At Brandinstinct, we go to great lengths to not talk about the environment and making green claims as the only way to help build a more civil society. It’s not that we are not green, it’s just that everyone is talking about the environment and we believe that creating a more civil society requires many efforts other than being green. It’s about communicating all sorts of progressive topics, sharing many different ideas that people think are important and creating dialogues that help us progress as a society on many, many fronts.

All that said, I really had to write this post since it stirred up something inside me.

The Stella Artois brand managed to turn the high cost of their lager into a benefit with successive ‘reassuringly expensive’ campaigns. The brand has built an image that exudes refinement and wit, has taken on an artisan character and yet serves as the standard staple of pubs and bars everywhere.

Well done Stella.

For all these reasons, I could not help but scratch my head at the new green push from the brand. It seems like too much of a departure and it raises too many questions in my mind. Is using 75% recycled materials a good standard? Is it the very best, which would help it retain a premium image?

I know that Innocent use 100% recycled materials for their bottles. I don’t know if this is even possible for bottles and cans, but I make the point to illustrate how awkward these communications can be if they look like a departure from the main brand narrative (even if they are wrapped up in scrumptious 60’s design).

Innocent promotes purity narratives at its core. Green and ethical stories about the brand are a no-brainer and should form a part of the central brand story telling. Stella is and no doubt should be proud of their recycling efforts. It perhaps forms one more reason to buy the brand over others and there should be a way to communicate this credential to the market.

There has not been a lot of activity in the Blogosphere on this campaign yet, but the comments from people (i.e. not industry) are not great. Greenwashing is simply one way all companies can depart from the central narrative of their brand and put themselves on a limb unnecessarily. Stella would also put their brand at risk if they started harping on about the importance of the family unit, security or excitement. When these departures occur, the consistency of the brand is interrupted and it puts the brand at risk.

Marketing Magazine reports Last week, Stella Artois unveiled a tie-up with TV presenter and environmentalist Ben Fogle to highlight an on-pack push for the Stella Artois Hedge Fund, which helps support the planting of new hedgerows in the British countryside.

So, it would seem that there is a significant effort behind the campaign. However, being environmentally conscious is now simply an entry cost for this generation. Trying to fashion yourself into a hero for the environment is made difficult by competitors that make it their central promise and turn others pale by comparison. It’s best to speak quietly about these efforts in the right forums and slowly build on this story over time  in order to avoid a hypocritical label.

Despite being a bunch of  bike riding, tree-hugging granolas, all of the contributors for Civil Branding go out of our way to not write about environmental efforts and green branding.

We believe that being green is one of many activities that a company can undertake in order to help create a more civil trajectory for society. We avoid talking about green efforts simply because we want to promote the other 90% of worthy civil actions that brands can undertake to create a better society and differentiate ther brands. In fact, it can be argued that very little brand differentiation can be accomplished these days by going green.

Hence, my surprise at Stella Artois’ new campaign promoting green values. It’s a beautiful campaign, staying true to the French Riviera concept established by the TVCs. However, the strategy is not an obvious fit for the brand and seems like a real risk for the brand to take.

The Stella Artois brand has achieved incredible status, honing an art-loving, intellectual and deliciously dark humourous edge. Through careful management and bold moves it has turned its premium pricing into a positioning advantage. All the while, it remains the staple of all pubs and lager hounds.

Well done Stella.

Trouble is, how does green fi into this brand? Brands need to evolve and their meaning needs to become more complex – no question. But brands should also move in the established trajectory that they have taken so long to set.

When I see these ads, too many questions come to mind. Is 75% good? Is it better than the competition? Is it a remarkable benchmark? A simple search online makes me wonder. Entire countries like Switzerland and Finland recycle 90% of their glass. Being Canadian, I know that Ontario beer stores recycle almost 100% of their bottles and cans. Innocent use 100% recycled materials to create their bottles.

Stella should be proud of their environmental efforts and maybe these should be used as yet another reason to buy their beer. But when a brand begins to claim territory that is far off its trajectory, it begins to take on the risk of seeming unauthentic. Greenwashing is the major authenticity hazard of the decade but there are others. The recession has seen many premium brands try to include ‘value-for-money’ notions in their positioning (and fail). We also see brands like French EDF being accused of hypocrisy when waving the British flag.

There are many brands that easily claim green inside their brand. For example, Innocent promotes notions of purity, goodness and harmony through their brand and therefore has  a natural claim on all things green. Environmental messages permeate the brand just as naturally as they do with the Body Shop.

Stella are going into partnership with The Tree Council to plant hedges in the British countryside, so it seems that they are really putting their weight behind the effort. I am sure the campaign will live on in appropriate media like POS and packs.

As I say earlier, all brands need to evolve the meaning and become increasingly complex. However, the emphasis needs to be placed on EVOLVE. The campaign has been plastered on every surface in London and has had very high media exposure in the UK. This surge ignores the softly-softy approach that most brands adopt when trying to evolve the meaning of their brands. using this approach creates a lot of attention and risk should things not work out.

Coca-Cola’s interest in taking a stake in Innocent is a classic example of a wealthy elephant company seeking to share in the goodwill of a virtuous mouse, like Cadbury’s stake in Green & Black’s, L’Oreal’s stake in Body Shop and McDonald’s stake in Pret. The goodwill that Coca-Cola and other interested parties value in Innocent is consumer preference that is rooted in the socially-progressive narrative that Innocent communicates. See earlier post about the HBR paper on Social Brands for more on this topic.

Be honest and prosper: easier said than done. Companies that communicate notions of truth, set themselves up for attack by a world that has grown cynical about big business. While it is admirable that Innocent Drinks has set up an entire company based on the values of truth and purity of action, it is perhaps even more incredible that one of the largest companies in the world, IKEA, also adopts a narrative of truth when promoting its brand.

Unlike Innocent, IKEA is also mired in controversy, ranging from deforestation to child labour to Nazi sympathy. Throughout all these claims, IKEA has taken an open approach, admitted fault on all occasions and adopted an unapologetic stance in key aspects of their operations like difficult furniture assembly, long customer queues and urban eye sores for buildings.

Despite all the criticism, IKEAs steady market position has led to it being dubbed the Teflon brand. At least part of their charmed existence can be explained by their honest approach to the market. For example, when accused of child labour, IKEA worked to ensure its suppliers did not use children in their factories. Not content with righting wrongs, they then set up a special effort with UNICEF aimed at eliminating child labour. IKEA has also gone further with action on deforestation.

Their continued successes can be attributed also to a liberal use of humour and their ability to laugh at themselves (a lot). Like Innocent, it seems they have a hard time taking themselves seriously.

Spoof ad depicting true Swedish culture

Fab faux designer extraordinare, Mr. Van den Puup