The Holiday season inspires charity; social media demands it.
The PowerReviews Social Shopping Study 2007 recently reported that 70 percent of all online shoppers are social researchers—these consumers use the Internet to investigate potential purchases. Of these, PowerReviews notes, 64 percent research not only what they plan to buy online, but also what they plan to purchase in stores.
The kind of information this research generates is not limited to those that do the virtual research; many are no doubt more than willing to share what they know with their fellow consumers and local merchants in the real world.
Media trends and parallel studies suggest a significant portion of shoppers’ research explores the integrity of a brand or a company. TV shows and public policies in 2007 targeted sustainable consumption, by the individual and by the corporation. In many European markets, for example the UK, the “green consumer” is a given. This purchasing trend is reflected in corporate practices. BP is “Beyond Petroleum”, and John Brown, BP’s Chief Executive, is one of the leading proponents of a pragmatic global sustainable energy policy. Last January, Marks and Spencer, in a successful effort to outshine competitors, implemented a 100-point five year plan “to become a carbon neutral, zero-waste-to-landfill, ethical-trading, sustainable-sourcing, health-promoting business”. This move was also in line with European Union plans to reduce European carbon emissions by 20% by 2020.
Next year, Buzz online suggests that the trend promises to expand, but with some new developments. M and S has just announced its plan to join the Fair Trade Movement increasingly practiced by competitors. Blogs and Forums are discussing not only the environment, but also the impact of the environment on the health and wellbeing of its inhabitants. Pharmaceutical industries are coming under fire for treating human health like a business—making money off disease and misery the way oil companies were accused of generating wealth from the poor planet. Discussion online vibrates between the ethical imperative to provide needed medicine and health care to the public and what constitutes effective health care. A common debate centres around pharmaceutical companies and health care professionals–are some over-medicating simply to make money?
Hannah Jones, the VP of Corporate Social Responsibility for Nike, referred in April to the “metatrends” impacting consumer behaviour. The environment, emerging markets in developing countries, and equality and concern for the well-being of our fellow man are not just traditional sentiments of the current season. Jones recognised these topics long ago (in online time) as some of the most significant metatrends to impact the future of consumer behaviour. Buzz suggests she’s right; Brands, companies, and even public agencies (witness Monday’s demonstration against the EU European Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg and EU ministers) are experiencing if not responding to the pressure of public concern. The Internet demands that this response not be cosmetic—limited to superficial revisions of a corporate veneer. Agencies, non-profits, and individuals online are anxious to attack any inconsistency in a company’s expression of concern and the behaviour of it (or its subsidiaries).
Nike experienced these attacks in the late 1990s, and the company responded with an integrated re-organisation of its supply chain in coordination with its public values. The results have been phenomenal—as Nike engaged with its former critics and really altered its practices, the bad Buzz subsided and the company re-emerged as a leader in the realm of corporate social responsibility, giving birth to a code of conduct to which clothing industries across the globe aspire. Criticism hasn’t ended, but the company has made its intentions obvious and real, using the bad Buzz as a basis for critical (and lucrative—the company now makes a number of well-reviewed environmentally friendly products) change.
Blessed be the Buzz.