Chicken Little was right (the sky really is falling).

According to a CNN article released Friday, our ozone layer--or rather the gaping hole in it--will take 15 years longer than expected to close. It won't be until 2065, not 2050 as originally forecast, for the ozone layer (the blue portion on the left there) over Antarctica to recover. Al Gore cannot be pleased. Then again, it does prove his point.

But do consumers care? Care enough to put their collective purchasing power behind earth-friendly products? While green marketing is all the rage right now with marketers, it doesn't appear to be mobilizing our markets.

Customers are certainly buying into all natural and organic, but those are foods and supplements that people ingest, so it's more personal to them. They can see and feel the difference. People tend to focus on initiatives that produce results in the short-term. But 2065 is truly an eternity. The ozone layer and global warming are issues that people feel are by and largely out of their control. And out of control means out of market share.

I'm working on several green products right now and finding the "green benefit" to be a challenging angle to engage customers around. The feedback I'm receiving is that customers like the idea, but they're not invested enough to place the extra money behind earth-friendly products (as with organic, many times these products cost more). So I'm having to leverage the green angle as a secondary benefit since it's not perceived important enough to move into the primary benefit quadrant.

Otherwise, just as Chicken Little's message fell flat, so too may the messages of many marketers. Are any marketers seeing more traction on the green front? Or running into similar challenges?

Comments

[Ann Handley]

CK, If it's not terribly more expensive and it works as well (or better than), it seems consumers will go for the green. Two resources for you:

The Rules of Green Marketing
http://www.marketingprofs.com/6/ottman1.asp

&

The Real News About Green Marketing
http://www.marketingprofs.com/6/ottman2.asp

Both by the same author on MarketingProfs. Neither resonated particularly well with the audience, much to my disappointment. I'd love to know whether you're uncovering anything new or different.

[Monica Powers]

With zero firsthand research to back it up (disclaimer), my sense is that the bulk of mainstream customers are selfishly motivated above all else, and perceived benefits (prestige, image, better service, higher quality, "better for you") are stronger incentives to buy than the urge to be green. So while green is thought of as a nice-to-have for most people (helps you sleep better at night to know that you did something good for the planet), it alone--or as a primary benefit--will drive fewer customers than a "what's in it for me" approach.

[Lewis Green]

CK, I have B2B clients who sell "green and clean" energy and who reduce the costs of energy using efficient lighting strategies and technology. In both instances, the messaging that sells does not include "green." It comes down, as Monica says, to ROI and how long it takes to reap ROI. My other experience with "green" was as a lobbyist and grassroots organizer for several peace and justice organizations. Again, our messaging was not about "doing the right thing" or "saving the planet". It was the traditional messaging around what's in it for our audience. Hope this is helpful.

[CK]

Thanks folks, it's so helpful to get feedback and new resources to check out.

Ann: I'll check out the two articles you pointed me to. I have been reading the green marketing posts at your blog, but hadn't run across these. One client is significantly more expensive than competitors (because they use green practices/products) so that's really challenging. The other is actually less expensive in the long-run and more effective but it's a "NEW" process, so there's a learning curve for new customers. People don't like change, but incentives do assist the transition.

Monica: Your gut instinct is exactly what I'm finding from the customer research I'm doing. Silly me had expected that the "good to be green" would go further than it is. It's still an incentive, just not as strong and primary as I had originally thought.

Lewis: I had no idea you were my go-to guy for green! The lobbying had to be a lot of fun and it's helpful hearing what has worked from your experience in this vein. Thanks for confirming that traditional messaging still rules the day.

[vaspers the grate]

There is one PROVEN way to make an issue, product, or cause hip and popular:

a blockbuster Hollywood movie.

Or better, cheaper, and faster: a video promo on YouTube, Our Media, Revver, Blip TV.

Multi Hyper Media expansion, Global Democracy Revolution, and the emerging Universal Content Utopia have defined the direction.

Global warming won't motivate us until we're all burned up. Should be called the Hellification of Earth, as a recent Business Week Blogspotting post discussed. "global warming" sounds good, especially in winter. ppl = dumbed down mediocres. Ha.

Do YouTube viral videos and mech it up.