Matt C
Web 2.0 Evangelist, Six Sigma Black Belt, Supply Chain, Operations and Customer Relations Leader
Considering the consumer products of your household, if you found out that one of them was based on a highly unsustainable supply of raw materials or energy, would you still use it because of brand preference or convienience?
Answers (13)
Richard J
Independent Construction Consultant & Video Producer
Best Answers in: Government Services (1), Property Law (1), Small Business (1), Green Business (1), Energy and Development (1), Green Products (1)
"Brand preference" would not keep me using a highly unsustainable product if a more sustainable alternative is available. "Convenience" might, that is, if the sustainable product was very inferior to the unsustainable product. But now you have me thinking about these two terms. What do you mean by them? What values do "brand" and "convenience" embody, exactly?
Curtis B
Experienced Supply Chain Professional
Best Answers in: Supply Chain Management (1), Professional Books and Resources (1), Professional Organizations (1), Professional Networking (1)
This is an interesting question, with the current consumer sentiment it would seem that awareness for this type of issue is at an all time high. I believe that as stated previously unless the sustainable product was inferior in someway to the "brand" product then consumers would probably switch. Convienience is another factor, some people just don't care as long as it does the job at a reasonable price.
Personally I would not use a product based solely on brand preference or convenience if it was unsustainable.
Greg P
President, Bluefin Productions Inc.
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (9), Government Policy (5), Advertising (4), Conference Planning (3), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Economics (2), Professional Networking (2), Air Travel (1), Business Dining and Entertainment (1), Education and Schools (1), Job Search (1), Event Marketing and Promotions (1), Financial Regulation (1), Government Services (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Criminal Law (1), Events Marketing (1), Public Relations (1), Sales Techniques (1), Corporate Governance (1), Organizational Development (1), Equity Markets (1), Philanthropy (1), Manufacturing (1), Branding (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Ethics (1), Starting Up (1), Green Business (1), Energy and Development (1), Blogging (1), E-Commerce (1), Computers and Software (1), Databases (1), Information Security (1), Software Development (1), Wireless (1)
Going t be painful to hear:
It depends!
There are some things I would (and do) change in a heartbet. Mostly for green issues, sustainability, etc
I've wathced how we purchase our produce, turns out some stuff from Chile has smaller carbon footprint than local grown food!!!
Some I change becuase I'm tired of sending my money (Even indirectly) overseas: Clothes, no problem, what makes the least impact on the World... Manufactured goods such as electronics and cars, I try to look for corporate profits staying here instead of overseas (not necessarily US v. Foreign made or built, but brand ownership)
But some product categories (Person care) are tough for me to change: Antiperspirent, toothpaste, underwear!
Dominic C
Head hunter in P&D Quantitative Recruitment
Best Answers in: Education and Schools (1), Resume Writing (1), Venture Capital and Private Equity (1), Economics (1), Financial Regulation (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Events Marketing (1), Commodity Markets (1), Futures Markets (1), Hedge Funds (1), Energy and Development (1), Software Development (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
One thing that might stop me is my growing skepticism about the "green" claims of so many brands.
Also the information about "sustainable" resources is grossly distorted by the media, and not in one direction. Fox and other low brow media likes to play down all resource shortages and the left wing media accepts any pseudo scientific nonsense from the green lobby.
This is made worse by an American education system that does not teach science, but instead punts Creationism and other superstitions instead. 40% of Americans believe this junk.
How can anyone who thinks the world is 6,000 years old make any useful decisions about oil and copper reserves which involve millions of years.
Brand preference is not likely to be a major factor since the loudest noise about this is from the largest brands. And so of course are the most cynical lies.
No. I'm afraid that if I were to find that then I'd change brand, irrespective of my brand "loyalty" my planet loyalty is a bit stronger!
Robin W
Customized Strategies Designer for Individuals, Businesses and NonProfits
I don't think the sustainability factor would enter in, of itself. So often in our energy history we've had "scientific alarmists" sound the "we're about to run out of . . . " gong, only to find that newer technology enabled us to access more. While there are limits to things, I don't know that I trust the message of lacking the resource to be accurate. (Pilzer's work highlights this phenomena).
I might change if the product itself were to cause more damage tha benefit.
An interesting question, thanks!
Robin E. Weber
http://dailydeliberation.blogspot.com/
Brand loyalty wouldn't keep me from switching. If I found a product that was better, more efficient, better for the environment and the health of my home, I'd consider switching. Convenience is a big factor. If it's something that will eat up my time or money, I may stick with what I have. I'd have to see the added benefits to switching first before making a decision.
Bob F
Searching for Next Non-Profit Challenge
Best Answers in: Energy and Development (2), Education and Schools (1), Non-profit Management (1), Manufacturing (1), Green Business (1)
Absolutely not. My wife and I read labels and evaluate products very carefully before buying. Essentially, we look at that before we look at price. Convenience plays into the equation, but it is really only used as another consideration of the life cycle analysis. If we have to drive too far for a greener product, we might settle for a green but lesser so product. We are likely atypical buyers who focus on local products and being informed, but I beleive our ranks are growing.
My brand preferences are created by the quality of the product and its sustainability. I don't mind paying 30% more for a product that is "fair trade" based or that uses sustainable supply chains. When I learn that a product is created by companies that disrespect human rights and environmental laws, I decide to not purchase any products from those companies. True cost economics...
Ivy C
Design Director at Knoend
Best Answers in: Green Business (1), Green Products (1), Web Development (1)
Here is the dilemma that faces green businesses. We are a society of convenience. Even econsicous consumers find themselves often in a situation where they will look the other way. Say you want to have coffee, and suppose there are only two coffee shops in a 5 mile radius from where you are. One carries coffee from mexico and uses styrofoam cups. The other store carries organic coffee from ethiopia, but the store itself doesn't recycle. This turns out to be a complex choice that involves carbon footprint, vendor values, farmer's efforts and so on. Most people, including myself, will not go through this extra time to evaluate these matters, deem them unsustainable and forego the coffee. It is similarily hard for someone to evaluate everything in their house and try to eliminate all the unsustainable objects - it is extremely time-consuming and difficult and impossible to be accurate. Until consumers as a whole - are willing to reject all unsustainable objects or businesses make a commitment to provide sustainable products only - we will continue to live in a upside down world. Personally I believe that brand does not have much hold, but the convenience factor is the key.
Stephen S
Office of the CFO at SHUAA Capital
Best Answers in: Energy and Development (2), Economics (1), Government Policy (1), Commodity Markets (1)
Define "unsustainable".
Do you mean like CFLs? Would I use a product that contains mercury and thereby poses a threat to groundwater supplies upon disposal? It would also potentially cause brain damage if a child inhales/ingests the dust from broken lights. I would not use them, no matter how "green" they are supposed to be.
For me, I really don't care what claims are made about a product. I am careful about sustainability. But your definition and mine might be quite different. I don't care too much about putting glass into a landfill or CO2 into the air. Silicon and C02 are among the least harmful chemicals we deal with.
I am quite mindful of mercury and other heavy metals, which cause serious damage to the ecosystem (and people who eat fish). I am more concerned about the acid rain and health problems associated with coal than I am with the CO2 that comes out of it. I am more worried about the nasty chemicals inside a hybrid car's battery pack than I am about the negligible difference in fuel economy vs. a turbodiesel.
I am concerned that overuse of antibiotics and underuse of vaccines could lead to massive outbreaks of deadly diseases unnecessarily.
I am MUCH MUCH more worried about the needs of the world's poor than I am about a tenth of a degree in global warming over the next century. The Kytoto Protocols would keep millions of people much poorer than they'd otherwise be, all to make an unmeasurable difference to world temperatures.
To answer your original question: I will never intentionally violate my personal code of ethics when I purchase a product unless I am in dire need. I will accept some minor tradeoffs. I will buy bottled water because it is very convenient for the gym, and the impact on landfills and pollution is very minor. I will never buy anything known to be produced by slave labor. (I use the word "slave" literally, implying coercion and not just poverty)
It all depends on your personal code of ethics. When it comes to "sustainability", just ask yourself: Who defines these terms for you?
I don't think brand preference is that big of an issue (although, I do have my favorite brands that I tend to go to first). I think all too often, and probably mostly subconsciously, we continue to use products that are unsustainable because they are ingrained in our day to day lives. For example, how about electronics? I don't care which product you choose, most electronics are "unsustainable" -- they require a lot of resources to produce (both material and energy) and most people keep electronic products for only a couple of years before throwing them away. Yes, in some places recycling of electronics is becoming more conscientious, more accessible, and more cost-effective. However, there is still a lot of energy being expended to recycle these devices that were not meant to be recycled. Plus we aren't even certain where they go once "recycled."
Also, how many electronics do you have plugged in at your house, office, where ever that use electricity even while "off?" Anything with a remote has to have a steady supply of energy to turn "on" when you tell it. Most computers and monitors use a small steady amount of electricity. Do you have a cell phone charger plugged in without a cell phone charging? Yep, it too is using electricity right now. How about your microwave or stove with that nice digital clock, have you thought about how much electricity that uses? While each device may be using only a few watts or less of electricity, multiply that time the number of devices and the number of hours in your billing cycle and that's a lot of KW-hrs that are being wasted. Now that may be stretching the "unsustainable" claim thin, but it highlights the point about how much we sacrifice in the name of convenience.
But I think the real question is, if you are using an "unsustainable" product for convenience, is there a way to make it more sustainable? Followed by: if that more sustainable product was 2 or 3 times more expensive than the "unsustainable" version, which would you choose? Or how about purchasing decisions. How often do you buy a new computer, monitor, keyboard, mouse, and speakers at one time when you could have just bought a new computer or just upgraded the CPU in your old computer? Or how about how laptops have no upgrade-ability, but yet tend to be increasingly more popular?
The problem with buying sustainable over "unsustainable" is that we make so many choices subconsciously and buying sustainable has to be a conscious decision and has to be done each and every time you purchase any product. And I believe that is inconvenient for the majority of the people. Which, unfortunately, does include myself. But I think most of use would put ourselves there if we were brutally honest about it.
I would like to say no. But judging from my current experience with zip lock bags - not the most green product - I would have to say sometimes yes for convenience. My kids use them in the lunch boxes everyday. But I have gotten them to start saving and re-using them. And one of my kids switches to wax paper bags (compostable) but it doesn't keep the sandwich quite as fresh. We are working on a better solution. How about a compostable zip lock? Any inventors out there?
