It’s hard to escape the constant ratcheting-up of rhetoric around the economic crisis over the last few months.In the context of sustainability, we’ve seen a flurry of reports and papers on whether sustainability and CSR will survive during the downturn, then the recession and now the economic crisis.But whilst the titles keep on changing, one thing seems to remain constant: that everyone makes an argument for hanging in there with sustainability endeavours, even in this climate, because they’ll pay dividends in the long run when everything picks up.Well, what if that is flawed? I don’t mean in the sense that they would not pay off in the upturn. But rather if there is no upturn? Every piece of literature seems to assume everything will return to normal at some point; that any corporate strategising around sustainability can assume those same constructs that have stood until now. But they’re not standing at the moment and there’s more than a chance that we’re witnessing the irreparable breakdown of the current model. In which case, these basic tenets on which corporate strategy is being based, need to be reviewed. Joseph Schumpeter (1954) coined a great term for this: preanalytic vision. In other words, before any analysis can be carried out, there has to be something to analyse - a vision. And once that vision has been defined, anything that lies outside of it, cannot be recaptured during the analysis. So is there an argument to say we need to revise our preanalytic vision? Is the very concept of the system being irreparably damaged outside our current vision? Looking at the wealth of ’stick with sustainability’ strategies being touted by consultants at the moment, the answer seems to be yes.This has to be a disaster.We’re at a defining moment in the way societies view business and how business has to service society and sustainability can play a pivotal role in bringing about these transformations. But in order for that to happen, sustainable strategising must not lean on the conventional tenets - the preanalytic vision of organisational strategy - thinking this bring about the necessary change.We have to recognise that maybe this is not a downturn, but instead represents a glimpse of the new status quo. How must business adapt to that?
Kavita Maharaj, Global Director of Corporate Relationships at Havas Media spoke earlier this week at Midem, the music industry’s premier annual gathering in Cannes. Kavita joined a panel of prestigious music industry gurus and brand specialists to debate the challenges faced by the music industry and how it can work more effectively with brands to increase revenues in the future.
The music industry is facing a huge challenge - as music consumption is at its highest level, music sales continue to slump as the increased number of downloads of digital tracks failed to make up for the plunge in the sale of CDs in 2008. Nielsen year-end figures 2008 released earlier this month showed that total album sales, including album equivalents made up of single digital tracks fell 8.5% (to 428.4 million units from 500.5 million in 2007). Physical album sales fell 20% to 362.6 million from 450.5 million, while digital album sales rose 32 per cent to a record 65.8 million units.
Kavita comments: “This is a deeply troubling trend for the recording industry. Despite record consumption levels, music executives are finding it hard to turn this into much-needed revenues as high interest in content, does not necessarily translate into willingness to pay amongst consumers. Successful industry players will be those who can collaborate effectively with brands and all the other music stakeholders to cultivate new revenue streams through innovative product and pricing strategies.
For example, there is a high level of consumer demand and preparedness to pay for live music concerts. Therefore, involving brands and other stakeholders in effective deals with live music concert properties, where all parties share in the spoils, is a potential revenue goldmine for the music industry and brands. The key to success will be music/brand partnerships that take advantage of consumer insights to determine what consumers will pay for and then negotiate partnerships that provide compelling return on investment for both the brand and the music industry.”
A little late I know, but just before the end of the year, we were fortunate enough to be a part of the Sustainable Life Media conference in Miami. As is often the case, the event was full of interesting people extolling the virtues of more sustainable practices - from large MNC’s such as J&J through to some fantastically nimble social start-ups. But more than that, there was a real sense of change in the air. A sense that for the first time we were looking at making businesses sustainable, rather than bringing sustainability into business. In other words, for the first time I sensed that sustainability was being recognised as a key piece of DNA architecture for business, rather than some fan-fared adjunct.The ramifications of this are profound: for a start, this is what Peter Salmon from Moxie (who I had the pleasure to share a plenary session with) has labelled Sustainability 2.0. Or even 3.0. It also suggests an exciting trend that sees sustainability becoming near-impossible to focus on within the firm. That is not to say that it is absent, but rather just invisible. Or rather, inherent. We are constantly hearing clients and colleagues citing an economic downturn as the worst possible time to embark on initiatives under the sustainability banner. But to make this criticism is to make the mistake that sustainability remains an annexe to the firm - an incidental anecdote to be told when appropriate. This is most certainly wrong; instead, sustainability offers the best chance for firms to remain in business, as they redefine boundaries of influence and re-stock reserves of trust.This sounds absurd, but for too long, I really do not think the majority of firms have actually viewed sustainability as being linked in any way to their…..well, sustainability. And as such, it has been a nice-to-have appendage.So maybe this is now changing? Maybe Sustainability 2.0 and the crushing re-evaluation of business in the current climate marks the arrival of sustainable sustainability? Based on the clear exodus of freshly-empowered CMOs and CEOs from large MNCs at the Miami conference, keen to demonstrate their new-found independence via boutique consulting efforts and old business cards with biro’d new titles and cell phone numbers, it seems so. Which also means sustainability could be finally becoming less about guilt, burden and ‘doing what’s right’ and much more about opportunity, energy and doing what’s exciting. Which would be very exciting indeed.G
