Learning case library

Cases and tasks for learning

Browse cases, pick the right tasks and share them as links or embeds in your LMS.

6

cases ready

68

tasks published

Cases

Ohjelma
Bike Lease Finland

Bike Lease Finland

Leasing and maintenance of employee bicycles, digital services.

Ohjelma
Excelence Solutions

Excelence Solutions

Consulting and data analytics, expert services and consulting.

Ohjelma
Finnish Timber Oy

Finnish Timber Oy

Ecological log buildings and construction site processes, project business.

Ohjelma
Green Scape

Green Scape

Customized green wall services for B2B clients, service business.

Ohjelma
Marine Craft

Marine Craft

Customized motorboats, project delivery, manufacturing industry.

Ohjelma
Scandinavian Design

Scandinavian Design

Leasing and maintenance of company bicycles, digital services.

Task

Assessment of Greenwashing Risks



In this task, the student analyzes the marketing of a case company from the perspective of greenwashing risks. They identify claims related to responsibility, assess their concreteness and credibility, and consider where the communication may be exaggerated or unclear. Additionally, the student reformulates risky claims to be more transparent and presents recommendations for improving sustainability communication. The task deepens the understanding of the limits and ethical challenges of responsible marketing.

Learning objectives

After completing the task, the student:
1. Can identify claims in marketing communication that may contain greenwashing risk.
2. Understands why certain sustainability claims are unclear or exaggerated from the customer's perspective.
3. Can suggest clearer and more transparent ways to communicate about sustainability.
4. Becomes skilled in assessing the ethical and reputational risks of responsible marketing.

Step by step

  1. Greenwashing risk assessment

    Objective:
    The objective of this assignment is for the student to learn to identify claims and expressions in the case company's marketing that may be exaggerated, unclear or misleading from a responsibility perspective. The aim is to understand when responsibility communication begins to resemble greenwashing and how it could be done in a more sustainable way.

    Materials:

    • The case description of the selected case company from the learning material.

    • The assignment is based on the case description and moderate assumptions about the company's marketing channels and messages (e.g. social media posts, advertisements, brochures, slogans), not on browsing real websites or campaigns.

    Assignment progress (instructions for the student):

    1. Briefly describe the case company's responsibility communication
      Write 5–8 sentences about how the case company likely communicates its responsibility:

      • in which channels responsibility is highlighted (e.g. social media, brochure, in-store messages)

      • what general themes are emphasised in the communication (e.g. environmental friendliness, domestic origin, employee wellbeing).
        This serves as a starting point for assessing greenwashing risks.

    2. Identify potential greenwashing claims
      Write a list of 5–10 claims or expressions that the case company might use in its marketing, for example:

      • “ecological choice”, “carbon neutral”, “responsible partner”, “a product that saves the world”.
        Indicate briefly for each claim:

      • which area of responsibility the claim refers to (environmental, social, economic)

      • whether the claim is specific or very general.

    3. Differentiate concrete and unclear claims
      Divide the list into two categories:

      • Concrete and substantiated claims (e.g. “80% of the packaging is recycled material”)

      • Unclear or exaggerated claims (e.g. “completely green product”, without clarification).
        Write ½ page explaining why certain claims are risky from a greenwashing perspective:

      • are numbers, benchmarks or explanations missing?

      • can the customer easily understand what the claim actually means?

    4. Evaluate the credibility of the claims from the customer’s perspective
      Select at least three claims that you classified as unclear and write a short paragraph (3–5 sentences) about each:

      • explain what in the claim raises doubts (e.g. absolute expressions, vague terms, contradiction with other actions)

      • consider what additional information the customer would need in order to consider the claim credible (e.g. certificate, figures, scope).
        End each paragraph with one sentence: how high you consider the greenwashing risk of this claim (low, moderate, high).

    5. Reformulate the claims to be more transparent
      Select 3–5 of the riskiest claims and write improved versions of them, in which:

      • you explain in more detail what the company actually does

      • you avoid absolute and exaggerated expressions

      • you also highlight limitations where necessary (“we aim to”, “we have started”).
        Write briefly why the new formulation is fairer and less prone to greenwashing accusations.

    6. Prepare a summary of greenwashing risks and recommendations for management
      Finally, write a 5–7 sentence summary in which:

      • you describe the main greenwashing risks in the case company's marketing

      • you explain in what situations a customer may feel misled

      • you present one or two key recommendations for management on how responsibility communication should be developed in the future (e.g. fact-based communication, openness about shortcomings).

    Submission and evaluation:
    Submit a text of approximately 1–2 pages showing:

    • an overview of the case company's responsibility communication

    • a list of potential greenwashing claims and their classification

    • an analysis of the ambiguity and credibility of the claims

    • improved, more transparent versions of some of the claims

    • a summary of key greenwashing risks and development proposals.

    Evaluation focuses on how well you:

    • identify potentially misleading or exaggerated claims

    • justify why certain expressions are risky from a greenwashing perspective

    • formulate alternative, more transparent messages

    • write clearly, in an organised manner and based on the case description.

    Recommended working time: approximately 45–60 minutes, individually or in pairs.

Tasks by audience and theme

University of applied sciences

Polytechnics and higher education studies.

68 tasks