{"id":13080,"date":"2016-11-04T17:23:45","date_gmt":"2016-11-04T21:23:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/digital.hbs.edu\/platform-rctom\/submission\/procters-environmental-gamble\/"},"modified":"2016-11-04T17:26:33","modified_gmt":"2016-11-04T21:26:33","slug":"procters-environmental-gamble","status":"publish","type":"hck-submission","link":"https:\/\/d3.harvard.edu\/platform-rctom\/submission\/procters-environmental-gamble\/","title":{"rendered":"Procter\u2019s Environmental Gamble"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"screen-shot-2016-11-04-at-5-11-44-pm\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

If an environmental sustainability program falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Procter & Gamble, the world\u2019s largest consumer packaged goods company touches and improves the lives of nearly 70 percent of the planet each day through its products. [2] The company has gone further than many competitors in reducing its carbon footprint. It has done so through improving manufacturing processes & reducing energy usage \u2013 but it has largely failed to communicate these improvements to its consumers either in the form of advertising or in the form of meaningful environmentally inspired products. As the general public becomes more conscious of climate change in its buying behavior, P&G faces the risk that consumers will deselect its brands if they do not understand and appreciate the lengths to which the company has gone to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG).<\/p>\n

Ahead of its time and still pushing the boundaries of carbon emission reductions today<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

At current rates, greenhouse gasses are projected to more than triple from 404 ppm today to over 1,300 ppm in the next century [3], raising earth\u2019s surface temperatures by up to as much as 14\u02daF [4,5] and wreaking havoc on the availability of livable land, supply of food and water, and accessibility of raw materials. Long before it was popular to do so, P&G published its first environmental safety publication in 1956. [6] More recently, the company has excelled in continuing to advance sustainability efforts behind the scenes. P&G has outlined a robust strategic plan, comprised of four primary goals to further reduce carbon emissions [7]:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Reduce the absolute GHG emissions of operations by 30% by 2020<\/li>\n
  2. Power all manufacturing plants with 100% renewable energy<\/li>\n
  3. Use 100% renewable or recycled materials for all products and packaging<\/li>\n
  4. Design products that delight consumers while maximizing the conservation of resources<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Meaningful progress in manufacturing processes and energy usage has built strong momentum<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

    P&G has realized significant progress in both manufacturing & supply chain. The company successfully converted 20% of transportation demand in North America from diesel operating fuel to natural gas. [8] In China, P&G built solar panels in the company\u2019s Huangpu plant, resulting in a reduction of 600 metric tons of CO2 annually. [9] Similarly, the company opened its first 100% renewable powered wind plant in Jiangsu China, reducing 5,000 metric tons of CO2. [10] Through projects of this kind, P&G reduced its energy consumption by 46%, CO2 emissions by 52%, and water usage by 51% between 2002 and 2007. [11]<\/p>\n

    Despite meaningful improvement, consumer perception of environmental consciousness is largely unacknowledged due to lack of effective marketing<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

    It is ironic that the world\u2019s largest advertiser would suffer from brand image issues, but P&G has failed to successfully portray an environmentally conscious image to its consumers. Martin Riant, the company\u2019s senior most Sustainability Leader recently said, \u201cI don\u2019t think we\u2019ve done nearly enough with consumers in this area. Some of that flows from us not having the businesses as connected in the delivery of our sustainability goals as they need to be.\u201d [12] This perception misalignment was highlighted in 2014 when nine Greenpeace activists broke into P&G\u2019s global headquarters and hung banners criticizing the company\u2019s lack of environmental policies, drawing significant negative media attention to the company.<\/p>\n