Sustainability is not what you say, but what you do: Why our favourite brands do not need to fake it

Just like the rest of the internet, my social media feeds fill up with rainbow graphics every June. The same companies that operate for eleven months of the year without the slightest reference to values suddenly proclaim how much they care about the planet, people, and diversity. However, deceptive marketing practices such as greenwashing in ecology or pinkwashing in minority rights, where a company says one thing but does another, have serious business consequences for firms. H&M or Coca-Cola, for instance, know a thing or two about this, and the list will likely only grow.

According to Capgemini data, over 33% of consumers in 2023 believed companies were greenwashing their initiatives. By last year, that figure had already risen to 62%. Scepticism is growing, and with it, the willingness of consumers and regulators to act. The problem is not that companies do not care about sustainability. The problem is that communication regularly outpaces reality, and the moment someone exposes this gap, it is not enough to just issue a press release or change the communication agency.

Yet the data show the scale of the opportunity being missed in sustainable branding. Research by Kantar shows that sustainability now accounts for up to a tenth of the value of the world's biggest brands. Still, 83% of companies receive negative ratings from consumers in this regard. And more than half of them do not communicate about sustainability at all, most frequently because they simply do not know how.

When content outpaces substance

A fundamental mistake that appears very often is mistaking a communication topic for a value. A company decides that this year's topic will be sustainability. It gives a brief to the communication department or agency. A campaign is created. A section on responsibility has been added to the website. And that's it, the company is now considered sustainable. Companies cannot change their principles with the snap of a finger. Greenwashing, pinkwashing, or any other "washing" occurs precisely when what a company says conflicts with what it does.

Sustainable branding is the result of a company actually living certain values, and only then can it speak about them credibly. A brand that communicates authentically and fulfils its ESG values must align these values across four levels: brand purpose, product experience, communication, and internal culture. If one of these levels is missing or lagging behind, the entire structure begins to collapse.

It is important to understand that consumers sense this contradiction faster than companies think. There is no need for an investigative journalist to step into the situation. An employee showing what it actually looks like in the office on social media is enough. A supplier confirming that conditions in the supply chain do not come anywhere close to the company's stated values is enough.

In 2022, H&M introduced an environmental score for its Conscious Choice collection. It was supposed to show customers how much less water and energy were consumed during production. However, Quartz found that for more than half of the products, this data was misleading or outright incorrect. Some pieces were even labelled as ecological, even though their impact was worse than that of conventional goods. H&M had to withdraw the index and faced protracted lawsuits. Industry publications and academic studies therefore describe it as a brand that invests in transparency and publishes auditable reports, but whose core business model, meaning high production volumes and short product life cycles, remains in direct conflict with the principles of sustainability.

Coca-Cola is regularly cited as the world's largest plastic polluter. It tried to mitigate this in 2019 with a campaign about bottles made from 25% plastic scavenged from the sea. The problem, however, was that this 25% applied only to a limited edition of approximately 300 bottles and not to mass production, which generates three million tonnes of plastic packaging annually. The British regulator, the ASA, publicly criticised the campaign. Coca-Cola thus became a textbook example of empty gestures that mask systemic problems.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines bet on the Fly Responsibly campaign, which claimed that flying can be sustainable through biofuels and tree-planting offsets. An Amsterdam court ruled otherwise in 2024. It stated that the term "sustainable aviation" is currently an oxymoron and banned KLM from using these slogans. It was the first judgment of this kind in history against an airline and a precedent for the entire industry.

What do all three cases have in common? A combination of three factors: vague terminology without a clear definition, a selective choice of data that looks good, and an absence of independently verifiable evidence. As a result, their communication creates expectations that their business model cannot fulfil.

The era of green promises is ending

In March 2024, the European Union adopted a directive that bans vague environmental claims, such as "eco-friendly" or "climate neutral," without supporting evidence of certified performance, effective from September 2026. The era of green promises is turning into the era of green proof, and companies that are not prepared for this transition will face not only reputational but also legal risk.

At the same time, there are companies that do not loudly communicate about sustainability, yet are perceived as credible. Their approach works because it builds on what I call "green honesty", a way of thinking that is reflected in the decisions, processes, and culture of the company long before it gets into campaigns and advertisements. Values are defined internally before they are communicated externally. In this way, communication does not outpace reality. These companies say what they are doing, not what they are planning. Presence in the topic is consistent over time. A single June campaign will build nothing, but systematic work throughout the year will.

It is also worth mentioning how these brands approach their own failures. Instead of sweeping mistakes under the rug, they speak about them openly and show how they are fixing them. At first glance, this approach may seem like a weakness, but in reality, it is one of the strongest trust-building tools. This is because consumers do not demand perfection. They demand honesty and sincerity.

Do's and Don'ts in the Czech Context

The Czech context complicates this even further. Czech society may look tolerant on the outside, but it is rather conservative at its core. Furthermore, topics such as diversity or inclusion are politically charged here and can easily have the opposite effect to that intended. I see this regularly with clients. A well-intentioned campaign that would pass unnoticed in Western Europe causes polarisation here that the company did not anticipate. This is not an argument for silence. It is an argument for precision, authenticity, and good timing, and, above all, for communication to be grounded in something real.

Even so, examples in the Czech environment show that sensitive topics can be communicated effectively and over the long term. Since 2011, the Pride Business Forum has served as a platform to help companies build an inclusive work environment for LGBTQ+ employees. In its 14 years of existence, it has grown into a network of more than 100 member companies and institutions, and every year it presents the LGBTQ+ Friendly Employer award to companies such as Vodafone, MSD, Novartis, and Škoda Auto. The key to their success in the Czech context is not campaign visibility alone, but consistent internal work: educating HR teams, employee groups, specific benefits, and measurable results.

Conclusion

Although consumers are overwhelmed by information and will therefore never follow case studies on individual brands' campaigns, do not underestimate how informed they can be about products they care about. According to Kantar research, more than a third of customers will actively consider sustainability by 2030, and these customers will certainly not let themselves be deceived by a LinkedIn post in which a company emotionally claims values that are not in its DNA. Not every brand loved by customers will be ecologically sustainable, but many sustainable brands will be loved because of it.