Green marketing strategies: an examination of stakeholdersand the opportunities they present

J. Joseph Cronin, Jr & Jeffery S. Smith &

Mark R. Gleim & Edward Ramirez &

Jennifer Dawn Martinez

Received: 31 December 2009 /Accepted: 15 September 2010# Academy of Marketing Science 2010

Abstract As green marketing strategies become increas-ingly more important to firms adhering to a triple-bottomline performance evaluation, the present research seeks tobetter understand the role of “green” as a marketingstrategy. Through an integration of the marketing, manage-ment, and operations literatures, an investigative frameworkis generated that identifies the various stakeholders poten-tially impacted through the environmentally friendly effortsof a firm. Specifically, the inter-connected nature of the corebusiness disciplines of marketing, management (both strategy

and human resources), and operations are examined ascontrollable functions within an organization from whichstrategies can be enacted to affect a firm’s stakeholders. Theprior research in these areas is examined to identify potentialresearch opportunities in marketing while also offering aseries of representative research questions that can help guidefuture research in marketing.

Keywords Green marketing strategy . Environmentalstrategy . Stakeholder analysis

Introduction

As firms note the positive gains that can accrue throughenvironmentally friendly marketing strategies (e.g., Luoand Bhattacharya 2006) and the potential pitfalls associatedwith non-environmentally friendly strategies, going green isbeginning to take center stage in boardrooms around theworld. There is a growing interest among top managers,stakeholders and academics regarding green marketingstrategies and the potential impact on the triple-bottomline. Firms are increasingly adhering to a triple-bottom lineperformance evaluation, a concept coined to reflect thegrowing tendency of stakeholders to evaluate organizationalperformance on the basis of economic prosperity (i.e.,profits), environmental quality (i.e., the planet), and socialjustice (i.e., people)1 (Elkington 1997).

The recent BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico typifies theimpact that an environmental disaster can have on a firm’striple-bottom line. Not only has BP’s stock price plum-meted and credit rating been lowered (Guitierrez 2010), but

1 For the remainder of the paper, we use the triple-bottom line andpeople/profit/planet (or 3P) concepts interchangeably.

This research was supported by the Institute for Energy Systems,Economics and Sustainability (IESES) at The Florida State University.

J. J. Cronin, Jr (*) : J. S. Smith :M. R. GleimThe College of Business, Department of Marketing,The Florida State University,Rovetta Business Annex Room 307, P.O. Box 3061110,Tallahassee, FL 32306-1110, USAe-mail: jcronin@cob.fsu.edu

J. S. Smithe-mail: jssmith@cob.fsu.edu

M. R. Gleime-mail: mgleim@fsu.edu

E. RamirezCollege of Business Administration,Department of Marketing and Management,The University of Texas at El Paso,Business Room 230,El Paso, TX 79968, USAe-mail: eramirez29@utep.edu

J. D. MartinezFogelman College of Business & Economics,Department of Marketing & Supply Chain Management,The University of Memphis,FAB 302,Memphis, TN 38152, USAe-mail: jmartine@memphis.edu

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.DOI 10.1007/s11747-010-0227-0

consumer boycotts continue to spread while the environ-mental damage to the Gulf continues to devastate. Further,the recent miscues by BP have led to even greater scrutinyby governmental and other non-governmental organizations(NGOs) as a consequence of the lack of environmentalstrategies.

This example provides glaring evidence of the growingimportance of going green as a viable organizational strategywith specific implications for marketing as well. Specifically,firms are expected to commit to green marketing strategies as(1) the cost of materials and energy continue to rise, (2) publicpressure continues to increase, (3) there is increasingawareness that subscribing to triple-bottom line practices canincrease consumer demand, and (4) consumers’ growingantipathy to globalization is leading to strengthening NGOactivity relative to green performance (Kleindorfer et al.2005). In addition, while the costs of such efforts can besubstantial, improved environmental performance has beenlinked to greater financial performance, competitiveness, andinnovation benefits (Kassinis and Vafeas 2006; King andLenox 2002; Klassen and Whybark 1999; Majumdar andMarcus 2001).

As a result, organizations worldwide are recognizing theappeal of environmentally friendly products and strategies.Organizations are increasingly focused on developinginternal and external strategies that are green. Specifically,it is suggested that efforts will be made internally to recoverpollution causing outputs, to develop substitutes for non-renewable inputs, and to redesign products to reduce materialcontent and energy consumption. Similarly, external strategieswill likely focus on developing core competences in products,processes, and other supply chain activities that emphasizelong-term sustainability throughout the entire supply chain(Kleindorfer et al. 2005).

Given the prominence the green movement has risento in recent years, it is surprising the marketing literaturehas paid relatively scant attention to the efficacy ofgreen marketing strategies (see Baker and Sinkula 2005;de Ruyter et al. 2009; Drumwright 1994; Grinstein andNisan 2009; Menon and Menon 1997 for notableexceptions). Defined as “doing business while avoidingharm to people and the planet” (Center for SustainableEnterprise 2010), and identified as an actionable responseto calls for organizations to focus on their “triple-bottomline performance” (i.e., measuring performance based onthe effects of strategies on people, the planet, and profits),green is clearly an area of increased concern for organizationsworldwide. Unfortunately, marketing research that evaluatessuch strategic initiatives is lacking in comparison to otherdisciplines.

The need for additional green research is not limited topurely theoretical concerns as today more than 75% ofconsumers routinely report that they are green, or prefer

environmentally friendly products (Saad 2006). While thevast majority of consumers claim to be green, greenproducts account for less than four percent of the globalproduct market share (UNEP 2005). This alone suggests theneed for marketing research to address the massivedisconnect between attitudes toward green products andbusinesses and actual purchase behaviors. Early research onmarketing orientation noted the important role marketingcan play in developing the inter-functional coordinationneeded to meet the wants and needs exhibited in markets(Hurley and Hult 1998; Jaworski and Kohli 1993; Slaterand Narver 2000). As the key link between organizationsand markets, marketers represent the lynchpin in movingfirms toward a true triple-bottom line orientation.

Thus, the purpose of the current research is to reviewand integrate the literature surrounding green initiatives invarious business disciplines and offer a series of guidingresearch opportunities to advance the marketing discipline.Given that green research in other academic disciplinesexceeds the attention given to green strategies in themarketing literature, the central topical areas from the corebusiness disciplines (i.e., management, operations, andmarketing) are identified and utilized as a foundation fromwhich a series of research opportunities are generated. Toaccomplish this goal, we generate an overarching frame-work (see Fig. 1) that is based on stakeholder theory interms of the 3P concept as the basis for the literatureinvestigation. More concretely, we denote how the researchopportunities can be used in the generation of specificresearch questions that can act as a springboard for futuremarketing research on green marketing strategies. In otherwords, we offer a tangible guide as to how to recognize thegaps in the current literature while providing opportunitiesfor future studies. We believe that this article can serve asencouragement for marketing scholars to undertake researchthat evaluates how best to satisfy market needs and wants forgreen products.

Conceptual framework and methodology

As noted above, the goal of this article is to advance themarketing discipline in investigations addressing the con-cept of green marketing strategies. To guide our investiga-tion, we generated an overarching model (see Fig. 1)whereby research in the core business disciplines (i.e.,marketing, management, and operations) is reviewed inorder to identify the main themes that emerge. The themesare then integrated in order to determine what is knownabout each topic. We then employ a stakeholder analysis todetermine how marketing research can address the gaps inthe literature (i.e., what research opportunities exist) interms of the 3P perspective. More specifically, we denote

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

how the marketing discipline can reach the relevant stake-holders to increase emphasis on green-related issues. In thefollowing sub-sections, we offer a brief overview ofstakeholder theory and the 3P concept followed by adescription of how we employed our framework as a tool toidentify the research opportunities. We also outline theprocess we employed to identify the relevant studies thathave been conducted on green concepts as they pertain tothe business community.

Stakeholder theory and the 3P perspective

An overarching tenet has emerged that the organizationshould conduct business beyond the base consideration ofonly making a profit. In essence, the mindset has shiftedfrom doing whatever it takes to make money to a morebalanced approach whereby firms consider the multitude ofpossible effects a specific decision may have. Thismultifaceted perspective has been mainly addressed interms of making decisions while addressing the needs ofdivergent groups of relevant stakeholders (Freeman 1984).The concept is broadly entitled stakeholder theory andsuggests that a firm should pursue strategies that considerthe parties affected by decisions while trying to minimizedamage or maximize benefits to the representative groups(Freeman 1984). While there has been debate over thespecifics of the theory (see Brummer 1991; Donaldson and

Preston 1995), it has become commonly accepted thatorganizations need to be aware of the totality of theirdecisions.

The core tenet of stakeholder theory is to think beyondjust financial performance. It can be seen that this meshesneatly with the 3P (or triple-bottom line) paradigm of doingbusiness while avoiding harm to people and the planet(Center for Sustainable Enterprise 2010) as both proposeconsidering the range of potential ramifications of environ-mentally related decisions. It is through the overlap of the3P concept with stakeholder theory that the groups thatcould be affected by green strategies are identified. Thecore stakeholders that are considered within this study areconsumers, competitors, government and NGOs, investors,supply chain partners, employees, and society as a whole(Donaldson and Preston 1995). These stakeholder groupsare included as research suggests that the characteristics ofspecific groups impact their ability to influence organiza-tional strategies, of which green is one (e.g., ability togenerate political support, access to unique resources,expertise, and personal preferences or value) (Kassinisand Vafeas 2006).

From the marketing perspective, previous research hasnot been effective at reaching these specific stakeholdergroups. The dearth of research originating in marketing hasfocused mainly on the end consumer (e.g., Luchs et al.2010). In contrast, other fields have begun to utilize aspects

HumanResources

Operations Management

Marketing

Strategy

Internal Functions

Governmentand NGOs

Supply ChainPartners

Investors

Competitors

Consumers

Society

ExternalStakeholders

Fig. 1 Conceptual investigationframework

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

of the 3P-stakeholder overlap to guide investigations. Forexample, the operations literature has focused on sustain-ability across supply chain relationships that range fromback-end purchasing (Carter and Carter 1998) throughfront-end distribution (van Woensel et al. 2001) andconcluding with the retrieval and re-use of post consumercomponents (Guide 2000). Operations has even exploredthe internal aspects of employees (Gattiker and Carter2010), managers (Klassen 2001; Pagell and Gobeli 2009),and systems (Melnyk et al. 2003) while also investigatingthe performance impacts of reducing waste (King andLenox 2001; Rothenberg et al. 2001). In conjunction, themanagement discipline has addressed the larger-scaleimpacts of pursuing a green strategy. In particular, thepotential impact of environmental technologies as acompetitive force (Shrivastava 1995a), the linkagesbetween environmental strategy and stakeholder manage-ment (Buysse and Verbeke 2003), and the impact of afirm’s competitive environment on the development of abusiness-natural environment interface (Aragón-Correaand Sharma 2003) have been addressed. Since marketingis currently lagging behind these other disciplines, it isimperative that marketers investigate how the differentstakeholder groups can potentially affect and/or influencea firm’s green strategies.

Framework utilization

As research outside the realm of marketing, particularlymanagement and operations, has focused greater attentionon green strategies, it is our intent to use these studies,along with those in marketing, to help stimulate future workon the topic. In order to do so, we produced theinvestigative model (Fig. 1) to guide the generation of theset of research opportunities from which research questionscan potentially flow. The model identifies both internal andexternal components in order to identify the relevantbusiness literature while considering all the affected stake-holders (Banerjee 2002; Bohlen et al. 1993). The internalportion of the model demonstrates the inter-connectednature of the core business disciplines of marketing,management (both strategy and human resources), andoperations. This portion of the diagram is intended todenote the facets that an organization can directly controland is the origin of the vast majority of the academicliterature on green strategies within the firm. In contrast, theexternal section highlights all the relevant stakeholders thatcould be affected by the decisions an organization makes inregard to green issues.

After the model was developed, the goal was then toutilize it as a tool in the generation of the specific researchopportunities. In order to do so, we reviewed the literatureacross the business disciplines (the article identification

procedure is explained below) with the goal of determiningthe main topics that have been studied. These core topicswere then integrated in order to gain a full understanding ofwhat is known about green related areas. Once established,we then considered each topical area in terms of howmarketing could use what is already known to more fullyaddress the research needs of each stakeholder group.

Every core topic was considered in terms of howmarketing could serve as the coordinating unit that linksthe specific organizational strategies to each stakeholder.For example (the complete explanation is included in theresults section), one area that was identified was environ-mental certification (mainly noted in terms of ISO 14000).It was determined that most studies on the topic originatedin the operations literature, where the crux of what isknown mainly addresses why firms choose to pursuecertification and what operational benefits accrue. Inaccordance with the framework, there appears to be asignificant gap in the understanding of what certificationmeans to an organization relative to the majority ofstakeholders. We see that there is an opportunity to explorethe potential marketing implications in that there ispotential to use certification as a branding or promotionalstrategy for the general consumer base or for potentialsupply chain partners in a B2B setting. There is also thepotential to use certification as a signal to investors orsociety as a whole that the organization is taking a pro-environmental stance from which the image of the firmcould be enhanced. It is with this logic that each topic wasinvestigated so as to denote the research opportunitieshighlighted below.

Article identification

To identify important issues surrounding sustainable busi-ness practices, a large-scale integrative literature reviewwas conducted. First, to gather data for this review, arigorous keyword search of the literature using ABI/InformGlobal using Proquest® Smart Search was undertaken. Thekeywords “sustainability,” “green,” and “environmental”were initially used to generate more than 500 articles forreview. To ensure the validity of our review, we alsosearched the top-tier journals in the core business disci-plines for any article that addressed a green concept. As oursearch procedure resulted in some un-related articles (i.e.,those dealing with topics such as a “sustainable competitiveadvantage” or the “environment” in a traditional businesssense), we trimmed the dataset to only the truly greeninvestigations resulting in a total of 311 articles, spanning105 unique journals, being used for the final integrativereview. Each article was examined by at least tworesearchers with knowledge of the subject matter, and onlythe articles that were approved by both judges were

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

accepted. If an agreement could not be reached, the articlewas discussed between the judges and a third member wasasked to judge the article as well.

In the second stage, two researchers grouped the articlesaccording to multiple criteria, including the main subjectmatter, methodological approach, and business sub-discipline. With regard to the subject matter, the integrationused our framework of relevant stakeholders consideringpeople, the planet, and firm profits in identifying importantthemes across each business discipline. More specifically,the articles were grouped into three broad thematiccategories (green performance, green strategy, and thegreen consumer) followed by the classifying into relevantsub-categories. For example, it was determined that insidethe green strategy section, the topical areas of greeninnovation, green alliances, and internal greening of theorganization emerged. Further sub-classifications weregenerated inside each of these categories in order to morefully recognize the themes in the environmentally-orientedliterature. This classification scheme was then used as thebasis for the generation of the presented research opportu-nities to guide marketing research in the future.

Beyond the article classification scheme, it should benoted that any disagreements in the classification processwere resolved by a third member of the research team. Theinter-rater reliability for the classifications exceeded therecommended 0.70 level (Perreault and Leigh 1989). Witha data set of this size, the analysis paralleled a groundedtheory approach whereby we sought a saturation approachto indicate when the core set of themes had emerged(Strauss and Corbin 1998).

Research opportunities for marketing

This section provides the result of the literature integrationfrom which the main research topics were generated.Accordingly, a series of research opportunities are pre-sented which denote specific areas that are ripe forinvestigation from the marketing perspective. As the linkto the stakeholders of an organization, the marketingfunction is a key component in communicating greenefforts. Therefore, it is imperative that marketers beknowledgeable of these topics while being able to effec-tively reach the intended stakeholder.

Green performance

Encouraging firms to utilize “green” as a marketing strategywould be a difficult task for practitioners and academics iffinancial incentives of going green were lacking. Whenexamining the triple-bottom line, the benefit to people andthe planet is evident through green marketing strategies;

however, if superior profits are not present as well, it islikely firms will choose to not engage in such a strategy.Thus, a vast amount of research in management has focusedon the impact socially responsible initiatives (whichencompass green concepts) can have on financial perfor-mance, with conflicting views resulting. The first viewcontends that organizations that employ socially responsi-ble initiatives incur additional costs and are therefore at afinancial disadvantage (Aupperle et al. 1985; Ullmann1985; Vance 1975). The opposing view asserts that thecosts of implementation are minimal and the benefit ofimproved employee morale and productivity offsets anyadditional costs that an organization may incur (Moskowitz1972; Parket and Eilbirt 1975). Given the varying perspec-tives regarding the potential impact of social responsibilityon financial performance, it is not surprising a plethora ofstudies on the topic exist.

Research examining social responsibility and financialperformance has yielded mixed results. Both short-term andlong-term financial results suggest a negative relationship(McGuire et al. 1988; Wright and Ferris 1997), a positiverelationship (Russo and Fouts 1997; Waddock and Graves1997), a selective relationship (Jacobs et al. 2010) or norelationship (Aupperle et al. 1985; Teoh et al. 1999). Thus,early work by Narver (1971) suggests that such efforts maynot be a strategy for increased short-run profits fororganizations, but rather a strategy that firms may utilizeto maximize the long-term welfare of the firm. Manage-ment must adapt to the demands of social pressure andregulation to maximize the present market value of the firmby instilling confidence in stakeholders that the organiza-tion will not encounter sanctions down the road.

Similarly, more recent research provides an indicationthat socially responsible initiatives may not increaserevenues for the firm, but rather decrease risk for anorganization (McGuire et al. 1988). Potential risks, such aslawsuits, are expected to decrease due to the sociallyresponsible initiatives of the firm. Further, research sug-gests that the impact of socially responsible initiatives onstock price are directly associated with any positive ornegative effects of the initiatives (Alexander and Buchholz1978). The findings suggest that the stock market isefficient, thus any positive or negative effects of sociallyresponsible initiatives will be immediately reflected in theprice of the stock. The recent oil spill by BP sheds light onthe potentially devastating impact that the lack of greenstrategies can have on the short- and long-term performanceof the firm, as BP’s stock price and credit rating haveplummeted (Guitierrez 2010).

More recent findings related to social responsibility andfirm performance suggest that the link may be morecomplicated than originally expected. Hillman and Keim(2001) suggest that building better relationships with

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

primary stakeholders (e.g., employees, customers, sup-pliers) leads to superior firm performance. However,investing in socially responsible initiatives that do notdirectly impact the primary stakeholders will likely notcreate additional value for the firm (Hillman and Keim2001). Similarly, research suggests that socially responsi-ble actions and firm performance are negatively related;however, the causal relationship is unknown (Bansal2005). It is not clear if social responsibility leads to poorfirm performance or if poorly performing firms are lesslikely to engage in socially responsible behaviors. Simi-larly, the impact of firm financial performance has beenshown to impact perceptions of social responsibility asfinancially superior firms may appear to be more sociallyresponsible than their economically-depressed counter-parts (Brown and Perry 1994).

Recent research in marketing suggests that organizationsengaging in green practices may be able to benefit inmultiple ways. First, firms that have a green orientation arelikely to achieve greater financial gains and market share(Menguc and Ozanne 2005), high levels of employeecommitment (Maignan and Ferrell 2001), increased firmperformance (Pujari et al. 2003), and increased capabilities(Baker and Sinkula 2005). Further, results suggest thatsocially responsible actions lead to increased customersatisfaction and greater firm value (Luo and Bhattacharya2006) and can reduce undesirable firm-idiosyncratic risk,which can lead to greater firm valuations (Luo andBhattacharya Luo and Bhattacharya 2006). While benefitsare noted, Mathur and Mathur (2000) find that greenpromotional efforts by firms yield negative stock returns.

Organizations may also benefit from green practicesthrough cost savings. As pollution is a sign of waste, firmsthat curb pollution and reduce inputs that may lead to wasteshould see cost saving advantages (Lash and Wellington2007; Porter and van der Linde 1995). Improved energyefficiency and waste reduction can enable green firms toquickly recover the financial outlay needed to fund greeninitiatives. Through gains in energy efficiency and wastereduction, firms can quickly recover the financial outlayneeded to fund green initiatives. For example, DuPont spent$50 million in 2008 on energy saving initiatives and wasable to recover the financial outlay after only 12 months,thus creating future cost saving advantages for the firm(Winston 2009). Thus, given the results of green directedinitiatives on firm performance, it is evident that greenstrategies can be a benefit to firms. However, a morethorough understanding of the effect green marketingstrategies can have on firm performance is needed.Therefore, the following research opportunity is identified.

RO1: Investigate the link between green marketingstrategies and firm performance.

Green strategies

When attempting to achieve the goals of an organization,there are various avenues by which firms can pursue greenstrategies in order to address the needs of the variousstakeholder groups. Three main types of green strategies aregleaned from the literature: (1) green innovation, (2)greening the organization, and (3) green alliances. Thesethree strategies, and related categories within each strategy,are detailed below. The first commonly utilized strategy isthe development of new or innovative green products. It isbelieved that the development of new products or servicessends a positive signal to each stakeholder that theorganization is, indeed, a green company. Another potentialstrategy is to focus on environmental aspects within thefirm itself. In this case, the initiatives are more focused ongreening the processes associated with the production of agood or the delivery of a service. Beyond producing new,green products or greening the organization’s processes, acompany can also choose to utilize an alliance orpartnership to enhance the green orientation, which isanother way to send a signal that the company is goinggreen. As these are three main strategic directions withspecific sub-components, we use them as the overarchingcategories under which the more detailed topical areas arecontained. However, the large-scale effectiveness of any ofthese strategies has yet to be addressed either as a stand-aloneoption or in specific bundles. Therefore, research is needed toassess which of these strategies is most effective in terms ofaffecting the orientation of a company as a green firm. Thus,the following research opportunity is offered:

RO2: Investigate the relative effectiveness of variousgreen marketing strategies.

Green innovation

Developing environmentally friendly goods and services iscritical to the success of firms that are attempting to createinnovative products to meet the needs of the ever-increasing environmentally conscious consumer. As recentpolls suggest that 77% of Americans are concerned aboutthe environment (Saad 2006), it is not surprising that firmsare introducing green products at a tremendous rate withover 1,500 new products in 2009 (Makower 2009). Whileenvironmental standards can trigger product innovation(Porter 1991), firms that utilize green as an innovativestrategy are likely to develop effective ways to reducewaste, create new packaging and production processes, anddevelop better ways to deliver goods and services toconsumers (Coddington 1993; Mirvis 1994).

A concept that has been put forward to help firms bettercapitalize on green is the enviropreneurial marketing

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

strategy (Menon and Menon 1997; Varadarajan 1992).Enviropreneurial marketing is an entrepreneurial and envi-ronmentally friendly strategy that organizations can utilize tosatisfy economic and social objectives (Varadarajan 1992).Enviropreneurial marketing is based on the idea that green isa market opportunity rather than an obstacle that firms mustmerely overcome to operate in the marketplace (Coddington1993; Hunt and Auster 1990). As such, enviropreneurialactivities are proactive; that is, organizations are activelytrying to stay ahead of the competition and accept the riskassociated with being a market pioneer. Such a strategylikely generates innovative and technological advances thatallow firms to capitalize on both the entrepreneurial andenvironmentally-friendly strategies rather than merely meet-ing legal or regulatory standards (Shrivastava 1995b).

The development of green products, whether in thecontext of human resources, operations, or marketing,requires new ideas while dealing with added constraints ofenvironmental and consumer pressures. Green innovationstrategies are needed in order to satisfy the expectations ofthe wide range of stakeholders that have ambiguous, andsometimes conflicting, demands (Hall and Vredenburg2005). All stakeholders stand to benefit from successfulinnovation. Whereas other literatures investigate the rolesplayed by various stakeholders in green innovation(Shrivastava 1995b), the marketing literature fails toconsider whether the development of green products orservices is considered innovative by any organizationalstakeholders (e.g., directors, investors, managers, oremployees), let alone by consumers. As the roles playedby various stakeholders in the development, evaluation, andimplementation of innovative green products and strategiescan dramatically impact the frequency and success of greenproduct innovation, the following research opportunity isidentified.

RO3: Understand the developmental process, and associatedperformance (or outcomes), surrounding the genera-tion of new green products.

Greening of the organization

Admittedly, the ability of an organization to move toward amore green orientation is a difficult task that can traverse amultitude of paths. For the sake of this review, we used themain points from our literature integration while groupingthem into three general sub-categories; green champions,green processes, and supply chain management. Each ofthese is described below with the relevant researchopportunities noted.

Green champions The potential for an organization to trulybe green requires that the company accept the mantra and

fully integrate green initiatives across all aspects of thebusiness. However, this transition typically does not simplyoccur. Instead, there is an individual or group of individualsthat drive program implementation. These individuals areknown as green champions. Past research suggests thatmembers within an organization play a critical role in thegreen efforts and success of the firm. In fact, Drumwright(1994) suggests that the policy entrepreneur (i.e., a greenchampion) within the firm plays a critical role in institutingorganizational policies. Thus, policy entrepreneurs that areconcerned with the state of the planet are likely to engage inbehaviors that promote green strategies within the organi-zation. However, it is quite common that the person or groupleading the green initiative lacks the authority required toimplement new environmental policy (Carter and Jennings2004; Drumwright 1994). Unlike top management, oftenpolicy entrepreneurs lack the positional power to mandatestrategic change related to the green efforts of the firm.Further, as new environmental policy often requires changeto business practices and reward systems, it is often met withresistance from other functional areas within a firm (Carterand Dresner 2001; Carter et al. 2007).

Thus, while research suggests managers with high levelsof managerial responsibility demonstrating responsibilityfor environmental matters are the most effective inimproving buy-in from others involved in the process(Aragón-Correa et al. 2004; Drumwright 1994; Ramus andSteger 2000), achieving such commitment from manage-ment is not always guaranteed. Unless managementrecognizes the importance of environmental issues tostakeholders, and the benefits offered from such a strategy,it is likely that they will not champion new environmentalinitiatives (Hunt and Auster 1990; Klassen 2001; Lawrenceand Morell 1995). Thus, while it may be preferred fororganizations to utilize the pressure of top management toencourage organizational buy-in, it may not be the case ifthere is no one within the organization with the rankrequired to champion the initiative. Accordingly, researchsuggests that acquiring buy-in from others within theorganization is critical to the success of new environmentalpolicy (Carter and Jennings 2004; Drumwright 1994;Handfield et al. 1997; Willard 2008). Therefore, firmsmay be well served in identifying the most logicalchampion prior to pursuing a green transformation. Asresearch is scant regarding the methods of increasingorganizational buy-in towards new environmental policy,research opportunities exist.

RO4: Investigate the role of green champions in the initiation,enactment, and evaluation of new green strategies.

Green processes Another aspect of moving the organiza-tion toward a green orientation is associated with the

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

processes and practices utilized within the firm (Kassinisand Soteriou 2003; Montabon et al. 2007). Along this line,there are two main topics that have been extensivelycovered in the literature. Namely, past research has focusedon the manner in which waste (when viewed as non-greenactivities) can be reduced to achieve improved environ-mental performance. The other main area in the processliterature addresses environmental management systems(EMS) with a specific emphasis on the certification ofthese systems. The specifics of these two process-relatedthemes are discussed below.

Waste Reduction. As the problems associated with thedisposal of waste become more visible and widespread, thereduction of waste grows in importance for academics andpractitioners. Accordingly, the need to reduce operationalby-products is a common point of interest. The predomi-nant viewpoint in waste reduction stems from the belief thatan organization can view environmentally unfriendlypractices as a form of waste from which lean systems thinkingcan guide process improvement (Pil and Rothenberg 2003;Rothenberg et al. 2001). The “lean is green” concept has alsobeen viewed as being part of a total quality managementsystem (Angell 2001; Isbell 1991). Prior research hasdemonstrated that focusing on reducing waste through a leansystems approach has a positive effect on environmentalperformance (King and Lenox 2001). Similarly, King andLenox (2002) note that managers underestimate the value ofwaste reduction strategies, thereby presenting a gap betweenactual strategies versus potential value-maximizing strategies.Thus, managers typically do not enact organizational strate-gies incorporating such concerns. However, improvingorganizational processes that reduce waste, as opposed totreating waste once produced, increases efficiency, therebyincreasing demand from environmentally sensitive consumers(Ashford and Heaton 1983; Porter and van der Linde 1995).

Essentially, the operations literature concludes that wastereducing processes are viewed as a more positive greenstrategy than simply recycling waste (Lapre et al. 2000).For example, hazardous waste disposal creates extremeenvironmental problems that, in turn, produce exorbitantcosts for organizations, the government, and often societyas a whole (Porter and van der Linde 1995). Greenstrategies that prevent damage to the environment and savethe time and money typically invested in the disposal,storage, and clean up of waste are likely to be viewed withgreat favor in boardrooms around the world.

Similarly, the operations and supply chain literaturesconsider how integrating waste reduction into greenstrategies can lead not only to pollution reduction andenvironmentally responsible behaviors, but also greaterfirm profitability (Hart 1995; Porter and van der Linde1995; Reinhardt 1999; Russo and Fouts 1997). In theoperations literature, King and Lenox (2002) dissect

pollution reduction into its component parts to identify thelink between waste reduction strategies and positivefinancial results. Accordingly, marketing scholars cancreate value for organizations if research is undertaken toanswer similar questions. Specifically, research that exam-ines how consumers view waste reduction or whetherorganizations can create loyalty through the utilization ofgreen processes and practices are potential avenues ofresearch.

RO5: Evaluate the effectiveness of waste reductioninitiatives on the perceptions of stakeholders.

System Certification. The second major theme associatedwith business processes is the manner in which the entiresystem is managed. Research has shown that firms withformalized environmental management systems (EMS)achieve significantly higher performance when comparedto informal systems (Melnyk et al. 2003). The overarchingbelief is that providing formal guidelines for the EMSprovides tangible accountability for the people and pro-cesses involved. Beyond simple formalization, firms havethe option to have their systems certified by third-parties toadd validity to the environmental efforts. The mostcommonly researched standardization is the InternationalOrganization for Standardization’s ISO 14000 programwhile other, less common standards (e.g., XL, 33/50) existas well. In accordance, research has shown that firms withcertified systems outperform those that simply haveformalized ones (Melnyk et al. 2003).

Beyond the performance assessments of certified sys-tems, past studies have investigated the antecedents toadoption (Melnyk et al. 2003), the affect of certifiedsystems on practices (Sroufe 2003), the stakeholder setsthat influence certification (Delmas 2001), the diffusion ofcertification (Vastag 2004), and even comparisons betweenUS and German EMS (Klassen and Angell 1998). It haseven been shown that certification of an organization’ssystems demonstrates that a company is acting sociallyresponsible, thereby boosting a company’s image(Chinander 2001). As a continuation of these findings, theoperations literature suggests that the application of ISO14000 shows that positive indicators of systemic approachesto green business practices are effective in enhancing thetriple-bottom line of an organization (King and Lenox 2001;Klassen 2001; Melnyk et al. 2003).

From a marketing standpoint, organizations should betterunderstand the impact of adopting such standards onstakeholders’ perceptions of the firm and whether certifica-tion of green business practices creates value, differentia-tion, and loyalty among customers and other stakeholders.Examples might include the inclusion of certification inbranding and promotion strategies. Organizations also needto know what determines the effectiveness of certification

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

programs and how certification impacts green perceptionsof an organization and its products. This suggests thefollowing research opportunity.

RO6: Examine the role of certification in shaping theperceptions of stakeholders.

Supply chain management In addition to the greening ofinternal processes, an organization needs to integrate greenstrategies into its entire span of supply chain activities.Research has shown that firms with wider arcs (i.e., thosethat have stronger ties to trading partners in both upstreamand downstream directions) achieve superior performance(Frohlich and Westbrook 2001). It stands to reason that thiswould be the same for environmental initiatives. Thisconcept was supported in past studies (Bowen et al. 2001;Handfield et al. 1997) where it was found that successfulfirms are ones that fully integrate environmental strategiesacross all supply chain activities. In reviewing the greensupply chain literature, it can be seen that the studies fallbroadly into two distinct groups: chain construction andclosed-loop supply chain management. In this case, theformer addresses the initial establishment of the supplychain while the latter addresses the concepts associated withbringing materials back into the organization that havepreviously been used outside the walls of the firm.

Chain Construction. The importance of partnerships ingreen strategies is a critical component for organizations asbusiness transitions from a “firm versus firm” orientation toa “supply chain versus supply chain” perspective (Barratt2004; Bowersox et al. 2000). As noted, research demon-strates that both upstream and downstream partners influ-ence the adoption of green strategies (Bansal and Hunter2003; Vachon and Klassen 2006). In a supply networkcontext, efforts to reduce, recycle, and reuse materials arenoted as examples of such efforts (Carter and Carter 1998;Hart et al. 2000). Additional work suggests that channelpartners assist in improving product quality, reducing costs,and staying ahead of future regulations (Markley and Davis2007; Shrivastava 1995b). The supply chain literature alsosuggests that enacting a green approach to doing business,particularly within supply networks, benefits firms as asource of competitive advantage (Shrivastava 1995b). As aresult, partners, and potential partners, build positiveassociations through joint efforts to “go green.”

Because a firm’s resources and capabilities are finite, thesupply chain literature suggests that it makes sense forcompanies to leverage suppliers and partners in order totake advantage of others’ knowledge and expertise (Lee andKlassen 2008). Thus, firms should choose partners thatpossess valuable environmental management capabilitiesor, at a minimum, should work in conjunction with them todevelop a synergistic approach to green (Handfield et al.

2002). Such decisions allow a firm not only to increasetheir own capabilities through the proxy of the suppliersand partners, but also to use the time and resources that aretypically invested in developing those capabilities in otherareas, including environmentally friendly product and/orprocess innovation.

As established in the supply chain literature, a greensupply chain can create a potential advantage for anorganization and, thus, bolster triple-bottom line perfor-mance by delivering economic, social, and environmentalbenefits (Norman and MacDonald 2004). Additionally,organizations are beginning to realize the importance ofsocial responsibility concepts in the supply chain, includingenvironmental management (Murphy and Poist 2002).Adding to the rich foundation in the supply chain literatureis the establishment of corporate social responsibilitycategories that include the environment, diversity, humanrights, philanthropy, and safety (Carter and Jennings 2004).Others include additional categories such as labor practices(Roberts 2003) and procurement (Razzaque and Hwee2002). The marketing literature is in desperate need ofresearch that addresses how these issues relate to andimpact stakeholders, and specifically triple-bottom lineperformance when adopting a green strategy. To that end,the following research opportunity is posed in order toguide needed research as to the power of strategicallychoosing supply chain partners from a marketing manage-ment standpoint.

RO7: Examine the impact of the construction of thesupply chain on perceptions of stakeholders.

Closed-Loop Supply Chains. Another theme identifiedinvolves the role of remanufacturing, remarketing, andclosed-loop supply chains in the management of greenstrategies. Guide and Van Wassenhove (2001) identify aframework in the operations and supply chain literaturesthat provide managers with recommendations for maximiz-ing profitability while promoting reuse activities. WhileGuide and Van Wassenhove (2001) provide useful insightsand prescriptions for managers for how to manage the reuseof materials through remanufacturing, remarketing, andclosed-loop supply chains (also see Blackburn et al. 2004;Debo et al. 2001; Guide et al. 2003), questions as to howbest to communicate and implement return strategiesremain largely unaddressed in the marketing literature.

A reverse supply chain addresses the manner in which aproduct returns to the selling company, and the cycle issuggested to end when the company recovers the product’smaximum possible value (Kleindorfer et al. 2005). Thecycle includes returns for reasons such as the end of aproduct’s life, recalls, customer returns, and the end of alease, just to name a few. Literature in supply chainmanagement reveals the many challenges in this area that

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

companies must address in order to realize the best possibleprofit margin even when margins for returns are typicallyminimal. Forward and reverse supply chains create acradle-to-cradle path for goods manufactured, sold, returnedand reused, as opposed to a one-way cradle-to-grave flowthat works against going green (McDonough and Braungart2002). Supply chains must be carefully managed in order to(1) ensure maximum profit, (2) comply with regulatoryrequirements (e.g., waste reduction and disposal laws), and(3) provide excellent customer service to consumers andsuppliers alike.

The focus on going green in the management of supplychains has resulted in the identification of several areas ofresearch that should be of interest to marketers. Remanu-facturing is one such area. The increasing cost of rawmaterials and energy is leading firms to consider howproducts might be designed (e.g., recycled or reused) ordistributed (e.g., modular construction) so as to maximizevalue to the firm. That is, contemporary operations andsupply chain thought suggests that forward and reversesupply chains should form a closed loop and be coordinatedto maximize profits. This can mean new markets areopened for firms to sell used equipment, production by-products, and even spent resources that might be inciner-ated to produce energy. Remarketing is a related and similarstrategy. Marketing scholars can assist in achieving thegreen goals of the firm by identifying market opportunitiesand marketing strategies that connect consumers withremanufactured and remarketed products. To encourageresearchers to address these gaps in the marketing literature,the following opportunity is identified for marketingscholars.

RO8: Investigate the impact of closed-loop supply-chainstrategies on stakeholders’ perceptions of the firm.

Green alliances

As increasing attention is given to environmental manage-ment strategies, managers are including green initiatives asa criterion when searching for partners (Kumar andMalegeant 2006). Organizations attempting to increasegreen efforts may find it beneficial to work with otherfirms through less formal partnerships or alliances. Re-search examining partnerships is common in cause-relatedmarketing (e.g., Ellen et al. 2006; Lichtenstein et al. 2004)and suggests that choosing the right partner is vitallyimportant to the success of both firms. Organizations thatare able to pair with a “high-fit” cause likely reduce thesuspicion of consumers as they are likely to perceive therelationship as a strategic business move and as values-driven (Fein 1996). Fit may be defined as the perceivedcongruence of a firm’s socially responsible initiatives (e.g.,

support of an environmental cause) and synergies inactivities (i.e., what the firm is known for) (Ellen et al.2006). Thus, it is important that firms attempting to formpartnerships with other organizations, either profit or not-for-profit, consider the potential impact the partnershipsmay have on stakeholders perceptions.

In addition, the use of strategic alliances, somethingrarely considered in a green context, could prove beneficialto firms for numerous reasons. While firms typicallyengage in alliances for many reasons (see Gulati 1998 forreview), the distinct benefits afforded organizations interms of sustainability are numerous. The Star Alliance, analliance between 28 member airlines, is an example of theimpact an alliance can have on a firm. While the goal ofmember airlines in the Star Alliance is to share resources andminimize the resource allocation of each airline, they are inessence acting green. If the alliance was not formed, and eachairline had to act as a separate entity, the amount of wastewould be vast. While going green may not be the end goal ofthe alliance, it is creating a more environmentally friendlysystem. The alliance is benefiting member airlines innumerous ways, though they may not be capitalizing on thebenefits that may be offered for various stakeholders. Thealliance between the member airlines creates a win-winsituation; however, other marketing opportunities surroundingthe potential benefits of green alliances still exist.

While strategic alliances continue to proliferate thebusiness landscape, social alliances have yet to receivesimilar attention. A social alliance is described as apartnership between an organization and a non-profit thatis more than merely cause-related marketing, but rather amutually beneficial, long-term partnership for both firms(Berger et al. 2006). Social alliances are long-term invest-ments related to growing or transforming a business (Bergeret al. 2006) and represent a tremendous opportunity forfirms seeking to increase their green efforts. As such,alliances can lead to enhanced firm reputation, greatercustomer loyalty, and increased purchase behavior (e.g.,Brown and Dacin 1997; Lichtenstein et al. 2004; Sen andBhattacharya 2001). The opportunity for firms to utilize asocial alliance for green strategies would likely yieldsimilar results. Thus, the lack of research surrounding thevarious opportunities for partnerships and alliances repre-sents a substantial gap in the literature.

RO9: Investigate the role that green partnerships andalliances have both internally and externally on theperceptions of stakeholders.

The green consumer

When examining consumers relative to the environment,marketing research thus far has primarily focused on

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

Table 1 Summary of green marketing research opportunities and research questions

Research opportunity Representative research question(s)concerning consumers

Representative research question(s)concerning alternate stakeholders

RO1: Investigate the link between greenmarketing strategies and firm performance.

Does incorporating a green marketing strategycapture greater market share? Greater share ofwallet from consumers?

Does the use of a green marketing strategyincrease market share relative to thecompetition? Or can it be used as adifferentiating factor?What role does government intervention regarding

environmental regulation have onmarket share? How can a green marketing strategy bridge thegap between operations within the firm andgovernmental regulation?

What can organizations espouse to society tominimize expectations regarding futureenvironmentally-friendly actions?

Which green marketing strategies are moreeffective at maximizing stock returns?Minimizing risk?

RO2: Investigate the relative effectivenessof various green marketing strategies.

Can organizations use one of the three strategiesto reshape consumer perceptions of the firm?

Which of the three green strategies is most effectiveat satisfying the government and NGOs?

Which individual strategy significantly impactsconsumer perceptions? Or does it takemultiple strategies used simultaneously toimpact consumers? Is there an ordering effectbetween the alterative strategies?

Which of the three strategies do investorsperceive as less risky? Or most rewarding?

Which strategy is likely to engenderorganizational (e.g., employee, management)commitment?

RO3: Understand the developmental process,and associated performance (or outcomes),surrounding the generation of new greenproducts.

Should consumers be involved in the developmentof green products? If so, at what stage?

How can a firm leverage the unique capabilitiesof its supply chain partners in thedevelopment of green products?How can firms market green products as

innovative? Do consumers care if they areinnovative? What aspects of green productsshould be stressed? What aspect of greenproducts do consumers deem important?

Does the development of green products differfrom the developmental process of standardproducts? If so, how?

Are green products that are developedinternally perceived more positively thanexternally acquired (i.e., products developedby another company)?

In the case of acquired green products, how is theacquiring firm affected? The acquired firm?

RO4: Investigate the role of green championsin the initiation, enactment, and evaluation ofnew green strategies.

Can a firm use its internal green champion asthe face of its green marketing campaign? Ifso, who should it be? If they do, how doesthat affect consumer perceptions of the firm(e.g., trust and credibility)?

What position in the company do policyentrepreneurs or green champions tend to hold?In that position, do they tend to have the powerto mandate sustainability strategies?

What are the most effective characteristics ofgreen champions (e.g., position, personality)?

What are the mechanisms used by successfulgreen champions to increase organizationalbuy-in? Which are more effective?

RO5: Evaluate the effectiveness of wastereduction initiatives on the perceptions ofstakeholders.

Can firms utilize waste reduction strategies toincrease consumer perceptions of the greenorientation for the firm?

Are firms that reduce waste rather than merelyrecycle likely to be viewed more positivelyby investors?

Do consumers recognize or reward wastereduction strategies utilized by firms? Whatmarketing campaigns can communicateinternal strategies to consumers?

Can waste reduction strategies used by firmscreate greater levels of organizationalcommitment?

Are internally directed waste reductionstrategies more effective than off-the-shelfstrategies at staving off the competition?Reducing mimicry?

Can an organization use waste reductionstrategies to enhance its public image?

RO6: Examine the role of certification inshaping the perceptions of stakeholders.

Can environmental certifications be used toshape the perceived green orientation of afirm?

Does meeting environmental certificationrequirements (e.g., ISO 14000) allow greaterfreedom from governmental regulation?

How can environmental certifications beimplemented in promotional strategies?

Do environmentally certified firms require similarcertifications from supply-chain partners?

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

examining “green consumers,” or consumers that choose topurchase environmentally friendly products when given theopportunity. As such, the effects of culture (Anderson andCunningham 1972; Mostafa 2007; Webster 1975), personal-ity (Kinnear et al. 1974), impression motivation (Yoon et al.2006), and socio-demographic characteristics (Shrum et al.

1995; Diamantopoulos et al. 2003; Tanner and Kast 2003) onconsumers’ attitudes and behaviors toward environmentally-friendly product consumption have been investigated.Further, research suggests that perceived consumer effective-ness (PCE), or an individual’s belief that s/he can make adifference or impact by purchasing environmentally friendly

Table 1 (continued)

Research opportunity Representative research question(s)concerning consumers

Representative research question(s)concerning alternate stakeholders

How do consumers evaluate environmentalcertifications? Is one received better thanothers?

Can an organization use environmentalcertifications as a marketing tool in a B2Bsetting? If so, how?

RO7: Examine the impact of the constructionof the supply chain on perceptions ofstakeholders.

Can an organization leverage its supply-chainrelationships to enhance consumer percep-tions of a green orientation?

Can an organization leverage its supply-chainrelationships to enhance investor perceptionsof a firm?

Are firms held responsible for environmentalmistakes made by their supply-chain partners?If a firm is held responsible, what actions doconsumers take (e.g., boycott, negative wordof mouth)?

Does the selection of supply-chain partnersaffect organizational (e.g., employees) per-ceptions of a green orientation?

RO 8: Investigate the impact of closed-loopsupply-chain strategies on stakeholders’ per-ceptions of the firm.

Can firms differentiate their products based onthe fact that they utilize high-recycled con-tent? Do customers perceive them positively?

Does utilizing a closed-loop supply-chainstrategy impact the perceptions of society?

Does the perception of a green orientationchange as a company uses more recycledproducts or engages in remanufacturing? Canthese be used in promotional strategies?

How do firms convince supply-chain partnersto participate in these initiatives? Are theremechanisms to facilitate participation?

How can firms increase consumer participationin recycling or remanufacturing efforts?

RO9: Investigate the role that greenpartnerships and alliances have bothinternally and externally on the perceptionsof stakeholders.

Does an alliance affect consumer perceptions offirms involved? If so, is the effect equal?

How do investors perceive financial costs orbenefits of social alliances for firms?

Do the environmentally friendly outputs gainedfrom alliances lead to enhanced perceptionsof the firm or all of the firms in the alliance?

How should firms select organizations for analliance or partnership? Once selected, howshould the performance be evaluated (e.g.,life cycle effects, profitability, perceptualimpact)?

What impact do consumer perceptions of fitregarding a firm and its green partnershipshave on behavioral intentions?

RO10: Clarify the characteristics of consumersthat affect environmental consumptionbehaviors.

Are there innate forces within consumers thatdrive environmentally friendly behaviors?

N/A

What types of messages are likely to increasePCE for consumers in order to increase greenconsumption?

What role does an individual’s sustainabilitycompetence have on sustainability efforts?

What are the barriers consumers face whenattempting to make environmentally-friendlyproduct purchases?

RO11: Investigating the effects of consumerperceptions of green marketing strategiestoward green behaviors.

What impact do consumer perceptions of firmgreenness have on behavioral intentions?

N/A

How much information should be presented toconsumers in order to promote the greenefforts of a firm? What specific informationshould be given?

Are accusations of firm greenwashing a “deathsentence” for firms attempting to compete ongreen? Are there strategies to overcomeconsumers’ distrust?

The consumer column was inserted as many marketing studies address consumer issues, while the alternate stakeholder column is used to denoteopportunities that still exist in marketing. No opportunities were generated for alternate stakeholders in the consumer section as is noted by the N/A

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

products, is an important predictor of green consumption(e.g., Kinnear et al. 1974; Roberts 1996; Webster 1975).Similarly, the positive impact of social norms has beenshown to motivate environmental conservation in hotelguests (Goldstein et al. 2008).

However, the marketing literature has yet to examine thebarriers facing consumers. The negative effects of green-washing, and the general lack of trust felt by consumerstoward green firms has been noted as an obstacle that manyfirms must attempt to overcome (Kangum et al. 1991). Inaddition, a lack of green credibility, along with consumercynicism and confusion, are issues associated with greenmarketing strategies (Carlson et al. 1993; Davis 1993). Toooften consumers are left wondering which firms aregenuinely green, versus those that are merely paying it lipservice. Therefore, strategies aimed at the “reluctantconsumer” are critical if firms seek to advance, and reapthe benefits of, green marketing strategies (Zinkhan andCarlson 1995).

RO10: Clarify the characteristics of consumers that affectenvironmental consumption behaviors.

Picking the right green marketing strategy is animportant step for firms that aim to compete on green(Ginsberg and Bloom 2004). Research suggests that it isimportant for organizations to consider the potential greenmarket of consumers, as well as ways to differentiateproducts from the competition (Ginsberg and Bloom 2004).When examining socially-responsible messages, researchsuggests corporate hypocrisy after a firm has deployed saidmessages is very detrimental (Wagner et al. 2009).Similarly, research suggests that firms seeking to protectthe planet through green business practices are challengedby consumers’ receptivity to these efforts. In particular,many consumers doubt whether a firm’s activities andofferings are truly environmentally friendly (Mohr et al.1998). In order to overcome consumer skepticism, oper-ations suggests firms should systematically strive to maketheir business activities more sustainable and transparent,and include the reduction of environment-threatening waste(Marshall and Brown 2003). The lack of research examin-ing consumer perceptions of green actions is apparentthroughout the literature, thus the following researchopportunity is noted.

RO11: Investigating the effects of consumer perceptions ofgreen marketing strategies toward green behaviors.

Conclusion

A summary of the areas that marketing scholars mightexplore in research efforts is offered in Table 1. As is noted

in the table, this research highlights a number of opportu-nities gleaned from an integrative review of the manage-ment, operations, and marketing literatures. No doubt, theextensive number of research opportunities identified isexceeded by the challenges that will confront scholars intheir efforts to address the surprising and evident gap in themarketing literature relative to the efficacy of green as anorganizational imperative. As research notes the numerousbenefits offered to firms utilizing socially responsiblestrategies, it is likely that the number of firms enactingsuch strategies to increase their triple-bottom line perfor-mance will continue to rise.

Research suggests that companies need to become agile,adaptive, and aligned in balancing people and the planetwith profitability (Kleindorfer et al. 2005). As is noted, anumber of green strategies, or general categories ofresearch opportunities, appear relevant. The main typesof green strategies gleaned from the literature are: (1)green innovation, (2) greening the organization, and (3)green alliances. The development of new or innovativegreen products is a commonly utilized strategy by firmsattempting to go green. Another green strategy implementedby firms is a focus on environmental aspects within the firmitself. Greening the organization may be accomplishedthrough green champions, green processes, and greeninitiatives toward supply-chain management. Beyond green-ing the organization’s processes, a firm may also choose toutilize an alliance or partnership to enhance the greenorientation of the firm.

Further, no study is without limitations. We acknowl-edge that the green paradigm may span beyond thedefinition employed herein (e.g., public policy, planning,anti-consumption), which could have alternate effects onorganizations. However, we employed a narrow definitionin order to constrain our analysis to the more managerially-relevant concepts discussed in the business literature. Inaddition, the review concentrated on mainstream journals,therefore leaving many books and international journals outof the review. This fact could have biased the resultsslightly, but by integrating the mainstream research, webelieve the review is comprehensive.

All the themes identified conclude with the ultimategoal of meeting the wants and needs of various stake-holders. In particular, meeting the needs and wants ofconsumers is critical for firms that are attempting tocompete on the basis of green. Without a greaterunderstanding of stakeholder and consumer perceptions,firms are not likely to reap the financial rewardsassociated with green strategies. Thus, the resoundingconclusion is that there is much left to be discussed andevaluated relative to the use of green marketing strategiesto maximize the triple-bottom line performance demandedby stakeholders worldwide.

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

References

Alexander, G. J., & Buchholz, R. A. (1978). Corporate socialresponsibility and stock market performance. Academy ofManagement Journal, 21(3), 479–486.

Anderson, W. T., & Cunningham, H. (1972). The socially consciousconsumer. Journal of Marketing, 36, 23–32.

Angell, L. C. (2001). Comparing the environmental and qualityinitiatives of Badrige Award winners. Production and OperationsManagement, 10(3), 276–292.

Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive environmental strategy. Academy ofManagement Journal, 28(1), 71–88.

Aragón-Correa, J. A., Matıas-Reche, F., & Senise-Barrio, M. E.(2004). Managerial discretion and corporate commitment to thenatural environment. Journal of Business Research, 57, 964–975.

Ashford, N. A., & Heaton, G. R. (1983). Environmental, health,safety, regulation and technological innovation. In C. T. Hill & J.M. Utterback (Eds.), Technological innovation for a dynamiceconomy. Oxford: Peragon Press.

Aupperle, K. E., Carroll, A. B., & Hatfield, J. D. (1985). An empiricalexamination of the relationship between corporate social respon-sibility and profitability. Academy of Management Review, 28(2),446–463.

Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2005). Environmental marketingstrategy and firm performance: effects on new product perfor-mance and market share. Journal of the Academy of MarketingScience, 33(4), 461–475.

Banerjee, S. B. (2002). Corporate environmentalism: the construct andits measurement. Journal of Business Research, 55, 177–191.

Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporatesustainable development. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3),197–218.

Bansal, P., & Hunter, T. (2003). Strategic explanations for ISO 14001adoption. Journal of Business Ethics, 46(3), 289–299.

Barratt, M. (2004). Understanding the meaning of collaboration in thesupply chain. Supply Chain Management, 9(1), 30–42.

Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2006).Identity, identificaion, and relationship through social alli-ances. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2),128–137.

Blackburn, J. D., Guide, V. D., Souza, G. C., & Van Wassenhove, L.N. (2004). Reverse supply chains for commercial returns.California Management Review, 46(2), 6–22.

Bohlen, G. M., Diamantopolous, A., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (1993).Consumer perceptions of the environmental impact of an industrialservice. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 11(1), 37–48.

Bowen, F. E., Cousins, P. D., Lamming, R. C., & Farukt, A. C. (2001).The role of supply management capabilities in green supply.Production and Operations Management, 10(2), 174–189.

Bowersox, D. J., Closs, D. J., & Stank, T. P. (2000). Ten mega-trendsthat will revolutionize supply chain logistics. Journal of BusinessLogistics, 21(2), 1–16.

Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product:corporate associations and consumer product reponses. Journalof Marketing, 61, 68–84.

Brown, B., & Perry, S. (1994). Removing the financial performancehalo from Fortune’s “most admired” companies. Academy ofManagement Journal, 37(5), 1347–1359.

Brummer, J. J. (1991). Corporate social responsibility and legitimacy:An interdisciplinary analysis. New York: Greenwood Press.

Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies:a stakeholder management perspective. Strategic ManagementJournal, 24(5), 453–470.

Carlson, L., Grove, S. J., & Kangun, N. (1993). A content analysis ofenvironmental advertising claims: a matrix method approach.Journal of Advertising, 22, 27–39.

Carter, C. R., & Carter, J. R. (1998). Interorganizational determinantsof environmental purchasing: initial evidence from the consumerproducts industries. Decision Sciences, 29(3), 659–684.

Carter, C. R., & Dresner, M. (2001). Purchasing’s role in environ-mental management: cross-functional development of groundedtheory. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 37(3), 12–27.

Carter, C. R., & Jennings, M. M. (2004). The role of purchasing incorporate social responsibility: a structural equation analysis.Journal of Business Logistics, 25(1), 145–186.

Carter, C. R., Ellram, L. M., & Tate, W. (2007). The use of socialnetwork analysis in logistics research. Journal of BusinessLogistics, 28(1), 137–168.

Center for Sustainable Enterprise (2010). About the center forsustainable enterprise. Retrieved June 15, 2010 from www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu.

Chinander, K. R. (2001). Aligning accountability and awareness forenvironmental performance in operations. Production and Opera-tions Management, 10(3), 276–291.

Coddington, W. (1993). Environmental marketing: Positive strategiesfor reaching the green consumer. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Davis, J. J. (1993). Strategies for environmental advertising. Journalof Consumer Marketing, 10, 19–36.

De Ruyter, K., De Jong, A., & Wetzels, M. (2009). Antecedents andconsequences of environmental stewardship in boundary-spanning B2B teams. Journal of the Academy of MarketingScience, 37(4), 470–487.

Debo, L. G., Toktay, L. B., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2001). Marketsegmentation and product technology for remanufacturableproducts. Management Science, 51(8), 1193–1205.

Delmas, M. (2001). Stakeholders and competitive advantage: the caseof ISO 14001. Production and Operations Management, 10(3),343–358.

Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B. B., Sinkovics, R. R., &Bohlen, G. M. (2003). Can socio-demographics still play a rolein profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and anempirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 56, 465–480.

Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of thecorporation: concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy ofManagement Review, 20(1), 65–91.

Drumwright, M. E. (1994). Socially responsible organizationalbuying: environmental concern as a noneconomic buyingcriterion. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 1–19.

Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with Forks: The triple bottom line of21st century business. BC, Canada: New Society Publishers.

Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporateassociations: consumer attributions for corporate socially respon-sible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157.

Fein, S. (1996). Effects of suspicion on attributional thinking and thecorrespondence bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,70(6), 1164–1184.

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholderapproach. Boston: Pitman.

Frohlich, M. T., & Westbrook, R. (2001). Arcs of integration: aninternational study of supply chain strategies. Journal ofOperations Management, 19(2), 185–200.

Gattiker, T. F., & Carter, C. R. (2010). Understanding projectchampions’ ability to gain intra-organizational commitment forenvironmental projects. Journal of Operations Management, 28(1), 72–85.

Ginsberg, J. M., & Bloom, P. N. (2004). Choosing the right greenmarketing strategy. MIT Sloan Management Review, 79–84, Fall.

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., &Griskevicius, V. (2008). A roomwith aviewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conserva-tion in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 472–482.

Grinstein, A., & Nisan, U. (2009). Demarketing, minorities, andnational attachment. Journal of Marketing, 73(2), 105–122.

Guide, V. D. R., Jr. (2000). Production planning and control forremanufacturing: industry practice and research needs. Journal ofOperations Management, 18(4), 467–483.

Guide, V. D. R., Jr., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2001). Managingproduct returns for remanufacturing. Production and OperationsManagement, 10(2), 142–155.

Guide, V. D. R., Jr., Teunter, R., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2003).Matching supply and demand to maximize profits from remanu-facturing. Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, 5(4), 303–316.

Guitierrez, C. (2010). Gulf oil crisis: BP credit rating cut by Moody’s.Retrieved June 23, 2010 from www.forbes.com.

Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic ManagementJournal, 19(4), 293–317.

Hall, J., & Vredenburg, H. (2005). Managing stakeholder ambiguity.Sloan Management Review, 47(1), 11–13.

Handfield, R., Walton, S. V., Seegers, L. K., & Melnyk, S. A. (1997).Green value chain practices in the furniture industry. Journal ofOperations Management, 15(4), 293–315.

Handfield, R., Walton, S. V., Sroufe, R., & Melnyk, S. A. (2002).Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: a studyin the application of the analytical hierarchy process. EuropeanJournal of Operations Research, 141(1), 70–87.

Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural resource based view of the firm.Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.

Hart, S. L., Arnold, M., & Day, R. (2000). The business of sustainableforestry: meshing operations with strategic purpose. Interfaces,30(3), 234–250.

Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholdermanagement, and social issues: what’s the bottom line? StrategicManagement Journal, 22, 125–139.

Hunt, C. B., & Auster, E. R. (1990). Proactive environmentalmanagement: avoiding the toxic trap. MIT Sloan ManagementReview, 31(2), 7–18.

Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, andorganizational learning: an integration and empirical examination.Journal of Marketing, 62, 42–54.

Isbell, T. S. (1991). The backside of TQM: how waste indicates haste.Industrial Engineering, 23(11), 42–45.

Jacobs, B. W., Singhal, V. R., & Subramanian, R. (2010). Anempirical investigation of environmental performance and themarket value of the firm. Journal of Operations Management, 28(5), 430–441.

Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (1993). Market orientation:antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57, 53–70.

Kangum, N., Carlson, L., & Grove, S. J. (1991). Environmentaladvertising claims: a preliminary investigation. Journal of PublicPolicy & Marketing, 10(2), 47–58.

Kassinis, G., & Soteriou, A. C. (2003). Greening the service profitchain: the impact of environmental management practices.Production and Operations Management, 12(3), 386–403.

Kassinis, G., & Vafeas, N. (2006). Stakeholder pressures andenvironmental performance. Academy of Management Journal,49, 145–159.

King, A., & Lenox, M. J. (2001). Lean and green: exploring thespillovers from lean production to environmental performance.Production and Operations Management, 10(3), 244–256.

King, A., & Lenox, M. J. (2002). Exploring the locus of profitablepollution reduction. Management Science, 48(2), 289–299.

Kinnear, T., Taylor, J. R., & Ahmed, S. (1974). Ecological concernedconsumers: who are they? Journal of Marketing, 38, 2–24.

Klassen, R. D. (2001). Plant-level environmental management orienta-tion: the influence of management views and plant characteristics.Production and Operations Management, 10(3), 257–275.

Klassen, R. D., & Angell, L. C. (1998). An international comparisonof environmental management in operations: the impact ofmanufacturing flexibility in the U.S. and Germany. Journal ofOperations Management, 15(23), 177–194.

Klassen, R. D., & Whybark, D. C. (1999). The impact ofenvironmental technologies on manufacturing performance.Academy of Management Journal, 42(6), 599–615.

Kleindorfer, P. R., Singhal, K., & Wassenhove, L. N. V. (2005).Sustainable operations management. Production and OperationsManagement, 14(4), 482–492.

Kumar, S., & Malegeant, P. (2006). Strategic alliance in a closed-loopsupply chain, a case of manufacturer and eco-non-profitorganization. Technovation, 26(10), 1127–1135.

Lapre, M. A., Mukherjee, A. S., & van Wassenhove, L. N. (2000).Behind the learning curve: linking learning activities to wastereduction. Management Science, 46(5), 597–611.

Lash, J., & Wellington, F. (2007). Competitive advantage on awarming planet. Harvard Business Review, 85(3), 94–102.

Lawrence, A. T., & Morell, D. (1995). Leading-edge environmentalmanagement: Motivation, opportunity, resources, and processes.In J. E. Post (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance andpolicy, supplement 1 (pp. 99–126). Greenwich: JAI Press Inc.

Lee, S. Y., & Klassen, R. D. (2008). Drivers and enablers that fosterenvironmental management capabilities in small and mediumsized suppliers and supply chains. Production and OperationsManagement, 17(6), 573–586.

Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004).The effects of corporate social responsibility on customerdonations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of Mar-keting, 68, 16–32.

Luchs, M. G., Naylor, R. W., Irwin, J. R., & Raghunathan, R.(2010). The sustainability liability: potential negative effectsof ethicality on product preference. Journal of Marketing,74(5), 18–31.

Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility,customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing,70, 1–18.

Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2001). Corporate citizenship as amarketing instrument: concepts, evidence, and research direc-tions. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 457–484.

Majumdar, S., & Marcus, M. A. (2001). Rules vs. discretion: theproductivity consequences of flexible regulation. Academy ofManagement Journal, 44(1), 170–179.

Makower, J. (2009). Taking care of business. Retrieved August 25,2009 from www.greenbiz.com.

Markley, M. J., & Davis, L. (2007). Exploring future competitiveadvantage through sustainable supply chains. InternationalJournal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 37(9), 763–774.

Marshall, R. S., & Brown, D. (2003). The strategy of sustainability: asystems perspective on environmental initiatives. CaliforniaManagement Review, 46(1), 101–126.

Mathur, L. K., & Mathur, I. (2000). An analysis of the wealth effectsof green marketing strategies. Journal of Business Research, 50(2), 193–200.

McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Design for the triple topline: new tools for sustainable commerce. Corporate Environ-mental Strategy, 9(3), 251–258.

McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporatesocial responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy ofManagement Journal, 31(4), 854–872.

Melnyk, S. A., Sroufe, R. P., & Calantone, R. (2003). Assessing theimpact of environmental management systems on corporate and

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

environmental performance. Journal of Operations Management,21(3), 329–351.

Menguc, B., & Ozanne, L. K. (2005). Challenges of the “greenimperative”: a natural resource-based approach to the environ-mental orientation—business performance relationship. Journalof Business Research, 58(4), 430–438.

Menon, A., & Menon, A. (1997). Enviroprenerial marketing strategy:the emergence of corporate environmentalism as market strategy.Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 51–67.

Mirvis, P. H. (1994). Environmentalism in progressive businesses.Journal of Organizational Change Management, 7(4), 82–100.

Mohr, L. A., Eroglu, D., & Ellen, P. S. (1998). The development andtesting of a measure of skepticism toward environmental claimsin marketers’ communications. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 32(1), 30–55.

Montabon, F., Sroufe, R., & Narasimhan, R. (2007). An examinationof corporate reporting, environmental management practices andfirm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 25(5),998–1014.

Moskowitz, M. (1972). Choosing socially responsible stocks. Businessand Society Review, 1, 71–75.

Mostafa, M. M. (2007). Gender differences in Egyptian consumers’green purchase behaviour: the effects of environmental knowl-edge, concern, and attitude. International Journal of ConsumerStudies, 31(3), 220–229.

Murphy, P. R., & Poist, R. F. (2002). Socially responsible logistics: anexploratory study. Transportation Journal, 41(4), 23–35.

Narver, J. C. (1971). Rational management responses to externaleffects. Academy of Management Journal, 14(1), 99–115.

Norman, W., & MacDonald, C. (2004). Getting to the bottom of“triple bottom line”. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12, 243–262.

Pagell, M., & Gobeli, D. (2009). How plant managers’ experiencesand attitudes toward sustainability relate to operational perfor-mance. Production and Operations Management, 18(3), 278–299.

Parket, I. R., & Eilbirt, H. (1975). Social responsibility: the underlyingfactors. Business Horizons, 18, 5–10.

Perreault, W. D., Jr., & Leigh, L. E. (1989). Reliability of nominal databased on qualitative judgments. Journal of Marketing Research,26, 135–148.

Pil, F. K., & Rothenberg, S. (2003). Environmental performance as adriver of superior quality. Production and Operations Management,12(3), 404–415.

Porter, M. E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. StrategicManagement Journal, 12(2), 95–117.

Porter, M., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception ofthe environment-competitiveness relationship. The Journal ofEconomic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.

Pujari, D., Wright, G., & Peattie, K. (2003). Green and competitive:influences on environmental new product development perfor-mance. Journal of Business Research, 56(8), 657–674.

Ramus, C. A., & Steger, U. (2000). The roles of supervisory supportbehaviors and environmental policy in employee ‘ecoinitiatives’at leading-edge European companies. Academy of ManagementJournal, 43(4), 605–626.

Razzaque, M. A., & Hwee, T. P. (2002). Ethics and purchasingdilemma: a Singaporean view. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(4),307–326.

Reinhardt, F. (1999). Market failure and the environmental policies offirms. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 3(1), 9–21.

Roberts, J. A. (1996). Green consumers in the 1990s: profile andimplications for advertising. Journal of Business Research, 36,217–231.

Roberts, S. (2003). Supply chain specific? Understanding the patchysuccess of ethical source initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics,44(2–3), 159–170.

Rothenberg, S., Pil, F. K., & Maxwell, J. (2001). Lean, green, and thequest for superior environmental performance. Production andOperations Management, 10(3), 228–243.

Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective oncorporate environmental performance and profitability. Academyof Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559.

Saad, L. (2006). Americans see environment as getting worse.Accessed March 11, 2010. http://www.gallup.com/. April 20,2006.

Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does Dong good always leadto doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social respon-sibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 225–243.

Shrivastava, P. (1995a). Environmental technologies and competi-tive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1), 183–200.

Shrivastava, P. (1995b). Technological transformation and the newcompetitive landscape. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 183–200.

Shrum, L. J., McCarty, J. A., & Lowrey, T. M. (1995). Buyercharacteristics of the green consumer and their implications foradvertising strategy. Journal of Advertising, 14(2), 71–82.

Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (2000). The positive effect of a marketorientation on business profitability: a balanced replication.Journal of Business Research, 48, 69–73.

Sroufe, R. (2003). Effects of environmental management systems onenvironmental management practices and operations. Productionand Operations Management, 12(3), 416–431.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research:Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nded.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Tanner, C., & Kast, S. W. (2003). Promoting sustainable consumption:determinants of green purchases by Swiss consumers. Psychology& Marketing, 20(10), 883–902.

Teoh, S. H., Welch, I., & Wazzan, C. P. (1999). The effect ofsocially activist investment policies on the financial markets:evidence from the South African boycott. Journal of Business,72(1), 35–89.

Ullmann, A. A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: a criticalexamination of the relationships among social performance,social disclosure, and economic performance of U.S. firms.Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 540–557.

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2005). Talk thewalk: Advancing sustainable lifestyles through marketing andcommunications. Retrieved June 1, 2010 from www.unep.fr.

Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2006). Extending green practices acrossthe supply chain: the impact of upstream and downstreamintegration. International Journal of Operations and ProductionManagement, 26(7), 795–821.

van Woensel, T., Creten, R., & Vandaele, N. (2001). Managing theenvironmental externalities of traffic logistics: the issue of emis-sions. Production and Operations Management, 10(2), 207–223.

Vance, S. C. (1975). Are socially responsible corporations goodinvestment risks? Management Review, 64, 18–24.

Varadarajan, P. R. (1992). Marketing’s contribution to strategy: theview from a different looking glass. Journal of the Academy ofMarketing Science, 20, 323–343.

Vastag, G. (2004). Revisiting ISO 14000 diffusion: a new “look” at thedrivers of certification. Production and Operations Management,13(3), 260–267.

Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate socialperformance-financial performance link. Strategic ManagementJournal, 18(4), 303–319.

Wagner, T., Lutz, R. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2009). Corporatehypocrisy: overcoming the threat of inconsistent corporatesocial responsibility perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 73,77–91.

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.

Webster, F., Jr. (1975). Determining the characteristics of thesocially conscious consumer. Journal of Consumer Research,2, 188–196.

Willard, R. (2008). In M. V. Russo (Ed.), Objection-handling clinic oninhibitors the next wave. Environmental management: Readingsand cases (pp. 169–190). Los Angeles: Sage.

Winston, A. (2009). Finding the capital to go green. RetrievedNovember 12, 2009 from www.businessweek.com.

Wright, P., & Ferris, S. P. (1997). Agency conflict and corporatestrategy: the effect of divestment on corporate value. StrategicManagement Journal, 18(1), 77–83.

Yoon, Y., Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Bozok, B. (2006). Drawing inferencesabout others on the basis of corporate associations. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 167–173.

Zinkhan, G. M., & Carlson, L. (1995). Green advertising and thereluctant consumer. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 1–6.

J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci.