Business Professor Tom Lyon ’81 Tackles Corporate Accountability
Lyon studies how major companies disclose information to the public concerning their environmental footprints
Analyzing obscure trends like greenwashing (a deceptive marketing tactic where a business falsely promotes its products or services as environmentally friendly) and corporate accountability is Tom Lyon ’81’s specialty. Lyon, a professor at the University of Michigan Ross School of Business, studies how major companies disclose information to the public concerning their environmental footprints and how their level of honesty impacts society.
Recent decades have seen an evolution in the ways businesses, both large and small, relate to the greater community. Years of activism in areas as divergent as environmental research, civil rights, and organized labor have coalesced into the drive for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). While the subject is multifaceted, it refers to a shift of corporate priorities from shareholders exclusively to a wider array of stakeholders; employees, customers, everyday citizens, as well as investors. CSR concerns such things as a company’s environmental footprint and its promotion of economic equality.
In some cases, these objectives have moved beyond the corporate world and have been reflected in public policy. In 2017, however, the movement was dealt a blow when the Trump administration announced its intention to withdraw from the recently negotiated Paris Climate Accord, an international agreement with defined goals for reducing greenhouse gases. In 2021, the Biden Administration officially renewed its commitment to the agreement.
In the U.S. today, a lack of clear accountability standards allows companies to surreptitiously avoid responsibility — often through greenwashing by promoting their CSR initiatives to maintain the status quo. “In the last two to three years, there’s been an explosion of interest in greenwashing in the media, and I think that’s because there’s been an explosion of new greenwashing activity in the corporate world,” says Lyon.
This trend came as a surprise to him. A decade ago he expected a decline in greenwashing, but the recent trend prompted him to coauthor a May 2023 article titled “No End in Sight? A Greenwash Review and Research Agenda” for Organization & Environment.
In the piece, Lyon discusses a new form of greenwashing called future washing, which is rooted in the net-zero commitments made by many companies to eliminate all fossil fuel emissions by a targeted date.
“Net-zero plans will typically have a date of 2050, so we have 27 years in which something is supposed to happen,” Lyon says. “But there’s no possible way to document if the firm is going to achieve those reductions.” Casting the target date so far into the future allows current executives the luxury of procrastination and the means to personally avoid accountability, he adds.
The antidote is to link CSR to Corporate Political Responsibility (CPR), Lyon says. CPR demands a higher degree of transparency regarding a company’s political activities, such as the funds spent on lobbying and campaign contributions, and the objectives of those efforts.
Companies must then make their stated CSR goals compatible with their political strategy, and make that information public. This will enable them to promise only what they can deliver while building credibility with the public. The challenge for executives and managers will be to creatively promote sustainability while maintaining profitability.
These principles illustrate a nontraditional approach to the role of the corporation in society. Lyon points out that goals such as racial equality, a long-term perspective on corporate decisions, and the elimination of partisan gerrymandering reflect a progressive social/political agenda.
2 Responses
Jocelyn Phelps ’82
1 Year AgoGreenwashing: Can It Be Regulated Away?
The issue of greenwashing is critical as it provides ammunition to critics of efforts to stay on a 1.5°C trajectory by 2050.
I have been digging into what is happening in Europe, where we have both the Net Zero Banking Alliance (a UNEP sponsored, industry-led initiative that puts member banks in a funnel leading from vague promises to portfolio analysis and then firm commitments, board-level reviews, and 5-year objectives from 2025 on) and the European Green Deal.
The European Green Deal includes three pieces of regulation (oops, Americans don’t believe in regulation): one on benchmarks used to assess “green” products and services (answers the question “What is an ESG benchmark and what criteria must it meet?”); one on green taxonomy, which defines six priorities for European economies to fight climate change and determines which activities contribute to this fight, thereby enabling industries and investors to target appropriate areas if they want to make their own businesses greener or invest in green activities; and the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation, which applies to all actors in the financial sector. This last piece of regulation sets standard requirements for reporting on potential climate risks caused by investments, or threats of climate risk on investments; it also sets requirements for reporting on the level of investment of companies of a certain size in green developments.
How far does America have to go to create such a comprehensive system? Without dictating where investments have to go or what companies have to do, these European regulations are creating a climate in which companies and financial players have a strong interest in thoughtful green investing.
John Rundle ’72
1 Year AgoESG Investing
Readers of this piece might be interested in this investing web site that emphasizes ESG and sustainable investing: fennel.com. The founders of this app support the idea that change will come by putting pressure on companies through investing practices.