Showing posts with label Seventh Generation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Seventh Generation. Show all posts

A Responsibility Revolution Excerpt - Part Two

Q&A with B Corporation Co-Founder Jay Coen Gilbert
A Responsibility Revolution Extra
From authors Jeffrey Hollender & Bill Breen

During the two years they spent writing The Responsibility Revolution, authors Jeffrey Hollender and Bill Breen conducted an intensive series of interviews at key companies on the leading edge of the corporate responsibility movement. In this bonus excerpt from Bill’s conversations with Timberland CEO Jeffrey Swartz and Timberland CSR Strategy Manager Beth Holzman, they share some of the additional insights and perspectives these encounters provided.

 

Ambiguity is not an option. For any company that seriously intends to harness the power of the marketplace to crack society’s biggest challenges, authenticity—the capacity to do what you say you’ll do—is a core, non-negotiable attribute.

And that presents a problem.

Given the rise in greenwashing and cause-related marketing, how is a consumer or investor to know whether a “responsible” company’s bona fides are credible or counterfeit? The short answer is to dare to be a  B Corp. As we suggest in our book, The Responsibility Revolution, B Corporation’s certification system amounts to an irrefutable benchmark against which a company’s social and environmental performance can now be judged in its entirety. (That’s why Seventh Generation is a proud founding member.)

And yet, B Corporation is more than an acid test for authenticity. It’s also a support system for an emerging category of hybrid companies that are driven by social as well as financial goals. Here, in excerpts from Bill’s interview, B Corporation co-founder Jay Coen Gilbert delivers a report from the future of corporate responsibility 2.0. 

Q: What’s the problem that B Corporation seeks to solve?

Coen Gilbert: As important as the government and non-profit sectors are in addressing the social and environmental challenges that confront society, they're insufficient. More than three-quarters of economic activity consists of for-profit businesses, as measured by GDP. Business has the scale and speed to address the challenges of our time, whether its climate change, global poverty, or strengthening communities.

You really have to acknowledge that business is in the driver's seat—and then figure which direction you want it to go in. Our aim is to support the power of markets and entrepreneurship to solve social and environmental problems.

Q: Skeptics would argue that companies are responsible for shareholders, not society. Aren’t activist groups and non-governmental organizations better equipped to confront society’s challenges?

Coen Gilbert: The non-profit sector has a hugely important role to play, because there are plenty of places where the marketplace can’t reach. The problem is that structurally, 501(c)(3) organizations, or non-profits, are legally precluded from attracting the kind of capital that’s commensurate with the size of the need. So we're seeing non-profit innovators try to push their organizations to look and act more businesslike, in terms of their accountability, impact, and scale.  And we're seeing more and more for-profit entrepreneurs moving their purely market-driven businesses to incorporate mission.

Both ends of the spectrum are pushing towards a middle path, where you marry the power of markets with the purpose and mission of non-profits.

Q: So what’s preventing those two trends from accelerating?

Coen Gilbert: Non-profits’ legal structure makes it really difficult for them to attract the kind of capital that can scale their good ideas. And the legal structure for a business requires it to have a single fiduciary duty, which is to achieve a maximum return to shareholders.  That legal framework can have a huge chilling effect on the potential for for-profit social entrepreneurs to use their business to drive social value.

Q: How does B Corp attempt to reconcile those two impediments? 

Coen Gilbert: It allows you to raise capital and create some personal wealth out of all your efforts, but it also ensures that you maintain your mission over time. The “B” stands for the benefits that are created for all of the stakeholders engaged in your business, not just your shareholders. And it ensures that there's a balanced set of interests that are considered in your boardroom, rather than just the one dominant interest of shareholders.

In a B Corp, you can do what is required to grow your business and increase your impact, and if that requires relinquishing financial control [through a merger or acquisition], you can do that without relinquishing mission control.

Q: Why not simply advocate for legislation that encourages companies to consider the needs of their stakeholders as well as their shareholders? 

Coen Gilbert: We are totally not about regulatory solutions. We are a market-based solution, which says, "Empower those entrepreneurs and those investors with the tools they need to create the change they seek.” We want to have an evolved corporate form that meets the needs of an evolved set of entrepreneurs and investors.

Q:When you were designing the B Corporation template, were you also reacting to the rise in greenwashing? 

Coen Gilbert: That was a huge piece of it. Any company can put out ads with windmills and pretty flowers. But only certain companies can actually say that they've been certified as meeting a higher standard of corporate purpose, accountability, performance, and transparency. That's the new bar. The new bar is not a slick marketing campaign.

Q: How are companies using the B Corp certification to re-orient their strategy or goals? 

Coen Gilbert: There’s a consulting company in Philadelphia called Strategy Arts that went through the B-rating system. Because you get a higher score by serving customers that are delivering a social or environmental impact, Strategy Arts dramatically shifted its focus to working with sustainable businesses, rather than just any client who could pay the bill.

King Arthur Flour has talked about using the rating system to assess the companies in its supply chain. Private equity firms like  TBL Capital are starting to use B Corp standards to help ensure that they’re investing in triple-bottom line businesses.

In fact, more than 5,000 organizations and investors that aren’t B Corps have nevertheless used the rating system to asses the underlying social-environmental performances of other businesses. It helps them move from investing in mainstream companies that are simply trying to avoid doing harm, to enterprises that are actively creating some form of positive social impact.

When you direct the flow of capital towards impact investing, you begin to influence the marketplace in a way that far exceeds the effect of any one individual company.

Q: What’s the long-range potential for this “middle path” you’ve described, where mission and markets connect?  

Coen Gilbert: Fifty years ago, there was no such thing as a non-profit sector. Now it’s an entire ecosystem. In a generation, we believe this new sector will be at least as big as the non-profit sector is today, which is around five to seven percent of U.S. GDP.  And unlike the non-profit sector, the B Corp sector isn’t capped, in terms of its growth potential.

The 20th century was the century of shareholder capitalism. The 21st century, over time, will be the century of stakeholder capitalism, comprised of B corporations whose job is to create both shareholder and societal value.


Jeffrey Hollender and Bill Breen are co-authors of the recently published book, The Responsibility Revolution . Bill Breen is the Editorial Director, and Jeffrey Hollender is the Co-Founder and Executive Chair of Seventh Generation. Jeffrey is also the author of The Inspired Protagonist, a leading blog on corporate responsibility.

Recycle, Reuse, Rejoice!



Share/Bookmark

The Best Green Claim

Win With the Best Green Claim!

Submit the best green claim and win a Seventh Generation Healthy Home Starter Kit!  I’ll be reviewing these Seventh Generation home products.  These include multi-surface cleaner, disinfecting wipes, shower cleaner, paper towels and a few other items.  If you’re claim wins you will receive this great package of products for your home.  The winner will be announced Monday, April 12th.  So get your claims in today!  Read More HERE >>>

 

Posted via web from The Green Blog Network


Share/Bookmark

A Responsibility Revolution Extra: The Truth About Transparency

Guest Post from Jeffrey Hollender & Bill Breen


Timberland CEO Jeffrey Swartz and CSR Strategy Manager Beth Holzman: The Truth About Transparency A Responsibility Revolution Extra


 

 During the two years they spent writing The Responsibility Revolution, authors Jeffrey Hollender and Bill Breen conducted an intensive series of interviews at key companies on the leading edge of the corporate responsibility movement. In this bonus excerpt from Bill’s conversations with Timberland CEO Jeffrey Swartz and Timberland CSR Strategy Manager Beth Holzman, they share some of the additional insights and perspectives these encounters provided.

 


 

No company can claim to be authentically responsible if it doesn’t dare to get a little naked. Radical transparency—revealing your good, bad, and ugly impacts on society and the environment—is the first step toward turning critics into collaborators and collectively inventing aggressive ways to operate sustainably. As we show in The Responsibility Revolution, few publicly traded enterprises have done as much as the Timberland Company to innovate around transparency.

 

Along with Nike and Gap, Timberland was among the first big brands to reveal the locations of its suppliers’ factories and open them up to outside scrutiny. More recently, Timberland developed its Green Index, modeled on a nutrition label, which rates many of the company’s hiking boots and shoes on their environmental impact. There’s also the quarterly phone dialogs with CEO Jeffrey Swartz, in which callers query him about hot-button issues like eco-labeling and sustainable sourcing, and many more strategies for building a glass house.

 

When Bill Breen and I reviewed his interviews with Swartz, and other corporate-responsibility execs, we found that they’d dug into five essential truths about transparency. Each comes through hard-won experience.

 

Transparency is often irritating, difficult, and scary.

 

Swartz: Our efforts to be more transparent around our good and bad impacts on society and the environment started with the disingenuous discourse between activists and brands about where our factories are located. It was kind of a silly argument. It’s not hard to figure out where 300 million shoes are manufactured in China. Ten minutes with a phone book would give you the addresses. I didn’t want to have that conversation. And the best way to not have the conversation was to simply reveal the damn locations.

 

Holzman: When it came to releasing our factories’ locations, our biggest fear was that it might reveal secrets to our competitors, or they might learn of factories that they hadn’t considered sourcing from. But by 2005, the truth was inescapable: If we really are trying to improve the conditions in these factories and build trust with the stakeholders who are our biggest critics, we need to put it all out there.

 

Transparency starts conversations, which spurs collaboration.

 

Swartz: The important thing wasn’t the factories’ locations. The important question was the next question, Should [activists] see how these factories operate? That’s a good idea. Because once inside, they’d see that factories are dirty, smelly, noisy, and sometimes dangerous. I wouldn’t be in them unless I had made a judgment that I could defend to my kids. But the solutions to improving factory conditions are nowhere near as simple as we’d like them to be. Innovation can come from any seat in the orchestra, and by creating more of a three-dimensional dialogue with outside groups, we open up real opportunities for innovation that we wouldn’t otherwise capture.

 

Holzman: As it turned out, our competitors were in many of the very same factories that we were in. So we began to pool our resources to work collectively to improve conditions, instead of working individually on a one-off basis. For example, we’ve collaborated with Levi-Strauss and other brands on auditing the factories that we collectively source from. This frees up resources for our assessors and the factory management to focus on longer-range challenges, such as developing worker-training opportunities and upgrading management systems. The resulting improvements inevitably impact conditions on the factory floor.

 

Transparency depends on data.

 

Swartz: To be more transparent, you first need to gather lots of information. If you look at the environmental footprints we have in manufacturing only footwear, the volume of what we’ve learned—in an effort to go back to activists to say here’s what we know—has amazed us at almost every turn. 

 

Gary Hirshberg first alerted us to the fact that we were wasting time looking inside our factories, that in terms of our environmental impact it’s all about the cows. Methane emissions from cows are our single biggest source of greenhouse gas, by far. The problem is, nobody slaughters a cow for its hide.  They slaughter it for its meat. The hide and especially the leather that goes into our boots is a derivative product. But still, we have a derivative responsibility. Cows emitting methane might be only 20% of our problem, but we need to be accountable for our entire supply chain, from cows in the field to shipping the final product.

 

Timberland is not a cow company; it’s a shoe company. But it turns out that the best way for us to be a more sustainable company is to innovate around the cows—to find ways to use less leather.

 

Holzman: We had a lot of pressure from stakeholders on leather.  So we needed to have a lot more transparency around where that leather comes from and how it’s procured and tanned, since there’s a lot of chemicals and processes involved. As a result, we are now working with several other brands through the Leather Working Group to establish better protocols and measurements. If you don’t have the data and you don’t have those deep partnerships, your transparency initiative won’t win much credibility.

 

Transparency promotes accountability.

 

Swartz: I got the idea for the design of our Green Index labels from the signage at Whole Foods. The signs were very simple in their assertions: Here’s where this produce comes from. Here’s why it’s organic. I thought, Why can’t we put some kind of signage or label on our products, as a way to show their environmental impact? All the regulatory folks at Timberland told me my idea was dumber than dirt. We’d be admitting that we pollute, that we aren’t good at what we do. They argued that we don’t have a legal requirement to disclose, so why do it? But I believe naively that if you tell the truth, most people will applaud.

 

Holzman: The Green Index is obviously an eco-label that communicates to the consumer, Here’s this product’s environmental footprint. But the Index is even more of a tool for our designers. By publicly scoring the environmental impact of our products, the Index pushes designers to choose raw materials that go into the product, such as organic cotton, that are less harmful. That visibility makes all of us at Timberland accountable; it’s a powerful incentive for promoting sustainability.

 

Transparency is a potent competitive weapon.

 

Swartz: When we say that 5% of our energy is renewable, were also admitting that 95% of our energy isn’t. So I asked our team, How does that 5% compare to Nike? Their answer: there’s no way to know. My reply: There’s one way to know, let’s put the number on a label, and if consumers decide that that’s important, Nike will have to tell them.

 

Now, Nike is competitive, and they won’t want to disclose their energy from renewables unless it’s at least 1% higher than ours. Putting the label on our products is not about the consumer. Because honestly, the amount of pushback from the consumer has been minimal. But as an action-forcing mechanism inside our industry, it’s been dramatic. If Nike gets to 6% renewable, we won’t have a problem as long as we get to 7%. In other words, transparency can force all of us to try to get from 5% to 15% to 50% renewable energy. That’s a conversation that couldn’t have been forced until the motivation was market-based.

 

At the end of the day, if the consumer doesn’t care about this, it won’t work. But the consumer is really a proxy to spur the industry to push the envelope on sustainability.

 


 

Jeffrey Hollender and Bill Breen are co-authors of the recently published book, The Responsibility Revolutihttp://www.jeffhollender.com/responsibility-revolution. Bill Breen is the Editorial Director, and Jeffrey Hollender is the Co-Founder and Executive Chair of Seventh Generation. Jeffrey is also the author of The Inspired Protagonist, a leading blog on corporate responsibility.

 

Recycle, Reuse, Rejoice!

 

Posted via email from The Green Blog Network


Share/Bookmark