Many companies I speak with are struggling to communicate their sustainability progress (and with good reason - it’s genuinely hard to get right). I see two comms models emerging:
𝗟𝗲𝘁 𝗮 𝗵𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗯𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗺. Sustainability professionals talk about the 15 projects they did last year across different themes (biodiversity, emissions, recycling). When this works well, stakeholders are impressed and come away feeling warm and fuzzy. But in the increasingly structured environment of sustainability comms, this can seem like fragmented messaging that leaves stakeholders confused.
𝗧𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀. Sustainability professionals rely on targets they have set and their progress against this target as the mainstay of their comms. They talk about “reaching 4% of our target in 2023”. This is a risky game because progress can be influenced by factors outside their control, and falling short of targets can make it seem like they have failed, despite good underlying work.
A more effective way of building a narrative is to focus on a "north star metric". I would avoid having this metric as an emission percentage reduction (as an outcome over which you have limited short term control). I always prefer input oriented metrics - volume of packaging used, percentage of materials purchased from sustainable sources, etc. Metrics should represent activities that are easier to control, rather than numbers that are still in flux.
#scope3 #sustainability #climatechange
Energy Industry Leader & DEI advocate
4moExcellent to see another leader with a weird/squiggly career 👏👍