http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3TwULu-Wjw
I recently watched this video for another class. I had never heard of Yvon Chouinard or his clothing company "Patagonia". Upon watching this video I was quite taken aback. Patagonia is a company that is doing everything they can to help our environment. Yvon says that we need to "consume less, but consume better". For example, instead of buying a coat for each season, buy just one that works for all seasons. Their products use organic cotton rather than cotton that has been enhanced by chemicals, which may be a bit more expensive, but is much better in the long run. Their entire parking lot is covered with solar panels which produces enough power to run two buildings in their campus. They recycle everything they use and even turn used water bottles into polyester products for their clothing. Yvon has shown that he is very innovative and eco-conscious. He cares about himself and every last stakeholder. The most staggering thing I learned about the company was that they are involved in a project called "1% for the Planet". They give 1% of their sales (not just revenue left over after expenses) to environmental NGO's to, obviously, help the planet. Yvon Chouinard is a leader who is helping protect and better our environment for us now and for future generations. He is very confident in his company. He has developed his leadership skills over time. He began just as a person who loved nature. As time went on he discovered he wanted to make a difference in the world. As time passed, he has continued to innovate and do different things with his company. I am sure that as the world continues to change, his skills will need to be honed to better fit the needs of the company and the planet. My question is, why aren't more companies doing something like Yvon Chouinard and Patagonia to help our environment for the better?
Posted by Jason Svela
I believe that there are more companies out there that are trying to do things for the better of the economy. I feel that there are many organizations that are making an effort to be more evironmentally friendly (thier efforts may just not be large enough to broadcast in the news). A lot of things that are eco-friendly now days are also cheaper for the company in the long run.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, there may be some companies that are known for thier prdoucts and what they do and simply don't want to change. If they do change, they may be risking the generation of their products and their company. However, if they don't change to their surroundings and become more environmentally friendly, they may also hurt thier reputation as well.
What would you suggest? Change product and hurt reputation or hurt environment?
Posted By: Laura Whisenhunt
In one of my courses last semester my class did a case analysis of this company (Patagonia). It was initially started because of the great interest the owner had in the environment as well as they wanted to be the most environmentally friendly company in the industry. The question we were trying to answer was if they were going to expand or not because they were in the position to. But, the major question that came about was that if they were going to expand, were they going to try to keep their reputation as the most environmentally friendly company? The main reason for this is because expanding and keeping their image was going to cost them and they would start to lose their loyal users. This was going to be a big decision for a company because they had a lot riding on that decision. With this decision there was a lot of research done to see if it was going to be beneficial for the company as a whole. They decided not to expand as they initially thought because they wanted to stick to their values.
ReplyDeleteI do think that a lot more companies are starting to join the bandwagon, but at the same time other companies were not started because of the passion for the environment. It takes a lot of work for companies to become fully environmentally friendly. Overall, decisions just similar to the one Patagonia had are going to have to be made by other companies too, it is just more difficult because of the lack of knowledge that most companies have.
--Posted by: Devan Pritchett
I would agree that it is a slippery slope. By doing one thing it may create new benefits, but in return, may hurt the company somewhere else. I think more companies are finally jumping on the bandwagon and becoming more socially responsible. It is a long process that has to be company-wide to be successful. I think that if a company has a chance to do something that helps the environment, whether it be a way to reduce pollutants or conserve energy in some way, they should find a way to get it done while still remaining profitable. I am sure some companies just don't want to deal with the "hassle" of change and keep to the old ways of doing things. I just hope some day they will realize how important earth's resources really are and begin to help protect them the best they can.
ReplyDeletePosted by Jason Svela
I would have to agree that more companies in today's society should start being more social responsible considering global warming. If a lot more companies start going green, and the news then gives them credit for their acts, I personally feel that a lot of other companies would jump on the band wagon and would make a significant difference in today's economy.
ReplyDelete-Steve Fagiano
Just to point out, not only is Patagonia involved in 1% for the planet, but according to the video, Yvon Chouinard created the organization and began recruiting other organizations to be like his own. If one looks at this example from a leader and follower perspective, Yvon Chouinard is demonstrating a great example of leadership through earning the respect of his followers and giving them respect. Further, not only is Yvon Chouinard leading his employees, customers, and multiple other stakeholder groups, but he is recruiting more followers from throughout other organizations by asking them to take to the green initiative. It is truly inspiring to see what one person's leadership can do for so many people.
ReplyDeleteIn response to why other companies may be finding it difficult to "go green," one might look at the difficulty other companies are already having with just turning a profit. Turning a profit can be considered by most stakeholders as the main goal after all. As I learned in a case I also read last semester for my organizational strategy course, Patagonia has many sources of competitive advantage and is turning great profit margins. This could be a very large reason why this company is able to take such large scale initiatives toward the environment, which will only further their image in the long run anyway.
This last post was posted by:
ReplyDeleteJustin Fisher
I believe that many companies are trying to be more eco-conscious. It is a topic that has become much more well-known and companies who are taking on green efforts are seeing great profitability and long-term sustainability. Many companies are probably hesitant about going green because they would likely need to revamp much of their business and that can be costly. Although the high initial costs can be unsettling for some businesses, (especially smaller ones) it will no doubt create a more sustainable company and much more profits in the long run. For this reason, I think more companies should be seeking out new innovative ways to be more eco-friendly if they are not doing so already.
ReplyDeleteposted by: Amanda Goetz