When reading the Fiji Water case, I instantly
thought of Evian. As a more global brand, how does it address the similar
environmental issue? I took a look at the website and have some interesting
findings.
Evian has an objective to reach Zero Net Carbon in 2020. It claims to be
Danone's first brand to reach zero net carbon.
Under this scheme, it has two major
strategies:
1) reduce carbon footprint
2) restore water-linked ecosystem to offset
its carbon emission
Besides, it also conducts bottle recycling, community engagement, water preservation, etc.
How similar are these actions to Fiji Water! Certainly, Evian is claiming in a more mild way: "we own everything to Nature, which is why we are protecting it'.
Although it is not as dramatic as 'every drop is green', what do you think? Is it green washing, or responsible action?
I think it is very hard to judge what company is more or less greenwashed.
ReplyDeleteAs we discussed in last class the operating model of water business would be almost the same for all involved companies. And the negative impact is also would be almost the same.
I believe that Fiji is not the worst company, and we found from case study that they really did a lot for local community. They also try to respond to the critic and lower their negative impact. Maybe the way they were trying to communicate about that was not the best one.
Last year during Strategic Management we discussed the Nike case and the scandal with Child labor. And I remember prof Izuka forced us to look deeper and search for the roots of the problem. We had the competitors of Nike which supply chain (including production in low wages countries) but the main shot went on them. The cause was the confrontation local NGO but almost killed Nike reputation worldwide.
The same we can see in comparing Fiji Water and Evian. Local programs of supporting tap water in England (not the biggest market) bring to huge disturbance.
Everything is about how you communicate your activity in this small media world.