B2B Advertising Instructions: Sustainability Advertising

(That is the second of three posts coping with using environmental claims in advertising communications. In my first put up, I described the present political backlash in opposition to some ESG-related insurance policies, however I additionally famous that public assist for shielding the setting stays widespread, in response to latest analysis. This put up discusses why environmental claims in advertising have not labored in addition to some analysis findings counsel they need to.)

The present political backlash in opposition to ESG-inspired insurance policies and packages is prompting many advertising leaders to query the knowledge of together with environmental claims of their advertising campaigns.

Past the political danger, entrepreneurs should additionally decide whether or not using environmental messaging will enhance advertising efficiency and drive income progress. On this concern, the obtainable proof paints a blended image.

Sustainability Advertising Is Working . . .

The Sustainable Market Share Index(TM)[1] (the “CSB Index”) produced by the NYU Stern Heart for Sustainable Enterprise offers compelling proof that advertising merchandise as sustainable leads to substantial market share progress.

The CSB Index is predicated on gross sales information from Circana for 36 classes of client packaged items (CPG) merchandise (excluding alcohol and tobacco). Collectively, these 36 product classes accounted for roughly 40% of the overall US CPG market in gross sales from 2013 – 2024.

The 2024 version of the CSB Index discovered that:

• Merchandise marketed as sustainable held a 23.8% market share of the overall US CPG market, up 2.6 share factors from 2023, and the market share of sustainable merchandise has elevated 9.2 share factors since 2013.

However a Substantial “Say-Do” Hole Exists

David Ogilvy, the legendary promoting government and founding father of Ogilvy & Mather, as soon as stated:  “The difficulty with market analysis is that folks do not suppose how they really feel, they do not say what they suppose, and so they do not do what they are saying.”

As I famous earlier, latest surveys have constantly proven that public assist for actions aimed toward defending the setting and bettering sustainability is widespread, and comparable findings have been showing in surveys for a lot of the previous 20 years.

Nonetheless, quite a few surveys have additionally revealed a considerable say-do hole between individuals’s acknowledged views and attitudes about sustainability and their precise shopping for behaviors. For instance:

• In a 2024 survey of greater than 3,000 US and Canadian adults performed by Ipsos on behalf of Public Inc., 76% of the respondents described themselves as “aware customers,” however solely 38% of the respondents’ precise purchases have been made with consideration for social, moral, or environmental elements.

• In a 2025 survey of greater than 5,000 customers in Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, the UK, and the US by Blue Yonder, 78% of the respondents stated sustainability issues are considerably or crucial when procuring, however solely 29% had switched their model loyalty to firms they perceived as exhibiting extra sustainable practices.

The say-do hole just isn’t a latest growth. It has been showing in survey findings for at the very least the previous 15 years. For instance, in a 2010 survey by Cone Communications (described on this Forbes article), 80% of the respondents stated they have been prone to change manufacturers to 1 that helps a trigger, though solely 41% stated they and bought a product within the earlier yr as a result of it was related to a social or environmental trigger.

Causes of the Say-Do Hole

The sustainability say-do hole may be attributed to a number of elements.

Social Desirability Bias

First, some surveys could have overstated public assist for sustainability, at the very least to some extent, due to the social desirability bias. 

This bias refers back to the tendency of survey respondents to reply survey questions within the method they imagine can be considered favorably by others moderately than the way in which they really suppose or really feel.

So, when a survey asks individuals whether or not sustainability is essential to them when making buy choices, some respondents are prone to understand that “sure” is the “proper” reply.

Failing to Seize Relative Significance

Many surveys additionally fail to seize the significance of sustainability in relation to different elements that affect buy choices. For instance, a survey respondent could in truth say sustainability issues are essential when making a purchase order resolution, when the truth is that sustainability is much less essential to the respondent than elements corresponding to product high quality, value, and comfort.

This phenomenon is obvious within the findings of a survey of 1,000 US customers performed by McKinsey & Firm in March of this yr.

The McKinsey survey requested individuals to fee the significance they ascribe to seven elements when making buy choices. As the next desk exhibits, 72% of the respondents stated notion of high quality is extraordinarily or crucial, and 70% stated the identical for worth. Nonetheless, solely 33% of the respondents rated environmental impression as extraordinarily or very essential.

Effectiveness of Environmental Messaging

The scale of the sustainability say-do hole can be affected by how successfully entrepreneurs talk the environmental advantages of their services or products. The persistence of a big sustainability say-do hole signifies that entrepreneurs have to make their environmental claims and messaging extra persuasive.

In my subsequent put up, I will describe the 4 attributes that make sustainability claims extra compelling for potential patrons.

[1] – Sustainable Market Share Index is a trademark of the NYU Stern Heart for Sustainable Enterprise

Prime picture courtesy of Sheri through Flickr (CC).