Cosimo Bizzarri is interning with Futerra for the next three months. From October 2005 to November 2008 he worked as a writer at Fabrica, Benetton’s communication research centre, before being promoted to  coordinator of the Writing department and editor for COLORS Magazine. In 2008 he became assistant researcher at the Design Faculty of the University of San Marino, where he tutors the students on design management and communication strategies. Since early 2009, he's been working as a freelance strategist and copywriter for clients such as United Colors of Benetton, Vodafone Italia, Lavazza,  Gas Jeans and Oviesse.
http://www.cosimobizzarri.com 

Beware of Futerrans! After only four hours of coming into contact with them, you are contaminated with their anti-greenwashing virus! It’s my first day in the office, I’ve been having meetings in the morning and now I’m walking around Charterhouse Square, looking for something to fill my stomach with. I approach a menu posted outside an Italian restaurant. The owner has added a claim in between the restaurant name and the linguine ingredients.  It reads: “Save the planet. Eat in a small restaurant”. My lunch is going to be a ruminating one, in all senses.

More or less one month ago I was sitting with some friends in a beach restaurant in Liguria: the tables laid on a huge terrace (almost empty that night), the food was seafood fished that same morning, the wine was a white one grown in the nearby hills, and a lovely breeze coming from the sea was caressing my face. Needless to say, I had a great dinner and, despite the restaurant size, the guilt for contributing to the destruction of our planet didn’t come close to ruining the digestion of my octopus salad. On the other hand I know a lot of tiny restaurants the planet would be very happy to get rid of, like that one in Morocco that served me Chinese noodles with American ketchup on top and made me vomit for a long, very unsustainable night.

Contemporary popular belief tends to associate everything that is small with an ethical and sustainable lifestyle. This is not always the case, though. Little things can be cute, cosy, homemade, but it takes more than a small dining room to make a restaurant sustainable. 
Anyways, the linguine were ok.

It was my pleasure and privilege last Thursday to participate in a brilliant event at the BFI; ‘Projecting the Future’, alongside the amazing artist (& founder member of the Pogues – how did I not know that!) Jem Finer and BT’s former futurologist Ian Pearson (self-proclaimed ‘inventor of text messaging'). Our polarized panel debates and ponderings were ably invigilated by Helen Heathfield of Julie’s Bicycle.

We were invited to respond to a bizarre series of film clips from the 1940’s, 50’s and 60’s, all of which were visionary glimpses of the future at the time, but understandably look rather odd, weird or downright misguided with the benefits of twenty-first century hindsight. As you can probably guess, because of all the work Futerra has done on the power of positive, future visions to capture people’s imagination (best embodied by ‘Sell the Sizzle’), I was fascinated to see how companies were propagandizing the future seventy years ago.

The first clip up was of a truly terrifying domestic robot, in which a patronizing and sexist (it was 1940 I guess) robot repairman (who had apparently come out in a not-so-space-age looking dressing-gown) blinded a bewildered house-wife with technical jargon. The huge ‘man in a tin suit’ robot, a mono-syllabic metal Neanderthal, was operated by a control panel on which all the key domestic labour-saving tasks had been distilled down to nine buttons. Beyond the obvious ‘Answer Door, Wash Dishes, Clean House etc’ these inexplicably included the strangely specific ‘Get Hat’ and rather more challenging ‘Fix Furnace’, as well as the all-purpose ‘Scram!’.

Left a little shaken by the intimidating hulk of ‘Roll-Oh’ we were then treated to ‘Kitchens of Tomorrow’ (1956). A glamorous house-wife literally danced around her techno-kitchen where total-automation meant her role was reduced to that of simpering spectator, thereby freeing up her precious time for…badly dressed sporting activities apparently. This obsession with labour-saving reminded me of the old Ben Elton sketch about the logical conclusion of Marks & Spencer’s washing, peeling and chopping of vegetables (‘They save you so much time!’) would be simply buying a turd in a plastic-tray, going home and flushing it straight down the toilet – thereby cutting out the middle-man (and of course…saving you SO MUCH time).

In ‘Landscapes of the Future’ we encountered a halcyon world without limits, where oceans teemed with ‘undreamed of abundance’, full of water that could be desalinated to green deserts. Where jungles were ready to be cleared and tamed into productive farmland for rearing cattle and where thrusting masculine bridges and tunnels plunged through nature’s mountains and ridges with the barely suppressed phallic symbolism of progress. Made in 1964 the film felt like an Ayn Rand ‘Atlas Shrugged’ campaign piece, oddly reminiscent of modern neo-conservative thinking that chooses to consciously ignore, dismiss or actively denigrate environmental evidence. In a world where deserts are increasing, the ocean’s productivity and ecology is on a knife-edge and the clear-felling of Amazon rainforest an all too worrying reality, the techno-fix oriented philosophy smacked of hopelessly naïve optimism.

The final film (which you can see above) was the infamous ‘Futurama’ (not the Simpsons sister act I hasten to add – although I am also a fan). Skip to 5 minutes or so into the clip for the bit we were shown. The first thing that struck me was the pontificating pompousness of the voice-over – a sonorous ‘This is how it shall be…in the future’ type of portentous tone, with the most horrific (futuristic?) jazz-noodling of a  Hammond Organ going on in the background.

The ‘zoned’ city of tomorrow, where districts of commercial, residential and leisure activity are segregated for ‘efficiency and convenience’, reminded me of Woody Allen’s film ‘The Sleeper’. In this, Woody Allen’s character wakes from an extended coma a hundred years after slipping into it and is offered whisky and a cigarette by his Doctor. ‘But I don’t drink or smoke’ protests Woody at which point the Doctor chuckles and replies ‘Ah yes, you used to believe drinking and smoking were bad for you in the twentieth century – the complete opposite of what we now know to be true’. The unknowing sustainability errors of zonal development, traffic congestion, ghettoisation, increased need to travel, loom large in the film as the voice-over rather sinisterly describes how ‘undesirable slum areas and outmoded business areas are displaced’.

There were equally however some moments of inspired brilliance, such as the rotating hanger for dirigibles (I’m a well documents airship fan) that floats, somewhat mysteriously, on a ‘pool of liquid’ (water being far too mundane for THE FUTURE obviously), the smart segregation of traffic and pedestrians and the landscaped riverside parks that had replaced industry…instead of which we got Canary Wharf.

Our debates were fired by the notion of ‘progress’ that underpinned all these films. What is the point of development? Who benefits from it? Why are we obsessed with saving time and efficiency? Ian favoured a techno-optimism and inevitability of solutions such as massive genetic-modification of all life on our planet. Jem hymned an elegant simplicity of life that was depressed by Ian’s inexorable rumble of mechanization, digitalization and interference. Me? Being a sustainability buff I like to think the future is a mix of high and low technology, of what Schumacher called ‘appropriate technology’. Personally I like the intimacy of a ‘mundane household chore’ like cooking a meal, yet also love the technologies of renewable energy and many social aspects of the digital revolution.

In the end it was worth remembering who was behind the films we’d watched, most of which were produced by General Motors. There was a rich irony in the fact that the company that used to spend so much time attempting to engineer the future in it’s own interests (Futurama was enormously influential in driving car-based urban development models), has more recently driven (sorry) itself into extreme trouble by actively resisting change (reducing vehicle size, increasing fuel efficiency etc). 

So who, if anyone, is generating the compelling positive visions of a future we might all aspire to now? One that might influence a sustainability agenda in the same way that Futurama drove an automobile future? Answers on a recycled postcard please! Now where’s my jet-pack…surely we were all supposed to have one of them by now?

More depressing news in the papers today, the ominous ‘great Pacific garbage patch has got a twin, the great Atlantic garbage patch’! Eurgh…
 
But what’s the point in stewing, we need solutions not doom mongering!
 
There are already many fantastic campaigns that are highlighting the plight of our oceans; Plasitki has just returned from its plastic soup voyage, End of the Line is winning awards all over the place, and groups like Global Ocean are making sure consumers realise the effect of their purchases on the marine environment. I also really like the recent viral form California’s Heal The Bay  The Majestic Plastic Bag, and Surfers Against Sewage have been flying the flag with their ‘return to sender’ campaign.
 
But what can we do? What about normal people who live on the coast or just enjoy going on holiday there?
 
I have just returned from holiday on Bryher in the Isles of Scilly, a tiny archipelago 28 miles off the coast of Cornwall. Due to unique marine environment and its own micro-climate the Scillies go far and beyond their title of being an area of outstanding natural beauty.
 
And Scillonians understand sustainability, especially that of the oceans. Our latest report Branding Biodiversity talks about a dangerous trend in biodiversity loss around tangibility. If people can see nature, they care about it. If they can’t, they care less.
 
Scillonians depend on the sea; they see it, smell it and use it every day. To protect it, the group Scilly Waste has started a funky little campaign which creates ‘holiday souvenirs’ from marine litter.
 
The tongue-in-cheek gifts highlight a missing link for consumers; they don’t see litter going into the water so why should they care? By presenting it back to them as a gift, Scilly Waste are helping to show consumers that their purchases can have a serious detrimental effect on the oceans. It may be a small step but I hope to see many more campaigns like this in the future.
 
Our friends Nice & Serious have also made a short film on Scilly & sustainability if you would like more information. 

I still don’t truly get the Big Society. Apparently it’s designed "to create a climate that empowers local people and communities, building a big society that will take power away from politicians and give it to people”. Hmmmm.

But in a fit of URL enthusiasm I’ve registered:

• bigsustainablesociety.co.uk
• bigsustainablesociety.com
• bigsustainablesociety.org

Perhaps I’ve just been suckered into policy spin. Or maybe there’s a real value here. One of the most intriguing aspect in the BSB announcement was a commitment to “create a new ‘right to data’ so that government-held datasets can be requested and used by the public, and then published on a regular basis.”

And launching the Green Deal this week, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said. "All politicians have warm words on the environment, and all governments talk about leading the shift to a new green economy," he said. "This government is going to do things differently. We won't try and dazzle you with green gimmicks. We want to impress you by quietly getting on with the job.”

I worry about the ‘quietly’ part of that, without a Sustainable Development Commission who will be watching? Could it be us?

Put the Big Society, right to data, death of the SDC and greener government all into a pot and stir it around a little...an intriguing idea pops out.

How about if I used my impulse-buy URLs to create a ‘tax payers alliance’ for sustainable development? We could post government budgets and policies online, and build a gizmo that lets you search through them and tag things that will either help or hinder sustainable development here in the UK.

Futerra could then use our PR brawn to criticize, or celebrate the coalitions movement towards a Big Sustainable Society. Bigsustainablesociety.org would become a crowd-sourced SDC.

I’m too old and cynical to rely on ‘if I build it they will come’ – so if you’d use this gizmo, if you’d search through the policies, if you’d crowd-source the insights – then let us know.

Are you in? Or got a better idea?

A few weeks ago the Guardian ran a story on London’s PR agencies. They accused the UK of being the ‘reputation laundering’ capital of the world. UK PR Agencies promote dictators, human rights abusers and even those accused of genocide. Saudi Arabia, Rwanda, Kazakhstan and Sri Lanka all have London based agencies beavering away to change their image, encourage tourism and manage media coverage.

For a bunch of people supposedly expert in reputation management, the PR worlds answer was extraordinarily amateur. Lord Bell, the Chairman of the enormous global communications business Chime was almost dismissive   "I am not an international ethics body," he said. "We do communications work. If people want to communicate their argument we take the view that they are allowed to do so”. I love this quote in light of Chimes' slogan on their homepage "in a transparent world, your reputation can be the difference between success and failure". 

PR Week, the industry magazine tried to generate a better defence, but the answers still make my toes curl.  Did Hill and Knowlton's chief marketing officer, Tony Burgess-Webb, really think through the quote 'There is a genuine debate to be had around business ethics in the PR industry, as any other. But this debate needs to be based on a sensible and balanced view, rather than a one-sided perspective on what constitutes right or wrong”

I haven’t heard that kind of normative defensiveness from a industry in years. Back in the day most corporates and industry bodies would rely on ‘you’re not being balanced’ arguments against stakeholder concerns. Then they learnt the hard way that genuine concerns need a genuine answer. In fact, a proper stakeholder engagement approach is what most PRs advise when a client faces an ethics crisis. This needs to be more than talk; the PR industry needs to listen to the concerns, be more transparent about clients, train staff in greenwash and ethics and even establish a ‘whistle blowing’ line for when codes of ethics are broken.

Ironically, as well as the ‘reputation laundering’ capital of the world, London is also hailed as the groundbreaker in sustainability communications. Within this city there are probably more csr and sustainability communications experts per square meter than anywhere else.  PR in London is a house divided. From agencies at the cutting edge of change towards a sustainability society, to agencies representing the worst regimes in the world. And a few agencies that do both.

The PRCA (a PR industry body) has a voluntary code of conduct and some training available on ethics. But perhaps now London's PR experts in corporate social responsibility should turn inwards for a while, and put our own house in order.

There has been a lot of interesting conversations about how social media and crowdsourcing can do good, as we become more connected through social media and the web (though this brilliant TED talk by Ethan Zuckerman challenges this connectivity theory).

I am really excited by this new project called OpenIDEO form the folks at IDEO. Instead of just giving people a ring to throw their ideas into, they have created a process to coming up with innovative solutions to problems. They first pose a problem and then contributors come up with creative ways to tackle it. The whole process is explained in the video properly.

We have seen how social media campaigns can generate a lot of power and publicity, but this 'slactivism' is not really the sort of long lasting behaviour solutions that creates meaningful change. If this project is successful in engaging creative minds and helping each other critique them, then hopefully the results will be truly innovative.   

When Diesel ran it’s ‘Global Warming Ready’ campaign a few years ago, it seemed to raise a wry smile or two. Look! The cool dude in the snazzy white suit is taking his chameleon for a walk to impress the ladeez…that’s like, amazing and maybe this whole climate change thing might be actually a little bit sexy? As the globe heats up maybe we’ll all fling off our extraneous clothing and make out with each other like the desperately lithe and gorgeous models in the ads…

Well maybe. Although from what most of the science I’ve read tells me, climate change ain’t exactly likely to be some nubile fashion picnic. So was Diesel’s campaign a bit of tongue in cheek topical fun or a slightly crass hijacking of serious issues for advertising purposes?

I was thinking about this this morning after spotting an article about September’s edition of Italian Vogue, that well known environmental campaigning organ. Their cover story next month is a hugely provocative ‘Water & Oil’ piece, featuring page after page of photographs of a bedraggled, bitumen-streaked model lying slumped and prostrate on a tarry shoreline.

The question is, is this a pathetically self-indulgent and deliberately controversial attention-seeking (in the fashion media? Really?!) effort? Or, is it a valiant attempt to echo populist environmental concern in an unlikely outlet? A small part of me says ‘Bravo!’ as the images really are striking, but most of me says ‘Oh Christ’ when you read the accompanying text that goes along with the eco-porn photography…

“She keeps her skin golden thanks to Self Tan Face Bronzing Gel Tint (to wear alone or with foundation): it takes care of the skin, while giving it a hint of color. Carbon, anthracite, and all of the earthy shades "dress" her eyes, and her lips feature a ‘nude’ look. All by Clinique. Tulle dress with beaded embroidery, Ralph Lauren Collection”

So if you want to look like a washed-up Gulf of Mexico pelican you know the right make-up and designer gear to buy! OK, this controversy-courting tactic is a well-established one and was pioneered by Bennetton with their series of ‘shock’ ads, which probably peaked with the street poster of a blood smeared newborn. But it does raise the question as to where the line should be drawn…as others have commented online, is Darfur an acceptable subject for a fashion shoot? Could a shampoo advert use the Pakistan floods as a visual metaphor? Or the Chinese mud-slides as context for a face-pack promo?

The best bit for me however was the Google Ad (pictured above and since removed...but luckily I took a screen-grab yesterday) automatically placed beneath a blog article on the Vogue images…for ‘Red Diesel – supplied nationally in bulk or in barrels’. As I’ve said before many times, I increasingly feel that it is hard to satirise what already feels several steps past satire, or as the obvious gag would have it, this is simply Beyond Parody…

: )

No, this is not an invitation for some weird locomotive inspired sexual act rather its the title of a quite extraordinary theatre show it was my immense pleasure to both participate in and view the other week. Set in an abandoned office block in Bethnal Green, 'You me bum bum train' (YMBBT) is a theatre experience with a cast of 200, mainly volunteers, and an audience of one - you!

An instant sell-out, the only way I could get into the show was as a volunteer cast member. So it was that I found myself in full American football kit playing the opening scene (which as an 'actor' you get to do eighty times a night!). Weirdly, about the 5th audience member through the door was a mate, whom I thought hadn't recognised me (it was a little out of context after all and I don't usually swan around dressed as a Grid-Iron player!), but it turned out also had a spare ticket for the Wednesday show. I was in...

It's hard to do justice to the energetic insanity of YMBBT. It is genuinely interactive theatre, you are literally the star of the show and taken on an intense 40 minute ride of mind-boggling experiences. You find yourself burgling a house, preaching to a church congregation, crowd-surfing at a rock-gig, signing copies of your latest tome in a bookshop in front of a crowd of adoring fans and being a controversial Government Environment Minister facing a media grilling (I quite enjoyed that one I must say). It was a breathless and brilliant ego-trip of surreal proportions, a completely unique experience, enhanced still further by the fact that an informal 'pact of silence' encourages the audience not to give anything away and keep the content secret so as not to spoil it for others.

I would urge anyone who gets the opportunity to sign up to the YMBBT mailing list and seize tickets or step-up for volunteering at their next show. There is something magical about a bespoke, focused experience that you are the centre of and that is largely staffed by unpaid volunteers doing it for the sheer effervescent love of it all... 

Is there a sustainability communications link to this blog? Not sure, but I had to share this anyway!

The long wait for London is nearly over, the much trumpeted 'Barclays Cycle Scheme' is nearly upon us and I for one am really excited. However the name that TFL have gone with 'Barclays Cycle Scheme' hasn't got my juices flowing in quite the same way as seeing the bike stands pop up around town. In Paris they have the wonderfully named 'Velibs' and in Rome i have been on the 'Mobilitas'.

So why don't we come up with a better name amongst ourselves? I for one like the idea of them being called 'The Ordinaries' which was the original name for the Penny Farthing. Extra points of course for humour, originality etc.  

• What  they say: “We are also helping to develop carbon capture and storage processes...However, it will be many years before they are widely deployed.”
• What they really mean: We’ll lobby against this zero-emission economy to make sure it will be many, many years indeed.
• Their sin: Outright lying. Carbon capture and storage is but one--quite controversial at that--example of mitigating technologies which are absolutely available here and now.

3.    "The future belongs to renewable energies. Is that true at Total too?"

• What they say: “We’re securing the future of energy here and now...a wide array of resources that will be able to meet varied demand.”
• What they really mean: No. We’re focusing on what we always have: oil and gas. And we’re going to keep doing that.
• Their sin: Green products v. dirty company.

4.    "Total has a major impact on the region’s economy, environment and employment. Are there any responsibilities in these three areas that Total will no longer assume in the future?

• What they say: “We have always assumed our responsibilities on all three fronts.”
• What they really mean: Don’t Wikipedia us. Just stick to this report.
• Their sin: No proof. Whatsoever.

5.    “How will ongoing dialogue with employee representatives help improve safety?”

• What they say: “...the Safety Inspection Task Force set up in 2009 began and ended each site tour with wide-ranging discussions... it was agreed that regular progress reports would be made."
• What they really mean: We make PDFs. Now leave us alone.
• Their sin: Imaginary friends. Creating an internal committee to verify progress is, well, not verifiable.

7. “What can I say when people call Total a polluter?”

• What they say: “Environmental protection is our top priority.”
• What they really mean: Stop asking us. We aren’t even sure what the extent of our environmental impact is—so we’ll keep trying to learn more about it whilst producing the same core polluting products and services.
• Their sin: Just not credible.

The fact that an energy company could produce a report with greenwash embedded this deeply is terrifying. It’s a vital indicator of just how distorted the landscape of CSR reporting has become. Expending the significant corporate resources it must have required to produce this Reverse Greenwash Guide is a waste for a company like Total. Their money would be much better spent actually talking to stakeholders—and making this conversation public. Total, here’s your strategy for CSR in 2010: actual, verifiable, stakeholder engagement.You can start with this guy--he has a few lessons learned to share about corporate responsibility.

Dr Pepper and mother brand Coca Cola have been ‘stung’ by their own tagline in what is being labeled as an effective demonstration of the need to use social media wisely.

Dr Pepper’s most recent campaign encouraged Facebook users to surrender their status updates to the company and accept the consequences; What’s the worst that could happen? 

Well, in this case, children being exposed to graphic content, public humiliation and withdrawal of advertising.

However, I have doubts. The campaign saw users agreeing to be publicly embarrassed for the chance to win prizes, in effect exactly what has happened to Dr Pepper.

The resulting media coverage from the ‘scandal’ has shone a spotlight on the campaign which would have been impossible to generate without such controversy.

What do you think, social media wizardry or stupidity?

• Give AIDS the Red Card
• Brothers for Life
• Africa Goal
• Fairplay for Africa
• Yahoo World Cup Shootout Game

We would certainly like to hope so! The Marketing Society recently ran a film competition inviting agencies to submit a short creative piece addressing precisely this question. You can watch a few of the entries here, but I have to say, apart from the 'austerity times' short from AMV BBDO above, which I rather like, I was not exactly blown away by the contributed efforts. On this evidence alone we still have some way to go before the answer is a resounding 'Yes!'

From old tapes to yellowing books and Noel Edmonds jumpers, everything you find in a second hand shop has a story. It might be the M&S scarf you were given by the great aunt you only ever see at funerals, or perhaps it's the best book you read when you were travelling, every item has a value beyond the price tag. 

An Oxfam shop in Manchester is asking people who turn up with a second hand item to record its story - where they got it, why they're getting rid of it and what it's meant to them. The project is called "Remember Me" and it's a collaborative effort between Oxfam and TOTeM (Tales of Things and Electronic Memory). Each audio clip is attached to a tag, and then visitors to the shop use their own smart phone or a bespoke reader to listen to the stories through speakers.

Obviously, some stories are more interesting than others "I got given two Michael McIntyre DVDs for Christmas" doesn't really have the same impact as "I wore this jumper when I first met my boyfriend, it was treasured for years until he ran away with my cleaner. Now I can't stand the sight of him, the jumper and my hoover". But not every item can be a blockbuster.

The project was part of Manchester's Future Everything digital festival but it's something that a number of different stores and organisations, including Oxfam, are looking to roll out elsewhere. It offers second hand stores in particular a fantastic opportunity to inject life into their products and offer the consumer something that you can't get in H&M or TopShop. 

Perhaps we could use it at the next big Swishing party!

An alternative way to make biodiversity sizzle and one which was gloriously shown to me by an ever-so slightly traumatised friend.

Isabella Rosselini, fabled actress, model and general superstar has harnessed the power of sex to arouse (boom boom) interest in all manner of creatures. From the preying mantus to the cuttlefish, Rosselini brings biodiversity to life in amazing costumes.

Truly a celebration of the wild and the wonderful if ever there was one.

I'm not sure that's what we meant when we said there should be more of the love and less of the loss.

Catch them here....

That's the new UN Goodwill Ambassador for Biodiversity, Ed Norton urging us to save biodiversity. And the way he does it is the reason why we've just launched a new report: 

Branding Biodiversity. The New Nature Message.

As the name suggests, and in the tradition of our reports, we’re looking to shake things up. Branding Biodiversity is built on the premise that if our current biodiversity communications were more effective, we wouldn’t be losing so much of it.

It challenges communicators to swap extinction and complex scientific concepts for a set of simple brand values that inspire the public to act on conservation.

We started by identifying four main types of biodiversity message:

Loss: All about extinction

Love: All about our awe and wonder at nature

Need: The economic benefit of biodiversity

Action: Messages that ask us to do something

Each of these goes through the psychology mill to establish whether or not it’s a powerful driver for conservation behaviour. The output is, unsurprisingly, that not all messages are created equal.

In fact, the most common message, Loss, is the least effective. It makes two assumptions of people that aren’t right: that they care about nature for its own sake, and that they make rational decisions about how they act. The bottom line is that leading your communications with extinction will extinguish your message for the public.

Instead, the research shows that the most powerful driver of care and action on biodiversity is not Loss, but Love. It’s the awe and wonder at nature that just about everyone has felt, at some point, somewhere. Whether it’s a stunning view, a first encounter with a farm animal, or hearing a lion roar up close. That’s what get the blood running when it comes to nature, and explains why people in Birmingham care whether or not there are tigers in Bengal. more importantly, it is also the motivation for most people to actually do something to conservae nature.

So we have a new formula for communications:

Read the report itself to find out how to make it work.

And then forward it to Ed Norton (@edwardnorton).

Middle managers have a tough time. Stuck in the middle trying to support vast swathes of people, hit KPIs and juggle fickle senior leadership strategies and restructures. It's no wonder that sustainability doesn't rate highly on their list of things to do.

Engaging middle managers is one of the most consistent barriers to action we hear about. All too often, leadership from senior managers and action from grassroots gets stuck in the ‘treacle layer’ of middle management and fails to bring about wide spread culture change. So this is the challenge I threw to my Green Monday discussion table from. 

A full writeup can be found here, but I asked the table to come up with their own rules. Have a read and let me know what you think, have we got it right? Is there anything we've missed? Let me know!

There’s no magic bullet, but this is what we came up with....

Keep it compatible:

• Senior leaders must provide clever and compatible messages that appeal to all levels of an organisation, not just other leaders and grassroots.
• Use compatible messages that aren’t full of jargon: don’t label things ‘green’ or talk about ‘carbon’ unless you have to.

Tell them what they're doing right:

• Ensure that you are measuring results, so that you can give them feedback and let them know how well they are doing.
• Use praise to highlight good behaviours, rather than nagging and negativity. Make sure good results are rewarded and recognised.

Listen!

• Make sure that you’re engaging with managers and listening to them, rather than just telling them what to do.
• Fight your battles at the right time. Engage those that will listen and those that have the most influence first. Others will follow.

Help them get ahead:

• Create competition by showcasing success. Show what competitors are doing but also what other floors and buildings are doing well.
• Find out what sustainability means to them and how it can help them to look good. Then target these ideas when talking to them.