Search

The backstory itself is inspiring. A career military aircraft inspector who served during the Korean and Vietnam wars, Charlie “Mutt” Ferrell, Jr. also had sharp culinary skills, embodied in what was literally a secret sauce that traveled with him across Asia, and eventually stateside. For years, Mutt’s sauce was a highlight of many a party or cookout until Mutt passed away in 2005.

He never thought to commercialize his sauce during his life, but the recipe was a bequest Mutt left to his granddaughter, Charlynda Scales, who like her grandfather served in the U.S. Air Force. After receiving this news in 2013, Major Scales eventually decided to bottle it, label the sauce with his name and face, and a company was born.

Mutt’s Sauce found success, was humming along, gained press coverage on big-time media outlets… and then the pandemic hit.

“Mutt's Sauce was doing increasingly better every year prior to the pandemic. In fall 2019, we had opened an Amazon store online and were promoted by CNBC as well as Yahoo Finance for the trajectory of our growth,” said Scales, Mutt’s Sauce’s founder and CEO during a recent email exchange with TriplePundit. “We hadn't really embraced e-commerce, and didn't quite know how handle the volume of orders online.”

At one point, Amazon had paused the company’s online store as the online retailing giant’s algorithm concluded that Mutt’s Sauce was not fulfilling orders fast enough. The news was not a huge disruption to the company, as its business model was one largely focused on selling at in-person events and festivals. The summer of 2020 looked promising, as those months were booked for various events.

Enter March 2020.

“I gave birth to my first child, and had exactly six weeks planned of downtime before I'd be traveling [with her baby] - to all the events,” explained Scales. “The announcement of the pandemic happened the day I was bringing him home. My email inbox was full of cancellation notifications: Every event I booked that year was cancelled with no refunds.”

Business advice that Scales had received in previous years then became timely for her company; for example, many mentors who had worked with Scales had long urged her to shift toward more of an e-commerce business for several years. “The Amazon traffic was scary in my eyes,” continued Scales. “It's true that having too much demand is harmful if you're not ready to respond properly.”

From March to May 2020, Scales and Mutt’s Sauce were in business remodeling mode. She revamped and reopened the company’s website, allowing for a more seamless process when receiving online orders. The entire product line was repriced so it could become more profitable. And, the company received some Paycheck Protection Plan (PPP) funds, which the company used to develop packaging that was both easy to assemble and could help prevent breakage during shipping.

The pivot was underway, but Scales did run up against some challenges. “Instituting processes and re-examining all of the costs of goods sold took time, and we were under an invisible ticking clock to sink or swim,” explained Scales. “In the beginning, the resources being offered by the government had not taken the food industry into consideration, so PPP was basically all that was readily available. On top of that, we had to learn how to service our existing contracts - grocery stores - when people only cared to buy the essentials.”

Fortunately for Scales, her status as a veteran opened some doors. “Having an American-made, veteran-owned product did help during the pandemic. The support from the local community and Americans at large has been unwavering and humbling to say the least,” affirmed Scales. In addition to PPP funds, the company also was awarded a grant from the local Chamber of Commerce, enabling this southwestern Ohio-based company to buy new technology that helped with fulfilling online orders.

Also lending advice to Scales was SCORE, a nonprofit that connects volunteer small business mentors across the U.S. SCORE also runs a bevy of programs that partner with women-owned startups and small businesses, runs a small business resilience hub and also offers personalized business advisory services for Black entrepreneurs.

“SCORE has always been there for Mutt's Sauce,” said Scales. “I worked with the SCORE team to create webinars for fellow veteran entrepreneurs and they gave me a platform to talk about my journey, which has led to increased sales as well as great referrals for other business opportunities.”

According to Scales, Mutt’s Sauce is now performing well despite the hardships the pandemic had piled on the company. “Our sales were higher and now we know we can thrive as an e-commerce product. On top of that, we are even more connected to our customers and fellow veterans,” concluded Scales.

For the Fourth of July, Scales, a proud Black female entrepreneur, Air Force veteran, TedX speaker and winner of a wide range of awards, agreed to share a recipe with 3p. More can be found on Mutt’s Sauce’s Facebook page and Instagram feed.

Image credit: Mutt’s Sauce/Facebook

Over the past year, my husband and I have begun implementing more plant-based meat and dairy alternatives into our diets. Treats like Beyond Meat tacos and iced coffee with oat milk have quickly found their way into our family’s fridge, bellies and hearts.

We are far from the only ones. The plant-based food market is estimated to reach more than $74 billion (yes, that’s billion with a B) by 2027, with $17.5 billion coming just from meat substitutes. It’s no wonder gourmet restaurants and fast-food chains alike are looking to expand their meatless menus.

Wendy’s is the latest fast food chain to offer a plant-based sandwich option. Last week, the Dublin, Ohio-based company began testing its new Spicy Black Bean Burger in three U.S. markets: Columbus, Pittsburgh and Jacksonville.

As of press time, Wendy’s had not set an end date for the test run, but John Li, the company’s vice president of culinary innovation, told QSR Magazine that he and his team hope to have a better sense of the black bean burger’s future by “early August.”

Unlike McDonald’s McPlant, Taco Bell’s Naked Chalupa, or Burger King’s Impossible Whopper, Wendy’s black bean burger — which also contains chickpeas, carrots, corn, bell peppers and brown rice — isn’t trying to mimic meat.

Wendy’s new menu item is filling a much-needed gap in fast food’s meat-free offerings: sandwiches made of actual, recognizable vegetables!

After all, as Food & Wine restaurant editor Khushbu Shah wrote earlier this year, “tech meat” (i.e. Beyond Meat and Impossible) has a smaller carbon footprint than actual beef, but it's still five times greater than the carbon footprint of a bean-based burger patty. In addition, she pointed out, “many people are vegetarian or vegan because they don't want to eat anything that resembles meat.”  

No one eats a bean burger expecting it to taste just like beef. That’s kind of the point — it is something entirely different, in terms of look, texture and taste.

As Eryn Bennett, Wendy’s manager of culinary production and innovation, said in an interview with QSR Magazine, the company chose black bean as the base ingredient because it’s familiar enough to encourage customers to try it. “It’s not a substitute for meat. This is something that can stand on its own.”

Wendy’s has attempted several plant-based offerings over the years.

In 2015, the chain introduced its first black bean burger to three test markets across the U.S. While this burger did not advance beyond the testing phase, it was used as the basis for the recipe development of the current Spicy Black Bean Burger.

In 2019, Wendy’s introduced — and then quickly removed — a pea protein sandwich called The Plantiful Burger on its Canadian menu. (Pea protein is not to be confused with peameal bacon, a Canadian pork specialty and literally the opposite of plant-based eating.)

And, of course, who could forget Wendy’s “SuperBar” salad bar of the 1980s and 1990s? It was vegetarian — if you don’t count the tacos, the meat-filled pasta sauce, etc.

This actually brings up an important point in fast food’s expansion into different types of protein: “Plant-based” doesn’t necessarily mean “meat free,” nor does it mean vegetarian or vegan. In fast-food kitchens, it can be difficult to have grill space and prep areas specifically designated for vegan items only, especially if there are only one or two menu items that fall into that category. (Just ask Burger King.)

Often, restaurants add mayonnaise and/or cheese to plant-based sandwiches for extra flavor. Wendy’s Spicy Black Bean Burger, for example, comes with pepper jack cheese on it. Bennett pointed out several times in the QSR Magazine interview that the new bean burger is meant for “flexitarian," and not “vegetarian” diets.

And here, dear TriplePundit readers, is where other writers would make a “Where’s the beef?” joke. I respect you too much to do that, however. You are welcome.

Image credits: Wendy’s corporate site; Michael Form/Pixabay

It’s not exactly news that “climate positive” is overtaking “carbon neutral” as the responsible business community’s next destination in contributing to the Paris Agreement’s goal to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Even before the pandemic, commenting on the agency’s 2019 emissions gap report in a recent press statement, Inger Anderson, the UN Environment Program’s (UNEP) Executive Director, said, “Our collective failure to act early and hard on climate change means we now must deliver deep cuts to emissions – over 7 per cent each year, if we break it down evenly over the next decade. This shows that countries simply cannot wait until the end of 2020, when new climate commitments are due, to step up action. They – and every city, region, business and individual – need to act now.”

Acting now doesn’t necessarily mean getting paid later

Given the sluggish pace of progress, neutralizing carbon’s impact on the planet clearly won’t cut it anymore. Governmental and corporate entities are catching on to the risks of not doing enough and the immediate benefits of taking decisive and radical action to transform carbon intensive status quo operations.

To that end, more companies are coming out with climate positive commitments that work up to carbon neutrality and persist beyond that threshold. The evidence suggests that in turn, they are finding public support in pursuing this goal.

Consumer behavior has shifted globally. A survey from the Paris-based market research company Ipsos, published in late 2019, found that over two-thirds of adults surveyed across 28 countries claimed their concern over climate change has caused changes to their consumer behavior.

In drafting guidance companies seeking to embark on a climate positive strategy, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) observed one of many benefits to aligning with consumer demand: “Those companies who act on this climate positive agenda are likely to achieve a social and environmental ‘license to operate’ by society in the coming decades.”

That begs the question: how is it possible to adapt and evolve into a climate positive corporation? The WWF’s three recommendations for climate positivity move beyond science-based targets for scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions — with reductions that don’t lean on long-term carbon offsets. Companies aiming to go the extra mile must also advocate for progress and encourage appropriate shifts in consumer behavior.

Achieving climate positive goals worldwide and across industries

Early last year, before the pandemic came to headlines, the Outdoor Industry Association (OIA) set a climate positive goal for its entire industry: to become climate positive by 2030. The organization is aiming to become a global leader with the goal to be the first climate positive industry. Currently, more than 100 companies have signed onto the OIA’s Climate Action Corps, including brands such as REI, Patagonia and Klean Kanteen.

Just like any other industry, outdoor companies have their own unique incentives to combat climate change. How would outdoor companies fare without healthy ecosystems and communities? In a press statement, Amy Horton, OIA’s senior director of sustainable business innovation, said,

“There’s no denying that climate change is an existential crisis for the outdoor industry. The question is no longer ‘what will we do about it?’ – it’s how far can we go, and who wants to join us? We want the outdoor industry to lead the charge and inspire other industries. Our efforts alone will certainly not solve the climate crisis – we need every business, government, and individual to act. With this new strategy, we’ve established a credible, practical pathway, supporting resources, and interim milestones that will guide and accelerate progress for companies no matter how far along they are on the path.”

The Climate Action Corps’ year-one baseline shows promise, with almost half of the corps’ members taking action on scope 1 and 2 emissions from operations, and almost one-third taking action on scope 3 — the latter often the largest contributor to a company’s footprint, encompassing activities in the greater value chain. But the industry values honesty. The OIA noted during a virtual celebration of the Climate Action Corps’ inaugural year that for some members, certain product footprints have increased this year — and considering the long path to reach such goals, in the end that’s ok.

Persistence is the key to achieving such high goals becoming a climate positive company, White House National Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy emphasized as she spoke to the industry during the year-one gathering. “Don’t throw anything away because it’s not perfect,” she said. “Demand perfection, but keep moving forward.”

Such is sage advice for industries leading the way or just starting out in the journey to ensuring that in the future, we can live in a safer climate.

 Image credit: andreas160578/Pixabay

Just in time for a congressional hearing on diversity and inclusion in the financial sector, the Bank Policy Institute recently released a set of 30 recommendations for banks to help undo some of the economic damage done by generations of institutional racism. However, unless the Bank Policy Institute can convince financial corporations to stop supporting lawmakers leading voter suppression efforts, those 30 circles of activity will continue to be trapped in a walled-off square, and the promise of equal rights will remain a hollow one.

The Bank Policy Institute tackles institutional racism

The Bank Policy Institute’s 30 Best Bank Practices report is intended to promote a significant increase in economic opportunities and fairness in matters of finance. Compiled in the wake of George Floyd’s murder last year, it focuses specifically on the improvement of outcomes in Black communities, but it can apply to other communities of color as well.

BPI released the report in time to catch the news cycle with its testimony before the House Subcommittee on Diversity and Inclusion earlier this week. In that context, the report’s authors do not sugarcoat the current state of diversity and inclusion.

“Nearly one in five Black adults making over $100,000 a year reports being denied credit, more than twice the rate of White adults. And the rate of Black adults who are unbanked is more than double the rate of adults overall,” BPI explains.

“In slavery’s aftermath, the mainstream banking system remained largely closed to Black Americans, and so large-scale benefits of financial inclusion were denied to the community as a whole,” BPI states, adding that “This disparity persists to the modern day, driven by the shortcomings of past policy, neglect and intentional exclusion.” 

Voter suppression trumps best practices

The congressional hearing was titled, “The Legacy of George Floyd,” and its purpose was to “examine the extent to which banks, publicly traded companies, and others in the financial services industry have made good on their promises to Black communities and businesses, as well as steps those institutions have taken towards achieving sustainable racial equity within their organizations.”

Given that focus, it is understandable that none of the 30 recommendations outlined by BPI deal directly with voter suppression. Nevertheless, suppression of the Black vote and exclusion from the democratic process is a thread — and all too often, a murderous one — that has run concurrently with economic suppression and exclusion all throughout American history.

As with economic suppression, voter suppression has persisted to the modern day. The organized mob that attacked Congress on January 6 was ginned up by a years-long litany of false claims of voter fraud by former President Trump, focusing mainly on communities of color. Trump intensified his attacks on election integrity in the months leading up to Election Day, and when Black voters played a decisive role in Biden’s Electoral College victory, it only reinforced the false belief that the election was “stolen.”

Trump has never let up on his false accusations of a stolen election after January 6, and his supporters never stopped trying to silence the Black vote, too. When the bloodthirsty mob failed in its intention to murder former Vice President Pence and overturn the election results on January 6, state legislators took up the voter suppression cause.

The shift into statehouses has forced corporations to play whack-a-mole with their political giving.

In the aftermath of the violence on January 6, a unified corporate response was slow to develop, but a significant number of high-profile business leaders did pledge to stop giving to the 147 members of Congress who voted against certifying President-Elect Biden’s electoral victory. Many followed through on that promise, and their withdrawal of corporate funding could have a significant impact on extremist Republican representatives who depend heavily on support from PACs.

However, now that the voting rights battle has shifted to statehouses, some of those same corporations are being forced to examine their donations to state lawmakers, too.

That puts BPI member banks in an awkward position, even among those who responded aggressively to the January 6 insurrection.

BPI member PNC Financial Services Group (known mostly for its banking subsidiary, PNC Bank), for example, was among those setting a high bar. The company, in addition, has long compiled a credible record on the diversity and inclusion front.

“In the aftermath of the 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol, PNC has indefinitely suspended contributions to all members of Congress who voted against the certification of Electoral College votes for the 2020 Presidential election,” PNC states on its website.

On June 12, PNC also announced a $1 billion economic empowerment initiative focusing on Black communities and other underserved populations.

However, last month PNC also finalized its acquisition of the financial services firm BBVA USA Bancshares Inc. and its U.S. banking subsidiary. That puts PNC front and center in the war on voting rights.

BBVA operates mainly in seven states, and four of those - Alabama, Arizona, Florida, and Texas - have become notorious epicenters of state-based voter suppression activity in various forms, including a fake ballot “audit” in Arizona ordered by Republican lawmakers that threatens to undermine election results across the country.

Best bank practices and voting rights

PNC and other BPI members can help fight back by reading between the lines of 30 Best Practices.

Several leading banks ramped up their voter turnout efforts in 2020, and 30 Best Practices notes that banks have ample opportunity to flex their muscles outside of their own operations, while adhering to state and federal regulations.

“Externally, banks are looking at ways to immediately expand their philanthropic activities and boost their partnerships with other entities in ways that will benefit impacted communities and maximize the desired effects,” BPI notes, while advocating for management to take direction from diverse employees.

“BPI banks know that their philanthropy, partnerships and procurement actions should be driven by consultation with a diverse internal set of stakeholders with an eye towards constantly assessing the positive impact on the communities they serve,” BPI explains.

BPI also emphasizes that diversity hiring can and should have an impact on the philanthropic and community activities of banks.

“Empower bank personnel to assist in selection of philanthropic giving and spur personal involvement by matching your team members’ generosity, tying efforts to workplace giving initiatives,” BPI advises. “Banks are listening to their employees’ recommendations about new potential recipients of grant funding, with new types of organizations and new leaders emerging as potent partners for change.”

If banks are really serious about being potent partners for change, they can find a way to help boot anti-democratic lawmakers out of state and federal office and provide more support for those who advocate for voting rights instead of those abetting voter suppression.

Image credit: Jonathan Cooper/Unsplash

More than 20 years ago, the rise of online advertising platforms like DoubleClick and 24/7 Media promised to make much of the Internet and its content absolutely free. That promise sputtered during the early 2000s, but eventually big tech titans like Google (which eventually acquired DoubleClick) and Facebook not only ironed out some of the problems with online advertising, but also became wildly successful and profitable.

But the huge success of online ads, in the views of more consumers, has come with its own downside. Many would even say advertising has gone from innovative to creepy, as that eye cream or vacation you were thinking about keep following you from search engine results to social media platforms to that news story you’re reading. And for those who simply are researching information for work, study or play, those search results appear to get more and more cluttered.

To that end, one search engine company says it has an answer: a paid subscription model that promises a better user experience, one free of those oft-annoying ads, because this company is answering to its customers — not the advertisers who keep flocking to big tech.

Neeva has announced this week that its search engine service is available to U.S. customers. For now, those interested can visit the site, score a free trial for three months, and pay $4.95 a month thereafter. The company promises complete data privacy by blocking any third-party trackers. Users can also connect Neeva to calendars, email accounts and cloud storage platforms.

For those consumers for whom online shopping will always be their thing, Neeva allows them to choose retailers and vendors from which they wish to see results. Customization options are also available for news content and any financial information consumers wish to research.

Plus, for those for whom data privacy is of the utmost priority, Neeva allows for incognito searches as well. That’s a response to the concerns many people have about how their data is being shared online versus how companies are listening to them: A recent S&P Global survey, for example, found that while almost half of consumers worry about sharing their personal information online, only 8 percent of companies have dedicated teams that focus on such challenges as data protection and data privacy.

“Neeva was built on the premise that search should focus on the consumer, and only the consumer, not advertisers,” said Sridhar Ramaswamy, the CEO and co-founder of Neeva, said in a public statement. “Search results should always prioritize finding the best answer to a consumer’s query — not on selling ads or tracking behavior online. Today’s launch of our subscription-based model is the first step in providing a viable search alternative for consumers, built on trust and transparency.”

Neeva is not the first search that promises a search experience free from those data privacy, advertising and tracking concerns. DuckDuckGo has its share of fans seeking to avoid anything big tech since it launched in 2008; last month, Brave announced a similar search engine without user tracking and other data privacy worries; for now, that service is in beta testing.

But Neeva stands out for trying out a subscription-based model, and it also benefits from the knowledge it has from hiring a staff largely comprised of former Google and YouTube employees. For five bucks a month, there’s a good shot many consumers will feel the service and privacy are both worth that spend.

Image credit: Pierre Bamin/Unsplash

In a March survey, nearly two-thirds of Americans said they’re willing to pay more for sustainable products, but most (74 percent) don’t know how to identify them. So, how can brands communicate with consumers about sustainability and help them understand how their purchases and behaviors impact the planet? 

There's no getting around it: This space is complex, and creating products that truly carry less impact on the environment requires a host of considerations. But communicating with consumers doesn’t have to be complicated, and rising public awareness of sustainability is an open invitation for brands to turn consumer passion into engagement, loyalty and trust. 

“In general, we're seeing tremendous growth in the interest in sustainability features and benefits of products,” said Ellen Jackowski, chief sustainability and social impact officer at HP. “The average person is starting to feel the impacts of climate change. They're starting to understand the impact humans are having on the planet at a level that hasn't been recognized in the past.”

“We know sustainability is important to our customer, and we want to lead, not follow, consumer demand,” added Savannah Sachs, CEO of skincare and wellness brand Tula. 

We spoke with these two executives about how to communicate around a specific segment of the sustainability space — responsible forestry — to get a sense of how to break down complicated topics in an accessible way. 

Communicating with consumers about responsible forestry

Responsible forestry has received well deserved attention in recent years as an essential component of a low-carbon future. But it’s a deceptively complicated topic that can easily confuse consumer audiences. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which brings together environmental, social and economic interests to promote responsible forest management, applies 10 principles and 57 distinct criteria for verifying that forests around the world are well managed. There’s a lot to unpack with that. 

Still, even if the nuances that make for a well managed and sustainable forest aren’t familiar to the average person, the basics around why forests are important for a healthy planet are easier to understand. “Forests clean the air we breathe and the water we drink, [and they] provide habitat for 80 percent of terrestrial biodiversity. 1.6 billion people depend on forests for their livelihoods,” Chris McLaren, chief marketing officer for FSC U.S., told us earlier in this series. 

Once this basic understanding is reached, it’s a pretty short leap to educate consumers around how their daily habits can impact forests and how to make more responsible choices. “Whether consumers are familiar with the Forest Stewardship Council or not, the truth is we still all have a responsibility to our planet, and communicating our mutual goal of preserving the world’s forests is ultimately what’s most important,” said Sachs of Tula.

A consumer marketplace for certified sustainable products opens the door for dialogue 

In April, FSC launched an online portal to make it easier for U.S. consumers to buy products sourced from responsibly managed forests. On the new portal, OneSimpleAction.org, consumers can shop hundreds of products from popular brands and retailers, including HP, Tula, Seventh Generation and Charmin. 

The site also provides information about how consumer purchases of FSC-certified products can protect forests, using simple but evocative language — “One Simple Action can protect forests for all, forever” — to address consumers directly and make the call-to-action compelling and clear. "The new OneSimpleAction.org creates a powerful and convenient way for consumers — and the companies supplying the products they use — to make a big difference," McLaren of FSC, said in a press statement. 

HP, a longstanding FSC partner, is a founding sponsor of the platform along with Procter & Gamble. “FSC plays a really important role in helping to communicate with customers,” Jackowski said. “Increasing the awareness of what FSC is and all of the momentum they've gotten behind that certification helps us simplify how to communicate to consumers as well.”

Action items for sustainability communication that works

Embrace simplicity. “Simplify your messages,” Jackowski advised. “This space is really complex, so try to figure out the simplest message. By partnering with someone like FSC, you can also leverage the power of their logo and existing brand to continue that drive for awareness around sustainable forestry and management.” 

Ensure transparency. “There's this concept of 'plant a tree,' but we all know planting a tree isn't enough,” Jackowski said. “It really is about forest restoration, protection and responsible management, so be clear about exactly what your efforts are supporting and how you’re following the guidelines the science is directing us toward.”

Invite customers along. “Sharing news and updates on our sustainability initiative and partnerships across multiple platforms allows us to impactfully communicate our sustainability message to our customers,” Sachs told us. “This also gives them the opportunity to learn how they can participate with us on the path to a more sustainable and green planet. Through our partnerships with organizations like TerraCycle and Cloverly, we are thrilled to offer different ways for our community to join us as we all do our part in protecting the planet.”

This article series is sponsored by Procter & Gamble and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team.

Image credit: Unsplash/Michal Czyz

The failed insurrection of January 6 was aided and supported by 147 sitting members of Congress who pledged to vote against certifying the results of the 2020 Presidential election. As long as they continue to hold those seats, the American democratic system is at risk — to put it mildly. The question now is whether or not business leaders can deploy their political action committee (PAC) donations to help push anti-democratic lawmakers out of office when the all-important midterm elections come up in 2022.

And the answer for the influence of PAC donations is…yes

At first glance, it may seem that corporate funding makes little or no difference in the age of social media, at least not for elected officials who are willing to follow the Trump strategy of appealing to racists, xenophobes and white supremacists.

Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, for example, has been offsetting the loss of corporate dollars with a steady stream of offensive antics that appeal to her Trump-favoring constituents and a significant number of out-of-state supporters, too.

In addition, PAC donations only account for about 15 percent of all donations for members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives overall. However, that average figure hides a significant number of members of Congress who lean more heavily than others on PAC donations — or they did, before business leaders pulled the rug out from under them for supporting an insurrection.

PAC cancellation can hit where it hurts

Independent journalist Judd Legum has been tracking PAC donations to the 147 Republican members of Congress who voted to support the insurrection. He has noted that a significant number of business leaders followed through on their pledges to withdraw corporate funding from elected officials who supported the violent, bloody events of January 6.

A new analysis by the business organization Leadership Now Project adds more detail that suggests how deep the PAC cut goes for some of those lawmakers.

“Over half of the lawmakers who objected to the election results received more than 25 percent of their funding from business PACs, and of those, 25 received more than 50 percent from business PACs,” Leadership Now explained, adding that “The data reveals there are concentrations of lawmakers who receive high levels of business PAC funding in hotly contested states, particularly in Texas, Florida, and Pennsylvania.”

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

The detailed analysis names each of the lawmakers and provides the percentage of their funding from PAC donations.

“Companies can demonstrate that they genuinely support the legitimacy of the 2020 election results by staying accountable to their commitments to pull back funding,” Leadership Now observes. “At a moment when 26 percent of Americans and 55 percent of Republicans still doubt the legitimacy of the election, and members of Congress who refused to accept the results are consolidating their position, business commitments to pull back from these lawmakers make a meaningful difference in protecting our democracy.”

Some businesses still support the sedition caucus through PAC donations

So far, Republican members of Congress have blocked investigations that could reveal more information about the actions of the 147 insurrection-supporting lawmakers leading up to and including the events of January 6, However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving forward with the formation of a Select Committee, which cannot be blocked by Republicans. Its findings could be very damaging to insurrection-supporting legislators, and deeply embarrassing to any company that still donates to PACs associated with them.

For an indication of just how much heat could pour down upon business leaders who are willing to let insurrection slide, consider the case of Toyota.

Last week the watchdog organization CREW ran the numbers and found that 109 of the 147 legislators continued to receive corporate or industry PAC money after January 6.

Koch Industries and Walmart are among the top at the list for contributions to the NRCC and NRSC at $105,000 and $60,000, respectively. But the real attention-getter was Toyota, which turned heads with 37 contributions to individual members and leadership PACs totaling $55,000.

To put that in context, $55,000 is just about twice the $17,500 that Koch poured into members and leadership PACs. Walmart spent nothing in that category as did many of the others in the CREW analysis. The next closest company was Cigna with $12,500.

“While every member has a campaign committee, not all members have a leadership PAC, which is a type of political committee established by a candidate or a federal officeholder to raise money that’s supposed to be used to support allies,” CREW explained. “In practice, however, leadership PACs are often little more than slush funds for politicians to pay for luxury resort stays, golf club memberships, and private jet travel, thanks to the FEC’s loose interpretation of the statutes that govern them.”

Lessons for the tone-deaf

CREW matched the PAC donations with the 147 insurrection-supporting lawmakers. According to its analysis, Toyota made the list of top 10 corporate donors to the “sedition caucus,” coming in at seventh.

That would not have necessarily turned heads, except that Toyota was the only automaker in the top 10. It was also the only consumer product manufacturer in the top 10, and it was the only widely recognizable name except for Walmart.

The others were (counting down from the top): Koch, American Crystal Sugar, Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc., Walmart, Nextera Energy, Inc. PNC, CSX Corporation, U.S. Bancorp and Cigna.

The CREW analysis quickly turned into a media firestorm focusing on Toyota.

USA Today, for example, reported the CREW analysis under the headline, “Toyota tops list of corporate donors to anti-election-certification Republicans in Congress after Capitol insurrection.”

Toyota attempted to put out the fire with a public statement, but that only made matters worse.

"Toyota supports candidates based on their position on issues that are important to the auto industry and the company," the automaker said in a statement reported by USA Today and others. "We do not believe it is appropriate to judge members of Congress solely based on their votes on the electoral certification.”

The problem for Toyota is that voting to certify the General Election is a bipartisan formality that has taken place virtually without a hitch for generations. The January 6 vote was nothing like that. It took place just hours after a bloodthirsty mob broke into the Capitol Building with the intent to kill, in order to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power and install former President Trump into an illegitimate, unwanted and undeserved second term.

The lawmakers who voted against certifying the results were not voting for their favorite ice cream. They voted to endorse an anti-democratic, anti-American, violent and tyrannical power grab that could have wreaked chaos across the country and caused as much damage, if not more, than the Civil War.

Fortunately, the insurrection was quelled, and further violence has not erupted across the country, at least not yet.

However, those votes continue to have a consequential impact on the democratic process. Republican state legislators are attempting to pass hundreds of new laws that make it harder for Democratic-leaning constituents to vote, and they are leveraging the same false “voter fraud” canard that the insurrection supporters used to justify their votes against the 2020 election.

Given this context, Toyota clearly failed to recognize the significance of continuing to put PAC donations in the pockets of insurrection-supporting members of Congress.

“This is essentially a financial analog to the assertions by some GOP leaders that nothing really serious occurred at the Capitol on Jan. 6, and the Republicans’ refusal to support a bipartisan investigation of the events,” wrote LA Times business columnist and Pulitzer Prize winner Michael Hiltzik, under the scorching headline, “By supporting seditionist lawmakers, Toyota shows disdain for the public interest.”

What’s next for corporate America?

The media firestorm was bad enough, but for Toyota the consumer backlash could be even worse, as Toyota owners have taken to social media vowing to never buy another car from the company.

The threat of a consumer boycott could evaporate, as they often do. However, Toyota’s public relations crisis comes at a pivotal moment for the auto industry, when U.S. automakers like Ford are introducing all-electric versions of their most iconic brands.

That could put Toyota’s hybrid Prius brand at a disadvantage. Ford has already found that its all-electric version of the Mustang is drawing in a significant number of new customers. Toyota could find itself on the short end of the stick as car buyers explore new choices.

In addition, business-to-business boycotts can be highly effective. Toyota may begin to feel pressure from high profile corporate stakeholders such as NASCAR, which has been voicing support for the Black Lives Matter movement while trying to stay out of the voter suppression debate.

All in all, the entire controversy has lent steam to House Speaker Pelosi’s plans for investigating the failed insurrection of January 6, and holding to account those who were responsible.

Business leaders who don’t want to get caught in the crossfire should get out while they still can and stop sending money to both federal and state lawmakers who support insurrection, voter suppression, or both.

Image credit: Jose Fontano/Unsplash

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has long volleyed back and forth from being a lukewarm environmental enforcer to serving as a friend of industry, depending on who is in charge at the White House. Meanwhile, many communities of color have long suffered due to the lack of effective policies centered around environmental justice.

But last week, the EPA announced it will soon provide $50 million for environmental justice initiatives through funds made available under the American Rescue Plan (ARP), the coronavirus stimulus package announced by incoming President Joe Biden on his first day in office. As a response to the ongoing pandemic, the U.S. Congress has set aside such funding for grants, contracts, and programs that identify and take on environmental or public health threats in underserved communities.

For example, one program will allocate $200,000 for a mentoring program in Baltimore, Maryland. A new on-the-job training program will train young adults so they can be employed in full-time jobs within the evolving water industry. Participants will learn skills such as water quality monitoring, sampling, and reporting with the goal to boost water quality in urban and rural communities and, in the long run, find people to fill decent-paying water infrastructure jobs.

That $50 million is only a start. There is talk of even more funds in the next annual federal budget, but of course, considering how polarized Capitol Hill has become, that’s a hope, not an expectation communities can bank on.

Editor's note: Be sure to subscribe to our Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which comes out every Wednesday.

The change of tone, nevertheless, should put companies on notice, and that includes just about any business in any industry — including the energy and logistics sectors.

For example, companies doing business in the oil-rich Gulf Coast have long profited from the U.S. energy boom, but largely at the expense of communities of color. “I have witnessed how the oil and gas industry has dominated the Gulf Coast region at the expense of Black communities, engulfing our neighborhoods with massive amounts of toxic pollution from oil refining and manufacturing,” Beverly L. Wright, the executive director of the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, recently wrote for Scientific American.

Amazon’s spectacular growth in recent years has also made it a target of environmental justice advocates. In California’s Inland Empire, located east of Los Angeles, for example, local communities have chaffed at the company’s expanded investment in warehouses for several years, saying all the trucks that come with those facilities are polluting their neighborhoods. Amazon says it is responding in kind, with investments such as rooftop solar power and more electric vehicles for its fleets.

The solutions are complicated with no easy outcomes. Yet the bottom line is that more activists are saying they are tired of their neighborhoods having to suffer from the social impacts (including noise) and environmental impacts (including emissions) of these companies’ operations.

Oft-recited solutions for the surging warehouse boom are also not necessarily enough to sway the communities in which they are often located. Target has come under fire for its plans to turn a former coal power plant into a distribution center — one that could add around 2,000 jobs with wages starting at $18 an hour. But locals objecting to the project say a conversion to electric trucks is not enough. “We can’t get caught up in just a conversation around, ‘Yes, let’s just electrify everything and that’ll be the end of our problems,’ because it won’t be,” Kim Wasserman, executive director of the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, said in an interview with the Energy News Network. “There’s still a massive concern around how many warehouses are coming into low-income communities of color.”

At a minimum, companies need to take note from both the news at EPA and the rising voices within the environmental justice movement: At a minimum, if they seek to avoid additional regulations and a sullied public reputation, a commitment to lowering the impact of their companies’ operations needs to catch fire now.

Image credit: Nehemias Mazariegos/Unsplash

(Image: Inside the Living Lab at Armstrong World Industries' corporate campus in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, where the company is looking to implement ideas for the post-COVID office and gauge employee feedback.)

As the COVID-19 pandemic fades and vaccination rates improve, employers are working on plans for re-entry with an opportunity to reset previous environments. The benefits of working from home have given many people options for a more convenient, controllable and customizable workspace. Employers who want to attract and retain top talent will have to ensure that any work environment provides similar comforts. 

The post-COVID office as a work-from-home experience

For some people, working from home has been a tough challenge. Noisiness, lack of space and family responsibilities are among the factors that could make some pine for their own cubicles. Many others, though, have been enjoying the ability to move freely about their homes, shifting from desk chair to couch or kitchen stool at will, breathing air they control, savoring the view from a favorite window, or taking their laptops out to the deck, patio or terrace.

Ideally, the post-COVID office would replicate these benefits of working from home, while also providing the social interactions and collaborative opportunities that factor into creativity, innovation and productivity.

The challenge for designers is how to choose the best solutions that make a real impact on people’s daily lives at work. Partly thanks to the green building movement, modern office design can be highly flexible, humanistic and appealing, and the options are many.

Employee surveys can offer some guidance. The ceiling and walls manufacturer Armstrong World Industries, for example, released an employee survey earlier this year which indicates employees expect their workspaces to support personal wellbeing, as well as assure health and safety, when they return in person. 

Walking the healthy workspace walk

Armstrong is also observing the modern post-COVID office in action through the day-to-day experiences of employees working in its new Living Lab at the company corporate campus in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. 

The Living Lab is the precursor to a renovation of the Armstrong headquarters building in partnership with global design and architecture firm Gensler. The experience from the Living Lab will inform this renovation. 

The Living Lab began to take shape in 2020 with an initial focus on leveraging Armstrong’s sustainable products and other building elements to create indoor and outdoor workspaces that foster collaboration. That includes a working lounge, a working cafe, and rooms set aside for large and small groups, in addition to 24 individual work stations. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the program grew to include a focus on Armstrong’s Healthy Spaces air quality products. Sound, light and climate control are also key features.

Key themes: Information and flexibility

Employees began to occupy the Living Lab in May, and they are encouraged to provide detailed feedback on their experiences. Two key themes are already beginning to emerge.

One is information: During the COVID-19 pandemic, large swaths of the working public immersed themselves in the news. Armstrong employee feedback indicates people still expect a high level of information about the quality of their indoor environments, and the Living Lab is designed to deliver it.

Displayed at the entrance of the Living Lab is a WELL Health-Safety Rating Certification seal from the International WELL Building Institute, which Armstrong received in 2021. This certification provides a framework for organizations and communities to prepare for a safer and healthier future. When you see the WELL Health-Safety seal, you can feel confident knowing the space you’re entering is putting your health first, Armstrong says. Once inside the Living Lab, the first thing employees see is a dashboard displaying detailed information about the Lab’s indoor air quality, developed in partnership with HVAC services firm Trane. 

Along with this displayed information, key design elements help to create a sense of well-being: Ample light beams in from the windows, work stations are spaced out for safety and privacy, and Armstrong products like AirAssure ceilings and VidaShield UV24 air purification systems are put to work maintaining air quality. The Living Lab also includes an outdoor working space fitted with furniture, power and Wi-Fi.

Employees took notice from the start. “The biggest elements that caught my attention were how fresh the space felt and smelled, the flexibility of the workspaces, and the natural light,” said Alexandra Waltemyer, Armstrong’s senior manager for Healthy Spaces strategic initiatives. “As soon as I walked in, the space was bright, and it felt clean and fresh. It even has a visible dashboard showing all of the measures for the indoor air quality, so I not only sensed the fresh air, I could visibly see things like temperature, humidity and particle count.”

Waltemyer also noted the ability to move between different environments, a key element that makes the Living Lab similar to the work-at-home experience. “Having the option to change between a private focus room, having a space to collaborate, or even working at the counter in the work lounge for a change of scenery has really helped keep me productive and inspired throughout the day,” she said.

Corporate social responsibility in the age of information     

One especially interesting aspect of the Living Lab is its potential to inform and influence employees beyond working hours.

“Having the indoor air quality of the space I’m entering visible to me as I enter has made me crave even more knowledge of the air quality in the spaces I’m entering,” Waltemyer told 3p.

Meredith Baxter, Armstrong’s campus experience manager, had a similar experience. While citing the ability to move between individual and collaborative spaces as a key feature, she also emphasized the informational element.

“Every day upon entering the space, I can see a real-time air quality score that provides a sense of security of the overall ‘healthiness’ of the space,” she explained. “The visibility of the variables that impact the score make me wonder how I could incorporate similar measures in my home to identify areas for improvement to benefit the overall wellbeing of my family.”

Companies need to take lessons from the pandemic — and their employees’ home experiences, too

All in all, the Living Lab experience suggests that companies can leverage their products and skills to become a trusted partner for employees who seek reliable, accurate, and useful information about their indoor environment.

Socially responsible companies have long sought to attract top talent by informing and engaging on company-sponsored projects, including volunteering for student mentoring or environmental measures such as tree plantings. They have also had to prove that their quest to improve their social and environmental performance is one of deeds matching words. Now, the challenge becomes more complex.

As employees return to the post-COVID office — at a time when millions of job openings suggest companies are once again in a fierce competition for talent — executives will have to prove they are not only great places to work, but welcoming spaces where employees can be and feel their best, too. The Living Lab offers a testing ground for how to do that. While the initiative is still in progress, early insights indicate that by providing access to information and bringing the comforts and security of home into the workplace, companies can begin to show their responsiveness to the expectations of a new generation steeped in the lessons of COVID-19.

This article series is sponsored by Armstrong World Industries and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team.

Image courtesy of Armstrong World Industries 

The aerospace giant Rolls-Royce Holdings seems to be on a firm path toward net-zero, but it’s been a different story for another company, Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, the automaker known as the drive of choice for the U.K’s royal family, super-successful entrepreneurs and other folks with money to burn. Rolls-Royce Motor Cars has long resisted electric vehicle (EV) technology, but it finally appears ready to give zero-emission mobility yet another turn at the wheel.

This is not your father’s electric car…it is your child’s

Rolls-Royce Motor Cars came into being in 2005, after BMW beat Volvo and other contenders for the rights to make cars under the ultra-exclusive luxury brand with a global reputation for satisfying the most exacting tastes.

The battle for the Rolls-Royce brand actually began in earnest in 1998, just around the time GM was struggling (and failing) to find a market for its groundbreaking EV-1 electric car. Among other factors, back in the 1990s EV batteries were considerably less than perfect, with long charging times, high costs and low range being the main obstacles. GM launched the car in 1996 and stopped producing it in 1999.

The EV-1 experience may have prompted higher-ups at Rolls-Royce to ignore newfangled electric drive technology and stick with tradition. After all, if EV technology was less than perfect, why would Rolls-Royce customers be interested in it?

The company did test the waters in 2011 when it introduced an all-electric version of the Phantom, at a car show. However, it disavowed any intention to put the vehicle into production, citing the inconvenience of long charging times as one factor.

Rolls-Royce Motor Cars also set the Internet on fire in 2017, when it built and donated a single child-sized electric car to a U.K. hospital. In an interesting twist, the tiny car was intended to be a therapeutic device, helping to reduce pre-operative stress by enabling children to drive themselves through the corridors. Try that with a gas engine!

Rolls-Royce Motor Cars let the EV opportunity slip by

On the flip side, at least one automotive entrepreneur took a different lesson away from the EV-1 debacle. That was, of course, Elon Musk, who introduced his first all-electric car in 2008 through the Tesla Motors startup he co-founded. Rather than producing an affordable EV for the masses, Tesla launched its first model, the Roadster, as an expensive, exclusive sports car that fit the bill for auto enthusiasts who value cutting edge technology and innovation. It cost more than $100,000 and the first run of 500 vehicles sold quickly.

Not to lionize Musk himself — after all, his performance on various measures of corporate responsibility ranges from mixed to dismal — but the focus on innovation and performance helped to lift all EV boats. In 2010 Tesla received a large Energy Department grant aimed at producing affordable EVs at scale, based on his success with the Roadster. That key endorsement from government policy makers provided U.S. automakers with key federal-level support to adopt EV technology.

Since 2010, the cost of EV batteries has dropped like a stone and the technology has improved significantly. Along with an ever-increasing gaggle of other EV startups, legacy automakers in the U.S. and elsewhere have also begun to formulate plans for an all-electric future. That includes EVs equipped with fuel cells, which produce electricity from a reaction between hydrogen and oxygen.

Also included in the all-electric mix are luxury brand names like Jaguar. While not nearly as exclusive as Rolls-Royce, the Jaguar name leans on a reputation for quality and performance, at a cost.

Best of both worlds for Rolls-Royce and BMW?

By 2020, BMW critics were loudly questioning the company’s failure to develop a soup-to-nuts, dedicated electrification strategy. Some were eager to see BMW agree to spin off Rolls-Royce, in order to focus more energy on electrification for the mass market. They also argue that the spinoff would enable Rolls-Royce to reaffirm its title to ultra-exclusivity, citing the successful example of Ferrari.

It appears that BMW is determined to have it both ways. In recent weeks, Rolls-Royce launched its Coachbuild service, which ups the ante on automotive perfectionism by offering “an extraordinary design collaboration between patron and artisan.”

In the meantime, Rolls-Royce’s tease of the all-electric Phantom back in 2017 was not just a tease, after all.

At the time, Rolls-Royce CEO Torsten Müller-Ötvös confirmed that hybrid electric cars would not roll off the company’s assembly lines — ever. However, that comment was just a precursor to the main thrust of his main point. Müller-Ötvös explained that 100 percent electrification was the wave of the future, meaning several years away. In 2017, he explained, the technology was yet not up to Rolls Royce’s exacting standards.

Apparently, much has changed in the past four years — including a growing number of countries and local governments that plan to restrict the sale or use of conventional gas-powered cars. Earlier this year, Rolls-Royce confirmed it is working on an all-electric version of its Shadow line, reportedly to be called “Silent Shadow.”

In a recent interview with Bloomberg Television, Müller-Ötvös described how zero-emission electric technology complements the company’s brand identity.

"Electrification fits perfect with Rolls-Royce -- it's torquey, it's super-silent," he told Bloomberg. "We are not known for roaring loud engines and exhaust noises whatsoever, and that is a big benefit.”

The significance of a verrrry expensive electric vehicle

The announcement of an all-electric Rolls-Royce is a significant one because it helps to cement zero-emission technology in the popular imagination as a mature form of automotive engineering, one that is worthy of attention from firms with a reputation for delivering the ultimate automotive experience.

On the other hand, one electric car model may not seem like a big deal. It’s not, at least in terms of raw numbers. The iconic Silver Shadow, for example, is known as Rolls-Royce’s top selling passenger car, and it produced a total of only 38,000 units during its 11-year run from 1955 to 1966.

In contrast, Tesla’s all-electric Model S has sold more than 250,000 units since its introduction in 2012, and other automakers plan to introduce millions of their own zero-emission vehicles in the near future.

However, Coachbuild could be the secret weapon up Rolls-Royce’s sleeve.

Given the collaborative identity of Coachbuild, it is only a matter of time before someone with deep pockets and a passion for electric cars takes advantage of the new service.

Like the Roadster before it, the new Rolls-Royce all-electric Shadow could be the rising tide that lifts all boats even higher in the EV market of the future.

Image credit: Leon Seibert/Unsplash