As Newstalk’s George Hook rightly observed (26/11/2010) to talk about ethical business behaviour implies that there is unethical business behaviour - which of course there is. But is this ever excusable?
Of course a brand accused of any immoral wrongdoing would be quick to defend itself on some ground, but could one such ground be ignorance, or perhaps even innocence?
For the Conservative Party’s Children’s Taskforce, I interviewed a global food brand’s marketing director regarding its website’s inappropriate content for children, and he claimed to be unaware of the brand’s online activity. Admittedly, the bigger the brand the greater the challenge to be aware of all aspects of its marketing, but isn’t that one to which a senior manager must rise?
The much publicised Nike story of many years ago is a case in point: Senior managers at the time claimed to be unaware of the full extent of their suppliers’ questionable ethical behaviour. They quickly discovered that ignorance was not bliss, and that everything along the brand’s value and supply chains was applicable to, and impacted on, their business and their bottom line. Nike’s stated innocence of their suppliers’ guilt, at the time held little sway amongst consumers and it is a lesson well learnt by one of the world’s leading and most successful brands.
The role of marketing within an organisation means its tentacles should reach every aspect of the business. Where it may be difficult for its controller to be cognisant in detail, of all marketing-related activity, it is at least advisable to have best practices articulated, updated and embedded within the organisation.
Of course codes, contracts and committees can’t guarantee behaviour. But they at least show an intent, signal an expectation, and importantly layout an agenda for a pre-emptive discussion. All of which endorse a brand’s ethical position and clearly signpost that stance to partners, suppliers and stakeholders.
This blog’s wordcount is only the tip of the iceberg regarding this debate, but my ultimate conclusion is not so much that innocent guilt exists, but that guilty innocence is unacceptable and inadvisable for any marketer in this day and age.
