Facebook has been partnering with third party ad networks and data providers to deliver hyper-targeted banner ads through the Facebook Exchange since about mid-way through 2012.  According to an Adobe report, Facebook Exchange had served  a billion impressions through February 2013 and the results for participating advertisers are strong. Like 70% increased conversion rate strong.  This success makes sense when we consider the hyper-targeting power that is available when off Facebook web behavior is married to a user’s on Facebook demographics and experience.

So the big hope is that access to the news feed will further propel the success Facebook Exchange ads are achieving. But, will it? Or will it be met by privacy concerns and user frustration over “Facebook stalking.”

The jury is out, but with big data all the rave right now, Facebookers are sure to see ads up in their news feed grill that know who they are, know what they like, know where they have been on the web and hope to know how to make them buy, buy, buy.

With skyrocketing smartphone penetration and increasing adoption of mobile technology, I predicted that soon mobile banking would become a requisite offering, not just a differentiator.

Six months later, I figured it was time to check back in and see what’s happening in the space.

As expected, mobile financial transactions are fast becoming ubiquitous. In fact, mobile banking has now hit Facebook. ING Canada has pioneered a system that allows customers to log into their bank accounts through the social network. Consumers can check balances, view pending transactions and get account updates.

This development is particularly significant because it allows financial brands to connect strongly with their customers in their preferred environment. Facebook is an extremely rich messaging platform, and the ability to seamlessly and simultaneously message customers and interact with brand services in a familiar environment is incredibly powerful.

But while this type of movement toward financial transactions on social networks demonstrates significant vision, there are regulatory concerns that will slow development for a few years.

Another type of mobile transaction that is exploding in popularity is mobile check deposit. Only one year ago, banks had just begun promoting this service (done by taking a photo of the check and sending the image to the bank, usually through an app). Now, many banks are processing more than 10,000 mobile check deposits every day.

It’s undeniable that mobile check deposit is incredibly convenient for customers – the technology is a big time-saver – but it’s also helping banks improve their businesses. Financial institutions are beginning to understand that mobile technology is not simply a marketing bullet point, but also a tool to dramatically improve their balance sheets.

Bill Demchak, President of PNC Financial Services Group, has said that each mobile check transaction saves his bank $3.88 versus the same transaction at the teller window. That’s an astounding figure.

In my last blog post on the subject, I noted that widespread mobile adoption represented a significant communications opportunity for financial institutions, a way to add value for customers and in doing so, deliver targeted brand and product messaging. This is undoubtedly still true. However, as we race ahead and the technology evolves, it’s clear that we’ll continue to uncover even more opportunities in the mobile environment than we had expected. Brands should jump in and stay vigilant for new ways to create and derive value.

We read emails differently on our laptops than we do on an iPhone. Search results are impacted by screen size. Websites built for computers will not necessarily render effectively on mobile devices. And of course, the touch screen interface was a game changer as well.

What does this mean for marketers? It means we simply need to optimize by device.

A recent Marketing Charts study indicated 30% of mobile email recipients opt out of future communications if the email is not optimized for mobile screens. Another 80% delete it immediately. This is especially important when we consider that according to the same study, 41% of all 2012 email opens came from mobile devices. You can be assured the number will be higher in 2013. These are big segments of a database to lose simply because the steps to optimize for mobile email delivery were not taken.

Great ideas drive marketing success, but if those ideas are not aligned to each environment they appear in, they break down. Yes, the new media ecosystem is complex, but the engagement opportunities it offers can be a brand’s best friend. The key is to be considerate of each device and how it will present content and experience.

Never have best practices been so necessary to follow.

As a partner to one of the largest utilities in the Northeast, we are the shepherds of their brand on social media. We’re the keepers of the strategy, the day to day content managers, and when Mother Nature strikes, we’re also the storm and crisis support team.

When the utility has customers out of power and posting to Twitter at random hours, our team is there answering questions, providing information, and letting the them know that there is a real human paying attention, one who cares and is working as hard as possible to get them the information they need to keep their families safe.

During Nemo, our most recent major storm, many customers across New England were without power for nearly seven days, with temperatures hovering below the freezing mark. Our team was online and staying connected with them from 6 in the morning to 11 at night. During that time we:

• Reached 11.7 million people with messaging, retweets, and replies
• Sent 422 tweets (average of 60 per day)
• Engaged with 2,361 unique people
• Added nearly 2k followers to the social channels

What is the last piece of marketing you did that allowed you to have direct, one-on-one conversations with over two thousand customers?

We already had several storms under our belt prior to Nemo, so we went in knowing how to define the messaging strategy, how to set the right tone of voice, and what the protocol should be for escalating customer service issues. But this time, we also experimented with increasing the volume and frequency of messaging. The result? Even more positive feedback from customers. The trick is having plenty of fresh content. You can’t just keep saying the same thing over and over, so if you are going to increase frequency, you’ve got to have the content to back that strategy up. Our major lesson from this storm was that increased frequency really does reassure people in a crisis.

We’ll take these lessons with us to our next storm, because there’s sure to be another. Hurricane season is just around the corner.

That’s why our new efficiency campaign for National Grid is less about all the specific things people need to do, and more about how easy it is to save money. Rather than plug rebates or programs, we focused on how simple it is to make efficiency an everyday part of your life.

The campaign uses online video in a number of ways to tease the value of efficiency while encouraging people to engage at a deeper level. A series of pre-roll videos were produced, each one re-enforcing the idea “when you make efficiency a part of your life, it pays.” Radio, print, and rich media were also in the mix, all driving people to an online experience where they could see more video content and learn how to get started.

The concept centers around how easy it can be to feel rewarded by being more efficient. Convert your lights to CFL, find some cash. Clean out the dryer’s lint tray every few weeks, find some more. Nothing over the top; no promises of saving hundreds of dollars all at once. Just easy fixes for easy savings.

And no over-the-top production either. Everything had to be believable. Indeed, keeping it simple is what the whole thing was all about. Efficiency isn’t hard after all, it’s a snap.

From the get-go, we wanted to create a campaign that was on-brand for National Grid, while also serving as a unique idea around efficiency. In fact, that has been our approach all along with National Grid. Create compelling creative but do so in a way that stays true to the brand, keeping everything authentic, informative, and human. And so far, it’s paying off.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution.

That’s why we’re always excited to see great work in this space from other brands. Toms of Maine, the personal care products brand, recently created a website designed to share the brand’s actions and goals regarding energy and sustainability. It’s called the “Goodness Report,” and Tom’s is using it to educate customers about six categories of responsibility-themed initiatives: ingredients, energy, packaging, waste, community, and water.

“Sustainability reports” are nothing new, but Tom’s “Goodness Report” is a fresh and interesting take on the concept. In each category, Tom’s examines the company’s efforts to meet specific goals with anecdotes, charts and interviews. And by leveraging imagery and copious click opportunities, Tom’s is clearly trying to draw customers into the content.

In many ways, Tom’s has offered up exactly what many environmentally-conscious consumers clamor for – deliberate and transparent action against specific targets. As Tom’s CEO, Tom O’Brien said, “For many years we’ve had information about our products, sustainable business practices and values on our packaging and website. We’re learning that consumers want even more information.”

Connecting the Dots

But while the Goodness Report does an excellent job promoting customer education, it could do much more to promote customer engagement, which builds loyalty and drives sales. It’s not enough to simply place information out on the Internet. To make an impact on consumers, brands must engage customers in a dialogue or stimulate an emotional response.

While many consumers report being “somewhat interested” in social and environmental responsibility, only a tiny subset cares enough to really dig into corporate reporting. What ultimately convinces consumers to buy products is messaging about how the company or product relates to them, the consumers. How will the products of Company A improve the life of Customer B?

If Tom’s were to close the loop on its story, the company would use the “Goodness Report” to show consumers how reduced waste, improved packaging and better ingredients lead to better products, and thus improved lives for consumers.

In addition to creating stronger bonds with current customers, a focus on enhanced personal benefits will draw new customers into the fold. As it stands, the Goodness Report resonates only with “dark greens.” To broaden the customer base, it is essential for Tom’s to show potential customers why all this environmental stuff matters to them. In doing so, the brand will become relevant to many more people. Later, by incorporating Tom’s social channels into the “Goodness Report,” the brand can field questions and engage with customers about core environmental values and product benefits at the same time.

Tom’s has already done the heavy lifting – making real business changes. It’s fantastic that Tom’s of Maine is “taking on greater accountability” and creating “plans to address obstacles that get in [the] way.” Now the brand must build on its initial effort and truly bring the customer’s voice and values to the table.

When it comes to a better site experience, content is king.

Whether you are Mercedes, REI, Canyon Ranch, or the corner grocery, you need to make sure that you are adding content to your site on a regular basis—for most that means weekly, though for some that could even mean daily.

It’s not a homepage. It’s a store front.

Think of your homepage as the window shopping experience for your site. Any good retailer knows they need to change up their windows to entice customers to walk into the store. Websites need the same attention, so start by making sure your homepage is constantly highlighting new features and benefits.

Attract. Engage. Repeat.

Analytics prove that repeat visitors are your best customers. That means getting them to your site isn’t enough; you have to make sure they keep coming back for more. A website with static content is like a TV channel that re-runs the same episode over and over. Pretty soon, people are going to tune out. Without a steady stream of fresh content that re-enforces your brand, people stop connecting with it, and then they stop buying. Your site is among your key brand experiences, and since it belongs to you, the opportunities are limitless.

Focus on three.

A story that goes beyond what you are trying to sell, a story that reinforces your credibility, is a story that builds brand value. How do you get there? Start by determining the three key elements that connect people to your brand. Not four, not ten—just three. Make some sacrifices to create a more focused, deeper story.

For example, if visitors come to your site because of your organic products, ask yourself what are the three key elements that connects people to this brand? It could be a cause you align yourself with. It could stem from your corporate mission. It could be most anything. The point is to move beyond basic product information and begin to tell the bigger story.

You’re all in it together.

Producing great content is a big job. It is a hard job.  But it is not a job you need to do by yourself. Enlist other key people in your company to contribute. If you are a ski resort and ski lessons are a key part of your offering, have your ski school director do a weekly blog. If you are all about fair trade, assign your director of sustainability to tell the fair trade story, not just about your company, but the value of fair trade to the world. If you are all about energy efficiency, blog about it, and again talk about energy efficiency and its impact on the world—and don’t worry if you become the company known for having energy efficiency as a mission. Every great brand out there is known for something. Moreover, they stand for something.

Your website should become the vehicle for telling your brand’s story, and telling it takes the right content. So, what’s your story?

Editor’s Note: Over the next few months, longtime KSV friend and collaborator Jeffrey Hollender will be lending his voice and perspective to our blog. He’ll share his positions and musings on corporate responsibility, sustainability and social equity.

Recent research indicates that a green economy is a strong and inclusive one that will help the shift to an economy that is fairer, more sustainable and resilient. Author Ethan Pollack of the Economic Policy Institute outlines the benefits of a green economy in his paper “Counting Up to Green.” More than 3.1 million jobs are considered “green” as of 2010 and that number is increasing faster than the overall economy. Green manufacturing jobs are accessible to the nearly 70% of Americans without a college education. States with the greatest green intensity (the number of green jobs within a particular industrial sector) have generally fared better in the last economic downturn than states with a lesser green intensity. These statistics show a bright future for green jobs as we transition to a sustainable economy, and the seeds of this transition are already planted widely throughout many sectors – ranging from renewables to public utilities to appliance manufacturing. However, as Pollack explains:

The best case for greater environmental protection and green investments isn’t just about jobs, but rather about equity and broader economic growth. The ‘dirty economy’ model relies on allowing businesses to push a portion of their costs of production onto third parties without their consent, simultaneously causing harm to people who are disproportionately impoverished and lack political power, and distorting the market by causing overproduction of pollution-intensive goods at the expense of cleaner goods.

With these words, Pollack hit the nail on the head. While jobs are certainly important, it is equity – fair, all-inclusive economic growth – that is the ultimate goal of a sustainable economy. How sustainable can an economy be if it only benefits a few? As we’re currently witnessing, not very.

A sustainable economy is not only about how many photovoltaic panels can be manufactured, or how green our infrastructure can be – it is about workers owning their place of employment through a burgeoning cooperative movement. It is about local currencies giving an economic boost to small towns across the United States. It is about having a say in the governance and policies that affect our lives every day through unrestricted public engagement. It is about restructuring the way corporations work by putting a greater emphasis on the impacts they have on their employees, the communities they operate in and the planet. It is about rethinking the models of what progress is – does a higher GDP really benefit us? Let’s open our minds to new ideas of how the economy could work for us all.

As a source of inspiration, I really like this map that was created by the New Economics Institute called the Global Transition to a New Economy. It shows many of the current initiatives that are being taken to reach the goals of a truly sustainable economy. People across the country are taking more risks and are using their creativity to spark innovative ideas that will stimulate our economy in new ways.

Now the question is, what steps will you take to contribute to this progress?

Editor’s Note: Over the next few months, longtime KSV friend and collaborator Jeffrey Hollender will be lending his voice and perspective to our blog. He’ll share his positions and musings on corporate responsibility, sustainability and social equity.

A Harvard Business School “Working Paper” by Robert G. Eccles, Ioannis Ioannou and George Serafeim investigates the effect of a corporate culture of sustainability on multiple facets of corporate behavior and performance outcomes.

The authors find that corporations that voluntarily adopted environmental and social policies by 1993—which they call High Sustainability companies—exhibit fundamentally different characteristics from companies that adopted almost none of these policies – those that they call Low Sustainability companies. They found that High Sustainability companies are more likely to have organized procedures for stakeholder engagement, to be more long-term oriented, and to exhibit more measurement and disclosure of nonfinancial information.

Their article provides yet more evidence that High Sustainability companies significantly outperform their counterparts over the long-term, both in terms of stock market and accounting performance. The outperformance is stronger in sectors where the customers are individual consumers, companies compete on the basis of brands and reputation, and in sectors where companies’ products significantly depend upon extracting large amounts of natural resources.

Some of the companies that they consider include:

• Southwest Airlines – Identified employees and not shareholders as their primary stakeholders.
• Novo Nordisk – Made the same determination about their patients.
• Dow Chemical – Setting 10-year goals for the past 20 years, and recently ventured into a goal-setting process for the next 100 years.
• Natura – the Brazilian personal care, door-to-door sales company that has beaten out Unilever, P&G and Avon for a dominant market share by committing to preserve biodiversity and offering products that have minimal environmental impact.

The working paper takes a deep look at questions that include:

• Does the governance structure of firms that adopt environmental and social policies differ from that of other firms and, if yes, in what ways?
• Do such firms have better stakeholder engagement processes and longer time horizons?
• How do their measurement and reporting systems differ?
• What are the performance implications of a culture of sustainability?
• Could meeting other stakeholders’ expectations come at the cost of creating shareholder value?

One of the most insightful issues they dive into is the question of what is the relevant time frame over which economic value is created or destroyed becomes salient. “A short-term focus on creating value exclusively for shareholders may result in the loss of value over the longer term through a failure to make the necessary investments in process and product quality and safety. Such a short-term approach to decision-making often implies both an inter-temporal loss of profit and a negative externality being imposed on stakeholders. That is, managers take decisions that increase short-term profits, but reduce shareholder value over the long term and may hurt other stakeholders.”

The paper also explores the question of whether, and over what time frame, negative (positive) social and environmental externalities are eliminated (rewarded) and how that process affects long term value.

The paper concludes that performance is higher for the High Sustainability group compared to the Low Sustainability group by 4.8% on a value-weighted base, and by 2.3% on an equal weighted-base. They also find that High Sustainability firms perform better when considering rates of return, such as return-on-equity (ROE) and return-on-assets (ROA) and that this outperformance is more pronounced for firms that sell products directly to consumers vs. B-to-B. Consumer-focused companies compete on the basis of brand and reputation, and make substantial use of natural resources. Finally, using analyst forecasts of annual earnings they find that the market underestimated more the future profitability of the High Sustainability firms compared to the Low Sustainability ones.

Guest Blog Series: Jeffrey Hollender, Co-Founder, Seventh Generation

Editor’s Note: Over the next few months, longtime KSV friend and collaborator Jeffrey Hollender will be lending his voice and perspective to our blog. He’ll share his positions and musings on corporate responsibility, sustainability and social equity.

In late September of this year, H&M CEO Karl-Johan Persson met with People’s Republic of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to discuss an increase in textile worker wages and recommend annual wage reviews.

Why would the CEO of a successful fashion giant want to increase wages when their costs rely on that very thing being low?

There are a few opinions on the matter.

Per Grankvist of CSRwire praises Mr. Persson as a “CEO turned activist” and hails Persson as a pioneer who hopes to change the entire retail industry by calling for fair labor rights and increased efficiency. In the alternative, he notes, the supply chain could easily move to a country with less expensive labor.

In contrast, Anna McMullen of the Clean Clothes Campaign believes Persson’s goal was to “greenwash” the public and called it a PR stunt. She writes:

“Persson went to that meeting knowing that he represents just one brand – a powerful buyer admittedly, but still only one brand in Bangladesh. When governments set the minimum wage in their country for the garment industry, they have to think about their international competitiveness, and are all too aware that [multinationals] will move their production elsewhere if labour costs go up…brands like H&M must be the ones who go first and work with their supplier factories to achieve wage raises. In time, with enough brands doing it, governments may have the confidence to raise minimum wages.”

The garment industry in Bangladesh is booming. According to a recent McKinsey study, Bangladesh is preferred over other countries because of its strong performance in the criteria of price and capacity and because of favorable EU trade agreements. While buyers enjoy these perks, the study also states: “[W]ithin the next three years, both CPOs and suppliers expect a labor cost increase of about 30 percent.” All stakeholders expect wages to increase and most CPOs actually see it as a good thing.

The current low wages attract less educated workers and high turnover rates that negatively impact the efficiency of production. Importantly, the retail industry is demanding more sophisticated output from suppliers such as outerwear, tailored products, ladies intimates, and functional clothing. To achieve this demand, manufacturers will need to ensure the supply of skilled workers by increasing wages. In fact, to overcome barriers to the growth of the Bangladesh garment industry, McKinsey recommends that buyers actually try to increase wages. Download the McKinsey study here.

With this background, was Mr. Perrson out to improve the labor conditions in Bangladesh, or was he just thinking about his bottom line? While a CEO can certainly do both, it’s always worth taking a step back to analyze the underlying motives for these socially responsible initiatives.