Eat healthier. Sleep sounder. Save the environment. Recycle. Buy local. More than ever, we all want things to be "better" in our world. 

As marketers, we are charged with inventing the perfect marketing campaigns to show our consumers that our brands are better than the rest when it comes to helping them actualize their "better living" goals. This charge can leave some of us in a bit of a precarious situation: What do we do when we know that our brand is not better than the rest? Forge forward and do whatever we can to convince the public that it is so?  Unfortunately, there are many marketers in our industry who believe that the answer here is yes. They do whatever they can to superficially wrap themselves in some "responsible" do-good message.

On NPR the other day, I heard a term that I thought perfectly described what this segment is doing:  "greenwashing." These marketers are attaching their products to green messaging without doing much of anything to really deliver. And, while I understand the desire to appeal to the ever growing trend of consumers who consider themselves to be green, these marketers are playing a dangerous game.  When found out, their brands will be vilified. Dell customer service comes to mind. 

So I ask you, is greenwashing worth the gamble? How can you avoid the temptation of jumping on the greenwashing band wagon? Is there a way to practice a more brand-balanced diet?

First, it’s important to understand all of the pressures facing your brand and company, in order to determine how desperate your situation is and how aggressively you need to seek a brand balance. There are regulatory pressures, pressures from distribution channels, pressures from competition, pressures from invested constituents like shareholders and fellow employees and pressures from the general public. You can measure your signal-to-noise ratio to determine your specific situation:  The more noise, the better your signal needs to be. 

Second, it’s also important to understand how the dialogue is shifting - - though this lesson has been pretty much beaten into our heads by now, I suppose. The chart below summarizes the tone that balanced brands are now taking:

Third, its important to decide, based on the pressures your brand faces and the dialog your consumers demand, where your brand ought to be on the balance continuum:

If you practice what I call a brand balanced diet, the following criteria will sound familiar:

• Your brand story is consistent and can be measured against consumer-resonant benefits.
• Your brand teaches rather than preaches.
• You enable your consumers to have choices and are sympathetic to ‘studied cheating.’
• You invite your consumers to be part of your brand through ongoing dialogues.

Weight Watchers is a perfect example of a brand that is literally playing in the "balanced diet" arena.  "Learn how to lose weight and keep it off!" The brand’s tagline sums it up: We are not a quick fix solution, but a lifetime plan. The brand takes pride in teaching consumers that they don’t have to give up their favorite foods or restaurants in order to lose weight. Rather, it helps them police their own weight loss by applying points to foods so that they can learn how to visit their favorite restaurants while still maintaining their weight loss goals. This educational system is incredibly successful.  By not  telling their consumers what to do but, rather, how to do it, Weight Watchers enables their consumers to still "live the good life" and inspires consumers to stick with the brand’s plan for years to come. 

Lean Cuisine and its "Do something good for yourself" messaging is also spot-on. And, love him or hate him, Jared strikes a balanced chord for Subway, with its "Eat Fresh" tagline. One of the original brands in balance is Miller Lite, with its historical "Tastes great, less filing" position.

McDonald's is trying to strike a balance as well. On the one hand selling McFlurries and running ads that say "Nothing eats like a Big Mac," and on the other hand offering pretty good salads. Coca-Cola sells sugar water but also Diet Coke Plus (with vitamins.) Pepsi has its Smart Spot program and Kraft has rolled out Sensible Solutions labeling. Dove celebrates real beauty. Safeway has a fabulous line of store-brand organic products under the O name.

However, unlike balanced brands, there are many brands that operate in the "superficial," "naughty," or "just plain bad" arenas. Telltale signs include:  

• Aligning with hot topics with little substantiation.
• Having superhero tendencies.
• Walking a precarious line between the truth and fabrications in communications.
• Ignoring the new consumer dialogue.  

But what if you can’t accurately say where you operate because you are not a marketer who identifies with the extremes of Weight Watchers or Patagonia? What if your brand is just trying to do a little better?  Is this OK?

Let’s look at a brand that is doing just that, doing a little better: BP’s Helios House. While the BP gas station in L.A. does pump gas, it also doles out environmental information to its consumers and is built and operated in an environmentally-friendly way. The station is "doing better" than regular gas stations, but is it enough?  Is this a type of brand balance or a type of greenwashing to fool the public? 

I polled various marketers and asked them this exact question. The majority of those who answered told me that they felt that doing something was better than doing nothing, and that they don’t look poorly on the brand for doing what it can. Trying is better than nothing and is the first step towards bigger and better improvements (if it works.)

Another brand that is finding balance is Toyota. While one might find it hypocritical that Toyota makes both the environmentally friendly Prius and the gas-guzzling Land Cruiser, I think it's ingenious. Rather than creating a one-size-fits-all approach to making cars, the company creates vehicles that fit into their individual consumer’s lifestyle. It is up to each individual consumer to make the choice of what works.  And, as a result, the company manages to create messaging that is authentic; it is proud to make both environmentally friendly products as well as products that will appeal to larger families. It gives consumers the room to make choices that fit their own lifestyle needs.

As marketers, I wonder: Shouldn’t we push ourselves and our brands not to just do better but to do the best we can? Or am I asking too much? In the end, if we have the right intentions (based on what our consumers are telling us they want and need) and we are trying to solve real problems (vs.doing just enough to avoid trouble), then we’re on the right path to better brand balance. And that’s plenty to wish for these days!

Jim Holbrook is CEO of EMAK Worldwide, a family of marketing agencies including Upshot, Equity and Logistix.   If you would like a full copy of our white paper on this subject, please contact Jim at jim.holbrook@emak.com.