This document summarizes a presentation on sustainable brand perception versus performance. It discusses research from several organizations that measures corporate sustainability performance metrics and compares them to consumer perceptions of brands' sustainability efforts. The goal is to identify any gaps between how sustainably companies operate and how sustainability leaders they are perceived to be. Understanding these gaps can help companies improve their sustainability communications and initiatives to better align perceptions with their actual performance.

1. Sustainable Brand Perception vs.
Performance: Reducing the Gap
¡ Caroline Holme, Director of Corporate Affairs,
Globescan
¡ Kate Cox, Head of Strategy, MPG Media Contacts,
Havas Media
¡ James Cerruti, Senior Partner of Strategy and
Research, Brandlogic
¡ Tom Zara, Global Practice Leader of Corporate
Citizenship, Interbrand
Sustainable Brands
London Conference

2. Sustainable Brand Perception vs.
Performance: Reducing the Gap
¡ Caroline Holme, Director of Corporate Affairs,
Globescan
Sustainable Brands
London Conference

3. Recognised leaders – experts identify these companies as top-tier
sustainability leaders
Unilever 17
Interface 10
GE 7
Patagonia 7
Walmart 7
Marks & Spencer 5
Natura 4
Nike 4
Novo Nordisk 4
Siemens 4
Toyota 4
IBM 3
Nestlé 3
What specific companies do you think are leaders in integrating sustainability into their business strategy? (OPEN-ENDED)

4. Plan A
launched
Ecomagination
launched
Sustainable
Living Plan
launched
Start of corporate engagement
on sustainability

5. The ‘sustainability leadership triangle’ – recognised leaders demonstrate
evidence of success in each of three critical pillars
Vision /
Strategy
Integration / Engagement /
Performance Communication
Why do you think [INSERT COMPANY #1 FROM ABOVE] is a leader in sustainable development? Please enter up to
two responses in the spaces provided.

6. Sustainable Brand Perception vs.
Performance: Reducing the Gap
¡ James Cerruti, Senior Partner of Strategy and
Research, Brandlogic
Sustainable Brands
London Conference

7. Supported by
SB CONFERENCE
LONDON
November 26, 2012

8. The Sustainability Leadership Report
Is Is not another
• A management framework for • Green survey
focusing company investments
• Opinion leaders/NGO survey
• Comparing quantitatively real versus
perceived performance • Straight ranking of Top 50 or 100
• Of 100 leading brands in 9 GICs • Consumer perception study
• Across E, S & G dimensions
• Among highly attentive audiences
- Investment professionals
- Purchasing professionals
- Graduating students
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

9. Why we focus on “highly attentives”
Stated Importance of Corporate Good Citizenship in Decision Making
100
90
88%
80
• Invest in
70 Extremely • Partner with
or somewhat • Work for
60 important
50
40
30
20
• Purchase
10 intent 2%
0
"Highly Attentives" Consumers
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

10. The management framework begins with rigorous
comparison of performance on two dimensions
Source of the Source of the
Sustainability Reality Sustainability Perception
(CRD Analytics) (Brandlogic global survey)
141
environmental, social and governance
16000+
company ratings
metrics for rating companies
5 2500+
respondents from 3 highly attentive stakeholder
key performance indicators groups (800+ respondents in each)
per ESG dimension
1200 100
prominent global corporations covering 9
rated corporations of the 10 global industry categories (GICS)
6
major countries covered (400+ respondents
in each)
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

11. The Brandlogic
Sustainability IQ Matrix℠
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

12. CHALLENGERS LEADERS
REALITY
LAGGARDS PROMOTERS
PERCEPTION
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

13. The Brandlogic
2012 Sustainability
Leadership Report SM
100 prominent
global brands

14. CHALLENGERS LEADERS
TELL RAISE
A BETTER THE BAR
STORY
LAGGARDS PROMOTERS
LEARN FROM DO THE
THE LEADERS HARD WORK...
OR ELSE
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

15. Our study allows comparisons of peer performance year
over year, not just at the aggregated level shown here…
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

16. ...but also at disaggregated levels by stakeholder group
and E, S & G dimension…
While GE’s perceived performance improved in 2012, Siemens’ fell
among two of three audiences on each E, S & G dimension
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

17. …and at the level of the factors that comprise each of the
environmental, social and governance measures
Perceptions among CRD Analytics components of
Purchasing Professionals Social Performance Indicator (SPI) score
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

18. Thank you
For a free copy of the report, go to:
www.sustainabilityleadershipreport.com
NOVEMBER 26, 2012

19. Sustainable Brand Perception vs.
Performance: Reducing the Gap
¡ Kate Cox, Head of Strategy, MPG Media Contacts,
Havas Media
Sustainable Brands
London Conference

20. Sustainable Brand Perception
versus Performance: Reducing
the Gap
27th November 2012
Havas Media: Meaningful Brands for a Sustainable Future

21. We survey ‘meaningfulness’ globally
5th year of research into
brand meaningfulness
2011 survey covered:
• 50,000 consumers in 14 countries
• 300 brands in 10 industries
Explores brand equity in relation to personal well-being and
social capital
Directs, shapes and measures meaningful communications

22. “WOULD YOU CARE IF THIS BRAND
CEASED TO EXIST?”
CAN WE MEASURE
‘MEANINGFULNESS’?
“DOES THIS BRAND IMPROVE YOUR
QUALITY OF LIFE?”

23. Consumer Perception of ‘Being a Better Business’ and
‘Personal Value’ combined into one metric
Meaningful Brand Index
Collective Outcomes Personal Outcomes

24. Huge disparity in the power of brands across markets
30%
5% of people would care if
this brand disappeared in
the UK
18% of people would care if 12% of people would care if
this brand disappeared in this brand disappeared in
North America Europe
53% of people would care if
this brand disappeared in
South America
50,000+ people
14 countries
300 brands

25. Developing and Developed Markets
All Countries, 2010–2011 Always + Often
Always Often 2011 2010
Global 12 43 32 10 2 55% 47%
Chile 21 51 23 51 72% -
China 17 55 25 3 72% 68%
Mexico 17 54 24 4 1 71% 69%
Colombia 18 51 25 5 1 69% 45%
India 23 45 27 4 68% 69%
Italy 13 54 26 6 1 67% -
Argentina 19 47 26 7 1 66% -
Brazil 13 46 32 7 1 59% 63%
Spain 9 40 36 13 2 49% 46%
France 5 38 39 15 3 43% 43%
USA 5 31 39 19 6 36% 34%
Germany 4 32 43 17 4 36% 35%
UK 3 25 43 23 6 28% 28%
Increase/decrease of at least 3% since 2010
Q5t. How often do you consider environmental, social or ethical aspects when making purchase decisions / when you go shopping?

26. Why Responsible Products/Services not Chosen More
Frequently?
All countries, Top Three Reasons Given, Total Mentions, 2011
Informa(on:
“From
the
informa/on
available,
it
is
difficult
to
understand
if
a
par/cular
product
is
more
responsible
than
another”
Expense:
“They
are
more
expensive”
Availability:
“In
my
area
they
are
not
broadly
available”
Impact:
“I
think
that
my
individual
effort
does/will
not
have
a
big
impact”
Credibility:
“I
do
not
believe
what
the
company/product
says
about
its
environmental
and
social
responsibility”
Interest:
“I
am
not
interested
in
socially/environmentally
responsible
products”
Subsample: those answering “Often,” “Sometimes,” “Rarely,” or “Never” at Q5
Q6t. Why do you not choose socially/environmentally responsible products or services more frequently? Please choose up to three reasons.

27. Marketing saturation driving corporate cynicism?
1.2%
Developing
Developed economies
USA economies
Argentina
1.0%
Advertising spend as a proportion of GDP
UK
0.8%
Brazil
Global average
0.6% Germany
France Chile
Spain China
Colombia
0.4% Italy Mexico
India
0.2%
Correlation = -0.51
0.0%
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
% of people who always/often consider Environmental/Social/Ethical aspects when making purchasing decisions
Source: MBI & Z Global Forecasts

28. And economic growth concerns in developed markets?
18%
Argentina
Correlation = 0.59
16%
India
14%
Developing economies
China
12%
10%
GDP growth
Brazil Colombia
8%
Chile
Global average Mexico
6% Developed economies
4% USA
UK
France
2%
Germany Spain Italy
0%
-2%
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
% of people who always/often consider Environmental/Social/Ethical aspects when making purchasing decisions
Source: MBI & Z Global Forecasts

29. Insight + Implications for developed markets
People’s start point for corporate communications in the
Insight developed markets is cynicism. If the company’s motivation is
not clear, the message will be treated with suspicion.
Transparency is key – there is a specific need in developed
markets to put the short term business reason for commencing
Implication any marketing activity around Sustainability at the forefront of
the messaging to combat cynicism

30. M&S Case Study

31. Thank you!

32. Sustainable Brand Perception vs.
Performance: Reducing the Gap
¡ Tom Zara, Global Practice Leader of Corporate
Citizenship, Interbrand
Sustainable Brands
London Conference

33. BEST GLOBAL
GREEN BRANDS
2012
27 November 2012

34. Agenda
1. Introduction to the Interbrand
Best Global Green Brands rankings
2. Brand value perception methodology
3. Sustainability performance methodology
4. Value of sustainability reporting and disclosure
strategy
2 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

35. The world is moving to a new center of gravity

36. A glut of promotion and hype has created a cynical audience
4 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

37. Yet, there is clearly a lot of noise around
sustainability

38. We call this new paradigm ‘Corporate Citizenship’
How a Company treats….
Government Employees Customers Suppliers Community Planet
…defines their perceived
“Corporate Citizenship”
6 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

39. Critical examination of a key constituent
How a Company treats….
Government Employees Customers Suppliers Community Planet
…defines their perceived
“Corporate Citizenship”
7 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

40. Methodology
8 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

41. Our Starting Point

42. 79 Brands Evaluated

43. Performance Score
The performance score is calculated by Deloitte based on these 6 pillars:
Governance Stakeholder Engagement
Policies and mechanisms put in place by The degree to which the company recognizes
the company to manage environmental and engages with the various relevant
impacts and successfully set and execute stakeholder groups associated with the
environmental programs. company.
Operations Supply Chain
The company’s performance across operations as The company’s performance in measuring,
measured in energy efficiency, GHG emissions, reporting, and mitigating the environmental
water management, waste management, and toxic performance of their supply chain.
emissions management.
Transportation and Logistics Products and Services
The company’s performance in measuring, The product portfolio of the company and an
reporting, and mitigating the environmental evaluation of the green attributes of its
performance of their transportation and logistics, products, including product efficiency,
business travel and commuting. sustainable production, and use of
life cycle assessment.
11 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

44. Green perception assessment is based on a survey
• We interviewed a total of 10,000 consumers via an
online survey
• Each brand was rated by at least 125 consumers per market (a total of
1,250 respondents per brand)
• The markets included the top 10 countries in terms of economic impact
(highest percentage of global GDP)
United United
Japan China Germany France Italy Brazil Spain Canada
States Kingdom
12 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

45. Perception Score
The perception score is calculated by Interbrand based on the 6 external
factors of our brand strength components:
Authenticity Relevance
The perceived credibility of the brand’s An assessment of the relevance of brand’s
environmental claims. environmental claims. This involves comparing the
perceived importance of green activities for the
category with the brand’s green perception.
Differentiation Consistency
How differentiated the brand’s green efforts The consistency of the brand’s
are perceived to be relative to other various green communications
competitors in the category. across all touchpoints.
Presence Understanding
Consumer awareness of the brand’s The level of understanding of the brand’s
green activities and its green green activities as a whole.
reputation in the market.
13 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012

46. The gap
Two frequent scenarios
Internal External
>
Company is engaging in
Green Green meaningful green
Performance Perception initiatives, but the
Score Score marketplace doesn’t
know about it
<
Green Green Company is engaging in
greenwashing or is
Performance Perception
benefiting from a strong
Score Score brand halo effect
14 | Best Global Green Brands | London | 27 November 2012