Positioning for growth 2012

POSITIONING FOR GROWTH
Buyer Needs & Market Strategies
PREPARED BY: JONATHAN BALLANTINE DATE: JANUARY 2012

A vendor guide for climate change & sustainability
services and thought leadership research

Positioning for Growth:
Buyer Needs & Market Strategies
A vendor guide for climate change & sustainability services and
thought leadership research

Executive Summary

In late 2011, CR Vision conducted a series of interviews with sustainability
executives to ascertain current perceptions and opinions on climate change
business consulting services and thought leadership research offered by
consulting firms.

CR Vision conducted in-depth research with 31 industry practitioners from across
18 business sectors to assess the market landscape in order to provide a buyers´
perspective on climate change business consulting services and thought
leadership research from 13 consulting firms. The responses also provide
valuable insight into thought leadership design, marketing and 2012 investment
priorities, as well as illustrating key decision factors (both internal and external)
that drive vendor selection. Furthermore, this publication includes a report card
for each of the consulting firms, ranking their performance across seven
indicators.

By combining competitive intelligence together with customer insights, this
publication will assist consulting firms position for growth in 2012 and beyond, by
providing unique guidance on business strategy & expansion programmes,
service line development and go-to- market activities.

Ranked most important Key selection factor
PwC & McKinsey Sector Knowledge

Key CC&S progamme Engage consulting firms
Energy Efficiency 3 out of 4

Least effective TL tool Most effective TL tool
Surveys Webinar

Spending plans 2012 External TL Partnerships
83% increase 84% state add value

Positioning for Growth: Buyer Needs & Market Strategies CR Vision Private Use Only 1

Report Focus

This publication is aimed at helping consulting firms understand buyers´
perceptions and attitudes towards hiring external consultants for climate change
and sustainability engagements. The report has four main sections:

! Profile – this introductory chapter provides an overview of the companies
and participants involved during the research and development of this
publication. It also examines industry practitioners’ areas of responsibility,
current climate change and sustainability programmes, and the level of
support (both internal and external) required for successful implementation.

! Buyer Behaviour – summarises the opinions of 31 industry practitioners –
identifying their perceptions and preferences of external consulting firms for
the engagement of climate change and sustainability services (CC&S).
Furthermore, this chapter provides insights into buying behaviour and
spending plans for 2012 and beyond.

! Does Thought Leadership Matter? - the publication outlines to what
degree thought leadership influences spending decisions, identifies what
sustainability executives consider to be the key fundamentals of
Authoritative Thought Leadership and determines their channel
preferences. This chapter also features a perception-based benchmark
that assesses thought leadership by consulting firms across the two
dimensions of familiarity and perceived quality.

• Tell to Win – this concluding chapter highlights the transformation that is
happening across many industries, reflecting on the challenges and
opportunities this presents consulting firms with respect to delivery
engagement, thought leadership research & marketing, external
collaboration and business development.

In addition, this publication includes a performance report card for 11 consulting
firms. Following the interviews with sustainability executives a set of indicators
was developed to assess consulting firms across two dimensions – performance
& marketing.

Consulting Firms
SustainAbility
Booz & Co.
Accenture

McKinsey
AD Little

Deloitte

KPMG
ERM
BCG

PwC
E&Y

Indicators
Performance Scorecard 7 4 4 4 7 5 7 6 7 8 7
Market Share 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2
Track Record 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 3 3
Geographic Presence 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
Marketing Scorecard 12 9 8 10 7 9 9 7 11 12 9
Website Utility 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 1 3 3 3
Content 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2
External Collaborations 3 2 2 3 1 2 2 2 2 3 2
Thought Leadership 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2
Channels


Contents

Executive Summary 2

Report Focus 3

Chapter 1 – Profile 5–9

…Demographic profile
…Geographic coverage
…Annual revenues & emissions
…Survey participants - areas of responsibility
…Climate change becomes a strategic issue for business
…Internal support - enterprise-wide approach
…External support

Chapter 2 – Buyer Behaviour 10 – 14

…First impressions
…2012 investment plans
…Supplier categories – most likely to be hired
…Why buyers´ buy

Chapter 3 – Does Thought Leadership Matter? 15 – 20

... External thought leadership partnerships
…Thought leadership & consulting firms

Chapter 4 – Tell to Win 21 – 25

…Toward an open and collaborative process
…Why buyers´ buy
…Motives matter

Thought Leadership for a New Era 26 – 33

…Practicing the art of thought leadership
…PwC CEO Survey
…Engaging with your audience
…The rise of social media technologies
…Developing a “Leadership of Thought” platform
…Webinars
…A war on content
…Thought leadership fuelling demand creation

Looking Ahead 34

References 35
Appendices 36 – 53

1 – Performance Benchmark 37

2 – Report Cards: 11 Consulting Firms 38 - 49

3 – Interview Questions 50 - 53


List of Tables

Table 1: Sector overview 6
Table 2: Area of responsibility 7
Table 3: Significant climate change programmes 7
Table 4: The role of business functions 8
Table 5: Supplier categories 9
Table 6: Consulting firms – first impressions 11
Table 7: Spending plans 2012 12
Table 8: Supplier categories – most likely to be hired 13
Table 9: Consulting firms most likely to be hired 13
Table 10: Reasons for hiring external consultants 14
Table 11: Key selection factors 14
Table 12: The fundamentals of thought leadership research 16
Table 13: Thought leadership delivery channels 17
Table 14: External partnerships – preferred organisations 18
Table 15: How to improve thought leadership research 18
Table 16: Thought leadership & consulting firms 19

List of Figures

Figure 1: Thought leadership perception matrix 19
Figure 2: Consulting firms & thought leadership 32
Figure 3: Content development matrix 33
Figure 4: Consulting firms´ performance scorecard 38
Figure 5: Consulting firms´ performance benchmark 38

Legal Disclaimer

Assertions made in this document reflect the opinions of survey respondents and / or the
author. The author shall not be liable for any indirect or consequential loss, including loss
of actual or anticipated revenue or impact to reputation or goodwill, whether arising from
negligence or otherwise.

This publication remains confidential and is for private use only.


Chapter One

Profile

Demographic profile

Geographic coverage

Annual revenues & emissions

Survey participants - areas of responsibility

Climate change becomes a strategic issue for business

Internal support - enterprise-wide approach

External support


Profile

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the companies
and participants involved during the research and development of
this publication. It also examines industry practitioners’ areas of
responsibility, current climate change and sustainability
programmes, and the level of support required - both internal and
external - for successful implementation.

Demographic profile

Over 30 industry practitioners, representing 18 industry sectors participated in
this study. The largest number of respondents (3) represented Aviation,
Construction, Retail & Leisure, Utilities and Transport & Logistics. Table 1 below
highlights all the sectors that participated in this publication.

Table 1: Sector profile

Sector No. of Respondents
Aviation 3
Construction 3
Retail & Leisure 3
Transport & Logistics 3
Utilities 3
Food & Beverage 2
Metal & Mining 2
Telecommunications 2
Automotive 1
Banking 1
Chemicals 1
Health Care 1
High Tech 1
Insurance 1
Media 1
Oil & Gas 1
Pharmaceutical 1
Real Estate / Property 1

Geographic coverage Annual revenues & emissions

12 9 US $861 billion
Europe UK 2010 combined annual revenues

3 7 164 MMt CO2
Asia US Combined emissions (2010)*

* figure based on CDP 2010 disclosures / public information


Survey participants - areas of responsibility

The study was based on 31 interviews with leading multi-national companies
representing 18 sectors across four geographic zones. Respondents interviewed
were the most senior person responsible for climate change business
programmes within their organisations and had roles such as Head/Director of
Sustainability, Climate Change, Environment; or Corporate Responsibility. Table
2 below outlines their level of responsibility across eight categories.

Table 2: Area of responsibility

Energy & Resource Efficiency

Environmental Management

Ethical Supply Chain

Reporting & Assurance
Primary !
Carbon Inventory Management
Secondary !

Implementation Plan

Ethics & Integrity Management

Design of CSR Strategy

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Climate change becomes a strategic issue for business

All respondents affirmed that climate change/sustainability was both an important
business issue and a strategic issue within their business. This is reflected by the
fact that 84 percent of respondents have board-level commitments for CC&S.

Respondents were asked to outline their three most significant CC&S
programmes. Unsurprisingly, given today´s economic conditions, Energy
Efficiency was the most common activity receiving 21 nominations. Other
programmes included the transition to Low-Carbon / Renewable Energy Systems,
and Emission Reductions. Table 3 below highlights the most significant climate
change programmes.
Table 3: Significant climate change programmes

Can you describe your 3 most significant Results
CC&S programmes?
Energy Efficiency 21
Low Carbon / RES Energy 11
Emission Reduction 9
Clean Tech (finance & investment) 4
Technology Upgrades 4
Business Collaboration 3
CHP / Cogeneration 3
Efficient use of Resources 3
Innovation / Opportunity 3
CC Investment Strategy 2
Employee Engagement 1


Internal support - enterprise-wide approach

Climate change and sustainability programmes have become more strategic to
business, represented by the increasing number of core business functions
seen as playing a critical role in their successful implementation. From the
survey responses Facilities Management & Energy was ranked ïmportant ör
¨most important¨ by the most respondents (26 nominations) – although when
weighted scoring was applied it averages out as third behind Corporate
Responsibility and Health, Safety & Environment.

Table 4 shows the importance of business functions in the implementation of
CC&S programmes. Scoring has been weighted based on five levels.
• Totally unimportant -2
• Unimportant -1
• Neutral 1
• Important +2
• Very important +3

Table 4: The role of business functions

How important are the following business functions Total
for the implementation of your CC&S programme?
(1= totally unimportant to 5 = very important)

Corporate Responsibility 67
Health, Safety & Environment 64
Facilities Management & Energy 61
Finance 56
Human Resources 46
IT / Telecoms 42
Legal & Regulatory Affairs 25
Logistics / Distribution 24
Manufacturing 18
Marketing 15
Procurement / Supply Chain 13
Sales 10
Strategy 8

External support

One of the core objectives of the study was to ascertain the level of external
support required by multi-national companies to implement their CC&S
programmes. From the responses, nearly 3 out of every 4 respondents have
engaged external support during the design or implementation of their CC&S
programmes.

When asked which types of suppliers they felt were important for the success of
their CC&S programmes, respondents scored Environmental Consultants,
Energy Consultants, Not for Profits and Verification Companies positively. By
contrast, Management Consultants, Big Four Accounting Firms were considered
to be on average ¨neutral¨, whereas IT Consultants and Telecoms Companies
were considered to be ünimportant¨.


Table 5 below shows the perceived importance of external suppliers for the
successful implementation of CC&S programmes. Scoring has been weighted
based on six levels.

• Totally unimportant -2
• Unimportant -1
• Neutral 1
• Important +2
• Very important +3
• No response -1

Table 5: Supplier categories

How important are the following categories of

1. totally unimportant

5. very important
suppliers for the success of your CC&S

Weighted Score
2. unimportant

No response
4. important
programme? (1 - totally unimportant to 5 = very

3. neutral
important)

Management Consultants 12 7 5 3 1 3 -20
Big Four Accounting Firms 11 8 2 6 2 2 -12
Environmental Consultants 5 6 5 11 2 2 15
Energy Consultants 3 3 9 10 3 3 26
Not for Profits 6 2 12 7 2 2 16
IT Consultants 14 9 3 3 0 2 -30
Telecoms Service Providers 18 5 1 0 2 5 -39
Verification Companies 6 7 7 5 4 2 8

What is interesting here is that even the highest scoring consulting firms don’t
score that favourably. Is this because a) the market is so fragmented? or b) that
consultants aren’t actually valued that much? Based on the results in Table 9
(page 13) it appears to be a combination of both.


Chapter Two

Buyer Behaviour

First impressions

2012 investment plans

Supplier categories – most likely to be hired

Why buyers´ buy

Positioning for Growth: Buyer Needs & Market Strategies 10

Buyer Behaviour

This chapter summarises the opinions of 31 industry
practitioners – identifying their perceptions and preferences
of external consulting firms for the engagement of climate
change and sustainability services (CC&S). Furthermore,
this chapter provides insights into buying behaviour and
spending plans for 2012.

First impressions

Unprompted, respondents were asked to identify which consulting firms
first came to mind when thinking of CC&S business programmes.
Respondents were able to list up to three companies. The clear leader
was PwC, which received 11 nominations, followed by McKinsey (7), with
ERM & WSP scoring 6 & 5 respectively. Table 6 shows the consultant
firms identified, together with the frequency of nominations.

Table 6: Consulting firms – first impressions

When you think about climate change & Results
sustainability which consulting firms come to
mind first?
PwC 11
McKinsey 7
ERM 6
WSP 5
Accenture 4
Deloitte 3
AD Little 2
Booz & Co. 2
Forum for the Future 2
SustainAbility 2
ALTRAN 1
ARUP 1
BSR 1
Bureau Veritas 1
Carbon Trust 1
Climate Group 1
Context 1
eava 1
Ecorys 1
Ernst & Young 1
First Climate 1
KPMG 1
Siemens 1
The Carbon Neutral Company 1
UL Environment 1
URS 1


The study shows a small contradiction in that Table 5 (page 9) shows that
Management Consultants and Big Four Accounting Firms to be ¨unimportant¨ or
¨very unimportant¨ in terms of success for the delivery of CC&S programmes.

However, what is interesting is that the first consultants people thought of were
PwC and McKinsey. This suggests a few things from the audience:

! Survey participants tended to name the first consultancies they thought of,
! They are not really sure which consulting firms can offer practical guidance
on these issues, and / or
! Illustrates that both PwC and McKinsey are benefiting from increased
visibility in the marketplace based on their marketing activities.

2012 Investment Plans

When asked to comment about 2012 spending plans, 83 percent of respondents
stated that budgets would increase/remain the same as in 2011. Respondents
were then asked to outline the business areas in which they were most likely to
invest in during 2012. Approximately 40 percent stated that they would be
investing further across four areas: Developing Strategy; Innovation/Opportunity;
Supply Chain; and Green IT. Table 7 highlights the focus areas where
sustainability executives plan to invest during 2012.

Table 7: Spending plans 2012

How would you describe your spending plans
2. yes – next 12

3. will consider

for the following types of CC&S services in No Response
1. will spend

4. no further

2012? (1 – will spend to 4 – no further
months

spend

spend)

Develop Strategy 11 7 4 7 2
Conduct Risk Assessment 5 8 6 9 3
Governance / Remuneration 3 3 5 17 3
Climate & Energy Strategy 5 10 6 5 5
Carbon Management Strategy 6 7 3 10 5
Stakeholder Engagement 5 12 4 5 5
To provide an Assurance Statement 9 6 6 5 5
Supply Chain and Operations 10 8 4 5 4
Water Footprint 7 4 8 7 5
Green IT 10 8 5 5 3
Compliance / Regulation (REACH, ETS) 9 11 2 6 3
Innovation / Opportunity 11 5 4 7 4

Supplier categories – most likely to be hired

Given the current economic conditions it was no surprise to see Energy
Consultants ranked the highest with 22 respondents stating that they are ¨likely¨
or ¨certain¨ to hire them in the next 18 months.

Verification Companies were ranked second with 10 respondents stating that they
are ¨likely¨ or ¨certain¨ to hire them in the next 18 months. Table 8 highlights their
preferences regarding supplier categories.


Table 8: Supplier categories – most likely to be hired

How likely are you to hire one of the

1. very unlikely
following consultant firms in the next 18

no response
2. unlikely

3. neutral

5. certain
4. likely
months to deliver a CC&S engagement?
(1= very unlikely, 5 = certain)

Management Consultants 14 8 1 2 2 4
Big Four Accounting Firms 12 7 1 3 3 5

Environmental Consultants 8 3 11 3 2 4
Energy Consultants 2 5 3 14 4 3
Not for Profits 8 5 7 3 2 6
IT Consultants 13 4 6 1 0 7
Telecoms Service Providers 16 5 2 0 1 7
Verification Companies 7 1 9 6 4 4

Using a predefined list of 13 consulting firms, respondents were asked to
identify the specific consulting firm they were most likely to engage with over
the next 18 months. Based on ¨likely¨ and ¨certain¨ scores PwC and
McKinsey scored most favourably with 6 & 4 nominations respectively. By
contrast, based on ¨very unlikely¨ and ¨unlikely¨ scores, ICF and AD Little
scored least favourably with 25 and 24 nominations respectively.

Table 9: Consulting firms most likely to be hired

How likely are you to hire one of the
1. very unlikely

following firms in the next 18 months to
no response
2. unlikely

3. neutral

5. certain

deliver a climate change engagement? (1=
4. likely

very unlikely, 5 = certain)

Accenture 19 4 0 3 0 5
AD Little 21 3 1 1 0 5
BCG 19 2 3 0 0 7
Booz & Co. 21 4 0 0 0 6
Deloitte 15 6 1 2 1 6
Ernst & Young 17 4 1 2 2 5
ERM 10 9 3 2 1 6
ICF 21 4 0 1 0 5
KPMG 17 6 2 2 0 4
McKinsey 13 6 3 2 2 5
PwC 11 7 3 4 2 4
SustainAbility 17 2 2 2 1 7
URS 19 2 1 1 1 7

Why buyers´ buy

Responses provide valuable insights into why companies hire external
consulting firms to support their CC&S programmes. The two most prominent
responses were: Lack of Expertise/Resources; and Independent Advice (or
Sounding Board). See Table 10 for additional responses.


Table 10: Reasons for hiring external consultants

What are the top 3 reasons why your company Results
would seek consulting help for your climate
change initiatives?

Lack of Expertise / Resources 17
Independent Advice / Sounding Board / Specialist 13
Knowledge
Strategic Development / Global Action Plan 7
Risk Analysis 6
New Ideas / Innovation 4
Third-Party Certification 4
Build Internal Capacity 3
Staff Changes 2
Legislation Changes / Compliance 2
Bespoke Research 1

As a follow up, respondents were asked to explain their three key decision criteria
or selection factors for hiring a consulting firm to support their CC&S
programmes. Although Price was the most widespread response (11
nominations) it only featured once as the top answer. Respondents considered
Sector / Business Knowledge (9 nominations) to be the key decision factor when
selecting a consulting firm.

Several respondents commented that as climate change and sustainability
becomes more pervasive within their organisation – Sector / Business Knowledge
would become increasingly more valuable – with some suggesting it would be
more important than specific subject expertise. Although the ability to leverage
both provides a unique point of differentiation between consulting firms. Table 11
highlights the key decision factors for supplier selection. Scoring has been
weighted on three levels.

• First 3
• Second 2
• Third 1

Table 11: Key selection factors

What would be your top 3 decision criteria 1st 2nd 3rd Score
when hiring a consulting firm for climate
change and sustainability initiatives?
Understanding of our business / sector 7 2 0 25
knowledge
Price 1 7 3 20

Subject Expertise 6 1 0 20

Track Record 1 2 3 10
Composition of Team 0 1 2 4
Reputation 0 0 3 3
Implementation Driven 0 2 0 4


Chapter Three

Does Thought Leadership Matter?

External thought leadership partnerships

Thought leadership & consulting firms


Does Thought Leadership Matter?

In this section, the publication tries to understand to what degree
thought leadership influences spending decisions, outlines what
sustainability executives consider to be the key fundamentals of
Authoritative Thought Leadership and determines their channel
preferences. This chapter also features a perception-based
benchmark that assesses thought leadership by consulting firms
across the two dimensions of familiarity and perceived quality.

Respondents were asked to what extent can thought leadership research from
consulting firms influence perception and ultimately spending decisions. The
results are ambiguous in the sense that approximately 40 percent of respondents
say it has no influence, whereas 45 percent state that the quality of thought
leadership can influence behaviour change / spending decisions.

During the interviews with practitioners they were asked what they considered to
be the key fundamentals for high impact, authoritative research.

Relevance was ranked as the key component in thought leadership research with
30 respondents rating it as either ïmportant¨ or ¨very important¨. Practicality was
rated second with 28 nominations. By contract, Novelty was considered to be the
least important with 22 respondents rating it as either ¨neutral¨, ünimportant¨ or
¨totally unimportant¨. Table 12 highlights what practitioners considered as the key
1
components of authoritative thought leadership research.

Table 12: The fundamentals of thought leadership research

In your definition of what constitutes as
5. very important
2. unimportant

Äuthoritative Thought Leadership¨ - how important
4. important
unimportant

3. neutral
1. totally

are the following components? (1 - totally
unimportant to 5 = very important)

Relevance 0 0 1 12 18
Practicality 1 2 0 11 17
Clarity 1 0 4 10 16
Validity 2 0 6 5 18
Focus 0 0 8 13 10
Rigor 0 0 8 10 13
Novelty 6 6 10 8 1

Thought leadership has existed in various forms for over 50 years, notably in the
published form (publications, newsletters & surveys). However, during this time
we have seen a rapid transformation in how people produce/consume content.

The study wanted to ascertain buyers´ channel preferences in the face of an
ever-changing media landscape.


One 2 One meeting with a lead-partner was, not surprisingly, ranked the highest
with 27 respondents rating it as either ïmportant¨ or ¨very important¨. Within the
more traditional realms of thought leadership publishing, Case Studies were
ranked the highest with 21 nominations.

One key finding was that Webinars scored more favourably than White Paper /
Publication – with 16 nominations versus 12 nominations. However, the surprise
finding was that the Survey, the cornerstone of consulting firms´ thought
leadership research portfolio, was rated as ïmportant¨ by only 8 respondents, or
more bluntly was rated as ¨neutral¨, ünimportant¨ or ¨totally unimportant¨ by 3 out
of every 4 respondents. Table 13 highlights buyers´ channel preferences.

Table 13: Thought leadership delivery channels

What is your preferred channel for consuming

5. very important
2. unimportant
Thought Leadership research? (1 - totally

unimportant

4. important
3. neutral
unimportant to 5 = very important)

1. totally

One 2 One meeting 0 0 4 15 12
Case Studies 0 4 6 14 7
Hosted Event 0 3 11 13 4
Webinar 1 8 6 11 5
White Paper / Publication 1 7 10 9 4
Video 6 7 9 8 1
Survey 3 6 14 8 0
Social Media 4 10 10 5 2

External thought leadership partnerships

More and more companies are turning to business partnerships or collaborations
to support long-term business objectives. The very nature of thought leadership
has resulted in consulting firms going alone – however, responses from the study
provide new evidence that this model should evolve and that there are benefits
for consulting firms to engage more collaboratively in the design, development
and delivery of thought leadership.

Survey respondents were asked their opinions on the value of partnering with
different organisations. Eighty-four percent stated that external partnerships
would add creditability. Table 14 shows their preferred choice of external
organisation. Scoring has been weighted on five levels.

• First 5
• Second 4
• Third 3
• Fourth 2
• Fifth 1


Table 14: External partnerships - preferred organisations

In priority order, please rank which 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Total
organisations add the greatest value or
creditability to a consulting firms thought
leadership research?

1. Stakeholder Organisations (such as 8 6 11 1 5 104
WBCSD, WEF)
2. Businesses 10 4 6 6 5 101
3. Academics / Business Schools 6 10 2 6 7 95
4. NGOs (such as WWF or Greenpeace) 3 7 5 12 4 86
5. Sector Focused Association 4 4 7 7 9 80

Respondents were asked what consulting firms could do in order to improve their
thought leadership research. The responses from the interviews provide practical
suggestions that consulting firms could embrace in order to improve their
approach to thought leadership research (see Table 15).

Table 15: How to improve thought leadership research

What 3 things can consulting firms do to improve their approach to Responses
Thought Leadership research?

Make it relevant, practical and delivery focused Balance / Reality 16
Check - understand timeframes and our constraints
Work collaboratively with business to produce meaningful studies 6
Show better understanding of sector knowledge 5
More genuine / sincere 5
Greater transparency on assumptions and frameworks 5
Better Examples / Real Case Studies 5
Conclusions should not be linked to services offered 3
Look to have research published externally (business and 2
sustainability publications
Be honest / admit failures or lack of knowledge 2
Stop Bragging 1

Thought leadership & consulting firms

Respondents were asked to rate their familiarity / perceived quality of the thought
leadership research from a predefined list of 13 consulting firms.

Table 16 highlights mean scores based on the two dimensions of familiarity and
perceived quality. Scoring has been based on six levels.
• Totally Unfamiliar -2
• Unfamiliar -1
• Neutral 1
• Familiar +2
• Very Familiar +3
• No Response -1


Table 16: Thought leadership & consulting firms

How familiar are you with the CC&S Thought
Leadership research offerings from the Familiarity Perceived quality
following 13 consulting firms? (1 = totally (mean score) (mean score)
unfamiliar to 5 = very familiar).
Please also rate its perceived quality
(1= low quality to 5 = high quality)

Accenture 8 8
AD Little -16 -14
BCG -5 -9
Booz & Co. -19 -20
Deloitte 14 5
Ernst & Young 5 4
ERM 14 8
ICF -38 -38
KPMG 11 4
McKinsey 30 29
PwC 38 31
SustainAbility 20 21
URS -32 -35

The below matrix (figure 1) highlights mean scores based on the two dimensions
of familiarity and perceived quality.

Figure 1: Thought leadership perception matrix


Figure 1 suggests that although certain organisations have high brand recognition
both in general and, specifically, in terms of thought leadership – it doesn’t
necessarily correlate with their perceived abilities/strengths in the CC&S area – if
it did, then they would have scored more highly when respondents were asked to
state who they were most likely to work with in the future.

Combining this data with the results from Table 5 (Supplier categories) and Table
9 (Consulting firms most likely to be hired), the inference that can be made is that
many consulting firms may be winning in terms of ¨presentation¨ in the sense of
gaining recognition by getting well-presented thought leadership out there, but the
general consensus from respondents was that for the majority of consulting firms
their content lacks real penetration.


Chapter Four

Tell to Win

Toward an open and collaborative process

Why buyers´ buy

Motives matter


Tell to Win

This concluding chapter highlights the transformation that is
happening across many industries, reflecting on the opportunities
this presents consulting firms with respect to delivery engagement,
thought leadership research, marketing activities, external
partnerships/collaborations and business development.

Authoritative thought leadership research is the lifeblood of consulting firms.
When conducted with a genuine interest in the subject and client´s need, the
ideas and concepts can be very powerful, and can grab the hearts and minds of
the target audience (think SWOT Analysis, BCG´s Growth-Share Matrix and,
more recently, McKinsey´s Greenhouse Gas Abatement Cost Curve).

Responses from the interviews provide practical suggestions on how consulting
firms can redesign their approach to thought leadership research – where 1 out of
every 2 respondents stated making it more ¨relevant¨ and ¨practical¨. One
respondent from the Oil & Gas sector commented ¨ it must be practical /
pragmatic – a real hands on approach¨. Other comments included:

¨Show better technical ¨Focus on the hypothesis
knowledge of the industry they before getting stuck into the
are talking to.¨ data. Have something to say.¨

Logistics Utility

¨Make it relevant, practical ¨Provide something new that
and delivery focused.¨ isn't already out there.¨

Aviation Metals & Mining

¨Try to get promoted through ¨Detailed thought leadership -
leading sustainability journals/ which talks about solutions
magazines.¨ and trade-offs not
blue-sky thinking.¨
Publishing
Pharmaceutical

Toward an open and collaborative process

A recurring theme from sustainability executives was the lack of practicality and
depth on thought leadership combined with a desire to see what is in the "black
box" which many felt was at odds with what the consulting firms were willing to
show. Furthermore, several respondents commented that as environmental and
social issues become more pervasive across their organisation, sector knowledge
and experience would become increasingly more valuable, with some
respondents suggesting that it would be more important than subject expertise.


For many consulting firms where CC&S is a new service line there could be
significant opportunities to collaborate with mainstream business lines to provide
an integrated approach to thought leadership and delivery engagements.

This meeting point between functional and subject expertise will be
critical in helping clients go beyond incremental improvements.
According to Art Kleiner (of Booz & Co.) this is where the ¨magic
happens¨.2

Responses from the survey provide valuable insight into the role of external
partnerships for thought leadership design and delivery – where 84 percent of
respondents believed that external partnerships would add creditability. One
respondent from the automotive sector suggested that before publishing thought
leadership, consulting firms should go to the trouble of örganising a trustable
peer review process¨. Other comments included:

¨Draw on Academic research.¨
Retail & Leisure

Ëngage with businesses to develop case studies.¨

Food & Beverage

Ëngage with stakeholders.¨
Retail & Leisure

Consulting firms such as Accenture, Booz, McKinsey and PwC have already
established partnerships with ¨stakeholder organisations¨ such as the World
Economic Forum or the World Business Council for Sustainable Development
(WBCSD), and NGOs such as WWF or The Climate Group for their thought
leadership programmes. Sixteen respondents also suggested that consulting
firms work in collaboration with ¨business¨ or äcademics¨ in order to produce
¨meaningful studies¨.

According to the White Space report ¨2010 was not a vintage year
for thought leadership and that thought leadership is generally less
well-researched than it used to be.¨ 3

The White Space report asserts that in the aftermath of the global financial crisis,
consulting firms may have scaled back investments in thought leadership. The
report argues that this may be ¨false economy¨ as uncertain times leave clients
¨hungry for new perspectives and ideas¨.

Taking a collaborative approach to thought leadership could provide numerous
benefits to consulting firms. Firstly, it provides additional resources and
viewpoints – adding resilience and rigor. Secondly, it can support the
dissemination of seminal ideas by opening up a new indirect target audience.


Why buyers´ buy

With 3 out of every 4 respondents engaging consultants, the demand for
expertise is vital in resolving climate change and sustainability issues. Seventeen
respondents acknowledged a lack of ïnternal expertise¨ or ¨resources¨ as the
main reasons for engaging external support. Some of the comments from
respondents included:

¨For a project roll-out.¨ ¨Changes in Legislation¨
Food & Beverage Retail & Leisure

¨To provide knowledge and ¨Build internal skills /
experience where we lack it¨ capacity¨
Real Estate / Property Construction

Ëxternal/independent Ïnnovation / opportunity
assurances we are taking focused goal¨
correct path¨
Insurance
Transport & Logistics

During the interviews, respondents specified the key qualities they look for in
consulting firms prior to selection. When weighted scoring was applied Industry
Knowledge was considered the top decision criteria when selecting a consulting
firm - rated more important than Price. One respondent from the Retail & Leisure
sector also commented ¨Responsiveness to customers¨. Other comments
included:

¨They must possess a deep ¨Composition of the dedicated
understanding of our team, profiles of its members
business¨ and confidence in their ability¨

Oil & Gas Healthcare

¨Technical knowledge of our ¨True passion for
industry (hard to find)¨ sustainability¨
Logistics Utility

¨Good cultural fit with our Äs sustainability matures
organisation – like the people¨ sector knowledge will become
increasingly more important
Aviation for us¨
¨Combination of sustainability Pharmaceutical
and sector experience/insight¨
Insurance


Motives Matter

In uncertain times consulting firms must continuously innovate to create new methods and
services that enable clients to resolve complex issues. From a client standpoint selecting a
consulting firm entails significant risks. Thought Leadership research that is centred on
earning trust and creditability is essential for giving buyers confidence. Once trust has been
established prospective clients will then turn to that company.

A consulting firm´s commitment to thought leadership can reveal whether or not they are really
passionate about what they do or are just simply in it for the money. Several respondents from
the survey had questions about the underlying motives of a number of consulting firms –
citing, for the majority, their lack of history in the CC&S space. A general consensus from the
respondents was that given a lack of sector knowledge possessed by the majority of
consulting firms a significant proportion of time was used teaching and training ¨MBAs with
spreadsheets¨

¨Many big firms are only in this space for the marketing opportunity ... not
many have a long-track record or for that matter a genuine interest or
understanding in and of the issues. Typically smaller companies were founded
by passionate leaders - and this comes across in our engagements with
them.¨
Pharmaceutical

When communicating to prospective clients either through thought leadership or other
marketing activities, the end-user should be able to tell by themselves whether or not the
consulting firm has the required expertise or the experience to serve them. In practice,
prospective clients do not pay attention to what companies assert about themselves – many of
the respondents believed that consulting firms are ¨always trying to be right¨ and ¨never admit
failure¨ or ¨lack of knowledge¨.

¨Conclusions and recommendations should not be directed at their
solutions/products¨
Real Estate / Property

Thought leadership must be focused around the current needs and challenges of prospective
clients. Conclusions that are aligned to service offerings reveal a consulting firm´s true
underlying motives. Prospective clients want to learn how consulting firms will help them to
achieve their goals or resolve a complex issue. Clients, just like people, make perception
judgements based on motives more than on self-proclaimed expertise or extensive listings of
service offerings.

Many respondents cited ¨Global Capabilities¨ or ¨Global Rollout¨ as key reasons for engaging
with major, international consulting firms. As these firms cast their eyes on emerging markets
a strong portfolio of thought leadership, combined with a strong industry perception can
increase exposure in these new economies where name recognition goes a long way.


Suggestive Approaches

Thought Leadership for a New Era

Practicing the art of thought leadership

PwC CEO Survey

Engaging with your audience

The rise of social media technologies

Developing a “Leadership of Thought” platform

A war on content

Thought leadership fuelling demand creation

Optimising thought leadership process to support lead nurturing


Thought Leadership for a New Era

The world is transforming, where several industries are facing major disruption
from emerging technologies and changing consumer preferences. Over the
last decade we have witnessed the dismantling of the music industry. The
publishing industry wrestles with the challenge of going from print to digital
while still maintaining revenues – and looks set to face a similar onslaught
from Amazon & Co. Likewise the automotive industry is facing a similar
transformation as it moves grudgingly from petrol to electronic engines. This
section provides practical suggestions on how consulting firms can reposition
themselves by embracing a new model of leadership.

It is almost fifty years ago since McKinsey launched its management journal, the McKinsey
Quarterly – and by consequence created the birth of the thought leadership movement. The
McKinsey Quarterly was a coffee-table style publication that enabled them to target executive
readership. Other firms followed suit by creating their own publications and by the 90s
consulting firms were beginning to resemble publishers.

For many businesses, marketing has transformed from talking about yourself (advertising) to
listening to your customers and creating content around their needs (publishing) - many of the
new marketing techniques are actually publishing initiatives (blogs, e-newsletters). Joe Pulizzi,
4
author of Get Content Get Customers, states that ¨we are all publishers today¨.

Consulting firms (as publishers) are perhaps one step ahead of this curve. However, the
world of publishing is also transforming and demands consulting firms to embrace a new
model of leadership.

Practicing The Art of Thought Leadership

Transformation is creating a level playing field for all – the tools and technologies are available
for a one-man consultant to produce and disseminate thought leadership. From a client
perspective this creates advantages, as it should raise the bar for authoritative thought
leadership; and secondly increase the number and presence of specialist providers.

For large consulting firms they need to invest considerably more in the development and
leadership of thought. Moving forward the art of thought leadership revolves around four key
pillars:

1. Content – developing a strong point of view
2. Audience – the power of the secondary target market
3. Segmentation – aligning content to specific audiences
4. Connecting - engaging with your audience


Content Historically, developing a proprietary argument or point of view
was key to developing authoritative thought leadership. Although this is still
true in today´s world, this study advocates that there are alternative ways in
how consulting firms can develop their point of view, depending on the topic
at hand and market forces.

For certain issues it may be suitable for consulting firms to adopt a position of
¨Thought Leader¨ - where through extensive primary research they can earn
themselves a leadership position. However, in a crowded market achieving
this status will become increasingly more difficult.

Perhaps, the alternative and requires a paradigm shift for many consulting
firms is to become ¨leaders of thought¨ - given the complexity and scale of
climate change subjects, there could be numerous opportunities to adopt a
more open and transparent approach to content development one which
means involving prospective clients into the process.

An OpenSource approach is being used in many industries where
intellectual property is a key asset. Proctor & Gamble, IBM and
GoldCorp are creating value to gain competitive advantage by
5
opening themselves up to the concept of mass collaboration.

Audience Typically thought leadership was a direct communication tool – sent directly to
the primary target audience. Given the fragmentation in media channels –
each creating silos of interest - there is an ever-growing secondary market
which can help influence a consulting firm´s primary audience.

There is an added advantage in that what people say about you has
creditability than what you assert about yourself. Therefore, marketing
programmes need to be expanded to include a secondary market.

Segmentation Changing communication platforms together with a reprioritisation of the
target audience requires greater flexibility or agility in content delivery. The
challenge or opportunity moving forward is to realign or segment content to
meet changing consumption trends and expanding target audiences. A
broader audience suggests that marketing departments should segment and
target specific parts of their content so that it engages different audiences.

Consulting firms must assume that no one reader wants to read their research
in its entirety – by arranging segments of content based on the readers´
interests and preferences, consulting firms can broaden both their reach and
impact.

Connecting How clients and prospective clients consume information
should dictate how consulting firms engage with them.

Clients today are far better informed than at any time in history,
thanks to the Internet, with analysts like Gartner reporting that 90% of
all purchase decisions are now made based largely on internet
6
research.

A review of the 13 consulting firms shows that the majority of thought
leadership delivery channels to be publications (survey, newsletter, briefing,
case-study), webinars or video. Some have adopted new social media
technologies (Twitter, Blogs) – but like many companies they have not fully
adapted their communication methods to utilize these emerging channels.


PwC´s Global CEO Survey

How PwC segments its survey content

Last year, for the first time, PwC began to offer the survey in multiple formats, including
customised reports by industry and geography, as well as multimedia versions of specific
7
sections.

• Full Main Report
• 19 Sub-reports by industry and region
• Key issue data sets
• Video interviews of six global CEOs
• Video interview of PwC’s CEO
• Transcripts of full CEO interviews
• Various other customised reports

Resource Revolution: Climate Change Thought Leadership hits McKinsey´s homepage

In December 2011, McKinsey devoted its
opening homepage to its new report Resource
Revolution. The new McKinsey report "Resource
Revolution: Meeting the world’s energy,
materials, food, and water needs" shows that the
resource challenge can be met through a
combination of expanding the supply of
resources and a step change in resource
productivity. The research was developed by the
Sustainability & Resource Productivity practice
and the McKinsey Global Institute, the business
and economics research arm of the firm.


The rise of social media technologies

What is important to remember about social media it that it’s not about the technologies
themselves, but rather the change in behaviour. This is not a mere trend; it is a new form of
communication.

This new way of communicating goes against the grain of what consulting firms have been
typically doing – top down, broadcast-type communications with no interaction or dialogue with
their audiences. What social media has done is to turn this model upside down, by creating a
bottom-up, democratised communication platform. Incorporating social media effectively into
traditional communication strategy presents numerous challenges to consulting firms, notably a
change in posture from “push” to “pull”.

Consulting firms entering this space need to realise that social media is not another advertising
or media channel – even though it can facilitate business development and improve reputation.
An effective starting position for consulting firms is to listen to what is being said about key
issues.

Social media has been a quick success – and has caught many companies by
surprise. In less than a decade we have seen a massive shift in the way content
is being generated, distributed and consumed across global communities.

Once a consulting firm (or any company) begins its approach it is imperative that it is done in a
transparent, authentic and consistent way. There can be no dipping in and out – you have to
make a full commitment and try to become part of the conversation and the community. Content
needs to be kept fresh and relevant – although it does not necessarily have to be new or even
proprietary. Content in this instance could be providing one half of a potential conversation.

Based on discussions with social media leaders the critical success factor for
any social media marketing activity is for it to be genuine. If it seems or feels
inauthentic, it will fail.

A company’s communications team has a key role to play in the internal development of social
media engagement, by incorporating key components of social media within the organisational
communication strategy. However, if the two fundamental principles of social media
engagement are authenticity and transparency, then social media cannot be the exclusive
domain of the communications department in the longer term. To fully realise the potential of
social media, consulting firms need to make it a part of their DNA by embedding social media
across different business units – with all employees acting as ambassadors.

In many cases, client-facing personnel are better placed to engage at the micro-level and
convey a company’s message to their specific communities, rather than working through a
centralised communicator. Marketing and subject experts can benefit immensely, and can go a
long way towards humanising a company through their participation. All of this can generate
significant upside in the form of brand equity, research data, and much more.

Developing a “Leadership of Thought” platform

Business executives want depth of information, but they donʼt want to dig through a lot of raw
material to find what is relevant to them.

Content must be designed as a collection of organised subtopics that lets the user quickly dial
in on what is most important to them. Microsites provide this lightweight structure by offering a


few simple, interrelated navigation choices without getting bogged down with the baggage of
the main websiteʼs navigation structure.

By breaking topics into subtopics, consulting firms can deliver deeper content while making it
easier for users to consume. Microsites enable consulting firms to aggregate its collective
expertise on an issue in one place to provide a platform for clients / prospects interested in
that topic.

PwC´s 13th Global CEO
Survey provides an excellent
example from the consulting
industry.

Another example from the
consulting industry is
McKinsey´s What Matters

microsite brings together
researchers, academics,
journalists, policy makers
and executives to address
ten big questions.

Both PwC and McKinsey are
leading the way in consulting
firms’ use of microsites. The
one area where PwC could
improve is by incorporating
interactive dialogue tools that
foster exchange amongst the
community.

features a Debate Zone that
enables users to engage
with McKinsey professionals
and or with their peers.

Webinars

A key finding from the study was the growing importance and value of webinars – perhaps a
consequence from a reduction in conference attendance by industry professionals. Done well,
webinars can help consulting firms engage with their audience around a particular business
issue. The webinar presentation must be developed no differently from any high-level piece of
thought leadership – centred around the current needs and challenges facing clients.
Prospective clients will want to learn how the consulting firm will help them to solve a current
problem.


A war on content

Poor thought leadership can erode reputation therefore deciding not what to do is perhaps as
strategic as what should be done. Consulting firms should develop a process for thought
leadership development based on a combination of internal and external factors to develop their
sweet-spot.

Thought leadership has become a competitive battleground for consulting firms. Figure 2 below
highlights the competitive landscape for services and thought leadership activities of 11
consulting firms.*

Figure 2: Consulting firms´ services & thought leadership

Ernst & Young

SustainAbility
Booz & Co.
Accenture

McKinsey
AD Little

Deloitte

KPMG

PWC
BCG

ERM
Services / Thought Leadership
Assurance
Adaptation / Resilience
Biodiversity
Branding
Carbon
Cities
Energy & Resource Efficiency
Finance
Green IT / Facilities / Buildings
Lifecycle Assessment
Opportunity / Innovation
People / Talent
Renewables / Clean Tech
Risk / Governance & Compliance
Sector Focus
Smart
Stakeholder Engagement
Strategy
Supply Chain / Procurement
Trading
Transport
Transactions
Waste Management
Water

Key
Low Presence / or No Activity

Some Presence / Some Activity

High Presence / Activity

*The analysis is not conclusive and merely serves as an illustration to help facilitate the thought leadership content
process.


The (imperfect) analysis in Figure 2 enables consulting firms to develop their thought leadership
sweet-spot by identifying the green white space. From this a simple matrix can be developed to
assist consulting firms plan their thought leadership strategy (see figure 3 below).

Figure 3: Content development matrix

The matrix enables consulting firms to take a portfolio approach to developing thought
leadership where, depending on internal expertise, they will want to publish a range of research
within each of these quadrants. This matrix also assists in determining the appropriate delivery
channel. For example, in the top right hand corner ¨Lead¨ - it would be viable for consulting
firms to develop their own high-level platform such as a Microsite or Event.

Consulting firms must understand that not all prospects are ready for thought leadership or have
sufficient trust in their company / information. Instead, consulting firms must create multiple
pieces of content relevant to the prospective client´s stage in the buying cycle.

Thought Leadership fuelling demand creation

The buying process is highly emotional, and requires consulting firms to make both an
intellectual and personal connection. There are two emotions that will impact the prospective
client – fear or greed. More often than not it is fear which presents itself in two forms:
organisational; and personal.

Consulting firms must do their best to minimise this fear by eliminating risk, best achieved by
illustrating (not asserting) their capabilities, experience and services. A genuine, long-standing
commitment to practical thought leadership helps consulting firms build trust and long-term
engagement with prospective clients. Thought leadership that is well researched and delivered
enables consulting firms to make both an intellectual connection and personal connection with
prospective clients – helping to reduce any organisational / personal risk.


Looking Ahead

We are moving away from a world dominated by traditional printed media to one in which blogs,
twitter etc predominates. This doesn’t just mean that individuals and organisations have to
utilise these channels to communicate; they also have to adapt the content and tone to reflect
this new reality. What is often overlooked is that the language and style of writing favoured by
these new interactive channels is very different to that to be found in traditional publications.

There is a much greater expectation that content has to be tailored to the needs of the individual
– or, at least, the individual is free to select what interests him rather than be spoon-fed. This
has enormous implications both in terms of design of/investment in “smarter” communication
tools – the PwC CEO Survey serves as a great example of content segmentation to align to the
specific needs and interests of a broadening target audience.

More fundamentally, it requires a change in the corporate culture which, hitherto, has focused
on controlling outgoing information in order to a) project clear and common messages (e.g.
there is a McKinsey view of the world); and b) avoid the possibility that one part of the business
says one thing while some other part says the complete opposite!

What this requires is a willingness to “trust” employees to represent the organization’s
views/positions consistently. This requires a much more holistic approach to managing
knowledge within consulting firms to ensure that those who engage with the outside world have
some basic understanding of the new research concepts their employees are articulating.


References

Publication /
Number Title Company Date
1 Learning from Success: Survey Alterra Group 2009
reveals the keys to more effectively
developing and marketing intellectual
capital
How Booz & Company Develops and The Bloom Group 2011
2 Markets Consulting Concepts
3 White Space Report Source for Consulting 2011

Joe Pulizzi Online Marketing 2009
4 Summit
Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Anthony D. Williams & 2007
5 Changes Everything. Don Tapscott
6 JOINED UP CUSTOMER Peter Smith - How to 2011
SERVICE? DON'T MAKE ME trot marketing
LAUGH!
How PwC Repackages Content Source: Claire 2010
7 McDermott – Content
Marketing Institute
2010
8 How the B2B Buying Process has Inbound Sales
changed Network

Related Research

Title Company Date
Green Quadrant Sustainability Business Consulting Verdantix 2011
2011 (UK)
5 Growth Areas for Sustainability Spending 2012 Verdantix 2011

UK enviro consulting market assessment & Environment 2011
competitor analysis Analyst
White Space Report Source for 2011
Consulting
Global Environmental Consulting Strategies and Environment 2011
Competitor Analysis 2011 Analyst
Corporate Social Media Useful Social Media 2010
/ Jonathan
Ballantine
Vendor Needs & Strategies IDC 2009


Appendices

1. Performance Benchmark

2. Report Cards: 11 Consulting Firms

3. Interview Questions


Appendix 1

Performance Benchmark

Following interviews conducted with sustainability executives a set of indicators were developed
to assess consulting firms across two dimensions – performance & marketing.

Performance Scorecard

Market Share based on ratings made by survey participants.

Track Record based on relevance of core experience, proven
expertise of leadership team and history in the delivery of climate
change business consulting engagements.

Geographic Presence It was important to identify the breath of reach consulting firms have in
order to support global roll-outs or emerging market strategies.

Marketing Scorecard

Website utility rates the ease of navigation in finding relevant services, leadership and
insights from sustainability sections. In addition it assess the ease in
finding sustainability services from the main homepage.

Content rating is based on the frequency of thought leadership produced and
the perceived quality and familiarity as rated by survey participants.

Collaborations the number of partnerships or external collaborations the consulting
firm is engaged in for either thought leadership research or client
service engagements.

Channels rating based on innovation in content delivery – in terms of fostering
engagement

Scoring has been based on three levels

3 = Leading
2 = Average
1 = Limited

The scorecard on the following page is based on opinions of survey respondents, and
represents perceived findings in 2011.


Figure 4: Consulting Firms´ Performance Scorecard

Consulting Firms

SustainAbility
Booz & Co.
Accenture

McKinsey
AD Little

Deloitte

KPMG
ERM
BCG

PwC
E&Y
Indicators
Performance Scorecard 7 4 4 4 7 5 7 6 7 8 7
Market Share 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2
Track Record 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 3 3
Geographic Presence 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2
Marketing Scorecard 12 9 8 10 7 9 9 7 11 12 9
Website Utility 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 1 3 3 3
Content 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2
External Collaborations 3 2 2 3 1 2 2 2 2 3 2
Thought Leadership 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2
Channels

Figure 5: Consulting Firms´ Performance Benchmark


Appendix 2

Report Cards: 11 Consulting Firms

! PwC – Global Sustainability Services

! Deloitte - Sustainability & Climate Change

! Ernst & Young - Climate Change & Sustainability

! Accenture Sustainability Services

! AD Little – Sustainability / and Carbon Advisory

! BCG – Sustainability

! Booz & Co – Low Carbon & Sustainability

! KPMG – Climate Change & Sustainability

! McKinsey - Sustainability & Resource Productivity

! SustainAbility

! ERM - Sustainability and Climate Change


Positioning for growth 2012

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (11)

Semelhante a Positioning for growth 2012

Semelhante a Positioning for growth 2012 (20)

Positioning for growth 2012