Greenwashing Exam in Times of Crisis: Have Sustainability Projects Become Opportunism?

Concepts such as sustainability, inclusiveness and equality have taken center stage in the communication language of organizations in recent years. However, in times of crisis, it becomes clearer how much of this rhetoric is sincere and how much of it is just a strategic showcase. So where does the line between greenwashing and corporate reputation begin and end for B2B companies? Here's what brands need to know to pass the reputation test.

An Evaluation on Corporate Reputation, Greenwashing and Social Trust

Periods of social crisis go beyond testing the communication strategies of brands; it is the ethical compass of brands that really emerges during these periods. Especially for B2B companies, these periods are not only a “corporate risk” but also a test of “ethical stance”. Unfortunately, instead of passing this test successfully, some companies prefer to instrumentalize their DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) and ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) projects to gain reputation rather than to produce social benefits.

Although we hesitate to say it out loud, the name of this is now very clear: “New generation social washing.”

In other words, companies try to make themselves look “good” by using concepts such as social sensitivity, diversity and environmentalism as marketing tools instead of actually internalizing them. One of the most well-known sub-headings of this situation is greenwashing, which refers to the construction of sustainability projects solely for communication purposes in order to create the impression of environmental sensitivity. Although these projects may appear to contribute to society from the outside, in the background they may only intend to increase market share, gain customers, or take advantage of a crisis.

When Do ESG and DEI Become an Image Trap?

Claims of organizations to build a fairer, greener, more inclusive future through DEI and ESG projects only make sense when these projects are sincere, sustainable and measurable. However, it has recently been observed that some large-scale companies use these concepts as an “ethical shield”.

In times of increased social polarization and sensitivities, organizations feel the need to take a position as if they have to “choose sides”. While some of them fall into silence, others seek ways to appear neutral and gain visibility by highlighting their ESG/DEI projects carried out in times of crisis. This evolves into a classic “reputation manipulation” strategy in the language of public relations.

Unfortunately, when such projects do not produce a sustainable social impact and are commissioned only to polish the brand's outward-facing image, they lead to a loss of public trust. The target audience can smell such PR projects much faster, especially in the digital age.

Social Crisis Opportunism and New Generation Greenwashing

Although the term greenwashing was first used for misleading public opinion on environmental issues, at the point we have reached today, this concept covers a much wider range. Universal values such as social responsibility, diversity, equality, environmental sensitivity are unfortunately commoditized by some companies in order to create a “responsive brand” image.

In times of crisis, some companies suddenly sponsor new social projects, organize advertising campaigns targeting a certain segment of society, or post “sensitive” posts on sensitive issues related to the crisis. Of course, showing sensitivity to social issues is valuable. However, if this sensitivity is only practiced in times of crisis and only to gain visibility, it is nothing more than a marketing strategy.

The example of the US-based Koch Industries, where large-scale energy companies try to cover up their climate crisis-denying policies with “environmentalist” projects, is one of the clearest examples of this opportunism. It would be sad to see a similar approach spread among B2B companies in Turkey.

The Role of Sincerity in Times of Social Crisis

Today, brands are judged not only by their products but also by where they stand. But the critical question here is: Do they really have a stance, or are they just trying to attract customers by pretending to produce an eco-friendly business?

Value-oriented frameworks such as ESG and DEI are more than just footnotes in financial reports; they are embedded in a company's DNA. These principles are tested in times of crisis. If an organization reduces these principles to market tactics instead of adhering to them, it can neither protect its reputation nor build long-term trust.

Steps to Build Trust in a Social Crisis

• Measurability of sincerity: ESG and DEI projects carried out by companies should be supported by quantitative data and transparent reporting.
• Clarity instead of silence in crisis times: The most important pillar of risk management is proactive and honest communication.
• Actions should be taken to create impact, not to gain reputation: Social benefit is the goal of the strategy, not the outcome.
• Brand stance in times of crisis: In times of crisis, instead of remaining silent, a brand should be able to take a stance without distancing itself from the truth. Being sincere and honest, not taking sides, is decisive here.

As a result, how brands behave in times of crisis is one of the most important factors determining their long-term reputation. Tactics that can be perceived as greenwashing, although successful in the short term, lead to a loss of trust in the eyes of society over time. Values such as sustainability, equality and inclusivity should not just be used as marketing tools, but should become a real strategy embedded in the DNA of companies. Sincerity and transparency should be prioritized at all times, not just in times of crisis. Organizations should embrace social good to create a real impact. It should not be forgotten that societies forget crises, but they remember very well who is sincere and who is not. Every step that brands take in order to gain reputation draws the fate of their future.