Subscribe to Packaging Digest

The trials and triumphs of corporate transparency

February 17, 2012

Corporate transparency in packaging sustainabilityConsumers are demanding more transparency in sustainability efforts; stakeholders and investors are doing the same. As corporate citizens we need to give it to them.

Giving customers what they want is key to any business, and to keep investors and stakeholders on board, transparency is crucial to keeping them informed and happy. Packaging is at the front line of the sustainability battle, since it is one of the most tangible aspects eco-responsibility and is literally in consumers’ hands all the time. Nearly any purchase requires some thought towards packaging, whether it involves food, medicine or even new shoes.

Investors are becoming wary of overblown claims, and consumers are getting more educated about what “sustainable” really means. Suspect claims are being called out: Kmart was charged by the FTC for claiming its disposable plates were biodegradable, ENSO Plastics got in trouble for falsely stating their plastic water bottles were fully biodegradable–the list goes on. Increasingly, sustainability is hinging on honesty and transparency, and corporate transparency is vital to being successful.

Corporate transparency has positive potential impact; it helps grow trust in a brand because both consumers and investors know and understand exactly what they’re looking for. One of the most important benefits is that overall, transparency will have positive environmental effects because companies will have no choice but to actually be sustainable in order to win over consumers and investors.

Sustainable packaging even creates a business and marketing opportunity: putting “30 percent post-consumer plastic” on a package is not enough anymore. Companies need to be doing much more to truly make sustainability claims that will woo customers. In that vein, the business opportunity is lost if there’s no communication or transparency, because both consumers and stakeholders will remain in the dark about the sustainability and responsible business practices. The communication lines running between the company and investors, and between the company and consumers, must be clear and precise.

Another caveat: brands must be careful about potential partnerships. If a company partner or collaborator is not holding up the same standards of sustainability, or is making false claims about their sustainability, that can bring your company’s claims into question and lessen the impact of your efforts.

When dozens or hundreds of companies are striving for these measures, marketing wins will not necessarily be a given. A brand will also need to be detailed but simple in its marketing efforts. It won’t be substantial enough to say “compostable.” Telling consumers what the carbon impact is, how to recycle the packaging, or how to compost the leftovers, will be helpful.

While corporate transparency requires extra communication and marketing efforts and extra care taken when choosing business partners and suppliers, these efforts are not in vain and are, in fact, becoming crucial to keeping up with business standards. The efforts also pay off greatly in marketing and business improvement and–most importantly–for the environment.

Posted by Tom Szaky on February 17, 2012 | Comments (4)

May 12, 2013
In response to: The trials and triumphs of corporate transparency
Terry commented:

That hits the traegt perfectly. Thanks!


May 12, 2013
In response to: The trials and triumphs of corporate transparency
Mikel commented:

I’m so glad I found my solution olnine.


May 12, 2013
In response to: The trials and triumphs of corporate transparency
Tatiana commented:

Sir I am a practicing crciophartor in SC It appears that these charges are extremely excessive on the face of it was the injury a soft-tissue injury and how did she respond to the treatment? I have never in over 15 years of practice had an accident patient that required even half the amount of treatment that you received. The actual charges for each modality is not excessive but with that much treatment she would have to had pretty severe and multiple injuries.


May 12, 2013
In response to: The trials and triumphs of corporate transparency
Jennifer commented:

Sir I am a practicing crroopiacthr in SC It appears that these charges are extremely excessive on the face of it was the injury a soft-tissue injury and how did she respond to the treatment? I have never in over 15 years of practice had an accident patient that required even half the amount of treatment that you received. The actual charges for each modality is not excessive but with that much treatment she would have to had pretty severe and multiple injuries.

POST A COMMENT
Display Name
captcha

Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above. Note the letters are case sensitive:

Advertisement
Advertisement
About Us   |   Advertising Info   |   Site Map   |   Contact Us   |   FREE Subscriptions   |   RSS
 © 2012 UBM Canon. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy