The Triple Bottom Line Blog

Jeffrey Swartz, chief executive of Timberland, makes some intriguing comments in this interview, which unfortunately got somewhat buried in the Saturday edition of the New York Times (the least-read edition of the week).

Swartz expresses frustration with the slowness of the athletic footwear industry to adapt well-documented green manufacturing techniques for shoe production. Whereas companies like Nike, Patagonia, and his own firm have done a reasonable job of working together to improve practices in areas like child labor, progress has been much slower when it comes to, for example, encouraging suppliers to use wind or solar power.

What's most interesting is the reason Swartz cites. It has nothing to do with consumer awareness and motivation, which he says is equally low on all social indicators:

We ask people who just bought a pair of shoes how they made their choice, and the immediate answer is that the price was right, or they liked the look or the color.

Ask people what they know about the human rights or environmental track record of the brand they just bought, and they walk away. People buy on the basis of product attributes, not brand attributes.

Instead, the problem (as so often) relates to decision-making processes. Labor rights, he says, can get dealt with effectively at the middle levels of organizations, where like-minded individuals often have strong networks across the industry: "It's not Timberland and Patagonia collaborating, it's Betsy from Timberland networking with Casey from Patagonia. It's activist to activist, not company to company." But reforming manufacturing methods along eco-friendly lines calls for commitment and coordination at higher levels of the corporation, which is much harder to arrenge.

Of course, Swartz himself occupies that "higher level," so he is in a position to do something about it. The interview ends with an unusually self-reflective, even self-judgmental comment about why he hasn't:

Our competitors are so much bigger than we are, and that makes me reluctant to place the call. But maybe I really should do less lamenting that C.E.O.'s aren’t getting together, and pick up a phone. Maybe that's the answer: I should lament less and dial more.

Yes, we all should. But maybe one of Swartz's fellow CEOs will read the interview and save him a dime by picking up the phone himself.

Meanwhile, the story offers an interesting mini-case-study of how corporate change and the obstacles to such change are both embedded in the nuts-and-bolts of organizational life . . . right down to such petty personal details as whose number is on speed dial in the phones of which competing companies. It's why business leaders who aspire to be change agents can't be satisfied with crafted inspiring mission statements or making powerful speeches. They also have to get deep down into the weeds of what it actually takes to make change happen, which may sometimes mean figuring out who needs to pick up the phone and make the first call.

Labels: Jeffrey Swartz, Management and Organization, Timberland