Skip to main content
Printable page generated Monday, 10 November 2025, 8:15 PM
Use 'Print preview' to check the number of pages and printer settings.
Print functionality varies between browsers.
Unless otherwise stated, copyright © 2025 The Open University, all rights reserved.
Printable page generated Monday, 10 November 2025, 8:15 PM

2 Experiences and challenges when engaging with SMEs

2 Experiences and challenges when engaging with SMEs

SMEs are often referred to as a ‘hard to reach’ group. They are geographically dispersed, and very diverse in the buildings and spaces they occupy. Some draw their customers from the local area, and may be well-connected with other businesses and networks in the vicinity, while others have a national or international focus, and rarely interact with local business advisors. SME owner-managers are often ‘time poor’, having to divide their time and energy between clients, staff and business development.

In the opening activity we’ll look at the kinds of challenges and obstacles that advisors often face when seeking to engage with businesses.

Activity 2.1: Engaging with SMEs – the key challenges

This video features a number of low carbon advisors speaking about the challenges they face when trying to engage with business owners and managers on energy and environmental issues.

Download this video clip.Video player: gg_video2.mp4
 
Interactive feature not available in single page view (see it in standard view).

Watch the video (around 4 minutes) and make your own notes on the following points:

  1. What are the main kinds of challenges mentioned in the interviews? You may find it helpful to group them into categories.
  2. How do they compare to the challenges that you have experienced in your own work?
  3. Select three of the challenges mentioned by the practitioners and indicate how you would seek to overcome them.
To use this interactive functionality a free OU account is required. Sign in or register.
Interactive feature not available in single page view (see it in standard view).

Comment

The following challenges were mentioned by the low carbon advisors in the video.

  1. Owner-managers are often time poor.
  2. SMEs need to see a clear business case. You need to give them numbers.
  3. SMEs are often focused on the short term.
  4. Engaging SMEs in the first place is an obstacle.
  5. Speaking the language of business.
  6. Advisors often have different backgrounds and experiences from business owners.
  7. Energy is not a core priority for many SMEs.
  8. There is a need to get ‘buy in’ from colleagues – in both directions of a business hierarchy.

Another challenge that was not mentioned in the video but is discussed in Hampton (2018) is that SMEs can be quite defensive. Here are some quotes from this article:

  • ‘You do get people who say “oh yes, it’s fully insulated” because they just want to tell you it is. They are a bit protective, and want to think “I’m doing everything I can”.’
  • ‘People always think it’s a solution for somebody else. It’s for other people. “I’m not part of the problem”.’

Engaging with SMEs on environmental issues is challenging for a variety of reasons. These include the fact that SMEs are often time-poor; they are focused on the day-to-day running of the organisation, and climate change is not high on their list of priorities.

Additionally, advisors find that environmental messages don’t tend to be effective when first reaching out to businesses through marketing channels such as social media. Claiming to save an SME money might help an advisor to get in the front door. However, if advisors want to achieve lasting impact, they face the challenge of steering the conversation away from cost savings, toward environmental issues.

This course aims to help practitioners to have more meaningful and productive conversations. Later in the course, you’ll get a chance to reflect on whether money-saving messaging is compatible with these, or whether it sets up unhelpful expectations that mean it is harder to talk about values.

2.1 Economic arguments

The second activity in this session introduces the debate about whether purely economic arguments are sufficient to engage SMEs effectively.

Activity 2.2: Are economic, ‘business case’ arguments enough?

Timing: This activity should take approximately 15 minutes

Take a look at this short reading and make your own notes on the questions that follow. Save your notes so that you can refer back to them at the end of the course.

So far, you have heard from a few low carbon advisors that in order to initiate discussions with SMEs about energy efficiency or environmental impact, the best way is to promote support services using financial messages. The majority of environmental programmes aimed at SMEs adopt a variant of the phrase ‘save money – save the planet’, sometimes described as ‘win–win’. The promotional poster below is from a fictional low carbon SME support organisation, but uses typical imagery and messaging.

Described image

The benefit of this kind of marketing message is that it is a clear and simple message that appeals to what many businesses consider their top priority. However,this message has several limitations:

  1. It sends mixed messages in terms of values. By promising financial savings, it appeals to a business-owner’s ‘self-enhancing’ values; whereas ‘saving the planet’ appeals to ‘self-transcending’ values, of taking action for the greater good. Many psychologists argue that this kind of mixed messaging won’t lead to a permanent change in attitude towards the environment: those individuals who do take action are unlikely to be equally motivated by each of these principles.
  2. It dilutes the importance of taking pro-environmental action for its own sake. If advisors feel the need to justify action to business owners on financial grounds, they are making an implicit assumption about the business owner’s principal motivations, which may not be accurate.
  3. The ‘energy efficiency paradox’ describes the observation that SMEs do not take up opportunities for energy savings, even when they involve little or no investment. From this we can conclude that financial arguments are not sufficient to motivate SMEs to take action, and that other barriers must be overcome. When publicly subsidised programmes offer free advice and grants, they are simply aiming to improve the persuasiveness of financial arguments for taking action. More needs to be done to appreciate and address the variety of other factors besides financial cost–benefit that contribute to SMEs decision-making processes.
  4. It cannot address the large number of necessary actions and will not lead to financial savings in the short term. Tackling climate change is an enormous, system-wide task that will take decades, and although research has argued that the economic costs of inaction far outweigh the costs of mitigation in the long term, there may not be an immediate return for the organisations concerned. It can set particular kinds of expectations for the advisor prior to a face-to-face visit. For example, if a business owner has welcomed an energy advisor primarily on the basis that they may save them money, they are likely to be disappointed if no significant savings can be identified without additional investment or the trickier topic of staff behaviour change. Although advisors are often able to identify opportunities for efficiency, the framing and expectations of this meeting may make it difficult for them to steer the conversation on to the ‘softer stuff’, or to other (non-financial) benefits.

Now make your own notes on the following questions:

  1. Do you agree with the arguments presented in the reading?
  2. Besides making financial savings, what other messages might encourage businesses to consider their environmental impact?
To use this interactive functionality a free OU account is required. Sign in or register.
Interactive feature not available in single page view (see it in standard view).
Comment

The issue of how to engage effectively with SMEs remains a live debate, and you may well have strong views about the role that purely economic, or ‘business case’ arguments play, whether this is based on your own work experiences or on a broader review of the field.

As the reading suggests, there is research evidence to support the case for going beyond the conventional ‘win–win’ argument and for making use of other influencers, including the personal values of business owners and managers (Jansson et al., 2017; Schaefer et al., 2018). However, it is also the case that advisors often find themselves needing to demonstrate a clear financial return. If you remain sceptical, we would encourage you to keep an open mind for the time being – we will revisit this issue at the end of the course.

For further information on the use of imagery for climate communications, refer to the Effective communication guide  produced by Climate Outreach.

Thinking point

Do you think that SMEs are becoming more aware, and more concerned, about the impact they have on the environment? What kind of link is there between awareness and concern: does one always follow on from the other?

Summary and action points

In this session we have heard from low carbon advisors about the biggest challenges they face in their professional roles. It is clear that the nature of these challenges vary widely, and that in order to overcome them all advisors are required to have a wide range of skills, from the technical, to the empathetic, to the persuasive.

You should now be able to:

  • Appreciate the diverse skill-sets required to be an effective intermediary for SMEs.
  • Reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of using financial arguments to motivate environmental action.
  • Explain what is meant by the ‘energy efficiency paradox’.

You have now completed Session 2.