An article in the Sustainable Brand newsletter (http://tinyurl.com/companytrust) describes a study by Princeton Survey Research Associates that claims that 96% expect companies to behave ethically, 90% expect a focus on protecting the environment and 76% expect companies to limit their environmental damage. However, 10% of the consumers expect that companies can be trusted to do the right thing. The article suggests use of social media to communicate the message regarding steps companies are taking to be more responsible. Should companies take deliberate steps to highlight that they have earned consumer trust and make ethical choices ? Should one expect these steps to be aligned with profit motives in the long run or expect these steps to decrease profitability ? How should companies ensure that ethical practices are propagated across the supply chain ?
Tags
- agriculture
- Amazon
- Apparel
- Apple
- automobiles
- Capability
- Capacity
- China
- Collaboration
- competition
- consumer
- Consumers
- Coordination
- Cost
- Costs
- delivery
- demand
- Demand Surge
- Design
- disruption
- Dual Sourcing
- Ecommerce
- Efficiency
- emb2019
- emb2020
- Environment
- exports
- Fast Fashion
- Food
- Global
- global supply chain
- grocery
- Growth
- healthcare
- hospitals
- imm2018
- Imports
- India
- Infrastructure
- Inventory
- Japan
- Legal
- logistics
- Low Margins
- Loyal Customers
- manufacturing
- Margins
- mgmt5612018
- mgmt5612019
- mgmt5612020
- mgmt5612021
- Outsourcing
- pharmaceutical
- prices
- Quality
- rail
- Rare Earths
- regulation
- Retail
- Retailers
- Risk
- river transport
- Service
- ships
- software
- Suppliers
- Supply Chain
- Survival
- Sustainable
- technology
- transport
- Trends
- US
- WalMart
- Water
-
Recent Posts
Archives
- February 2022
- September 2021
- August 2021
- August 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- June 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- September 2015
- August 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- October 2010
Categories
- Africa
- Air
- airport
- California
- Capacity
- car
- cash
- chicken
- China
- cobalt
- Collaboration
- competitiveness
- congestion
- consumer
- Coordination
- Cost
- delivery
- disruption
- Ecommerce
- emb2019
- emb2020
- emb2021
- fairness
- flash memory
- Global Contexts
- Grain
- hospital
- imm2018
- imm2019
- Innovation
- intellectual property
- IoT
- labeling
- Liability
- logistics
- loyalty
- Made in USA
- manufacturer
- mgmt5612018
- mgmt5612019
- mining
- Operations Management
- ordering
- Prices
- product
- productivity
- queue
- Railroad
- recycling
- retailers
- Service Operations
- ship
- shoes
- Starbucks
- supplier
- Supply Chain Issues
- Sustainability
- technology
- Tesla
- toy
- Train
- transport
- truck
- Uncategorized
- Variety
- vehicles
- waste
Meta
The article shows both the high expectation and low trust of the customers about companies’ ethical behaviors. Under this situation, many companies did do something to highlight their ethical choices deliberately. If you enter the public website of a company, especially these big famous ones, there is always be a space called “social responsibility” or something similar. It seems to be a good way to build up goodwill and manage their brand with a positive impression. And the corresponding logic seems to be: More ethical reporting, more goodwill, more consumer trust and then more revenue. However, as one of the customers, I have doubts on that: Did the company just report what is good and hide what may be wrong? If all the ethical behaviors are true, did the company add the extra cost by doing those things on us? The latter doubt becomes stronger especially when I see companies doing so-called social responsibility activities less related with their main business.
As a kind of organization in pursue of profit, all the activities should serve for companies’ interests. So do their ethical behaviors. Without positive expectation in long term, I believe few companies are willing to invest so much in the social parts. Reasonably, I agree with their choice but reserve my opinion on their implements. Instead of doing extra work less related to their business, trying to offering best service and most value to customers could be more realistic. As for how to present their ethical behaviors, a standard report given by the third part of a certain industry earns more trust from me. Sometimes, we just want to know the truth and then give the trust. Any exaggeration using media power could have the contrary effects and cause extra cost.