There are currently two very different strategies pursued by multi-brand groups in the U.S. in their drive towards sustainable development:

• A “sustainable brand” strategy: Clorox and S.C. Johnson have both chosen to create a “green” cleaning range. Both groups have regrouped all their “green” cleaning products under a single label – Green Works and Nature’s Source respectively, with remarkable success. Clorox extended this strategy to beauty by acquiring Burt’s Bees. This is a classic brand portfolio strategy: Aware that consumer preferences have been evolving towards eco-friendly products, a “green” label is added to the existing portfolio. This niche strategy is a direct response to the development of green private labels that distributors have been creating, but which targets the most fervent “green” consumers.

• A “transversal” strategy: The approach chosen by P & G is totally different, targeting all mainstream consumers. Advocating a long-term vision for sustainable development, the group decided to gradually reinforce the “green” dimension of most of its flagship brands. It created “Tide Coldwater”, an “Ultra Downy” softener, using 35% less plastic for each container, developed rechargeable batteries at Duracell… There is no “green” label as such at Procter.

In fact, this “product clean up” approach is one that many brands worldwide have been implementing. However, Procter added two unique features, thus converting it into an innovative strategy:

1. 
A pedagogical dimension: Realizing that the majority of consumers cite the lack of information as a deterrent to buying “green” products (especially in Europe) and shift the responsibility for instruction and information to governments and brands, in 2007 Procter initiated an educational drive called “Future Friendly” in Great Britain and Canada (“The Future Together”). Each product of this drive is projected as one that will reduce the waste, energy and water used during its manufacture or its use. It also offers a guide that helps consumers make “eco-friendly resolutions” on a dedicated website, and its “Future Friendly Awards” accentuates the importance of the consumer. This programme has been launched in the U.S. on March 29.

2. 
The big difference between the American campaign and those in England and Canada is that “Future Friendly” carries the P & G signature. The group adopts it as its strategy from the beginning AND bestows full legitimacy to the initiative. In this way P & G affirms itself as a true umbrella brand, nourished by the values of the various brands of the group and feeding them its own values in return. This is not the first initiative of its kind: P & G has been testing pop-up stores in Canada (the Look Fab Studios) comprising 5 of its beauty labels – under the P & G brand. Here then is another strategy to counter the growth of private brands: building a corporate brand, acquiring strong transversal values – such as sustainable development. Did I not say so? We are living in such exciting times….

Michel Gutsatz – BrandWatch