need for a cleaner and greener economy, the leadership at many large environmental organizations did not reflect the troops fighting at the community level. Therefore, Tarbotton’s appointment as head of RAN in 2010, after three years at the organization, was a huge milestone.

Tarbotton’s activism hardly stopped once she took RAN’s helm. She was among the 1200 arrested for protesting in front of the White House against the Keystone Pipeline. She was also vehement in her opposition to mountaintop removal (MTR) of coal, speaking out at Bank of America shareholders meeting. Her leadership in this fight had a role in convincing several banks, including BofA, to develop policies limiting the finance of companies involved in MTR mining.

Her greatest achievement, however, was reaching a remarkable agreement with Disney. After 18 months of negotiations between RAN and Tarbotton, the media and entertainment giant agreed to cease procuring paper from endangered forests in Indonesia and elsewhere for the company’s entire operations. As Danny Kennedy, an entrepreneur and activist said to Forbes in an email, “Disney execs danced for her, timber tycoons ran from RAN because of her.” Not even Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) and its well funded public relations machine could cower Tarbotton: after Disney became yet another corporate domino that cut ties with APP, the paper company’s communications department meekly announced it would provide RAN any information the NGO requested.

Rebecca Tarbotton is survived by her husband, Mateo Williford, her brothers Jess and Cameron and her mother, Mary Tarbotton. Public memorial services in San Francisco and her native British Columbia are pending. She leaves behind an incredible legacy of dedication and pragmatism, unbridled optimism and enormous shoes that will not be soon filled.

Leon Kaye, based in Fresno, California, is a sustainability consultant and the editor of GreenGoPost.com. He also contributes to Guardian Sustainable Business; his work has also appeared on Sustainable Brands, Inhabitat and Earth911. You can follow Leon and ask him questions on Twitter or Instagram (greengopost).

Image credit: Rainforest Action Network

Submitted by General Mills

By Mary Jane Melendez, Associate Director, General Mills Foundation

As one of the world’s largest food companies, General Mills has a long legacy of philanthropy. From an orphanage our founder Cadwallader Washburn built following a mill explosion in 1878 to a high-protein powder our scientists developed more than 60 years ago to feed those suffering from malnourishment, our history is rich with examples of strong community engagement.

I experience this tradition of community involvement every day as I lead grant making and community action operations for the General Mills Foundation.

In my role, I am responsible for General Mills Foundation Hunger and Nutrition Wellness Grants, International Giving programs, product donations, disaster relief and operational excellence initiatives. What makes this work truly empowering is General Mills’ continual commitment to revolutionizing the way we work with partners and focus on introducing new and innovative ways to serve our communities.

Rescuing Food from Landfills

One aspect of my job that I am particularly passionate about is food rescue.

Shockingly, every year more than 30 million tons of food piles up in landfills across the United States. This is a problem for several reasons, but most importantly, when perfectly usable food is sent to a landfill, it bypasses the 50 million hungry Americans who struggle with hunger.

Food that is in danger of going to waste is an increasingly important source of donations and an area of high priority for General Mills as we focus on alleviating hunger and advancing nutrition wellness globally.

And we’re making progress every day to rescue food and make adjustments to our operations so that more food can be saved from the landfill and shared with those in need.

Some examples of the work we’re doing include:

• Rescuing products to be destroyed: Last month, we received an inquiry on our corporate blog A Taste of General Mills from The Community Pantry, a food shelf in New Mexico.  We learned that the pantry was storing 23 pallets of Yoplait, Grands biscuits and Pillsbury refrigerated cookies from a truck that had overturned. The pantry had been instructed by an insurance company to destroy the products and when we learned of this, we worked quickly with employees in our supply chain and quality groups to redirect this product to donation and serve families in need during the holidays.

• Finding new purpose for bulk items and ingredients: This spring, an employee saved a $650,000 surplus of pineapple pouches that go into our Wanchai Ferry frozen entrées from going to waste by donating them to Feeding America. Often times, ingredients and bulk items are not priorities as food donations because people don’t think of these items as being used by a family at home. We make these donations work well by partnering with Feeding America, a national network of food banks, to repack and re-label these types of items into family-sized portions. This process saves millions of pounds of edible food from the landfill every year.
  
  
• Redirecting mis-labeled products: Recently, one of our employees identified an opportunity to save more than 8,000 cases of granola bars that had been mislabeled.  These bars, a snack item always in demand at food banks and feeding agencies, were donated and re-labeled by food banks in Indiana, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Georgia. Collectively, these organizations serve hundreds of thousands of hungry people – many of them children.

But these are just three examples. We work daily to identify opportunities like these to rescue food and get it into the hands of people who need it. And one way we organize these efforts is through a group of employee volunteers called the Product Donations Action Team (PDAT), which has made it a priority to boost awareness of our product donation program.

The Product Donations Action Team 

The PDAT leverages employee expertise in supply chain operations, warehousing, tax, finance and quality to help drive improvements in our food donations processes around the world.  In the end, their efforts result in more food for donations to support those in need.

Last year, this team met with several groups throughout the company to educate them about the opportunities to make product donations and save perfectly good food from reaching the landfill.  The educational effort resulted in an additional $5 million in food being donated in 2011.

These donations – which encompass every brand manufactured by General Mills such as Big G cereals, Green Giant vegetables, Yoplait yogurt and Pillsbury baking products – help feed children and families struggling to make ends meet.

It’s personally rewarding every time we are able to save perfectly good food from the landfill and in turn, feed people who are struggling with hunger. I challenge both companies and individuals alike to think creatively about how we can together reduce food waste and recapture usable food.

At General Mills, we are challenging ourselves to find solutions. Every day we continue our journey. We’ve made a lot of progress, but recognize that much more is ahead of us, especially as we keep our eyes focused on environmental sustainability and working with our communities.

About the Author

Mary Jane Melendez is an Associate Director of Community Action.  Her responsibilities include management of the General Mills Foundation Hunger and Nutrition Wellness Grants, International Giving programs, product donations and disaster relief initiatives.  Mary Jane serves on Board of Urban Ventures Leadership Foundation and on the Senior Corporate Affairs Professionals group through the Minnesota Council on Foundations.

At General Mills, Mary Jane leads the Product Donations Action Team.  This is a cross-functional team that works to ensure eligible food and packaging items are donated, reducing destruction and helping to alleviate hunger.  Since 2009, this team has saved millions of dollars in safe, edible product from being destroyed and directed that product to Feeding America to help feed those in need.  Mary Jane received her undergraduate degree and Masters in Business Administration from the University of St. Thomas.

-----------------------------

More from General Mills:

Causes & Consumers: Breaking Through The Brand Philanthropy Clutter

How Leadership, Relationships & Adaptability Built a Hunger-Fighting Nonprofit

It’s Not Nutritious Unless People Eat It: Consumer Acceptance Guides Companies' Responsibility Efforts

Food Waste: 3 Ways to Compel Change Among Business & Consumers

General Mills' 2012 Global Responsibility Report: Understanding Impact

By Jacquelyn Ottman

Communicating the benefits of “biobased” content, the world’s newest ecological marketing term, is often tricky. Biobased represents all of green marketing’s traditional challenges — including greenwash — but has additional, unique challenges all its own. Happily, strategies and a credible third party label now exist.

Opportunities for biobased products and packaging

There are many reasons for a business to use biobased content instead of traditional petroleum-based ingredients in their products, including:  it helps grow the farm economy, promotes energy independence, and helps manage carbon impacts, providing a useful hedge against potential future carbon taxes. Finally, biobased agricultural and other renewable material can mitigate petroleum’s wild price fluctuations, supply disruptions and geopolitics.

From an image and marketing perspective, a shift to biobased content can enhance reputation with stakeholders, including risk adverse investors. It can boost sales in the B2B and B2C sectors, as well as support and enhance many types of "green" claims. Let’s look at these in more depth.

Selling opportunities are growing in the federal, commercial, and consumer markets. In the U.S., for instance, the federal sector will benefit from an Obama executive order signed in March 2012 to double the amount of biobased purchases.

Initial market research suggests consumer willingness to purchase biobased products and packages. Research commissioned by Genencor in 2011 suggests 40 percent of Americans are "aware of" the term biobased and 77 percent will "definitely" or "likely" buy comparable biobased products.

In the consumer sector, biobased content can halo a brand. Coke’s new partly sugarcane-based PET PlantBottle (with "up to" 30 percent bioplastic), reinforces the brand positioning of Coke’s health-oriented Dasani bottled water and Odwalla juice brands. PlantBottle is now being licensed from Coke by H.J. Heinz for its iconic ketchup brand.

In 2010, 83 percent of U.S. adults identified with "green" values, with various segments expressing their own reasons for likely interest in biobased. For instance, the LOHAS (Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability) segment represents the deep green consumers who take a holistic approach to all things sustainable and green; Naturalites look for organic food, natural personal care, cleaning and pet foods; Conventionals conserve natural resources; and status conscious Drifters who likely to be seen carrying cloth shopping bags and driving a Toyota Prius. (Source: The Natural Marketing Institute).

Together, these consumers fuel a $290 billion U.S. market for natural products, renewable energy and more benign household products. Well-known brands that actively incorporate biobased content include Ford, Seventh Generation, Stonyfield Farm, and Procter & Gamble’s Gillette ProFusion and Pantene brands.

Marketing challenges of biobased

1. Unfamiliarity. Consumers don’t know the meaning of "biobased." The term is not in the dictionary and is limited to scientific, engineering and B2B usages. USDA, which introduced a “USDA Certified Biobased Label” in early 2011, defines biobased as made from agricultural materials, forestry and marine-based sources; so, even a well-informed consumer needs to learn that biobased products come from more than soy and corn.

2. Risk of Greenwash. Because biobased is unfamiliar but sounds "green," consumers can infer such environmental benefits as “natural”, “renewable” and “biodegradable” which may or may not be the case depending upon the product. Benefits that are too easily and often incorrectly implied or overstated increase reputation risk.

Green marketing lessons of the past still apply. As Mobil learned the hard way, in the early 1990s, their Hefty trash bags which were marketed as "photodegradable" (although not called biobased) were pulled from the market after seven state attorneys general sued saying that the bags would disintegrate (i.e., break down into small fragments under the influence of heat and/or oxygen) but not degrade in landfills for which they were intended and advertised. (See the recently revised FTC Green Guides for further detail.)

3. Science. The ASTM D6866 scientific test standard upon which the USDA Certified Biobased label is based, helps define "biobased" and accurately measure content. Even with this credibility, results present communication challenges. Because the test measures biobased content as a percent of total carbon content, minerals and water are excluded. This can make comparisons difficult between products that contain minerals and water versus those with only biobased ingredients.

4. Red flags. Despite its many benefits, biobased content raises some red flags among some segments of consumers. For instance, some biobased products could compromise performance;  a case in point, the first Sun Chips "compostable" bag made from corn-based PLA bioplastic had to be withdrawn because it was noisy; PLA manufacturer Natureworks quickly reformulated.

Also, some consumers take issue with biobased materials made from genetically altered crops (as is the case with most corn and soy grown in the U.S.), or are concerned about the effect agriculturally-based content may have on food prices.

Some may also question the sustainability of the harvesting practices. Finally, some consumers are concerned that biobased ingredients are imported rather than domestic, thus representing carbon impacts associated with transporting the materials from distant shores, or stealing business from domestic farmers.

5. Confusion and misinformation. Still, many consumers — and even product marketers — mix up the terms "biobased" and "bio-degradable." Both these properties are absolutely independent. Biobased refers to the origin of a material and biodegradable refers to the end-of-life. Biobased does not mean a material is biodegradable and vice-versa.

Success strategies for marketing biobased products and packaging

Submitted by Gregory Papajohn

By Gregory Papajohn and Lee Ann Zondag

How do you continually strive to achieve greatness? Where do you look for drivers, tools and benchmarking? How do you turn your achievements, resources and leverage into impact?

The Civic 50 now offers exactly that opportunity. In partnership with the National Conference on Citizenship (NCoC), Points of Light and Bloomberg LP, these 50 companies represent the best companies that improve the quality of life in the communities they do business through the application of time, talent and resources.  

The selection: The S&P 500 listed firms were surveyed for civic engagement programs against seven critical dimensions later analyzed by independent assessors. These dimensions included:

• Measurement and strategy:What are the program structure and metrics?
• Leadership: Is the C-suite involved?
• Design: Are corporate departments participating in program activities and direction?
• Community partnerships: Are companies acting as true partners to nonprofits and other companies?
• Employee civic growth: Is the program influencing personal growth and engagement of employees?
• Cause alignment: Do the core competencies and workforce skills of the business align with the supported causes?
• Transparency: Is the company communicating its work to the public and sharing best practices?

But the The Civic 50 is not just another list.

We see it as a declaration of great brands; companies that can inspire and motivate those not currently on the list to join the ranks.

Community, Community, Community

Following the release of The Civic 50 we had the chance to catch up with Jackie Norris, executive director of the Points of Light Institute and Ilir Zherka, executive director of NCoC, co-collaborators in the new endeavor.

Our first question for the duo was one of ground reality: Why should anyone pay attention to The Civic 50 over any of the other rankings and lists that recognize companies for their civic (using this term loosely) efforts?

The response was a resounding one: Community.

Norris and Zherka both explained that The Civic 50 breaks new ground by focusing on how companies engage in their communities. “Often the conversation stops at environmental sustainability or human rights. Here we present you with the opportunity to tell your story in the community,” stated Norris. “To share the heart of who you are – the full complement of what your people do outside of their families for neighbors, communities, their government,” added Zherka.

We also believe that The Civic 50 provides a new place to communicate – not where you comply and hold yourself accountable to others’ standards (such as can be the case with sustainability indices) – what you proactively decide to do on-the-ground, in your town, and on your teams.

The Name Game

We next asked about the thought process and choice of the words “civic” and “engagement” to describe The Civic 50. "Don’t overthink it," they said. It was simple, really: they thought about what they woke up to do every day – engage people and passions to take action. And, voila!

The Big Three

Time, talent, and resources are the fundamental components of the survey – and comprise civic engagement – that truly capture the essence of the work The Civic 50 companies do in the space. Main findings:

• Time: Between the 430,000 employees of IBM [NYSE: IBM], which took the top spot in the inaugural list, 3.2 million hours were spent volunteering in 2011.
• Talent: More than two-thirds of the top 50 companies say they “frequently” or “always” use the professional skills of their workforce to address social issues and real community challenges.
• Resources: The top five companies provided $1.5 billion in grant support to community organizations, 17.5 million volunteer hours (valued at over $375 million) and $150 million in matching donations.

“[The contributions of time, talent and resources] demonstrates that the best companies in America are deeply committed to strengthening their respective communities,” Zherka concluded.

So whether we reference Morgan Stanley’s [NYSE: MS] (No. 6) Volunteer Month or Citigroup’s [NYSE: C] (No. 2) Global Community Day, organized volunteer programs show that top companies encourage employees to give back to their communities through the use of time. Talent-based programs like Aetna’s [NYSEF: AET] (No. 4) research on the role of ethnic diversity to deliver the highest quality of healthcare and FedEx’s [NYSE: FDX] (No. 12) work to improve communities’ disaster response and recovery programs exemplify how company knowledge and skillsets can be applied to better communities and professions.

Lastly, partnerships with community organizations and employee gift matching programs like those of GE [NYSE: GE] (No. 9), McGraw-Hill [NYSE: MHP] (No. 8) and Campbell Soup [NYSE: CPB] (No. 7) show that top companies – and employees – are making financial investments to strengthen their communities.

Planning for the Quarter…  Century

Shifting base for a second, Jim Collins challenged attendees at this year’s World Business Forum to plan for the quarter century (read: not quarter as in three months, but quarter as in 25 years). Collins was emphasizing what we believe is integral to the whole purpose of the GolinHarris CHANGE team. We look up and down the short- and long-term (positive) impacts you, an institution, can – and should – have.

Zherka demands a similar approach for The Civic 50 applicants. We must look beyond the fiscal quarter, he challenged, asking future applicants to “exist to change behavior.”

For sure, companies listed – and those who applied – for The Civic 50 are looking to change behavior and influence a long-term positive impact. The top companies have even reached a point where their civic programs and use of time, talent and resources in communities are not seen as separate CSR entities, but rather an integral part of the brand identity. IBM's Smarter Cities Challenge is one such example, awarding 100 cities around the globe $50 million worth of IBM expertise to address topics from urban agriculture to public safety.

Campbell Soup, known for its soups and strong community work, prioritizes health and education where Campbell employees live and work by promoting access to nutritious meals and activity through the Nourishing Our Neighbors initiative. And General Electric, known for its innovative thinking, converts its belief that innovations can improve healthcare for more people into action by supporting community health centers around the globe.

It is endeavors like these that help everyone come to the same page and understand not only why companies must make investments and engage with their communities, but also the benefits these commitments have on communities, employees and companies. It’s interesting to note that a lot of the companies on The Civic 50 are household names and aspirational brands, often ranked on Fortune’s World’s Most Admired Companies and Best Companies to Work For lists.

Coincidence? We think not.  

Interested in knowing all of the companies that made the list? Meet “America’s most community-minded corporations” here.

 

---

 

Editor's Note: As Lee Ann and Gregory exemplify, The Civic 50 is the first comprehensive ranking of S&P 500 companies that best use their time, talent and resources to improve the quality of life in the communities where they do business. Beginning in January 2013, Jackie Norris, executive director of the Points of Light Corporate Institute, will launch a new blog series for CSRwire to go in depth into the seven dimensions and illustrate how these 50 companies are demonstrating best in class corporate citizenship practices. Stay tuned!

Submitted by Guest Contributor

Ben & Jerry’s is one of the most well-known brands with a social mission.

Rob Michalak, Director of Social Mission at Ben & Jerry’s, answered a few questions about what becoming a B Corp means for the company, and what other businesses can learn from their experiences. In conversation with the B Lab's Katie Kerr.

How do you define success in business?

A successful business is one that creates prosperity for all stakeholders.

Ben and Jerry’s wrote a book on values-led businesses and sustainability.  Why then become a certified B Corporation?

Certified B Corporations codify what being a progressive, socially conscious business is all about. By becoming a Certified B Corp we are supporting the movement for business to play a leading role in providing social as well as economic benefits to society-and of course great products and services. 

Why do you think B Corporations are important?

I think we’re seeing in society right now the need for corporations to stand for something more-think of the Occupy Movement and people speaking out against the divergence of wealth and corporate greed.  The B Corp movement is an answer to that. It’s a model that can ensure companies provide benefits to society in a way that’s transparent, balanced, and people can believe in.

What is the “change you seek”?

Ben & Jerry’s overall mission is to make the best product we can, be economically sustainable, and at the same time, create positive social change-specifically to advance new models of economic justice that are both sustainable and replicable. The B Corp model is a great one to provide the rigor and standards to ensure that we are living up to our own mission and that we push further.

What do you hope to accomplish by being part of the B Corp community?

We want to constantly challenge ourselves to be better. The B Corp community is made up of organizations that share similar goals and have high standards that we can use to challenge ourselves and improve.

To define true success in business, we need to learn from each other. We are all trying to find a path for business to contribute to society on many levels. I hope that Ben & Jerry’s can provide insights and experiences that can benefit other organizations, and we look forward to other companies providing lessons to us.

How do B Corp standards help further your objectives to transform business?

The B Corp standards provide a very comprehensive framework for us to review our progress against our own goals and to establish new ones. The B Corp standards are shared by other organizations, so we can be part of and use a more universal baseline to measure our progress.

Was it difficult for Unilever to approve Ben & Jerry’s B Corp Certification?

Not really.

Unilever has always expressly supported Ben & Jerry’s progressive business model by ensuring it continues in perpetuity through a unique governance structure that is, essentially, a benefit corporation structure. Unilever knows that the value of the Ben & Jerry’s brand is linked to Ben and & Jerry’s being a values-led business. Sure, there were lots of meetings to review legal and operational aspects of becoming an official B Corp, but B Corp certification helps build trust with out consumers that Ben & Jerry’s remains a values-led business.

Is there anything you learned by going through the certification process?

Going through the B Corp certification process reaffirmed those things we have been measuring internally and gave us confidence that this business model can serve society the way progressive economic models should. We also realized there were areas that we weren’t looking at that deserved our attention and needed to improve.

What would you tell someone considering becoming a Certified B Corp?

I would applaud their decision to become a certified B Corp.I would tell them that it’s not easy.  Creating positive change is never easy. Being a Certified B Corp does take a lot of work but with that work there’s a lot of reward. 

Ben & Jerry’s hopes that the B Corp becomes the standard and the norm for businesses in the world.

Sidebar: How Can Ben & Jerry’s be a B Corp if they’re owned by Unilever?

While divisions or individual brands within larger corporations are not eligible for certifications, subsidiaries of larger corporations are eligible.

Subsidiaries, including Ben & Jerry’s, must meet the same social and environmental performance standards as any other Certified B Corps.  However, because Ben & Jerry’s is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Unilever and therefore has no meaningful shareholder accountability, Ben & Jerry’s is required to meet additional audit and transparency requirements, including a mandatory audit and disclosure of its full B Impact Assessment, not simply its B Impact Report.

In addition, because of the unique governance structure between Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s Company Board, which has responsibility for its Social Mission, Ben and & Jerry’s must make public relevant excerpts from the acquisition agreement between Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever, which demonstrate that Ben & Jerry’s is legally required to consider the impact of its decisions not only on Unilever as sole shareholder, but also on all Ben & Jerry’s stakeholders.

For more details, check out bcorporation.net/benjerry.

More:

SSIR Article Attacks B Corps, Points the Finger at Ben & Jerry's

[Ed note: This article has been updated since it was published]

The following article is part of our lessons in sustainable business series by students at the Presidio Graduate School.

By Bettina Baylis

In 2010, Chipotle, under criticism for some of its sourcing policies, was looking for a way to maintain its growth rate and also strengthen their “food with integrity” values.

Chipotle Mexican Grill, founded in 1993 by CEO Steve Ells, is based on the idea that the quality of their ingredients matters. As they grew into a national chain, their core mission was refined and named “Food with Integrity,” and they increasingly became public champions of the benefits of eating sustainable food. Embracing this strategy created a competitive advantage and helped drive phenomenal growth; by December 2010, they had 1080 restaurants and $1.8 billion in sales.

While they had sometimes failed to deliver on their promised integrity, they had measurable successes. The percentage of food sourced from sustainable suppliers grew enough for them to claim by the end of 2010 that the majority of their meat was "naturally raised" (their term for animals raised without hormone injections and antibiotics). Forty percent of the beans they served in 2010 were organic, and all the cheese was from milk produced without rBHT. In 2010, at least 35 percent of one of produce items were sourced from smaller local farms (defined as within a 350 mile radius of the restaurant).

But meanwhile, the company’s reputation for having a responsible supply chain took some hits. Since 2006, Chipotle has been accused of lack of transparency on their “Food with Integrity” mission. Despite new environmental commitments, the company dragged it's feet on signing on to an agreement in support the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, an NGO founded by Florida tomato farmworkers, the company signed on October 4th, two days after a protest outside Chipotle's headquarters.

Strategy and outcome

By 2010, Chipotle realized their reputation was at risk. In order to meet their growth targets, they needed to reconnect with their existing customers and attract new ones. They needed to find a way to rebuild consumer faith in their mission of ‘Food with Integrity.’

The strategy Chipotle decided to implement was to promote its increasingly green farm-to-table-to-consumer supply chain. It launched a multi-pronged initiative to “change the way people think about what they eat,” building on their original “Food with Integrity” vision. Their new 2011 “Cultivate a Better World” campaign focuses on connecting with consumers emotionally, and telling the story of why Chipotle sources sustainable foods, beginning with a fun consumer website and social media presence.

• Chipotle created the Chipotle Cultivate Foundation, a non-profit focused on three food issues: supporting family farms; increasing animal welfare and pasturing; and increasing nutrition and reducing obesity in children. To date, they have donated almost $1.5M to these causes. Donations include sales from in-store “Boorito” events (first begun on Halloween 2010), where customers who came dressed up in Family Farm-themed costumes on Halloween received a burrito for $2.

• Chipotle hired the Creative Artists Agency (CAA) to produce “Back to the Start,” an emotionally powerful animated short on the importance of raising pigs sustainably. It went viral on YouTube (viewed more than 6.8M times as of September 2012), and the campaign and film have won many awards, including for Best Integrated Campaign and Best Film for Branded Content at Cannes (June 2012). In addition, 60 cents of each download of the movie’s theme song, Coldplay’s “The Scientist” sung by Willie Nelson, is donated to the Cultivate Foundation.

• Chipotle organized the first “Cultivate” festival in Chicago to help build community in a target market, and to bring together “food, farmers, chefs, artisans, thought leaders and musicians” according to their website. There are similar festivals planned for 2012.

• Chipotle expanded their Farm Team invitation-only loyalty program. Customers build points not by purchasing food, but by playing games online that educate about food supply and production. The awards points are then redeemable for discounts in the restaurants.

Lessons learned

The ‘Cultivate a Better World’ integrated marketing campaign continues to be wildly successful. It creates strong awareness and connection with consumers, and reinforces Chipotle as a very public leader on important food issues. The downside of the campaign is that it can feel slick and packaged, especially once you notice how very few numbers are supplied to support their claims. This feeling increases as you hear more about Chipotle’s lack of transparency. One example is their policy of avoiding third party-verified standards. Chipotle is more likely to craft its own definitions and follow them without independent oversight. This leads to a credibility gap: one wonders if they are telling us a feel-good story, or the truth? After reading their 2011 annual report, it is hard not to wonder how often to they have had to substitute in conventionally-raised meat for their much promoted humanely raised, and whether they are vigilant in alerting their customers when they do?

Chipotle has potential to do so much good in the humane and sustainable food movements. They need to address their lack of transparency not only for their own strategic benefit, but also for the credibility of the movement itself. It is time for Chipotle to take the lead and start disclosing more clear and detailed information about their food and how it is sourced. They could use existing best practices, such as the Global Reporting Initiative, to guide them. With their ability to connect with consumers, they should find their credibility grow even stronger if they disclosed some of their failures along with their hard-earned successes.

Image courtesy of Chipotle 

Submitted by Guest Contributor

By Karl Hofmann, President and CEO, Population Services International

Have you washed your hands today? Probably not enough.

In Washington, D.C., the consequences aren't too severe. A few more colds and coughs than any of us wants or needs, but probably not much more than that. Elsewhere in the world, for billions of people, the consequences can be far more serious, absurdly serious. Even fatal.

Global Handwashing Day is a good occasion to remind us of the importance of this deceptively simple public health intervention. As Unilever's Myriam Sidibe noted in her recent column, more than two million children lose their lives every year to preventable causes such as diarrhea and pneumonia - largely because they are not washing their hands.

As in so many other areas of global health, strong and targeted public-private partnerships can make a huge difference in addressing this challenge.

Realities & Gaps: Influencing Millions

A chief lesson learned from Population Services International's [PSI] 40 years of experience in global health is that there is a need for robust distribution networks for health products and services. Moreover, these networks must be accompanied by communication campaigns, which educate families about health issues that affect their communities and motivate them to adopt healthy behaviors. 

For example, it is important to ensure that a rural store has a constant supply of soap to sell to local families. However, it is equally as important to help those local families understand why buying and using that bar of soap consistently will help protect their health, and to create drivers that encourage them to do so. 

It's easier said than done of course.

The public sector does not have the capacity to address these dual needs alone. Constrained public budgets necessitate new approaches, new business models, and new partnerships to ensure that life-saving products and information reach families, regardless of whether they live in an urban setting or a rural community.

Today, new partnerships between NGOs like PSI and companies like Unilever, Alere, and Merck are responding to these gaps, creating game-changing health solutions that can be replicated on a global scale. 

Establishing Win-Win Partnerships

These private-public partnerships for health work because they are symbiotic.  

NGOs benefit from corporate ideas, innovation, consumer insight, and a constant pursuit of “the next best” health technology or tools that can help turn the tide against major threats to global health. Conversely, companies benefit from NGOs’ on-the-ground understanding of local markets and health realities, as well as their strong relationships with local governments. Combined, these factors help position companies to enter new markets, grow their businesses, and save lives in the process.

Simple Directive, Tough Habit: Saving Lives Through Handwashing

A new initiative launched in 2012 between Lifebuoy (Unilever’s leading soap brand), PSI (one of the Unilever Foundation's global partners) and local governments is focusing on establishing behavior change programs in schools and communities across Kenya, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe – three countries where handwashing with soap practices are low.

In Kenya, for example, 28 percent of school children report washing their hands with water at key times during the day, yet only 1 percent report using soap.  

This simple act of handwashing with soap can significantly reduce the number of deaths among children due to diarrhea and pneumonia -- two of the leading killers of children in these target countries. The new Unilever-PSI initiative will help children get into a habit of correctly and consistently washing their hands with soap at critical times of the day. 

Using Lifebuoy soap products and communication materials, teachers and community health workers will work to change behaviors among school aged kids through handwashing programs and activities, such as song writing, comic books, and even hand washing pledges. 

We know that when children learn and understand healthy behaviors, they help pass life-saving information to their families at home and future generations – setting off a powerful ripple effect. 

Together PSI and Unilever aim to reach over 250,000 school aged children and their families in Kenya, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe over the next year to help them build better handwashing habits. Through these three pilot programs, Lifebuoy, the Unilever Foundation, and PSI hope to prove the efficacy of this approach, and replicate the program at scale across a number of countries.

In doing so, we move closer to realizing our mutual goal of impacting the health and hygiene behaviors of one billion people by 2015. Will you join us?

Join the conversation with Unilever, PSI, and its partners at #IWashMyHands as we launch a worldwide dialogue to push handwashing up the global health agenda. Visit PSI’s homepage, weigh in on Twitter, make a pledge on Facebook -- and spread the word.

Related:

Saving 600,000 Lives a Year: What Will It Take?