Starting from a clean slate confers all
sorts of benefits. For new merchants,
ones just starting up (a rare breed, I know), it’s relatively easy to develop a
green business model and brand, stock only greenest-in-class products, and
forge winning customer relationships with green builders and remodelers.
For those saddled with the baggage of
history, existing customer and supplier relationships, and predictable revenue
streams, it’s a different story. How do
you green your product lines, bring your existing customers with you, while
appealing to a new breed with rising green expectations?
We’ve been dealing with these questions in
this column for the last several years.
Based on personal experience, as well as observations of what has worked
for others, we’ve drawn the conclusion that any merchant can become a green
merchant, and inevitably, every merchant must.
But it is a difficult journey fraught with many compromises. The recent kerfuffle over a new credit
category proposed for the latest incarnation of LEED 4 highlights one of the trickiest.
First, the kerfuffle. Without getting too bogged down in technical
detail, the main issue is the proposed “Avoidance of Chemicals of Concern” credit,
which aims to raise the bar on indoor air quality by eliminating certain
chemicals in emitting products and that certain products include disclosure of
chemicals used. In one part of the
proposal it references REACH, an EU program that monitors chemicals.
The American Coating Association took
exception in widely publicized comments it submitted to USGBC, arguing that compliance would hurt the market. They suggested an alternative, compliance with 2007 California Air
Resources Board Suggested Control Measure, instead. Even 61 members of Congress got involved.
There are two points to be made here. First, let’s recall some recent compliance history. There were a few industry leaders who saw new
CARB regulations coming in 2007, did nothing, and were forced to take back their
non-compliant product from retailer shelves and distributor warehouses. Second, LEED does not require compliance. On the contrary, it aims to identify leadership – that’s what the “L” in
LEED stands for – and more to the point, it is voluntary. No manufacturer is required to make, test, or
certify products that meet LEED credits.
This is an all important difference that separates compliers from leaders.
For merchants trying to create a winning,
green formula being able to identify the difference between products and
manufacturers aiming for compliance, and those focused on leadership, is
crucially important. Who would hire a
builder or an employee, whose main selling point is compliance with minimum
regulated standards? Don’t we all want
to work with leaders who go beyond the minimum and set their own standard? Don’t we want to be leaders? But the
unfortunate reality is that because of longstanding channel marketing practices,
with manufacturer spiffs, promotional deals, brand or industry dominance, and so
on, this is also an area where compromises are inevitable. And probably, there are long-term
relationships involved, too, which can make it tricky.
So, what to do? First, develop an understanding of current
vendor relationships and identify the manufacturers with a commitment to
continuous product improvement, innovation and leadership. Second, start strengthening relationships
with the leaders and collaborate on new programs wherever possible. Third, identify gaps and seek new
greenest-in-class alternatives in every category. Fourth, engage those manufacturers in the
compliance camp and encourage a change in their product development philosophy. You never know, they just might
listen. Finally, develop a long-term
trend toward greenest-in-class products.
It may be tricky to manage existing relationships and the short-term
benefits they confer, but in the end, working with leaders delivers its own
rewards.
Posts
