HELLO! | SIGN IN | REGISTER

Why do you think changing commerce to a philanthropic model, along with following triple bottom line practices, is still only reaching the innovators and some of the early adopters?  How can we communicate most effectively to the general public?





verbila
POSTS: 11
POSTED BY: verbila
ON Mar-27-08 | 16:44:49

Some things that come to mind for me would be:



1. Emphasizing the ability to compete on price with companies that are not triple-bottom line companies. Too often people think that socially responsible companies charge more for their services or products, but this is not always the case. Many companies offer products and services that are very competitive price-wise. We need to let people know that everyone can patronize TBL companies, it's not just for wealthy people.



2. Play up what "long term" means in terms of sustainability. "Long term" can have a number of contexts. It can mean that if a product or practice is environmentally friendly, that the planet will be healthier for your grandchildren, or their grandchildren. Or it could mean that the company itself is profitable and self-sustaining so that their employees can enjoy job security long term, and that the city they reside in can count on their tax contributions now. Community and partnerships that are long term are an important part of the social fabric. I think a lot of people are frustrated at how the social fabric seems to be unraveling in many places and contexts. We need to "weave" it back together by creating companies that will be here now and in the future, and won't abandon a community for profit purposes alone.



3. Transparency and making it personal. When you put a face on a company, whether it's the founders, the employees, the producers/partners, or whomever, I think the level of trust goes higher. I want to know about the people that make the company or product, and how it's affecting their lives. I want to know how that item was produced, what it's made out of, how it got to my local store. When you tell stories about people and the process, that personal connection makes everyone realize that "we're all in this together".



4. Sorry to have a negative slant, but I think that every time the companies that have major skeletons in their closet in terms of exploitation of people and of the earth are exposed to the public, it helps advance the cause of TBL companies, because they are the alternative to that. People do get legitimately horrified when abuse is exposed, but we need to know exactly what alternative we have to patronizing those businesses. You could have an ad campaign that's like "Did you know that Company A treats their workers unfairly? Company B (the TBL company) makes the same product, but treats their workers fairly.  Here's how you can find Company B's product." It's not just a matter of boycotting "bad" companies, it's also a matter of specifically and consciously patronizing "good" companies. When I patronize TBL companies I feel like I'm not just getting dollar value on what I buy, I feel like my money is going further, like it actually has more purchasing "power" because I am contributing to something positive.



(I am a World of Good, Inc. employee, but these opinions are my own.)





Kvale Good Natured Games, LLC
POSTS: 9
ON Apr-24-08 | 22:54:58

I think the effort can be to reach more of the mainstream public - the people not yet fully committed to the healthier business models. It's not affordable for a business to advertise to reach them on a grand scale.



One way to reach and engage them is through grassroots efforts. Getting people in dialogue, talking about distinctions between the self-driven and the principled companies. Water cooler chat has a peer influence.



Another way is to get the motivated public to speak their interests to the media. They can share when they are pleased with particular news stories and request to learn more on other small companies.



Engaging them may come through tangible stories and facts, allowing people to clearly picture a "before and after" comparison.



The public show know that to support a triple-bottom line company is much more likely to result in that company making more progress in development their wares or services. A large corporation typically has stockholders they wish to "feed" first and foremost.



I am pleased to hear all of the interest in a green economy to create new jobs. Yet part of me is concerned that "Big Business" organizations will take over these products and services quite soon and water down the authentic efforts being made by the small companies. A step forward by any of the old businesses is better than none at all, and I suppose there will always be room on the market for the most ethical companies.





People of Hope Crafts
POSTS: 2
ON May-15-08 | 15:50:28

I think this is a VERY IMPORTANT topic.  So as far as I can tell more and more socially and environmentally responsible companies are popping up...So the missing factor is engaging consumers to support these companies.  How can a movement really happen without the masses to support it?



Well I believe the answer lies in consumer education.  Triple bottom line companies should focus on two factors, selling their product and selling the CAUSE.  So, there should be speakers out in the community talking about the pros of their cause.  Speak at college campuses, talk with neighborhood groups, church groups, present the cause at an open mic-event, host an educational party, encourage others to do so as well, post flyers, organizes others to spread the word...get the picture?  Activate the masses...





jinx33rokz
POSTS: 1
POSTED BY: jinx33rokz
ON Jun-18-08 | 12:06:36

I am new to all this so please forgive me for my ignorance. However I think if products were certified for example organic companies have the "usda organic" label on the  product label... it would help to educate consumers at the moment that is most important, the time of purchase. If there is something like that in place already, then the public needs to also know about it. Use me as an example. I would also like to add that I am on here today researching cruelty free companies because last night I saw the show 30 Days and they had a hunter go live with an animal rights family. TV is the number one way to reach the public.





Indochine Natural
POSTS: 86
ON Apr-26-08 | 09:12:38

What about some effort to engage directly with developing country artisans and producers, not just communication with the Fair Trade wholesalers and traders??





eConsciousMarket.com
POSTS: 5
ON Jun-15-08 | 20:17:32

There is no doubt that some US producers are working directly with artisan co-ops abroad. Great examples of that are Stephanie Bernstein of To-Go Ware working with Burmese women's co-ops, and more recently the Conserve co-op in India, to make the cases for her reusable bamboo sets....or Global Exchange purchasing children's toys and instruments from co-ops in Africa and South America. When sustainable goods are bought from people at a fair wage and sold profitably, there is no doubt that the Triple Bottom Line is being served.





Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next