Toyota’s brand and messaging have sadly fallen victim to Newton’s law about an object in motion. Its long-running ad campaign promises that its cars keep “Moving You Forward.” Turns out, they keep moving you forward because their faulty accelerators and brakes won’t let you stop.

The impact these recalls will have on the Toyota brand could be significant. Toyotas have become symbols of quality and value from a company with a strong reputation for corporate responsibility. This week’s events and revelations clearly cast a dark shadow.

What may be an even tougher blow to Toyota is that one of the vehicles involved in this fiasco is the Prius – the beloved hybrid vehicle innovator and long a beacon of more sustainable, more eco-friendly automobiles.

Sustainable products continually fight the brand baggage of being perceived as potentially lower performing. Add to that the premium (though steadily decreasing) cost of the Prius and you have a recipe for a crap sandwich. Costs more. Does less. It’s a lethal enough combination for a traditional automobile (or any product for that matter), and doubly deadly for a “green” one.

I’m curious to see how this will unfold and how Toyota will respond – and if the Prius may lose its position atop the auto hybrid ladder. What do you think?

I’ve been wrestling with this post for quite some time. Approaching green branding has unsettled me for a while, but I couldn’t quite articulate why. Then, just a few days ago, James Bedell tweeted a pic of the new Sprite Green – and it hit me what’s wrong with green as a brand. 

Everything.

I may take a certain amount of flack for this post, but I adamantly feel that both the concept and the marketing activity known as “green branding” need serious re-branding. 

Before diving into details, let’s take a step back.

Consider the characteristics of a good, strong brand. It has a clearly defined benefit. It is uniquely differentiated. It has a distinct voice and experience associated with it. It consistently delivers upon its promised benefit to consumers/customers. The great, beloved brands – Apple, Target, Google to name a few – achieve all of the above in spades.

Now consider “green” and all its brand baggage. Here are 4 reasons green branding needs a re-boot:

#1 Green has no clearly defined benefit. First and foremost, the term “green” has been used and mis-used so often, in so many ways, it's lost meaning. Forget greenwashing, the term "green" itself has been white-washed to the point that brand building on green is like branding built on that nebulous benefit called “quality.”

Take Sprite Green, for example. Why is it called “green?” Turns out it’s because the soft drink is produced with an all-natural sweetener (not to mention 5% lemon juice per serving).

So, what is green now? Something made from all-natural products? Something that when used has a positive or neutral effect on the environment? Something produced in a more eco-friendly manner? All of the above?

And to what level of eco-friendliness do brands have to be in order to be considered “green” without being accused of greenwashing? The concepts of "shades of green" personally makes me a little sick to my stomach when you consider the additional brand confusion to an already confusing term, let alone the lack of standardization. Suddenly brands will have to define dark green vs. green vs. lime green? Jump right into the brand nightmare, the water is warm.

#2 People don’t trust green. Because of the effects of greenwashing and continued debate about the imperative to fight climate change and preserving natural resources, 70% of consumers don't think companies are genuine when they talk about how they help the environment and society, according to Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability (LOHAS). How can you build a brand around a message shrouded in doubt and misperception? Which leads us to reason #3…

#3 Green used to suck. Today’s environmentally friendly products, solutions and services have come a long way from what were first brought to market. But sadly, too many people still perceive anything “green” as more expensive, less effective, too complex and requiring too much time to install/implement/etc. The “green” brand experience has been tainted almost beyond repair. Until the market is educated to the contrary, perception will continue to be a very real barrier to adoption…and a huge piece of brand baggage that green needs to check.

#4 Green’s uniqueness has a time limit. As the market becomes more educated and as government legislation/standardization begins to take hold, there will be such demand for environmentally friendly, more efficient and sustainable products/solutions that “green” will become cost of entry for any brand. Consumers want transparency. Employees want transparency. Shareholders want transparency. And all of them want companies to do good and perform exceedingly well. Green will be a major factor in achieving these goals for everyone. So while green holds some facet of competitive advantage now, it will soon become a feature of any good brand, not the primary benefit. 

--

So, what is the re-brand for green brands? As is the case for every company or product, brands must be rooted in a tangible benefit to consumers or, in the case of b2b, businesses. Efficiency. Productivity. Cost savings. Ease-of-use. Comfort. Style. PLUS the most excellent benefit that it’s created of materials and by means that have a positive effect for the planet. Strong green brands must be strong brands in and of themselves. In the quest for the triple bottom line, we can’t forget the bottom line.

Green branding is dead. Long live green branding.