Category Archives: CSR

Do As I Say, Don’t Do As I Do!

As promised, today is Masquerade Monday.

There’s a lot of hype about the importance of ethics and sustainability to today’s consumers and how companies that aren’t sustainable and ethical are at risk of consumer boycotts and bankruptcy.

But is this really the case?

In an attempt to answer this question, Trade Extensions commissioned Fly Research to conduct two general public awareness surveys to answer the question. Fly Research collected 1,000 responses from US consumers and 1,000 responses from UK consumers. The results were not quite what you might expect.

While 47% of UK and 48% of US consumers say they “try to buy from companies with a good record on sustainability and ethics, but don’t always“, when asked what was important when shopping for goods only 9% of UK and 16% of US consumers rank “ethical company/brand” in the top 3 attributes. In contrast, 87% are more concerned with value for money, 76% are more concerned with price, and 73% are more concerned with quality I’d expect.

Furthermore, when given the choice, only 31% of US and 19% of UK companies are much more likely to buy from companies with proven policies on sustainability and ethics. And, furthermore, while 90% state that they would be happy to pay a little more if they knew that an item was sustainably sourced, the majority, 47%, would not pay more than 5% extra!

In other words, while the masses say they want sustainability and ethics, they want sustainability and ethics only as long as it doesn’t cost them anything.

220 Years Ago Today, Congress Banned US Vessels from Supplying Slaves to Other Countries

However, slavery was not banned in the US until 1862, 68 years later! It’s unfortunate that while the Congress of 1794 was enlightened enough to ban the spread of slavery, they were not progressive enough (or should I say benevolent enough) to ban slavery outright. The sad truth is that the forefathers of the robber barons new that cheap labour was the key to building their empire, and didn’t want to ban slavery as the cheapest labour was free labour.

And the lust for cheap labour continues until this day. The abolition of slavery didn’t do much to increase the average person’s quality of life as there were no minimum wage law until 1933 and no minimum wage law between 1935 and 1938 (as the first law was struck down by the Supreme Court). As a result, only those lucky enough to be protected by the unions in the mid-to-late 19th century had any guarantee of a decent wage until the minimum wage act came into force.

And what happened when the minimum wage reached its highest purchasing power ever in 1968? The new robber barons of the 1970’s started to look abroad for cheaper labour and by the early 1980’s, the biggest organizations were starting to outsource to China, Vietnam, and other low-cost locales. (And when those locales got expensive, outsourcing spread to other locales like India, Malaysia, and the Philippines and a blind-eye was turned when the supply chain used child labour.)

The lesson here is that 220 years ago the Congress of the United States embarked along the right path with a very ethical decision to ban US ships from supplying slaves to other nations, but didn’t follow up with an across-the-board ban on slavery. As a result, slavery endured for three more generations and gave the US a black eye from a historical human rights perspectives that it need not have gotten. Similar tardiness with respect to unions’ rights legislation, minimum wage laws, equal rights laws, and child labour laws have also resulted in black eyes either for the nation or some of its biggest corporations that spread its image around the world.

There’s no need for any of this, especially today when your organization can control its fate and its image (and have a positive effect on the image of its country). It’s time for you to put an end to “just do as I say, don’t do as I do” in your supply chain and take proactive efforts to make sure you’re socially responsible across the board and across the supply chain. Stand up and make the US a leader in global human and worker rights initiatives. Show the emerging markets what they have to achieve if they truly want to be a first world super-power. It’s not just about GDP.

Top 12 Challenges Facing India in the Decades Ahead – 08 – Poverty

As per our last post, India is poor. Really poor. By far the poorest of the BRICs with 2/3rds of the population poor by any reasonable definition of poverty. Just how poor is India? In just about any ranking that matters, it’s not well off. When it is compared to the 16 countries outside of sub-saharan Africa that are poorer than it, India is in the lower half of the rankings at best, and near, or at, the bottom in a few cases.

For example, let’s start with some of the leading social indicators (Source: An Uncertain Glory, p 49):

  • Life Expectancy at Birth: 9th
  • Infant and Under-5 Mortality Rates: 10th
  • Access to Improved Sanitation: 13th
  • Mean Years of Schooling: 11th
  • Literacy Rate: 9th for Males, 11th for Females
  • Proportion of Children Under 5 Undernourished: 15th

And this list includes Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia, Haiti, Krygyzstan, Laos, Moldova, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua, New Guinea, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Yemen!

Consider the sanitation metric in particular. In Bangladesh, which is considerably poorer than India, only 8.4% of the households practice open defecation. However, in India, 55% of households practice open defecation. How can you become a first world country if you can’t even provide your citizens with toilets? (Or even outhouses?)

The metrics are even worse when you compare it to the BRICs. Worst life expectancy. Worst mortality rates. Least access to sanitation. Worst literacy rates. Most undernourishment. In addition, it has the lowest immunization rates and the lowest health care expenditures as a percentage of GDP.

With respect to health care, India did launch the National Rural Health Mission in 2005-2006, but allocated it a measly RS 10,000 crores per year for the fist five years. Given that almost 70% of India’s population is still rural, if two-thirds are poor and likely in need of the program, that’s about 560 Million people who could use help from the program. If you do the math, that’s less than 1 rupee per five people! Plus, it seems to be going down a road of privatization, relying on private institutions and private insurance, with public transfers for the poor who make the BPL (Below Poverty Line) cutoff and qualify, and this is a direction that has yet to work successfully for any major country. In almost every country with good health care, a good public system preceded a good private system.

SI could go on, but you get the point. While India is increasing its GDP at a relatively rapid rate, it is still poor (and the poorest of the BRICs) and the average person is really poor and needs a lot of social assistance to even reach the same standard of life that poor people have in China, Brazil, and Russia. With about 800 Billion people who could use some form of government assistance, this is a huge burden in a country that collects, on average, 1 US dollar for every 3 citizens in tax revenue.

While You’re Celebrating Your Thanksgiving in the U.S.

Think about what you can do to make the rest of the world, including the 870 Million people in the world who are chronically under-nourished, thankful as well.

As Procurement Pros, you have a lot of control over the global food supply whether you realize it or not. Money does talk, and with enough pressure, the supply chain will walk to your marching orders. And if those orders are appropriate, maybe we can prevent half of the food being produced going to waste.

According to The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, roughly 1/3rd of the food produced in the world for human consumption every year, approximately 1.3 Billion Tons, gets lost or wasted — due to losses during harvesting, storage, transport, and processing. This loss is almost four times what would be needed to feed all of the chronically under-nourished people in the world, and part of the reason food reserves are at an all time low.

And to make matters worse, the growth, and partial harvesting, storage, transport and / or processing produces 3.3 Billion tons of CO2 emissions and wastes precious water and energy resources. So, not only are people starving when there should be enough food, but we’re wasting limited fresh water and energy in the production of the food that is being wasted.

In developing countries, 40% of this loss is occurring at post-harvest and processing levels due to financial, managerial, and technical constraints in harvesting techniques as well as storage and cooling facilities. Additional infrastructure investments would solve the financial and technical issues, and getting smart people on the ground would solve the managerial issues. If a large grocery chain decided to invest on the ground, and reduce loss from an average of 35% to 10%, it would effectively increase production by almost 40% and lower the cost per unit by almost 30%. (Production levels go from 65% to 90%. 40% of 90% is 36%. 30% of 90% is 27%.) This is not a hard problem to solve. And it wouldn’t take too long before the grocery chain saw ROI.

In developed countries, more than than 40% of losses happen at retail and consumer levels. Faster transport, better storage, and better inventory planning could have a big impact at the retail level. The only thing a Procurement Pro can’t really control is consumer waste.

So think about what changes you can make in your organization to minimize food waste and encourage investments on the ground in the regions, and on the farms, you depend on. And when costs go down, your organization will have something to be thankful for too!

Stop Blaming the Supplier! Melamine in the Milk is Your Fault!

Research reveals that only 6% of procurement managers and directors have ever been made aware of unethical activity in their supply chain. (Source: EY.com)

As much as we’d like to believe that only 6% of supply chains have unethical activity, given that almost 86% of North American companies have a supply chain reliance upon China alone for key parts1, that’s a pipe dream. Depending on how rigid you want your definition of ethical to be, I’d guess that the number should be closer to 60%.

So why is it your fault if your supplier does it? Simple. It’s because less than half of your organizations do any due diligence in their supply chains! Only 48% of UK firms do any due diligence at all! Even worse, 14% of respondents to the EY survey did not even know what third-party due diligence meant, for crying out loud! You have to do due diligence and you have to ask tough questions and someone who can be trusted has to do a site visit to major suppliers at some point. If you do all this, and the supplier lies through their teeth, then, while your company may still be held financially responsible, it won’t be held criminally responsible and ethically you will know you did all you could (except cut the supplier loose before they did the unethical act, but at least you can cut them loose as soon as they do).

This is why you need good supply chain visibility, document management, and CSR monitoring. There are companies that do this, including Resilinc, Integration Point, and Ecovadis. (See the Vendor Post Index or Resource Site for more.) Reach out and get these types of solutions if you don’t already have them. They will be worth it.

1 Supply Chain Disruptions, Ted Landgraf, Above the Standard Procurement Group, July 15, 2012