Search

Photo: Sunset in the Jessore Sadar district of Bangladesh, one of the 190 nations where Unilever conducts business, and where the company has an opportunity to improve water stewardship over the next decade.

The multinational consumer goods company Unilever recently announced that it is teaming up with two new partners to meet three new water goals. With those goals, Unilever hopes to achieve “water security for all” by 2030.

A huge global footprint leads to a massive water footprint

The company is right to focus on water as one of its primary sustainability goals. With over 400 brands and products available in 190 countries, Unilever is operating in many places that are facing some sort of water stress. In addition, many of its products require water—everything from laundry and shampoo to tea and household cleaning products.

The new water stewardship goals follow up on previous targets set by Unilever, including halving the water associated with the consumer use of its products and reducing water abstraction in manufacturing by 40 percent by 2020. The company exceeded the manufacturing goal by 7 percent, but it recognizes that much more work needs to be done. Further, its end-user water footprint has actually increased by 1 percent, leading to a rethink about how to set future water targets.

Unilever looks ahead to 2030

99 percent of Unilever’s water consumption is linked to end use, creating a tricky problem of changing its customers’ behavior. For the 2030 goals, the company has continued to shift to focusing on product formulation and technology to ensure that less water is needed in the consumption of its products.

Further, as part of the focus on water use in its manufacturing goal, Unilever plans to implement water stewardship programs across 100 manufacturing sites in water-stressed areas. For that work, Unilever has teamed up with the Alliance for Water Stewardship to enable closer collaboration in shared water catchment areas around manufacturing sites.

To engage more fully within the societies in which it manufactures and sells products, Unilever has teamed up with the 2030 Water Resources Group, a public-private-civic organization hosted by the World Bank Group, to support country-level collaboration as a path to finding common interest across diverse groups seeking better water management solutions.

As a first dive into its partnership with 2030 WRG, Unilever has started working on a project with the Red Crescent Society aimed at addressing the spread of COVID-19 through access to clean drinking water, hygiene and handwashing. Bangladesh is an important place to start.

Bangladesh offers huge challenges and opportunities

While Bangladesh has an abundance of rivers running through its fertile landscape, many of its citizens still lack access to clean water. 5 million of the country’s 165 million people do not have clean water to drink or bath in, and 85 million lack improved sanitation. Many of the country’s 230 rivers are severely polluted and the coastal areas face additional threats: saltwater intrusion and storm surges. Climate change is poised to make matters worse. Floods, cyclones, earthquakes and droughts are increasing in intensity, further stressing the nation’s clean water supplies.

These climatic and environmental pressures along river ways and in battered coastal areas, along with the human rights crisis that has led to the Rohingya people fleeing persecution in Myanmar, are creating a much larger migratory push towards already strained cities and displacement centers. The results are even more threats to clean water availability and the fueling of crowded conditions that make containing the spread of COVID-19 more difficult. On top of that, the economic pressures burdening the country, of which 90 percent of the workforce is in the informal sector, creates a bleak picture.

Thus, the investments and commitments by companies such as Unilever to improve access to clean water and good sanitation is essential. COVID-19 is straining already challenged environmental situations, from climate justice to access to clean water to a busy hurricane season. Businesses are wise to consider how to reduce harm, increase benefits, and work collaboratively to solve the difficult problems we face. Looking through a multi-faceted lens to find solutions to complex, Unilever's push to take on several interwoven problems is a necessary first step.

Image credit: Reza/Unsplash

General Motors (GM) continues its push towards an all-electric, zero emissions future with the announcement last Friday of the company’s partnership with EVgo. Together, the companies say they will build an extensive EV fast charger network with a focus on locations in cities and suburbs over the next five years.

Earlier this year, General Motors unveiled the automaker’s electric vehicle (EV) strategy with a commitment to roll out a range of EVs across all of the company’s brands while providing customers a choice of cars, SUVs and trucks, including offerings from the company’s flagship Cadillac brand.

Underpinning the rapid roll-out of this multi-vehicle, multi-brand strategy is GM’s development with LG Chem of proprietary and modular Ultium battery technology that the company believes will allow it to quickly scale its EV portfolio by 2025.

Complementing its vehicle strategy, the new announcement to bolster America’s charging infrastructure with EVgo follows the same timeline, with a commitment to add 2,700 new fast chargers in 40 metropolitan areas, thereby tripling the size of EVgo’s network - already the largest operator in the U.S. according to a joint press release.

EVgo currently operates more than 800 fast charging locations across 34 states. The company’s CEO, Cathy Zoi, says 115 million Americans already live within a 15-minute drive of an EVgo fast charging station. Since 2019, EVgo has contracted to power 100 percent of its chargers with renewable energy.

Speaking during Friday’s briefing, GM’s CEO, Mary Barra, said that following extensive research, the company found that range anxiety “has fallen to the background” among consumers: no doubt as better battery technology has given rise to much improved vehicle range between charges. Now, customers say they want an extensive EV fast charger networks.

The focus on deploying new infrastructure in metro areas as opposed to highway corridors follows the two CEOs' beliefs that an EV fast charger infrastructure has to be built out for those drivers who don’t have easy access to at-home charging.

So, good news for apartment-dwelling city drivers. But not only that, the two companies see the increase in EV use for ride share and home delivery services as an indicator that there will be increasing demand for convenient access to urban charging locations. In addition, because vehicles being used for these purposes tend to be in use over greater periods of time during the day, they stand to have a significant impact on decarbonizing transportation.

GM and EVgo declined to say during the press briefing which metro areas will be involved in the new EV fast charger infrastructure build-out and were not forthcoming on the financial commitment to make it happen. They did, however, say that they hope to ultimately secure support from Washington, D.C., by way of devising incentives for consumers to adopt clean vehicle purchases. 

How receptive the federal government will be remains to be seen, but since the economy is in the doldrums due to the strain of the pandemic, the companies recognize that historically speaking, the auto sector has always played an important part in economic recovery, so there is an opportunity to do so again.

During the briefing, EVgo’s Cathy Zoi described the expanded EV fast charger partnership with GM as a “gigantic step forward” in meeting future infrastructure demand and indicated that demand will continue to increase.

For an automaker to focus on an ambitious EV fast charger infrastructure is of course not new. From the outset, Tesla recognized that if the public was to adopt its EVs, the company had to make them convenient to use. So, Tesla invested hugely in building its Supercharger network so drivers could make long journeys without worrying about going without a charge.

GM’s and EVgo’s partnership, however, has the advantage that their charging infrastructure will be open to all EV users, regardless of brand.

Image credit: GM

New phase-out measures announced by one of France’s largest banks, Société Générale (SocGen), which outlines how the company will exit the coal sector by 2030 in the European Union and OECD nations - and by 2040 for the rest of the world - have been labeled a “sham intending to mislead.”

Reclaim Finance, a Paris-based NGO and think tank that advises on fossil fuel divestment, has contended that the bank’s latest policy for a 2030-2040 phase-out strategy does not cover the financing subsidiaries of corporations active in the conventional energy sector.

Ranked among the top three banks in France by market size, SocGen will still finance some of the world’s biggest fossil fuel producers according to the think tank, which is funded by private foundations including the European Climate Foundation.

The organization has also identified a “rollover risk” on gas financing in the case of SocGen, which is one of the world’s largest funders of gas and liquefied natural fas (LNG). Among the bank's various ventures in the fossil fuels sector, SocGen is a significant financial advisor to the Rio Grande LNG export project in Brownsville, Texas.

The think tank indicated that further analysis of how financial flows to the coal sector evolves is required to understand just how SocGen applies its policy. But it argued that this phase-out policy does “not genuinely align with the climate catastrophe.”

Lucie Pinson, founder and executive director of Reclaim Finance, said, “One would have hoped that SocGen’s policy would be at the level of the Paris Financial Center’s best practices and meet the commitment they made one year ago to support a coal sector exit effectively.”

She added: “Regrettably, the bank’s policy could merely be a sham intending to mislead those who do not read the fine print.” On the surface measures being adopted by the bank appear to meet the principal criteria recommended by Reclaim Finance and its partners.

Commencing from now, SocGen says it is committed to no longer financing corporations deriving more than 25 percent of its earnings from coal that do not have a phase-out strategy aligned with the 2030-2040 timeline. This covers mining companies “directly operating or owning Thermal coal mining assets.” But the bank did not pledge to apply its policy to passive management, which makes up 40 percent of managed assets. 

Thereafter and starting in late 2021, its commitment will be extended to other companies developing new coal-fueled power plants, or that do not have a phase-out strategy aligned with the 2030-2040 timeline. 

Corporations such as RWE, Germany’s biggest power producer, should according to Reclaim Finance, “logically be excluded immediately” from being provided with finance from SocGen, given that RWE has direct ownership of coal mines and meets all the aforementioned criteria. 

However, the bank’s policy appeared at first glance not to apply to mining behemoth Glencore, which in 2019 mined over 140 million tons of coal and made it one of the world’s ten largest coal producers. The majority of its financing comes the company’s parent, Glencore PLC, with several other financing subsidiaries besides.

Its subsidiaries dedicated to producing and trading coal, such as Prodeco in Colombia, Bulga Coal and Mount Owen in Australia, are well above SocGen’s exclusion financing threshold. 

“BNP Paribas [BNP] may have been afforded the benefit of the doubt, the same does not go for SocGen,” Pinson said, “While BNP’s policy [concerning its coal phase-out plan] should result in an end to financing entities funding Glencore’s coal subsidiaries, SocGen’s policy clearly does not as they will continue financing a group whose coal production is fueling the climate catastrophe and is linked to egregious human rights violations.” 

Apart from entities developing new projects beyond the end of 2021, corporations excluded from general financing by SocGen will still be eligible for “financing products and services dedicated to the energy transition.” This wording allows for the funding of projects replacing coal with gas and LNG projects, which SocGen often puts forth as “transition energies.”

In a clarification from SocGen issued after Reclain Finance’s initial view, the bank said that organizations as a whole will be excluded from financing “if they have not adopted a transition plan by the end of 2021” consistent with the objectives of exiting coal by 2030-2040. This could therefore cover Glencore.

Pinson stressed that tackling how fossil fuels are financed is “only the first step”, adding: “We generally welcome the move by SocGen, albeit it’s a very long one. However, they should not exit coal to increase [its] exposure to gas financing.”

Image credit: Benita Welter/Pixabay

In early July, a tweet about Jersey Mike’s Subs went viral. It claimed the restaurant chain was changing the name of its BLT sandwich to “BLM” in support of Black Lives Matter. The social media reactions poured in, and some news outlets even covered the statement. The tweet wasn’t an official business announcement from Jersey Mike’s, however – it was a joke posted by comedian/writer Yassir Lester.

The fact that so many people thought it was a real post shows just how prevalent these empty corporate messages and efforts have become.

Social media posts are only a tiny start

Virtually every brand has released at least one social media post, email, or advertisement about racial injustice in recent months. No doubt you’ve scrolled past dozens of these messages in your newsfeed or inbox offering sentiments like “We hear you,” “Celebrate our differences,” and “Working together.”

To stand out from competing clutter, many brands use visual elements like redesigned logos or specially packaged products to announce their commitment to social causes. The most ubiquitous iteration of this in Summer 2020 is a black box, either blank or with white text. These messages are empty – and often hypocritical – without real action, however.

A company’s packaging and product names aren’t necessarily the problem. (Then again, maybe they are.) The real issue is the lack of diverse voices in every level of the organization (especially in C-suite roles). It is the continuation of recruitment efforts that favor white candidates. It is the financing of politicians who support outdated, racist legislation. Corporations can post “Black Lives Matter,” but they must show – through their policies and their spending – that Black employees, vendors, customers and neighbors actually do matter.

“We make change by enacting it within our organizations and therefore becoming the exemplars for others,” wrote marketing consultant and professor Mark Ritson in a MarketingWeek op-ed. “If you care about black lives, you don’t get inspired by an Instagram post. You get inspired by black faces in the boardroom. Companies need to become the change they are tweeting about.”

The right way to use a product to bring social justice: Ben & Jerry’s

Ice cream company Ben & Jerry’s has been at the forefront of using their presence and products to make a difference. While founders Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield sold the business to Unilever in 2000, they still oversee the brand’s social justice initiatives.

Over the years, Ben & Jerry’s has released specialty flavors with names like Pecan Resist, Empower-Mint, and Hubby Hubby, raising awareness and funds for everything from LGBTQ rights to climate action to campaign finance reform. In a profile in last week’s New York Times, Cohen and Greenfield were asked if they ever felt “squeamish” about “politically driven flavor names”.

“It doesn’t make me squeamish if the initiative is genuine,” Greenfield said. “If you talk about Justice ReMix’d [a cinnamon and chocolate ice cream first released in September 2019], the flavor is there to call attention to the issue of criminal-justice reform and the activities the company has done.”

So what has Ben & Jerry’s done to address criminal justice reform?  In conjunction with the release of the aforementioned Justice ReMix’d flavor, the company partnered with Advancement Project, a civil rights organization that works with local grassroots programs on racial justice initiatives. A portion of profits from each pint purchased benefits Advancement Project’s Free & Safe campaign.

Through the partnership with Advancement Project, Ben & Jerry’s has put political pressure on government officials to disrupt the school-to-prison pipeline, and end municipal policies of incarceration due to unpaid bail. The company’s founders also joined the American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC) in signing a letter to Congress in support of a bipartisan bill ending qualified immunity. (Ben Cohen discussed his views on qualified immunity with TriplePundit in a July email.) 

In addition, Ben & Jerry’s corporate website and social media handles frequently post about racial bias and nonprofit groups doing the work to end racism.

So while many companies are desperately attempting to gain attention online as being committed to addressing racial injustice in America, Ben & Jerry’s and other companies like it are putting real action behind their words on social media. After all, as one brilliant recent headline by Forbes Senior Contributor Janice Gassam put it, “Dear Companies: Your BLM Posts Are Cute But We Want To See Policy Change.”

Sign up for the weekly Brands Taking Stands newsletter, which arrives in your inbox every Wednesday.

Image credit: Clay Banks/Unsplash

It’s hard to believe we could even think about coats and jackets in the middle of summer, but sooner than we’ll realize, it’ll be time to break out the winter gear. Fashionistas who seek more sustainable alternatives to what’s currently out on the market may want to take a close look at new product lines from Napapijri.

Now part of VF Corporation’s family of brands, Napapijri, which was founded in Italy over 30 years ago, recently announced it scored a gold-level certification from Cradle to Cradle, one of the world’s leading standards for the manufacture and use of safer, circular, and more environmentally responsible raw materials.

Napapijri ventured into the recyclable textile market at first with its Skidoo Infinity jackets, which launched last fall. Once consumers buy these jackets, they can register them with Napapijri. After two years go by, if they no longer want the coat as part of their wardrobes, customers can return them to the company. Napapijri will then take the steps necessary to recycle the jackets and reprocess them into new raw materials and products.

According to the brand, the use of only one type of material within the jacket’s design and construction makes the recycling process far more seamless. One advantage of this approach is that the jackets’ fibers are less likely to degrade once they are churned into renewed materials. Napapijri researchers reportedly spent about three years perfecting the design and blend of fibers for these jackets.

“Napapijri sits within VF’s family of brands as an incubator of new ideas, processes and approaches to fashion-making,” said VF’s Anna Maria Rugarli in a public statement. “Its dedication to sustainable practices is reflected in the positive choices the brand has been making in the last few years – from developing an alternative to down and phasing out all animal fur, to pioneering a series of jackets designed, created and brought to market in keeping with the golden standards of circular economy.”

This fall, Napapijri plans to add three more items to its Circular Series: the Circular Anorak, Circular Rainforest and Circular Puffer. Each of them is manufactured with nylon made by the synthetic fiber manufacturer Aquafil, which brands the fibers under the Econyl name. Aquafil, which is based in Italy, derives these fibers from waste materials such as discarded fishing nets.

In addition to containing Econyl regenerated nylon, Napapijri’s jackets will be filled and trimmed with nylon 6. As with the jacket’s shell, once it is ready for recycling, the nylon 6-based insulation can enter a recycling machine, which allows the fibers to be upcycled without losing any of their original form or quality, so the fabric can be recycled again and again.

Napapijri says it’s on target to add more circular items in the coming fashion seasons.

Image credit: Napapijri/3BL Media

The ongoing COVID-19 crisis hasn’t prevented the nascent battery storage industry from growing over the past several months. And some of the largest sites are underway at some of the most random locations.

Most people who live in or near the Monterey Bay area on California’s central coast know Moss Landing as the sleepy hamlet about halfway between Santa Cruz and Monterey. Visitors to this tiny town wedged along California’s Highway 1 stop by for fresh seafood and scenic views of the local sand dunes. Many visitors also arrive during whale watching season, as they hope to catch the sight of the flukes or graceful movements of the different species of whales (as shown in the photo above) and orcas as they migrate up and down the Pacific coast.

In addition to whale watching, this town is also known for the unfortunate sight of the Moss Landing Power Plant, which dates back to 1949 and at one point was the largest power generation station in the Golden State. But over time those stacks were retired, and its systems were upgraded. Now the natural gas-fired Moss Landing plant can boast another superlative: It will soon be home to what will be the largest battery storage system in the world.

Earlier this spring, Texas-based Vistra Energy announced its intention to expand its already massive battery storage system adjacent to the Moss Landing power station. At its launch, the battery storage installation boasted 300 megawatts (MW) of power. This spring, Vistra said it would partner with the local utility, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), to add another 100 MW unit to bolster this system, pending the approval California’s public utility oversight board.

The ambitious proposal took another step toward being switched on late last week with Monterey County’s planning commission unanimously voting to approve Vistra’s proposal.

"Our Moss Landing site provides a unique opportunity for extensive battery development with its existing infrastructure and the physical space needed for even more potential growth. Utilizing our existing power plant sites allows us to cost-competitively develop renewable and battery storage assets as we rotate our power generation portfolio toward carbon-free technologies," said Vistra’s CEO and president, Curt Morgan, in a public statement. "Vistra is appreciative of the opportunity to, once again, work with PG&E and the State of California to help integrate clean energy from renewable generation sources and ensure reliability of the electric system."

The project still awaits the approval of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) but considering the state’s and local governments’ ambitious climate action goals, that bureaucratic hurdle should only be a matter of time.

Meanwhile, Tesla and PG&E are working together to build another battery storage installation at the Moss Landing site. Once all these energy storage systems are up and running, the site’s total storage capacity could exceed 1.1 gigawatt hours of energy storage – in other words, about 6 hours of power storage capacity. The entire system, according to PG&E, could save the utility about $100 million in reduced inefficiencies over a 20-year period.

Image credit: Humberto Braojos/Unsplash

With the news out that the U.S. economy contracted by almost a third in the last quarter — marking the worst GDP report ever — at first, now does not seem to be the right time to talk about paying what labor activists call a living wage. Companies have responded to such assumptions in kind by either keep wages flat or rolling back temporary wage increases for essential workers.

But at a point when many of us are tired of being stuck at home yet fearful of returning to the shopping mall or local bar, evidence suggests that rewarding workers who are showing up to do their jobs during this emotionally taxing period could actually pay off in several ways.

A new report from Just Capital confirms what other studies have indicated all along: Paying workers a living wage can result in less absenteeism, lower turnover, and more capable and motivated workers.

Just Capital researchers recently crunched data they have on companies and separated them by comparing a batch for firms that pay a living wage versus another batch that does not.

At a basic level, a living wage is defined as pay rate that allows a worker to meet the minimum standard of living where he or she lives. A living wage for a single person with no kids in Los Angeles County, for example, is just under $31,000 a year, versus a little over $24,000 in St. Louis.

The results showed that even though countless companies in the U.S. saw their performance crater during the first several weeks of the pandemic, companies that did pay a living wage tended to perform better than those who payed lower hourly wages. The discrepancy was most notable in early April when the media was rife with stories of countless small and large companies teetering toward bankruptcy.

But as more of the U.S. reopened later in the spring, those firms committed to a living wage still outpaced their lower-paying peers. The companies in the 25 percent who paid the highest wages gained more than a 12 percent return versus those in the lower quartile, which gained an average return on that labor of just over 1 percent.

“With many workers now facing increased economic insecurity in face of the COVID pandemic, responsible companies should consider paying their workers more,” the report reads. “This would allow them to focus on their jobs, which in turn can have a positive impact on the company’s bottom line.”

Discussions about employee engagement, a hot topic just a few months ago, have largely evaporated as companies have shed large parts of their workforce, save for the countless articles suggesting how companies can keep remote workers happy.

But as Congress continues to struggle with its passage of another version of a coronavirus stimulus bill, companies — especially the large retailers that have emerged stronger over the last several months — are now in the lead position to do what they can to ensure essential workers feel protected. Part of that challenge is standing up for your employees. But at a time when many are worried about how they can pay for food and rent, a living wage offers security while providing workers with the motivation to perform well while they are on the clock. In the end, looking out for your employees now can help secure resilience for the long term.

Image credit: David Emrich/Unsplash

Garment workers worldwide have a lot in common with meatpacking plant employees: Unfortunately, they work in close quarters, find it nearly impossible to follow social distancing guidelines, and face many on-the-job risks while making products consumers expect to be both affordable and of high quality. Reports keep surfacing of garment workers at factories that have shifted their operations to make personal protective equipment (PPE) who themselves have contracted COVID-19.

The ironic risks garment workers face as they make PPE

The latest incidents have been occurring in the Garment District of Los Angeles, the epicenter of apparel manufacturing in the U.S. Among the tens of thousands of workers employed in this sector, approximately half are undocumented immigrants. The result is a culture in which workers are afraid to speak out about their wages and working conditions. The lack of transparency in this industry has made it difficult to track the origins of COVID-19 outbreaks. The 300 cases attributed to one factory alone last week is a symbol of how the Los Angeles area has been one of the largest coronavirus hotspots in the U.S.

Factories in countries that have much larger garment industries, such as Bangladesh, are also seeking to relaunch their operations and get back into business by manufacturing PPE. The catch is that more garment workers will confront more threats to their health from the virus, ironically as they make products designed to protect other people from being stricken by it.

A tool to boost transparency in the PPE sector

To that end, the people behind the Open Apparel Registry (OAR), an open-source online tool that maps garment factories worldwide, say they now have the data needed to help monitor sites where workers are making PPE.

OAR announced that manufacturing sites of various sizes can be monitored, whether they are small work studios with a handful of workers or far larger factories. Supply chain and procurement managers can access the database for free and research factories based on the type of products (such as gloves and masks) they manufacture. Anyone, such as human rights advocates working within an NGO, can access OAR’s tool for free. All they need to do is register for an ID.

As of now, the PPE manufacturer option now provided by OAR has a handful of datasets. The organization is currently seeking more data, which would provide buyers of PPE more insight and transparency in their supply chains.

Image credit: Vera Davidova/Unsplash

Goal-setting is familiar territory for most major multinational corporations. But as the needs and demands of our world change rapidly — on issues from climate change and resource scarcity to equity and social justice — companies are challenged to make sure their ambitions evolve in kind. 

Still, it’s rare to see a company revisit past goals still in progress and increase their ambition to align with what’s needed. As it transitions from its Sustainability 2022 framework to a set of more high-reaching goals for 2030, leading global consumer packaged goods company Kimberly-Clark offers a case study in how companies can go about changing their vision to align with what the world requires today. 

Goal-setting must be purpose-fit for a challenging world

Before the global coronavirus pandemic, the world was already grappling with a host of social and environmental challenges. 

The climate crisis remains dire. U.N. data indicates that government commitments fall far short of what’s needed to realize the goals of the Paris climate agreement. And despite progress in some areas, the world is also falling behind on achieving the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030, according to the U.N.'s annual Sustainable Development Goals Report, with advances “offset elsewhere by growing food insecurity, deterioration of the natural environment, and persistent and pervasive inequalities."

Both individuals and business leaders think the corporate world must step up its actions to fill these gaps.  Over 90 percent of citizens think it’s important for the private sector to support the SDGs, for example, according to data from PwC. Yet more than 80 percent of the world’s largest companies are unlikely to meet the targets set out in the Paris climate agreement by 2050, according to a study of almost 3,000 publicly-listed companies and their climate disclosures. 

Corporate action is ramping up. To date, nearly 1,300 leading businesses around the world have made climate commitments through the We Mean Business coalition’s Take Action campaign. More than 240 companies committed to source 100 percent renewable energy as part of the RE100 initiative. And 285 companies have had greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets verified through the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi) in line with the Paris Agreement. 

Sticky challenges demand bold ambitions

For Kimberly-Clark, which counts itself among those with goals verified by SBTi, an outside-in perspective is integral to the goal-setting process and matching ambition with the global agenda, said Lisa Morden, the company’s vice president of safety and sustainability.  

“There is more scientific evidence around pressures and impacts on natural systems and the environment in general,” Morden told TriplePundit. “There are big, sticky, difficult challenges all around us — and those challenges require a pretty bold ambition. We’ve always set targets that we knew were a stretch, but in the last few years, we’ve worked on trying to understand what Kimberly-Clark’s contribution to the Paris accord, for instance, might look like.”

Kimberly-Clark’s 2022 Sustainability Framework, set in 2015, was updated with a new set of goals announced earlier this month. Many of the 2022 goals were already surpassed. The company now aims to reduce its plastics, water, carbon and natural forests footprints 50 percent by 2030. That includes reducing its absolute greenhouse gas emissions by half in just a decade from Scope 1 sources, which are the emissions from its own production, and from Scope 2 sources, those created from producing the energy a company purchases to run its business. In addition, Kimberly-Clark aims to cut its Scope 3 emissions from purchased goods and services and end-of-life treatment for sold products by 20 percent. 

The company decided to take a fresh look at its goals about a year ago, Morden explained: “A lot has changed in terms of what we feel like we can do and what we feel like we should do as a result of the external context we're operating in. We said, ‘It's probably time to take a step back and ask, ‘Are we being big and bold enough?’ We felt it was time.”

The art of the stretch goal

Since 1995, Kimberly-Clark has had a five-year cadence of setting goals (the seven-year goals set in 2015 were an outlier, set to coincide with the company’s 150th anniversary in 2022). With each round, goals were adjusted, the company set more ambitious objectives, and the portfolio of programs expanded "as more knowledge came into the system,” Morden told us. 

“It’s worked very well for us,” she explained. “It’s a source of engagement for our teams and with each cycle we’ve been able to innovate and  stretch further.”

For the 2030 goals, two areas in particular reflect that stretch. Within its GHG emissions reductions, it was a first for the company to set an absolute target to reduce Scope 3 emissions by 20 percent. 

“The Scope 3 piece is a very different challenge than we are used to,” Morden said. “We’ve had to apply some assumptions around what we can achieve that aren’t based in as much experience as some of our other programs." Those considerations depend in part on alternative materials development that is underway, how key core suppliers will drive reductions, and the success of the company’s circular economy focus.

Part of that focus is another bold goal: reducing Kimberly-Clark’s plastics footprint by 50 percent and having 100 percent reusable, recyclable, or compostable packaging by 2025. “We’ve amped up our focus on plastics significantly,” Morden said. “We’re looking at bio-based plastics, renewable plastics, plastics that can be recycled more easily, and even biodegraded or composted more readily.”

For corporate goal-setting, the key to success is an inclusive process

For Kimberly-Clark, the key to success with continually raising its ambition has been an inclusive process of goal-setting that reaches into every corner of the company. 

“We've learned that the act of setting the goals with your business and functional teams , and connecting that to the vision or purpose of the company, is key to engagement and activation of the ambition” Morden said. “There's a whole layer of strategy deployment activity that sits below the goals themselves. This is where the rubber hits the road in terms of bringing the ambition to life.”

For the goal-setting to work, it can’t be top-down, she added. “When people have their fingerprints on the goals — and [they are] included in the process of learning, exploring and developing the pipeline of initiatives — it's a very different kind of engagement model. During every cycle that we've gone through since the early ‘90s, we've gotten better at that. Our employees are increasingly more excited to participate and engagement is expanding from where it started in supply chain and manufacturing, into product and material innovation, and now into helping our brands further their purpose in the world.”

For business leaders seeking to redefine their goal-setting process in an ever-more complex world, Morden’s advice is as follows: “Don’t be afraid of the bold ambition. Be sure that it is reasonable and appropriate to your footprint, to who you are as a company, to what your raw materials look like, to who your customers, consumers and stakeholders are—be sure it's a relevant focus. And then, in your strategy deployment, work with the different functions and regions and stakeholders internally in the company, get their fingerprints on it, bring them along the entire journey. With a little bit of rigor and discipline, and an inclusive process, we’ve found it’s possible to not only design ambitious goals but to actually deliver on them.”

This article series is sponsored by Kimberly-Clark and produced by the TriplePundit editorial team.

Image credit: Jianxiang Wu/Unsplash