I had some feedback from my "perspective" in the Perspective's section from the September 2008 issue of Medical Design Technology magazine where I argue that improvements in benefits and cost savings will produce more of a competitive advantage for companies than simply being "green". You can read the whole section from the link on the front page of Amoebic, Inc.
In response, my colleague Mark Bowes disagreed and said, "at the moment, there is a segment of the consumer population that wants to be green, or wants to be be perceived as being green. These people will pay a premium to buy products that are associated in consumers' minds with lowered environmental impact, regardless of whether the products make sense environmentally."
I agree that there are certain products that benefit in the marketplace from simply being labeled as "green", whether or not they have been proven to actually be better for the environment, because some consumers want to be perceived as being environmentally conscious. But from my experience in product development, this has also created skepticism, since many consumers have already caught on that "green" can mean relatively little, depending on the company and product.
Particularly in this environment of economic uncertainty and customers watching their wallets, companies would be wise to demonstrate and quantify the "greenness" of their product if there is no tangible other benefit, or they should demonstrate cost savings or additional benefits to cut through the "green" noise and be competitive.
