Too Little, Too Late?

This week, the NY Times reported that GM will struggle to make it through 2009 without an economic bailout from the government. Over the past few months we have talked a bit about GM's entry and promising growth into the sustainability discussion. Just over two months ago, J.D. Powers and Associates reported that GM's ranking as the most sustainable car brand in the blogosphere was just narrowly behind Toyota, a huge win for GM. Or so we thought... (Read the post: GM Makes Green Strides)

It is one of our core beliefs that brands who are the first to enter into the sustainability discussion in their industry will reap the greatest reward. Brands that demonstrate leadership and dynamism and share a true vision have always risen to the top. Think of BP versus ExxonMobil or Walmart versus Target.

That's why it is hard, given the recent news, not to think about Toyota's vision versus GM's. One can't help but wonder: what would GM look like today if they had embraced the changing energy and automobile landscape sooner, instead of ignoring it for so long. What if they had been the first (or even the second or third) to enter into the hybrid market? Does vision matter? Only if you want to survive.

The Closing Ceremony

So it's over. The 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics has run its last race, pummeled its last horse, awarded its last dozen or so gold medals to Michael Phelps.

And it was a good one. Two weeks of non-stop Olympic coverage (NBC had more air coverage then hours in a day thanks to all of their networks). Recording breaking ratings -- over 34MM viewers during prime time coverage. Some pretty amazing stories told.

Throughout we've looked at the world's biggest brands try to put their best foot forward. The world's biggest stage is the perfect place to talk about the world's biggest issues. And sustainability certainly is taking center stage.

Looking back at the advertising over the fortnight (we're using our proper English in preparation for the 2012 London Games), this Olympics clearly got a "Green Medal." And that's good news for everybody.

We leave this topic with a few thoughts on what makes good sustainability strategy and messaging (or any messaging, for that matter)—in hopes we see much more of it:

1. Be Synergistic – Don't try to sell trees, if you normally sell widgets. Instead design a widget that is made from trees. Maybe that's not possible, but you get the drift.

2. Be Authentic – As David Ogilvy said, “The consumer is not a moron, she is your wife!” Consumers are smart people. Give them the benefit of the doubt and let them make their own choices. If you are truthful, they will follow.

3. Make it Relevant – The ads that worked best were relevant to the Olympics, the brands, the products and a vision of a more sustainable world. Tall order. But when it works, it really works.

4. Have a Vision – Companies that lead, win. Go ahead and seize the opportunity. Become a sustainability leader.

And most importantly, COLLABORATE.

Brands can't do it all on their own, nor are they expected to. Remember the BP line? "It's a Start.” When a company acknowledges its role in the world, amazing things happen.

After all as the Japanese proverb says, “None of us is as smart as all of us.”

(It sure would have been better if it was a Chinese proverb... but oh, well.)

An Olympic Effort by GM

Have you seen the new GM ad running during the Games? It aims to set GM apart as a "company that gets it," by showing off all the "green" bells and whistles they've got coming out of the R&D lab. It reminds us that GM is an innovator and is bigger than any one of its brands.

Of course, it's hard not to smile a bit smugly as the US car giant tried to unload the albatross formerly known as The Hummer. Maybe they should have left that brand's badge out of the spot...? But you have to applaud GM's willingness to change. But what about the U.S. car buyer? Will they be willing to change along with GM? Will they support a hybrid that doesn't come in the shape of a giant Chevy Tahoe? Will they "pay forward" a few dollars more to make a fuel cell a reality sooner?

Dunno. But times have changed and smart companies—like GM—should lead the mass revolution. Commit to technologies and products it knows people will want. And that only happens from the top. Afterall, it was another car company's founder, Henry Ford, who said, "If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse."

What do you think?