Anyone who has even casually monitored the media for stories on the "greening" of brands and retailers has likely noticed a few disconnects between what is said and what is done.
For instance, can a brand tout environmental awareness while distributing bottled water as a promotional item (visualize a corporate-sponsored, cause-related run, an hour after the finish)?
An article by Charles Fishman in the July/August issue of Fast Company includes many striking facts about the increase in bottled water usage, such as: "We pitch into landfills 38 billion water bottles a year -- in excess of $1 billion worth of plastic." Yikes. Given the fact that consumers are savvier than ever about the environment, in particular, and marketing strategies, in general -- brands should be paying attention. Why? Because trust is lost when ad campaigns and web sites don't match the experiences or promises made at other customer touch points. Especially on the "greenfront" -- the loss of trust could be incredibly detrimental to relationships with some of today's more influential consumers (women, for example).
Now, as reported by Michael Barbaro in the New York Times, there is word that the new chief executive of Liz Claiborne has decided to pare down the large apparel company's business by cutting any brand that doesn't have: "the potential to sustain dozens of retail stores, multiple product categories (not just clothing, but shoes, handbags and cosmetics) and international growth.
Four made that cut: Juicy Couture, Lucky Brands, Mexx and Kate Spade. By 2010, the company plans to open 300 new stores for these labels. It will operate 148 Juicy stores, up from 56 today; 311 Lucky stores, up from 189; 120 Kate Spade stores, up from 40; and 275 Mexx stores, up from 234."
Take that growth in number of stores and square footage as opposed to the approach being taken by Nau, a new and still teeny lifestyle/outdoor apparel brand based in Portland, Oregon. As reported by Polly LaBarre in the June issue of Fast Company, that innovative brand chose to go the "webfront" way, as described below:
"The advantage: If customers use the store as a fitting room and push purchases to the Web, Nau can build smaller stores (2,200 to 2,400 square feet compared to the traditional outdoor specialty store's 4,000-plus square feet), reduce in-store inventory dramatically, and slash operating expenses. Plus, it consumes less energy and materials."
From entrepreneurial ventures come some of the most innovative business ideas -- smaller and fewer footprints vs. more square footage in many locations. What Nau is doing is cutting edge, but shouldn't it be a no-brainer? I wonder if some of the Liz Claiborne brands' customers might give the company extra points for fine tuning its businesses in such a way and thinking longer term?
Make the human-to-human connections via webfront/gallery-aesthetic type stores, save money on energy costs, AND meet consumers online -- where they practically live already (or is that just me?). Growing a brand is no longer an issue of number of stores, square footage or international reach. For consumers, there is a lot more to it.