My colleague and I are from Denmark. We, along with much of the world, admire the United States? relentless pursuit of the Next Big Thing, its inherent optimism, and its go-getter attitude. Other parts of the world should learn to embrace change the way America does, be inspired by its perpetual freshness of spirit, and, most important, replicate just a fraction of the country’s innovation capability. Only in America could brand innovators like Google, Nike, and Starbucks emerge.
But in the area of sustainability, there isn’t much to admire about the U.S. and its leading brands. Despite major initiatives by such companies as Walmart and General Electric, the general picture is bleak. The U.S. is by far the biggest environmental sinner, no matter how environmental impact is measured.
Sustainability requires un-American values such as slowness and centralization.
It’s difficult to call out specific culprits, when the American economy is based on consumption — the single biggest source of carbon-dioxide emissions. But even the most advanced American brands haven’t begun to approach solutions to the issue. From where we stand, they seem oblivious to the world’s three biggest challenges: water supply, energy supply, and global warming. But most companies seem to spend their resources working on reuse and minimizing the resources that go into producing goods. But that can only take us part of the way to sustainability. The heart of the problem is that American brands push more and more products on the consumer without mechanisms for re-usage. With ever-shortening product life cycles, the problem is only getting worse.
This is no secret at the management level of top companies. So why is it that even the best American brands, so clever, innovative, and adaptive in all other aspects of business, aren’t able to come up with smart solutions to the resource problem that the culture of consumption has created?
The answer is counterintuitive: Our experience tells us that it is exactly because American companies are so amazingly innovative, entrepreneurial, and intensely competitive that they can’t find ways to deal with the global challenges. Finding sustainable solutions isn’t about discovering new, ever-more disruptive ideas. It requires the opposite, something very un-American: standardization, slowness, and centralization. To most, more ideas are always better. But in this case, the more green solutions we have, the less effective and efficient processes become.
What American brands, therefore, need to do, is revisit some of the deep-founded beliefs about business, their companies? identities and why they operate in a consumerist market.
There are three major changes brands must put in place.
There will be no sustainable consumerism without standardization. It is as simple as that. Companies in all industries need to agree to certain modes of production that allow for recycling. Take the beer industry, for example. In many countries, most glass bottles are reused over and over again, but this is possible only because the big brands have agreed to stick to a certain size and type of bottle.
American brands hate the idea of standardization. But just as America has the worst train and cell-phone systems in the developed world, because such technologies require one shared system, American brands will lose the sustainability battle unless they learn to give up individuality for standards.
American brands must rethink thow they create value.
American consumer brands are notoriously good at making quick changes — spotting a trend and then following it up with a blockbuster product. The time it takes to get most products to market has been significantly reduced over the last decades. But to become sustainable, companies need to take their time and extend their products? life cycle.
Well-designed products simply last longer. There is a lot to be gained by developing a product line that’s less R&D intensive and that can be optimized, reused, and even spin off more service offerings. The Volkswagen Beetle is an excellent example of a product that has endured because it was well made to start with. An entire customization and repair industry grew up around that car, and Zipcar now uses the new Beetle as part of its fleet. Certainly, the car-sharing model is one that could have been developed by a manufacturer.
Last but most important, American brands must rethink the very idea of what they want consumers to consume and how they create value. In theory, you can grow in two ways: You can produce more, or you can add extra value to what you already produce. The latter is the way toward sustainability.
Take Starbucks: Despite the company’s impressive growth, it has hardly increased the amount of coffee beans the world consumes. Instead, it has grown by finding numerous clever ways to create value in all parts of the value chain — everything from interior design, product innovation, marketing, and services. More American brands must learn that they can minimize the consumption of goods but increase total consumption at the same time.
All this poses a significant challenge to the way American managers have been taught to think and operate. They have to learn that the next innovation frontier is about breaking away from resource dependence, decoupling growth and consumption, and prolonging product life cycles.
Does all that sound un-American? Might it not be even more un-American to dismiss the daunting task of sustaining consumption by making it sustainable?
[Top image by Rahims]