Here in San Francisco, It's Sunday Morning Coming Down

Passenger Elevators

Taken this afternoon inside the Masonic Center garage. Nob Hill is a goldmine of architecture and signage.

Sustainable Design Town Hall: Nathan Shedroff

Back in early May, I wrote about a group of about 20 or so designers and educators who attended a Designers Accord town hall meeting in San Francisco to explore the subject of sustainable design and exchange ideas. This post is part of a short series in which I continue the conversation with some of the other presenters there about designing messaging that drives measurable, ground-level change.

Previous posts:
Series Introduction
Lynda Grose and the Sustainable Cotton Project

---

Nathan Shedroff is the chair of the MBA in Design Strategy program at California College of the Arts, really one of the only programs of its kind in the U.S. He's a prolific author whose most recent book, Design Is the Problem: The Future of Design Must be Sustainable, outlines a stunningly accessible vision of the future of design. At the town hall in May, Nathan discussed the interdependence of design, business, and sustainability—as he pointed out, "you can't have one without the other."



More recently, I asked Nathan a few questions via email about how individuals and organizations can translate sustainable design thinking into practice. His responses—along with the whole of Design Is the Problem—reveal a pragmatism infused with optimism that is often lacking among sustainability proponents, and that is utterly necessary if real change is going to take place in both the private and public sectors.

Jess: What has teaching this stuff taught you about how people best respond to sustainable design issues? How did that influence the writing of Design Is the Problem?

Nathan: I've been teaching sustainability and product development for at least three years—and some of experiences definitely influenced the book. One of the things that sometimes happens is that people assume sustainability is only about the environment. Another is that a lot of business students, though not engineers and designers as much, aren't terribly interested in sustainability at first. I should note that these aren't my students, luckily.

Next, many students go through a profound kind of depression at first. In the first 6-8 weeks of our Sustainability Studio in the program, our students were noticeably discouraged. It's not that they didn't realize that the impact we've had on the planet and other people was bad, but the extent in both breadth and depth is pretty staggering. It's not until about weeks 8-10 that they really pull themselves out of it, and that's mostly because we not only talk about the tools available and the strategies to create more sustainable solutions, but they actually use these. We don't teach about sustainability [as an exclusive concept], but in the context of making solutions. I think this context is critical because it simultaneously informs and enables, and that sense of enablement is important for sustainability, and is at the core of design.

A lot of this rethinking of the design process seems to require three things: the commitment, the know-how, and the resources to implement. That seems like a tall order for the average American business, which is statistically likely to be small (under 100-500 employees, depending on the industry); how does a single person operating within an organization begin to pull those three things together?

The first thing organizations can do is familiarize everyone in the company with the basic principles and frameworks of sustainability. Everyone should know what sustainability is and shouldn't be afraid to talk to others about it. Walmart has done this very effectively through their engagement with Act Now Productions, now known as Saatchi & Saatchi S.

I was at a sustainability conference recently and there were too many people who got up on stage and essentially said "I'm not sure why I'm here because I don't really know anything about sustainability." I challenged the entire audience not only to be more informed next year but to set a goal that everyone in their organization, by the end of the year, should know enough to be comfortable getting onto any stage and speaking about sustainability. It sounds like a tall order but I don't actually think it's that difficult. It's actually much easier for smaller companies than for larger ones.

Sustainability is just one important business trend but it represents a major failing of most organizations. They don't know how to both engage their own employees and inform them about their own business. Everyone in an organization should know and be able to respond to the organization's strategy, business goals, industry drivers, and customer profiles. It's crazy that most employees can't articulate this and it's the fault of leadership, not the employees. Sustainability is just a new business driver to add to this overall need.

The book spends a lot of time discussing the need for a "systems perspective" and what that means. But it seems to me that American culture and institutions are designed to celebrate the individual—individual experience, individual expression, individual success. First, can you talk a little about the value of a systems perspective and second, how can a society like ours reconcile its individualistic nature with the need for a broader view?

Perhaps we've emphasized the individual over the system too much, in the same way we emphasize competition over cooperation. Neither is better than the other, and neither can exist without the other—not if things are to progress. Evolution wraps these same two dichotomies together as proof that they're both natural and necessary.

Individuals can't function nor be individualistic without a supporting society (which is a set of systems). There's nothing incompatible with supporting both systems and individuals, cooperation and competition, and standards and innovation. Maybe, we simple need to tell the rest of the story. In the U.S. media, we tend to present everything as an either/or choice across one, narrow spectrum. You're either a Liberal or a Conservative, a business person or an environmentalist, etc.

The truth, of course is that life is more rich and complex than these false choices. It used to be common that people identified as "fiscally conservative but socially liberal" but even this has disappeared from the national dialog. We're asked to choose between being prudent or being sympathetic, as if the two were mutually exclusive. Business is seen as being all about money and profit despite that not being the initial history of business in the U.S., nor reflecting why so many people start their own companies.

We have to cast off these false choices and old stories. Even if they were true in the past (and I don't think many of them ever were), they're not relevant now.

Where is this reconciliation happening right now? Where is it most lacking?

It's more lacking in large organizations of all types: businesses, governments, and even nonprofits. The culture of doing business or running an organization must be completely reconsidered, starting with hierarchy, strategy, and instituting a service-oriented culture.

We are grossly inefficient but in ways most pundits don't consider. For example, most every critic of government points to businesses as an example for being more efficient and effective. I'm not sure how many companies they've ever worked in but most businesses aren't a terribly good example of efficiency nor effectiveness. There are exceptions, for sure, but really, our government would have failed long ago if it had suffered some of the disasters business has been responsible for. Local governments have, undoubtedly, moved faster in many cases and are more effective than state and national governments but, again, there are exceptions.

We also need to rethink our economic models. The ones we've been using for the past 5-10 decades were flawed from the start. We've been patching them for years but the patches aren't good enough. You get what you measure and we've been only measuring money—not any other element of a successful society or lifestyle. It's no wonder that's the world we've gotten, and we find it increasingly difficult to value anything else.

You also co-wrote the book Making Meaning: How Successful Businesses Deliver Meaningful Customer Experiences, in which you discuss the many ways businesses can connect to customers to develop deeper, longer-lasting relationships. In a recent interview, you discuss how important it is to use meaning as a way of connecting with people on the issue of sustainability. But is there more to it than that? Is there something inherently parallel about meaning and a sustainable system? Is a sustainable system itself inherently meaningful?

The jury is still out on that. I believe that the more meaning we have in our lives, whether that's from buying and having more meaningful things, experiences or relationships, the less stuff we ultimately need. I don't, however, have research on this and I'm not aware of it. All of my experience is anecdotal but I do see evidence of it all around me.

The people I see with the most meaningful lives have stuff, for sure, but less of it than most others, and they tend to consider their purchases more carefully and in a wider context. They tend to be more engaged with sustainability—and [engaged] more deeply. They're not the people rushing out to "acquire" bamboo floors and green this-and-that for the sake of it. That's largely a fad at the moment. If they were remodeling, they would certainly make these choices but not for the sake of having these things.

I find that the people who live their values more tend to be happier or, at least, more at ease. I attribute this to being more engaged at the level of meaning. So, in a very real way, I believe that helping people live more sustainably will, necessary, need to engage them at the level of meanings and values—at least for any long-term effect. Thankfully, we have models for doing this, now. We just need to use them.

---

You can read about these models in Nathan's book, Design Is the Problem. I highly recommend it, whether you're a designer or communicator, business owner, or simply interested in new ways of thinking about old systems. You can also visit Nathan at his personal website, and learn more about CCA's MBA in Design Strategy.

Earthquake Preparedness Has Never Looked So Good

...Or been so easy to understand. The San Francisco Department of Emergency Management has done an incredible job with this infographic-based website explaining how to handle yourself in the (fairly likely) event of an earthquake. [Edited to add the real credit: I shot him because I loved him, damn him! in collaboration with asketicsf.]



The site is ultra simple, focusing on the six most common places you'll be when the Big One hits. The hilarious graphics (check out the mid-quake hair) immediately get the point across. And the copy follows suit, providing only the pertinent details, making it easier to remember, while throwing in a good dose of San Francisco attitude (when experiencing an earthquake at your local taqueria—how very relevant—you're given the choice between duck-and-cover and "grab your drink—it wasn't cheap"):



After watching the History's Channel's over-the-top-yet-nightmare-inducing look at San Francisco's earthquake history the other night, it was abundantly clear that although San Francisco's government actually has a really good earthquake preparedness plan in place, the city's residents are typically apathetic. The site does a nice job of combining design and copywriting into a short-and-sweet educational piece to break through that apathy.

(And yes, we have a run bag to keep us alive should we need it.)


[via Quipsologies]

Come See Me Talk About Greening Your Organization 5/19

I'll be joining a free panel discussion this coming Tuesday about greening your organization for San Francisco's Small Business Week, and we'll be focusing on local resources like the San Francisco Green Business Program. While this is geared toward the practicalities of small businesses, the panel (and accompanying day-long workshop, should you choose to stay) will be seriously helpful to any organization, commercial or nonprofit, looking for practical resources for reducing its environmental impact.

• Date: Tuesday, May 19
  Time: 11:00 am (full day runs 8:45-2:30)
  Location: SBA Entrepreneur Center, 455 Market St. 6th Fl., SF
  Cost: Free
  Register: http://leanandgreen.eventbrite.com/
• 8:45: How I Greened My Business
  10:00: What's In It For My Business
  11:00: Local Government Support and the SF Green Business Program
  11:45: State Support
  12:30: Networking lunch

So if you've been curious about the SF Green Business Program, and you'd like to hear about how it works, how it helps, and how to make the most of it to build your business, please swing by and say hello.

Note: Although registration is recommended, I'm pretty sure you can just show up without registering.

Sustainable Design Town Hall: Sustainable Cotton Project

As mentioned in a previous post, a group of about 20 or so designers and educators recently met at a Designers Accord town hall meeting in San Francisco to explore the subject of sustainable design and exchange ideas. This is the first in a short series of posts in which I'll continue the conversation with the other presenters there about how people can design messaging that drives measurable, ground-level change.

Lynda Grose and the Sustainable Cotton Project

California cotton used 5,849,172 pounds of chemicals in 2005, many of which are known to be significantly toxic to air, water, soil and people. Lynda Grose, fashion designer and associate professor at CCA, is working with the Sustainable Cotton Project to reduce the amount of chemicals used on California cotton crops. Her presentation offered an overview of the subject, but also explored some of the inherent challenges in communicating complex or unintuitive sustainability initiatives.

What exactly is cleaner cotton?

Cleaner cotton is the term used for the crop produced by farmers enrolled in SCP's BASIC program. BASIC (Biological Agricultural Systems in Cotton) is a farmer-to-farmer information-sharing program throughout California's Central Valley that "enables conventional farmers to adopt organic and other environmentally preferable (biologically-based Integrated Pest Management) farming techniques." It's been remarkably successful in its eight years of existence: according to an independent analysis, BASIC growers "spray up to 73% less of the most toxic insecticides and miticides used in cotton" compared to conventional growers in their area.

Grose points out, however, that cleaner cotton is not the same as organic cotton, which uses no synthetic pesticides. So it must not be as good, right? Wrong - and this is a perfect example of how many sustainability initiatives seem counterintuitive at first glance. There are a few reasons why Cleaner Cotton is such an important piece of the sustainable agricultural puzzle:

1. Organic cotton requires a great deal of hand labor. With California's higher minimum wage, this means that converting to an organic system can be cost prohibitive for conventional farmers. In fact, much of the organic cotton used in U.S. clothing, for example, is shipped from overseas, where the cost of labor is dramatically lower (resulting in more competitive pricing). So while overseas organic cotton may reduce pesticide and GMO use, it does nothing to support local (and badly needed) American farming economies.
2. The problem of toxic pesticides:
   To get about 3 bales of cotton per acre in California, conventional growers use an average of 2.1 pounds of chemicals.
   Cleaner cotton offers better yields than organic. "This is one of the significant factors in bringing growers into the 'cleaner cotton' program," Grose explains. While conventional California growers yield about 3 bales of cotton per acre, "organic cotton so far yields 50% of that. Since growers are paid per pound for their fiber, this represents significant economic risk...especially without a committed market." And how does cleaner cotton compare to conventional? "The yields are the same."
3. Proportionally, cleaner cotton cuts chemical use more than organic. In 2007, there were 240 acres of organic cotton grown in the state, reducing chemical use by about 500 pounds, according to the SCP. Compare that to the 2,000 acres of cleaner cotton that resulted in a reduction of about 2,000 pounds of chemicals, and you start to see why cleaner cotton makes so much sense.

Given the clear advantages of cleaner cotton, then, it should be a simple matter of switching growers from their conventional systems, right? Well, not exactly.

A system greater than the sum of its parts

We all know that changing just one component in a system is unlikely to change that system in the long term. We might see a temporary shift or hiccup, but eventually that system will self-correct and return to the status quo. So, to effect long-term sustainable change, each piece of the system needs to change together. As Grose mentioned, without a market of fiber manufacturers committed to purchasing cleaner cotton, there's no guarantee growers will be able to sell their cleaner yield. So the SCP is taking a three-pronged approach:

1. It helps conventional farmers convert their acreage to cleaner cotton crops (creating a supply).
2. It encourages businesses to purchase California-grown cleaner cotton in addition to overseas-grown organic cotton and instead of conventional cotton (building a distribution system).
3. It educates consumers about the advantages of cleaner cotton (creating a market demand).

Of course, changing the attitudes and behaviors of three different constituent groups is much harder than changing just one.

Reaching one goal through multiple stakeholders

If the Sustainable Cotton Project approached their campaign using a blanket message for all three groups, they might find themselves facing serious resistance. Each of these groups has a different set of obstacles to changing already comfortable (and often, profitable) behaviors. Looking at our farmers, for example, the challenges in getting them to switch from a conventional farming system are clear. Grose puts it in context:

"Cotton is grown in different regions. each with their different ecological stresses. Organic is a good tool in developing nations, where labor costs are cheaper. It's not an effective tool in developed nations where labor costs are high.

Asking a farmer to transition to organic cotton is like asking a western medicine doctor to transition to Chinese medicine and acupuncture: it's a fundamentally different system.

Cleaner cotton brings conventional farmers into biological systems, and over time they begin to trust them and apply them to other crops. Because it is scalable, it converts more farmers and more acres to biological systems than organic does. Cleaner cotton doesn't negate organic; each has their relevance in a given region."

But manufacturers and consumers are driven by different obstacles (often price, perceptions of quality, and others). So, the SCP communicates its umbrella message—"cleaner cotton is better than conventional"—to each group using different subtexts and communication channels:

• Growers
  "Farmers listen to farmers," says Grose. Farmer-to-farmer information sharing programs appeal to the close-knit community and trust issues found among growers, and on-site farm tours allow growers to see cleaner cotton in action.
• Manufacturers
  Farm tours also engage manufacturers, switching the mindset from numbers on paper to real-world results. SCP also reaches out to companies at trade shows and company headquarters, providing "very visual presentations" in language that appeals to their particular motivations.
• Consumers
  Finally, SCP has created an online presence to educate the general public about the advantages of purchasing items made with cleaner cotton. The group also uses traditional publicity campaigns to drive awareness.
  

By respecting the concerns of each of their target groups and selecting appropriate communications channels, the Sustainable Cotton Project reaches more people, and has a greater lasting impact than if they either used a single communications campaign, only reached out to one group at a time, or positioned cleaner cotton to compete with other accepted farming systems. In fact, Grose is quick to point out that cooperation has been key to the group's success: "we position cleaner cotton to complement, not compete, with organic cotton, since the goals are the same: non-GM (genetic modification), family farmers, reduction in chemicals, etc." Treating each group as a valuable component in the whole system has resulted in a highly effective campaign.

Simplifying otherwise complex messages has its pitfalls

It's not all fluffy sweaters and fuzzy mittens, of course. The SCP still faces some challenges given the complexities of the industry. During her town hall presentation, Grose described one of the fallouts of such an effective communications campaign: simple messages are easier for people to grasp, but then you risk oversimplifying the issues to the detriment of your ultimate goal. In the mid-late '90s, for example, the group ran a campaign using the all-American t-shirt as its symbol:

"We took data on chemicals sprayed from all cotton states at that time, and the average yield of fiber per acre, and average amount of cotton in a typical t-shirt, then we did the math...and 1/3 pound [of argicultural chemicals] used for every t-shirt is what it came to at that time in the U.S. It was so effective a message that a host of companies picked it up without doing the math on the cotton they were using...so the data is no longer accurate, yet it is still used by some because it is a simple message."

Unfortunately, there may not be an easy solution to this problem of complex messaging. "Brands love to communicate in sound bites," reminds Grose, which means it's up to those crafting the sound bites to think harder about where they might end up, and how they might be used. Which leads us, often, to looking at the issue from different angles - both from the points of view of each stakeholder group, and from those we haven't traditionally considered.

When asked about the challenges and opportunities involved in reaching different groups with seemingly different interests, Grose responded: "They see cleaner cotton as part of an overall cotton strategy which includes organic and cleaner cotton. It's a significant shift from thinking about the product, to thinking about the cotton business." And that shift in our overall perception of any given "problem" is what will ultimately lead to better, more sustainable solutions in every sector.


Related Posts:
Sustainable Design Town Hall: Sharing Good Ideas

Sustainable Design Town Hall: Sharing Good Ideas

Collaboration is one of the fundamental pieces of a functional design industry. It also happens to be one of the fundamental pieces of sustainable progress. In order to take positive, measurable steps forward, designers need to come together to identify relevant problems, brainstorm new ideas, and troubleshoot potential solutions. And that's what some of us did last week at Lunar, the hosts of a Designers Accord town hall meeting here in San Francisco.

A huge nod goes to Vanessa and the Lunar crew for creating a really successful, open atmosphere for idea sharing. Five of us spent 5-10 minutes each presenting a different idea to the group of about 20 fellow designers and educators. No specific theme, just idea sharing.

I spent my time mostly asking questions, of course. As I told the group, I'm currently helping a couple of different groups develop certification standards for graphic designers and their projects. I've been tapped by Eric Benson of re-nourish and Yvette Perullo of Rethink Design to provide input on a responsible design protocol. The protocol is a three-tiered certification system (partially modeled on the LEED system), intended to provide designers and clients with a rigorous framework for evaluating print design projects. We're also working on a studio-level version, which is where most of my work is being done. Simultaneously, I'm providing similar recommendations to the San Francisco Green Business Program for their design studio guidelines.

Developing these guidelines poses a significant challenge on many levels, and I'll be discussing those in another post soon enough. But last week's presentation, and the ensuing discussion, allowed me to get valuable input from other working designers, which will only strengthen the final recommendations. Folks raised questions, challenged my assumptions, and provided great ideas for improvement. Most of all, I was surprised by how generally open to certification they were. Perhaps it was the knowledge that such a program was being developed with genuine consideration for the limitations and challenges it will face.

There were some really cool ideas passed around by the other four presenters, too. Throughout this week, I'm going to post about each of them, so be sure to tune in (or subscribe to the email feed).

More Adventures in Direct Mail: SF Bike Coalition

Earlier in the week, I dissected the failings of a snail mail campaign that was sent to me by a local arts nonprofit. On that same day, I received another mailing, this time from the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, who couldn't have taken a more different approach. There was nothing particularly fancy about the envelope's presentation or contents, but it was clear that the group had invested a good deal of energy making this single mailing as effective as possible. Here's how I knew that:

• Bigger envelope means more bang for the buck.
  Although it was a standard 9" x 12" manila envelope, I knew there had to be something juicy inside to warrant such a large mailer. That thing was getting opened out of pure curiosity.
• One message, many materials.
  Turns out the mailing was intended to get my business on board with San Francisco's "Bike to Work Day." Small plugs for the SF Bike Coalition were cleverly scattered throughout the materials (including a copy of the group's newsletter), but they were all directly tied to the issue at hand: Bike to Work Day (the newsletter, for example, contained a Q&A about the event, among other BTWD features). Picking one message and reinforcing it throughout the mailing kept me from getting distracted, detached or confused.
• Appealing to your audience:
  "It is a known fact that employees who arrive at their workplace by bike are alert and productive and are generally healthier employees. Their employers reduce health insurance premiums and avoid costly employee benefit expenses like parking..."
  Overcome objections in advance.
  One of the best aspects of this mailing was the use of social marketing techniques (more on that later). From the opening of the introductory letter to the content of the newsletter, it was clear the Coalition had thought long and hard about what might prevent recipients from acting on their call for participation, and heading these objections off at the pass. The messaging was framed to address common employer concerns, including costs and employee productivity, which made it really easy to be won over.
• Provide the right incentives.
  Finally, the Coalition included a ton of materials to help its audience act on its request for participation in BTWD. Don't know the best way to implement the program among your employees? Follow the enclosed checklist. Unsure of which routes to take, or how hilly the streets are? Check out the enclosed San Francisco Bike Map. Need a way to get the word out to your employees? Post the enclosed BTWD poster. Looking for a fun team project? Take the enclosed Team Bike Challenge. Concerned about safety or getting stranded without a car? No worries, just check out the enclosed pamphlet explaining the San Francisco Emergency Ride Home program. And of course, if you want more info about the event or the Coalition itself, read the enclosed newsletter. Thinking ahead has allowed the Coalition to provide the answer to every potential question in advance, making it incredibly easy to participate.
  

These last two techniques are, as I mentioned, a significant component of social marketing (not to be confused with social media marketing, which relies on web 2.0 tools like Twitter or YouTube to spread a message). Social marketing is an incredibly effective way to encourage positive behavior change in individuals within a group context. It's a little broad to get too detailed here but the SF Bike Coalition, knowingly or not, has adopted several of its most successful principles:

1. They knew their behavior goal (employer participation in Bike to Work Day).
2. They knew their audience (employers with specific concerns about how BTWD would effect their employees health and productivity).
3. They addressed potential barriers for action (not enough information, too dangerous, too costly).
   
4. They included incentives to reinforce the behavior they were looking for (maps, team challenges, emergency rides home, posters).

Now, if they follow up with a phone call asking me if I participated, then they'll really be on point (after all, you need to measure if your campaign worked to know whether it's worth the investment). I only had two real issues with this mailing, and I have to admit they're not minor:

1. They failed to vet their mailing list (although I'm a San Francisco business, I'm not an employer), leading to a lot of wasted paper.
2. They included a lot of paperwork, much of which may get tossed.

That said, it's a relief to get a direct mail piece so thoughtfully directed to its audience. By taking all of the above into account during the design and writing stages, the group has vastly increased the likelihood of a positive response rate. The next time you send something to your constituents, I hope you'll consider these points, too.

How Not to Do Direct Mail

I just received a direct mail solicitation from a wonderful nonprofit that supports local photographers through exhibitions, education and youth mentoring. I wish so much they had taken a different approach with this mailing, because I can't imagine this one will yield the kind of response they're hoping for.

The package arrived in a standard white no. 10 business envelope. It contained a one-page letter, a semi-gloss, full-color, tri-fold brochure that unfolds into a 12" x 18" poster, and a self-addressed, unstamped reply envelope. What's so wrong with this?

• Concealing the goods.
  Why drop coin on a beautifully printed poster-sized piece, and then hide it in a nondescript envelope that makes it look like junk mail? Either gussy up the mailing container, or make the poster a self-mailer that begs to be unfolded immediately.
• Address anonymous.
  "Dear Friend" is no way to address someone when you're asking for their money. In this day and age of variable printing, there's simply no excuse. And if your marketing director doesn't know what variable printing is, you've got an even bigger problem.
  
• Not quite compelling:
  "Your membership is your ticket to a remarkable range of programs and benefits."
  So much copy, so little targeting.
  The front of this single 8.5" x 11" letter included a litany of member "benefits" directed at all kinds of different people—including artists, art lovers, collectors, and who knows who else. Simply laundry listing your organization's features and hoping readers are willing to pick and choose what matters to them is a great way to make sure nobody pays attention to anything. Pick an audience, and write exclusively to them.
  
• Features do not equal benefits.
  And here's another thing: listing what you offer doesn't explain how your audience will benefit. Don't tell me about your exclusive, members-only parties, tell me how I'll make important career connections and discover new trends before they hit the mainstream.
  
• Letterhead overload.
  I understand the desire to acknowledge a nonprofit's staff, board of directors, advisory committee, and curatorial council members, really I do. But if you're printing this on your letterhead, it means you're repeating this information with every single communication you send out. Why? It might hurt to hear, but you need to ask yourself if the reason has more to do with the staff's needs than your audience's.
  

But all this wasn't enough to turn me off and convince me not to give. No, the straw that broke the camel's back was the flip side of the letter. An entire page dedicated to a collaborative art project that I (little old me) was invited to participate in! How exciting, I thought. And all I have to do to be eligible is purchase a membership and send in my own mail art submission? I looked for the cost of membership on the accompanying brochure/poster. $50 ain't bad, considering I'd also get access to the rest of those features listed so exhaustively on the front. And that's when I noticed the deadline for submissions: May 1, 2009. Receipt date of this package? May 1, 2009.

That's right, folks. I was invited to participate in a project—a project that was supposed to sell me on donating to this organization—on the day of the submission deadline, effectively making me ineligible. That's not an oversight. It's not a mistake. It's a slap in the face to your audience.

This is not a time for this kind of ineptitude, folks. Tighten up! Don't waste your marketing dollars on what has the potential to be a highly effective campaign by not thinking it through. If you need expertise, then ask. But nonprofits can't afford to be making these kinds of mistakes right now.

CompostModern is this weekend

For those of you in the San Francisco Bay Area, don't forget about AIGA's CompostModern conference coming up this weekend. I'm looking forward to hearing the likes of Joel Makower, Nathan Shedroff, Eames Demetrios and others discuss sustainable design solutions. I am, however, a little worried.



Perhaps I'm too cynical for my own good, because I find myself worrying that it's going to be yet another green design pep rally. There is certainly real value in waxing poetic about be the change, but I'm getting antsy for some really grassroots impact in this industry. I get worried that the freelancers and indie studios across the country—the ones who can't or won't afford an AIGA membership, or whose local municipalities don't even have a public recycling initiative—are being left out of the conversation.

CompostModern may be different, though. First of all, it's cheap. That's important because there are already far too many overpriced, corporate-driven, trade showesque sustainability conferences out there. We need to make the barrier for entry into this green design conversation much lower if it's going to spread. Students, for example, can't drop $1k+ on some business conference just to be exposed to the movers and shakers (there shouldn't even really be any movers and shakers in a movement like this, but that's probably far too much to ask). And students are the ones who need to carry the torch.

Second, it's bringing in speakers from outside the design world, too. That's important because we designers often get to thinking that we're either more powerful than we are, or not powerful at all. Bridging the gap between design and business—developing more integrated systems and industries in this country—is pretty much the only thing that's going to allow sustainable design to infect mainstream culture.

I've seen some of these folks speak on the subject of sustainable design before. Dawn Danby of Autodesk, for example, and John Bielenberg of Project M. As someone who's already pretty well entrenched in the concepts to be discussed, I wonder how deep these speakers will really go. Or are we going to be wowed by the latest big-budgeted design "innovation" once more? Will there be clear, specific next steps offered to the audience, or will we be left to pat each other on the shoulder just for showing up? And who, exactly, will be attending?

And these, at the end of it all, are the people I really want to hear from. The audience. What will we take away? What will we do afterwards? What will change? I have a few ideas, but for those you'll need to stay tuned.

Roughstock Hours

We're closed! I'm on vacation through the first, though I may be posting occasionally here. Have an amazing transition into 2009!


Photo by Margaret Sand (mom)

No on 8: The Musical

Too bad the original No on 8 campaign wasn't this well choreographed...

Updated: Roughstock's Environmental Policies

Just a quick note that I've updated Roughstock's environmental statement, which outlines the various ways the studio attempts to reduce our environmental footprint. As a certified San Francisco Green Business, this statement gets filed annually with the Green Business Program.

Download: the full environmental statement
Learn more: our commitment to sustainability

The Hypocrisy of Prop 8

Some very nicely designed posters from Mark Luethi, for the Stop Prop 8 campaign, that cut right to the heart of this issue:







Each poster can be downloaded and distributed by clicking on the images above (or check out the whole flickr stream). I strongly encourage you to do so, and to attend any of the many rallies coming up.

Beth Schuenemann

A couple of weeks ago I featured several artists whose work I got see at the Art Explosion open studios. Beth was one of them, and she's provided me with some images so I can share her work with you. She does really graphic urban landscapes—the style perfectly captures San Francisco and its architecture in way that photography just can't.












Check out more of Beth's work in her Art Explosion profile.

Nov. 4, 2008: This Is It, Folks

Please, please vote. This is a different kind of election, and it needs to be loud. I mean really loud. In addition to casting your ballot, here are some more ways to engage:


Behind the Candidates:




Polling Place Photo Project:

Art Explosion Fall 2008

Twice a year, the Art Explosion Studios in San Francisco open their doors for a mass art show featuring their tenants' work. You get the opportunity to take in a huge variety of art in one place, and to talk to the artists themselves about their work and process. This is a quick recap of just a few of the artists that really stuck with me this weekend.

Keith Gidlund

By far my favorite of the show, but I'm a sucker for black and white photography. And shot with a Holga, no less. Keith was showing a wall full of this work, which focused entirely of natural landscapes. Not only does the circular framing amplify the organic shapes within the frame, it combines with the black and white medium to create an almost scientific specimen-like effect. It's beautiful work, almost breathtaking.





Definitely explore his website, as he has several sets of images that are stylistically very different from each other. His sweeping horizons and transparent collection are worth a look-see.

Ken Hay

I am not typically drawn to work like this, but something about it stopped me in my tracks. This little red house kept making an appearance, often in multiplicities, throughout Ken's work, only to end up in flames in his recent drawings. The meticulous geometry of his pencil lines frame a weird sort of chaos. All in a folk arty, colorful vernacular that normally turns me off but this time around pulled me in.

Artists without Websites

Sophia Antipas: A great eye for outside space, architectural and organic details, color.

Don Ross: Not a lot on display, but my favorite was a large-size drugstore diptych of a young boy (kid) and woman.

Beth Schuenemann: The woman I came to see. Really graphic, colorful paintings of San Francisco buildings. I'll get my hands on some of her work and post it soon.

Britt's Baby: Yes, it's wicked corny, but Beth's coworker Britt had her baby with her and the kid was a work of art. Four weeks old, tiny, and very, very serious. Honestly, she looked a little intense. Like, don't mess with me tense. But in a sweet, new baby way.

Vote No on Prop 8

I am a huge proponent of equality under the law (except for corporations), and California's upcoming election is an important one. In a couple of weeks, Californians will be able to vote down proposition 8, which changes the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and woman only.

While I understand that a certain portion of the population are morally opposed to gay marriage (me, not so much), I simply don't agree that it's okay to write inequality into the law. I see this as a civil rights issue, plain and simple. The problem is that Prop 8 has some pretty big-money backers, and they've taken some pretty underhanded approaches to pushing Prop 8 on the people, including claiming that by not redefining marriage, it will somehow mean California schools will start teaching kids to be gay. It's a pretty big reach, but anything goes in politics these days. So sad.

Anyway, I went ahead and created a flyer you can download and distribute—hang it in your store front, give it out at rallies, wheat paste it across your town (whatever you do, make sure it's legal).

(New) Instructions for Download:
1. Click once on the image below to open it in a new window.
2. Right-click (or option-click) on the new image.
3. Select "Save Image As" and choose your folder.
4. Select "Save."



The image above is a small, low-res version. For the full 8.5 x 11 image, click on the thumbnail above.

Rights and Permissions!
You may reproduce, distribute and display this poster anywhere and everywhere. You may not sell it, or alter it in anyway. If you distribute it, I'd love to see photos of your event or action.

Musical Interlude: Nick Cave and the Bad MotherF$#%@in Seeds

Saw Nick Cave at the Warfield this past Saturday. What can I say, I'm a sucker for a skinny funny-lookin' rock 'n' roll man in a suit. I remember picking up Kicking Against the Pricks when I was 15 and it nearly split my head open.

This footage is not from this weekend's show, but is pretty recent:



(Footage from the show I was at can be found here, though there's a little much audience for my taste.)

The thing about Nick Cave is his storytelling. And his nasty version of Stagger Lee. And his funny Australian accent. And his devotion to Elvis. And his complete wackiness as evidenced by the commercial for Dig Lazarus Dig! on his site (navigate yerself to the "Miscellany" section).

Happy 51st birthday, Nick!

New Work: Evnine and Associates Logo and Identity Collateral

I'm really excited to introduce the redesign of Evnine and Associates' new logo and identity collateral. The new streamlined look plays with the financial concept of "extra market returns," symbolized in the industry by the alpha symbol (the "a" in "eva," which is the company's nickname among its client base).



The big challenge here was creating a look distinguished enough to impress a rather staid financial industry while still communicating the personality and charm of this incredibly focused team of statistical wizards.



Both the letterhead and envelope are printed on 100% recycled paper, while the business card is printed on a heavier stock, 30% PCW recycled paper.

Tell Your Neighbors About the Spray!

I'm going to ask that you indulge my "politics" as I get loud for a bit - I'm just really not okay with getting sprayed with chemicals!

So, for those of you who live in California and want to spread the word, please help yourself to this poster. Download a PDF of either version by clicking on the image. Then take it your local copy shop and start passing them out to friends, neighbors and especially local businesses.





The petition continues to grow, with over 22,000 people refusing to be sprayed. Let's keep it growing!

California Plans to Use Citizens as Guinea Pigs: Why Every U.S. Resident Should Care

Beginning this summer, airplanes will fly 500-800 feet over California, spraying hundreds of thousands of California residents with an untested pesticide called CheckMate. This will start one night in June, and will happen again three nights a month for nine whole months. None of us will know which nights our towns are being sprayed, and none of us will be able to stop it. Your children will wake up the following morning, head to the park, breathe in the air, play on the jungle gym, and you will have no idea if their little hands are coated in the CheckMate pesticide. You might even be walking home from the BART station one evening, and hear that low-flying plane hum over you as it drops its load.



This ain't no horror story - it's actually going to happen. The State's Department of Food and Agriculture is initiating the largest aerial pesticide spray in the history of the United States because it's afraid the light brown apple moth will take over our plants.

• Never mind that the evidence suggests that this moth has been with us for decades causing no harm whatsoever (and has, in fact, been controlled by natural predators).
• Never mind that scientists across the globe have dealt with this moth before, and advised California that widespread spraying will do no good.
• Never mind that the State's previous spraying last year resulted in well over 600 reported ill health effects.
• Never mind that a man named Stewart Resnick, an agribusiness man whose farming company happens to own the manufacturer of CheckMate (the pesticide to be sprayed on us) has made generous political contributions to our State's officials.
• And never, ever mind that 19,000 citizens and counting have said out loud that they do not want to be sprayed.
  

And why should anyone who lives outside of California care? One simple reason: we are the nation's guinea pigs. The USDA recently announced plans to survey all 50 U.S. states to see if the light brown apple moth can be found anywhere else. If they do, you can bet that state officials where you live will look to California as an example for how to deal with it. Even though California's approach won't work.

So what can we do? Do we sit back and inhale the fumes? Do we let agribusiness dump pesticides literally on our heads? Close our eyes and hope we don't get sick? This is not a joke, and this is not the State's choice to make for us.

Join the tens of thousands of other residents who refuse to be sprayed! You don't have to become an activist, and you don't have to give up your valuable time. Just pick and choose from the following easy steps, and make your voice heard.

1. Sign the petition to stop the spray.
2. Learn the facts about their plans.
3. Write an email to Gov. Schwarzenegger, who currently supports the spray.
4. Write an email to Sen. Migden, who's filed legislation to delay the spray.
5. Send an email to everyone you know telling them about the spray (or linking to this blog post).
6. Write a letter to your legislators voicing your opinion.
7. Attend the meetings on 4/15 and 4/16 to add your voice.
8. Flyer your block, neighborhood or town to inform your community.
9. Send out a MySpace, FaceBook or other social networking bulletin about this.
10. Blog about the spray, or simply link to this post.
    

Get loud. Get angry. This is your air, and your body. Don't let them f--- with it.

Headline Hilarity, or Giving the Vag the Respect It Deserves

The SF Chron is often accused of being a rag, and headlines like this one don't help dispel such a reputation. The play on words shown below is, while hilarious, a little too much personal info for my taste. Nothing's funnier than a nice play on words, but please mind the images you conjure up!



I also feel the need to point out that such a headline seems to reinforce the lack of respect given this particular body part. The headline manages to completely ignore the actual point of the article: Eve Ensler's visit to the Bay Area in support of V-Day, a campaign to stop violence against women. The sad truth, too, is that a headline about an anti-violence campaign is likely to draw in far fewer readers than the cheap joke that ran.

Bill McKibben on Slowing Global Warming and Moving Toward a Sustainable Economy

Bill McKibben, author of Deep Economy and other books, and one of the earliest reporters on global warming, spoke about the movement to slow global warming the other night in an on-stage interview. I found it odd that the conversation wasn't more in-depth considering the audience (imagine a roomful of rich, white San Francisco liberals - kind of preaching to the choir, hmm?), there were a number of points worth mentioning. I'm just going to quicky sketch out some of these below.



The Challenge of Making the Complex Simple
One of the most difficult aspects of communicating about global warming - and sustainability in general - is that it's such a complex, intertwining subject. Everything feeds into everything else, is connected to everything else in more ways than one, impacts and is impacted by everything else. In a world increasingly desperate for easy answers - just push this button - we're faced with laying bare complex issues and attempting to navigate toward not-so-intuitive answers.

Add to that the fact that this isn't exactly a sexy issue and we're faced with quite the uphill battle. As McKibben said, it's a bit like "going to the doctor and being told you have high cholesterol and have to cut the fat out of your diet." No one wants to do it, and those who do are "rewarded" with not being sick. Logically that may be a big, juicy carrot but at the end of the day we're still stuck munching carrots instead of french fries.

The Challenge of a Brand New Movement
The environmental movement has experienced a lot of changes over the decades, and now that the science is finally in (yes, it is), it's been somewhat vindicated. But this shift means that the movement now needs to go beyond merely proving that global warming exists and, instead, tackle the solution. The solution, of course, is massive economic change. I say "of course" as though this is obvious, and it is to those who have done any deeper reading on the subject outside of, say, USA Today. But McKibben points out that the environmental movement, while solid at education etc., isn't necessarily well-equipped to deal with changing the world's economic system.



It seems to me that the movement itself is a little too insular for that. Once derided for its moral overtones and scolding approach, I'm not sure it's really capable of stepping outside that sense of morality. Changing the global economic structure - regulation of the corporate world, public investment in R&D, global manufacturing and transport, you name it - requires the buy-in of so many differing entities that using a moral imperative to drive this change would seem implausible. But maybe that's exactly what we need - a global recognition, from inside the economic paradigm, that our current global economy is simply not meeting the social responsibilities long promised by unchecked markets.

And what of those markets? When McKibben was asked, "How do you minimize growth [McKibben's approach to stopping global warming] without replacing capitalism?" he replied by stressing the need for more focus on local economies. The idea is that a network of strong local economies provides a safety net of sorts for a stronger global economy. "How can I make it bigger?" is the wrong question, says McKibben. We're craving that smaller, local, community connection that the bulk of us [city-dwellers] have essentially missed out on as urbanization and technology has run rampant. But I'm getting on a tangent.

The Challenge of India and China
Although the U.S. is the primary global consumer, this may well change sooner than we realize (or will be ready for). Developing countries have, for the first time in perhaps the world's history, huge leverage in the growth of their own economies. To power the vast populations of China and India, cheap energy is needed. Right now, cheap energy means coal, which is simply too dirty. If these countries rely on coal - as they are currently doing - we'll be powerless to stop global warming. McKibben points to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen in 2009 as an key potential turning point. He's of the mind that the only way to succeed in combating global warming is to convince China and India to abandon coal. Good luck with that.

Marking Collective Success
In spite of all the challenges that lie ahead of us, McKibben was careful to point out that as a society, we are actually making great strides towards effective change. He cited not just the mainstream adoption of the subject, but also the increasing number of creative solutions that are cropping up both locally and abroad. In an effort to harness this momentum and maximize it, he's started 350.org,* which asks you and I to put our heads together to come up with new solutions. As he writes on the organization's website:

"What we need most right now are your ideas for how to take the number 350 and drive it home: in art, in music, in political demonstrations, in any other way you can imagine. We will connect actions all around the world and make them add up to more than the sum of their parts–but we don’t have all the ideas and all the inspiration. We need yours."

And that really is what it all boils down to: each and every one of us needs to make a simple decision. Will I work towards change, or will I continue with more of the same? No need to read more into it than that—as a single human being, you don't have to solve the world's problems nor remove yourself from the life you love. But as a group of individuals working towards change, the momentum becomes unstoppable.


*350 parts per million is the maximum safe level of carbon dioxide we can have in the atmosphere. It's McKibben's benchmark for a halt to global warming.

San Francisco Green Business Resources

When I decided to get certified by the city of San Francisco as a Green Business, I wasn't sure what to expect. Would I have to invest in expensive changes, or sacrifice business productivity for the sake of environmental savings? It turns out that the process was fairly straightforward and the required changes and commitments were easy to implement. Not only that, but the program's coordinators were always ready with resources and ideas.

If you're a San Francisco business owner who's interested in making operational improvements to reduce your environmental impact, you're in luck. The city has some fantastic programs and resources to guide you through the process. The list that follows is segregated into appropriate categories to help you find what you need, fast.


Certification Programs

San Francisco Green Business Program
Aimed at helping companies further their commitment to the environment, this multi-agency program certifies businesses and provides help along the way.

Grants, Loans and Tax Credits

San Francisco Mini-Grants
SF Department of the Environment gives away free money for environmental business projects (quick turnaround grants from $1,000 to $10,000) on a first-come-first-served basis.

San Francisco City Grant Programs
While not environment-specific, San Francisco offers plenty of free money for businesses looking to expand operations, implement new programs, or simply grow.

San Francisco City Loan Programs
While not free money, loans can help get your business where it needs to go.

San Francisco Enterprise Zone Tax Credit
This program offers tax breaks to employers operating within designated Enterprise Zones, and/or hiring from Enterprise Zones.

Participatory Programs

SF Approved Green Purchasing Program
An extensive collection of resources for implementing your own sustainable purchasing policy (you might also want to read my article, "How to Find Green Vendors")

San Francisco Commuter Checks
Looking for a way to provide additional benefits to keep your employees happy while serving the environment? These tax-free public transportation vouchers help encourage employees to reduce car use.

Sunset Scavenger Business Recycling and Composting
It's free to recycle and compost your waste in SF! This site provides all the info you need to start reducing your landfill waste. Your compost even helps grow local wine! This program is especially great for restaurants that produce high levels of food waste.

Neighborhood Revitalization Programs
San Francisco operates revitalization programs in many neighborhoods, working with local businesses to provide opportunities, business support and funding.

Tips, Guidelines, and Additional Resources

SFPUC's Environmental Resource Guides for Businesses
A collection of prevention tips and guidelines for various industries.

Small Business, Green Business
The SF Small Business Commission's list of green business resources and a few additional programs.

The above links should give you plenty of food for thought. As you can see there are tons of resources at your disposal, and most are easy to act on. I hope you'll join me and the hundreds of other local businesses who've decided to incorporate sustainability into our bottom line! And in the interest of pooling our collective intelligence, I'd love to hear your own success stories, challenges, or other resources you've found helpful.

Lights Out!

Tomorrow evening is Lights Out San Francisco, a group effort to reduce energy consumption by turning your lights off for one hour. The organizers expect to save about 15% of the energy typically consumed on a San Francisco Saturday night.



If I was still bartending, I'd be hosting a Lights Out Party for this thing. Imagine a roomful of revelers, a crapload of candles, and no lights! Sounds pretty sexy to me. Then again, you don't need a party to light a few candles and enjoy the non-electrified mood lighting...

All ya gotta do is turn off your non-essential lights on Saturday, October 20 (tomorrow!), from 8:00-9:00 pm. You can also sign the pledge if you're feeling really proactive.

It's Official: Roughstock Earns Green Certification

Roughstock's been getting some press for our recent certification as a San Francisco Green Business! We've worked closely with various city agencies throughout the fairly exhaustive certification process, focusing on reducing energy and water consumption, minimizing Roughstock's waste stream, and adopting purchasing policies that reflect environmentally preferable standards.

This certification marks an important shift for both myself and Roughstock; I really want this studio to serve as an agent for change within both San Francisco and the larger business and design worlds. This includes working directly with environmentally and socially conscious companies, as well as operating as sustainably as we can.

It's reassuring to know that both our local business community and the wider design world recognizes the value in sustainable business practices. Read what they're saying about Roughstock:

• Graphic Design USA features Roughstock in their inaugural Green Design newsletter.
• The Sustainable Business Alliance celebrates Roughstock's certification.
• Download the full press release (PDF).

PARK(ing) Day 2007 Is Tomorrow!

Grab some sod, a tree or two, and a bench and start feeding the meter. PARK(ing) Day is more than just some hipster eco-radical's idea of a good time. It's not performance art. It's a really valid, important use of public space.

Map Love: I Didn't Do This In Grade School

Give this real quick map game a try. Seems like a great solution to the shortage of maps in South Carolina.

Art for the Public, Please

My sister sent me word that Don Fisher, founder of the Gap, wants to open a museum in the Presidio to house his expansive collection of 20th and 21st century art. This would be an incredible resource for San Franciscans; the collection is considered to easily be one of the best in the world. The public has rarely had a chance to see any of the pieces, save for the lucky employees of the Gap who get to encounter particular works during the course of their normal work day (I specifically remember drooling over Warhol's silver screened Elvis in the lobby of the corporate headquarters downtown).

But instead of welcoming the prospect of public art, some San Franciscans are doing what they do best: complaining. Lee Rosenbaum points to an SF Chronicle editorial that raises the specter of a "rich man's playground," and SFist seems "a touch worried" based on the hideous bow and arrow sculpture sullying the Embarcadero. It's all too bad because this city has been driving art and artists away for years now. The cynical side of me, of course, can't help but note that Fisher also happens to be supporting a particularly touchy ballot measure pushing for increased city parking at the expense of public transportation funding. Couldn't hurt to be seen as a public do-gooder during the campaign, could it?

Ultimately, though, this collection would be a remarkable destination, and would remind people that San Francisco celebrates the creative arts. I never thought I'd be siding with Don Fisher on anything!