What do you think?
Rate this book
Ethical Chic: The Inside Story of the Companies We Think We Love
How popular companies like Apple and Trader Joe’s project a hip, progressive image—and whether we should believe them
Consumers are told that when they put on an American Apparel t-shirt, leggings, jeans, gold bra, or other item, they look hot . Not only do they look good, but they can also feel good because they are helping US workers earn a decent wage (never mind that some of those female workers have accused their boss of sexual harassment). And when shoppers put on a pair of Timberlands, they feel fashionable and as green as the pine forest they might trek through—that is, until they’re reminded that this green company is in the business of killing cows. But surely even the pickiest, most organic, most politically correct buyers can feel virtuous about purchasing a tube of Tom’s toothpaste, right? After all, with its natural ingredients that have never been tested on animals, this company has a forty-year history of being run by a nice couple from Maine . . . well, ahem , until it was recently bought out by Colgate.
It’s difficult to define what makes a company hip and also ethical, but some companies seem to have hit that magic bull’s-eye. In this age of consumer activism, pinpoint marketing, and immediate information, consumers demand everything from the coffee, computer, or toothpaste they buy. They want an affordable, reliable product manufactured by a company that doesn’t pollute, saves energy, treats its workers well, and doesn't hurt animals—oh, and that makes them feel cool when they use it. Companies would love to have that kind of reputation, and a handful seem to have achieved it. But do they deserve their haloes? Can a company make a profit doing so? And how can consumers avoid being tricked by phony marketing?
In Ethical Chic, award-winning author Fran Hawthorne uses her business-investigative skills to analyze six Apple, Starbucks, Trader Joe’s, American Apparel, Timberland, and Tom’s of Maine. She attends a Macworld conference and walks on the factory floors of American Apparel. She visits the wooded headquarters of Timberland, speaks to consumers who drive thirty miles to get their pretzels and plantains from Trader Joe’s, and confronts the founders of Tom’s of Maine. More than a how-to guide for daily dilemmas and ethical business practices, Ethical Chic is a blinders-off and nuanced look at the mixed bag of values on sale at companies that project a seemingly progressive image.
Consumers are told that when they put on an American Apparel t-shirt, leggings, jeans, gold bra, or other item, they look hot . Not only do they look good, but they can also feel good because they are helping US workers earn a decent wage (never mind that some of those female workers have accused their boss of sexual harassment). And when shoppers put on a pair of Timberlands, they feel fashionable and as green as the pine forest they might trek through—that is, until they’re reminded that this green company is in the business of killing cows. But surely even the pickiest, most organic, most politically correct buyers can feel virtuous about purchasing a tube of Tom’s toothpaste, right? After all, with its natural ingredients that have never been tested on animals, this company has a forty-year history of being run by a nice couple from Maine . . . well, ahem , until it was recently bought out by Colgate.
It’s difficult to define what makes a company hip and also ethical, but some companies seem to have hit that magic bull’s-eye. In this age of consumer activism, pinpoint marketing, and immediate information, consumers demand everything from the coffee, computer, or toothpaste they buy. They want an affordable, reliable product manufactured by a company that doesn’t pollute, saves energy, treats its workers well, and doesn't hurt animals—oh, and that makes them feel cool when they use it. Companies would love to have that kind of reputation, and a handful seem to have achieved it. But do they deserve their haloes? Can a company make a profit doing so? And how can consumers avoid being tricked by phony marketing?
In Ethical Chic, award-winning author Fran Hawthorne uses her business-investigative skills to analyze six Apple, Starbucks, Trader Joe’s, American Apparel, Timberland, and Tom’s of Maine. She attends a Macworld conference and walks on the factory floors of American Apparel. She visits the wooded headquarters of Timberland, speaks to consumers who drive thirty miles to get their pretzels and plantains from Trader Joe’s, and confronts the founders of Tom’s of Maine. More than a how-to guide for daily dilemmas and ethical business practices, Ethical Chic is a blinders-off and nuanced look at the mixed bag of values on sale at companies that project a seemingly progressive image.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2012
38 people are currently reading
344 people want to read
About the author
Fran Hawthorne
19 books278 followersFran Hawthorne got sidetracked for three decades writing award-winning nonfiction, including eight books, mainly about consumer activism and business social responsibility. But she's been actually been writing novels since she was in elementary school.
Her newest--HER DAUGHTER--has just been published by Black Rose Writing. Kirkus Review said of it: "A deep dive into the pain of separation and hope for reconciliation conveyed with grace, realism, and empathy."
Fran has also published two other novels, including I MEANT TO TELL YOU (Stephen F. Austin State University Press, November 2022), a finalist for the SARTON AWARD, the ERIC HOFFER BOOK AWARD, the NATIONAL INDIE EXCELLENCE AWARDS (in both contemporary novel and women's fiction), and other honors.
Her newest--HER DAUGHTER--has just been published by Black Rose Writing. Kirkus Review said of it: "A deep dive into the pain of separation and hope for reconciliation conveyed with grace, realism, and empathy."
Fran has also published two other novels, including I MEANT TO TELL YOU (Stephen F. Austin State University Press, November 2022), a finalist for the SARTON AWARD, the ERIC HOFFER BOOK AWARD, the NATIONAL INDIE EXCELLENCE AWARDS (in both contemporary novel and women's fiction), and other honors.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
July 3, 2024
Enjoy reading this book. It go together well with Secret Life of Groceries by Benjamin Lorr. It’s nice to get a chronological story of how well known successful brands developed
August 14, 2017
With this book, Fran Hawthorne, seasoned business writer, attempts to answer the question:
"Is it possible for a product to be both trendy and loved? To be trusted and also loved?"
Fran Hawthorne, Ethical Chic
The criteria Hawthorne used focused on trendiness and philanthropy or "hip v community". She used ratings from various business, consumer and watchdog organizations. She picked only American companies that have public images for both, or what she calls the "double halo". These are the 6 companies: American Apparel
Apple
Starbuck's
Timberland
Tom's of Maine
Trader Joe's
This is a difficult task for a current events book - I think this project is more suited for an article series - because information changes so quickly. In fact, this is the situation Hawthorne describes in her introduction; so some of the information was already obsolete at printing in 2012. Interestingly, the criteria for receiving the "ethical seal of approval" from the various groups and organizations are not only contradictory, but in many cases, negate each other.
After reading the book summary, I honestly thought this was going to be an essay about the power of marketing and public relations in our society. It wasn't, but the idea was mentioned in Hawthorne's final chapter. I also don't agree that these 6 companies are the best choices - only 2 of them are considered the leaders of their industries or sectors. In 2012, 3 of the companies were already subsidiaries of larger conglomerates (4 since then) - so do they really control their product or image? Do they continue to have their current reputations based on their origins? Is it the product itself that's great or the image we perceive?
Event though, it missed the mark for me and left many unanswered questions; this book is an interesting snapshot in time.
"Is it possible for a product to be both trendy and loved? To be trusted and also loved?"
Fran Hawthorne, Ethical Chic
The criteria Hawthorne used focused on trendiness and philanthropy or "hip v community". She used ratings from various business, consumer and watchdog organizations. She picked only American companies that have public images for both, or what she calls the "double halo". These are the 6 companies: American Apparel
Apple
Starbuck's
Timberland
Tom's of Maine
Trader Joe's
This is a difficult task for a current events book - I think this project is more suited for an article series - because information changes so quickly. In fact, this is the situation Hawthorne describes in her introduction; so some of the information was already obsolete at printing in 2012. Interestingly, the criteria for receiving the "ethical seal of approval" from the various groups and organizations are not only contradictory, but in many cases, negate each other.
After reading the book summary, I honestly thought this was going to be an essay about the power of marketing and public relations in our society. It wasn't, but the idea was mentioned in Hawthorne's final chapter. I also don't agree that these 6 companies are the best choices - only 2 of them are considered the leaders of their industries or sectors. In 2012, 3 of the companies were already subsidiaries of larger conglomerates (4 since then) - so do they really control their product or image? Do they continue to have their current reputations based on their origins? Is it the product itself that's great or the image we perceive?
Event though, it missed the mark for me and left many unanswered questions; this book is an interesting snapshot in time.
January 8, 2015
I saw this on the list of the library's new ebooks and I was excited to read it because I'm pretty interested in consuming ethically. Presumably anyone who picks up this book would already be interested in these issues, but it's written to a... less educated consumer audience? Does that make me a snob? Whatever, like, fucking duh you should bring your own mug to coffee shops. It did have some interesting insights about the companies it was evaluating. Also, I was surprised by how lenient it was in its rankings. Like, Hawthorne's conclusion for Trader Joe's is that it doesn't deserve its good reputation for corporate social responsibility, "but who cares?" I mean... I kind of care? That's... kind of why I wanted to read this book? Will Naomi Klein please write a book on this subject? (I mean, I know she already wrote No Logo. You should probably just read No Logo: No Space, No Choice, No Jobs if you're interested in businesses & consumerism & such.
July 1, 2012
While somewhat interesting reading about the various companies, this book drove me nuts with too many conflicting viewpoints. Like pointing out that Apple's high price tags discriminate against low-income people, but also pointing out where wages should be higher. The two issues go hand-in-hand.
Also questioning: "...Trader Joe's has created a false demand for unnecessary consumption. Isn't that socially irresponsible?"
Also have to mention the author's belief that any company that is socially responsible MUST have a union. Not following the logic on that one either.
I guess the gist of this book is that no company is perfect, and even as one tries to identify where companies should be "more perfect", you run into conflicting ideals, where to improve one area, you weaken another.
Also questioning: "...Trader Joe's has created a false demand for unnecessary consumption. Isn't that socially irresponsible?"
Also have to mention the author's belief that any company that is socially responsible MUST have a union. Not following the logic on that one either.
I guess the gist of this book is that no company is perfect, and even as one tries to identify where companies should be "more perfect", you run into conflicting ideals, where to improve one area, you weaken another.
March 11, 2013
This book is a discussion of what exactly makes a company ethical- or socially responsible. Is it how they treat their employees? Their effect on the environment? Where they get their raw materials? Overall, this book gave me a lot more questions than answers, but they are questions that I think more people should be asking about what there are buying, eating, and supporting. The book was very well researched and highly readable, but if you are looking for definitive answers about what to buy and what not to buy, this book doesn't offer any.
August 6, 2013
i liked the concept behind this book, but wasn't super into all the companies she chose. Trader Joe's and Tom's of Maine were the ones that interested me most; feel like I already knew a lot about Apple, Starbucks and American Apparel. Skipped half the chapter on Timberland, cuz meh.
June 4, 2014
Interesting, but this already short book could have been a lot shorter. The author seems to drag it out way more than necessary. For instance, I read more often than I would have liked "I'll address that later in the chapter."
Also, the conclusions are nothing revelatory.
Also, the conclusions are nothing revelatory.
January 25, 2015
Skimmed only. Final conclusion, companies don't mean to be "evil" but sometimes are, but often not on all fronts. And the unifying theme is all corporations rate poorly on their reaction to unions. Go figure.
November 19, 2014
A fun and interesting read, but it leaves you wanting more. I'd enjoy reading a second edition in a few years, with new companies.
September 23, 2014
interesting but not a must read
Read
October 7, 2014The author tries to explores an ideal company: being socially and economically responsible, but also popular and chic.
July 1, 2021
Quotes I liked:
1.
Even during the 2008–2009 downturn and the weak recovery afterward, BusinessWeek magazine noted in amazement that stressed-out, debt-ridden, mortgage-foreclosed consumers still found spare change (or unused credit lines) for Apple iPads and Starbucks lattes. They would forgo a new car, switch from brand-name to generic toiletries, and pick up shampoo at discount outlets, the magazine said in an August 2010 cover story. But Apple and Starbucks were irreplaceable.
2.
Historically, it was the upper crust who defined “cachet,” and the lower classes strove as best as they could to emulate it (or, like Jay Gatsby and Tom Ripley, pretend they were of it). The post–World War II suburban ideal was a Cadillac and a fur coat like a movie star’s. In the modern version, middle-class twentysomethings straight out of college dreamed of Rolexes, Jaguars, a converted loft in SoHo, or a ski house in Vail, then went into debt buying them if they could, or settled for Chinese knock-offs if they had to. In her 1998 book The Overspent American, Juliet B. Schor, then a senior lecturer at Harvard University, described how the ideal has been creeping ever higher, ever further from our means, from keeping up with the neighbors to keeping up with the boss at work to desperately trying to reach the exalted ranks of Beverly Hills, 90210.
3.
A true brand is an instant identity card, signage that separates the members from the outsiders. A community.
4.
In short, the story of Apple has everything you’d want in a heroic myth: David versus Goliath. Near-death and resurrection. Beautiful heroine (or products). Brilliant young hero-genius, misunderstood by the common world, who dares to challenge the status quo. And, apparently, a happy ending.
Until the hero is struck down at the height of his powers.
5.
It was an unusual target from the start. “Some of our members had family members that were working there, and they described kind of a crazy scene,” Coulter recalled. “The owner would ride around the factory on a skateboard. He was a gringo from Canada who spoke Spanish and didn’t wear a suit and tie, the classic patrón model: you drive people hard and then show great fits of generosity.
6.
It’s an important business practice to treat your workforce well, as Henry Ford discovered nearly a century ago, when he began paying his workers a wage high enough that they could afford to buy his Model Ts.
7.
Greenpeace, Rolf Skar said, doesn’t try to tackle the basic philosophy of consumerism. That would be too overwhelming. “We’re looking at pretty discrete questions,” he said, like the deforestation caused by one pulp-and-paper mill or one cattle ranch in the Amazon. One acre of rain forest at a time.
1.
Even during the 2008–2009 downturn and the weak recovery afterward, BusinessWeek magazine noted in amazement that stressed-out, debt-ridden, mortgage-foreclosed consumers still found spare change (or unused credit lines) for Apple iPads and Starbucks lattes. They would forgo a new car, switch from brand-name to generic toiletries, and pick up shampoo at discount outlets, the magazine said in an August 2010 cover story. But Apple and Starbucks were irreplaceable.
2.
Historically, it was the upper crust who defined “cachet,” and the lower classes strove as best as they could to emulate it (or, like Jay Gatsby and Tom Ripley, pretend they were of it). The post–World War II suburban ideal was a Cadillac and a fur coat like a movie star’s. In the modern version, middle-class twentysomethings straight out of college dreamed of Rolexes, Jaguars, a converted loft in SoHo, or a ski house in Vail, then went into debt buying them if they could, or settled for Chinese knock-offs if they had to. In her 1998 book The Overspent American, Juliet B. Schor, then a senior lecturer at Harvard University, described how the ideal has been creeping ever higher, ever further from our means, from keeping up with the neighbors to keeping up with the boss at work to desperately trying to reach the exalted ranks of Beverly Hills, 90210.
3.
A true brand is an instant identity card, signage that separates the members from the outsiders. A community.
4.
In short, the story of Apple has everything you’d want in a heroic myth: David versus Goliath. Near-death and resurrection. Beautiful heroine (or products). Brilliant young hero-genius, misunderstood by the common world, who dares to challenge the status quo. And, apparently, a happy ending.
Until the hero is struck down at the height of his powers.
5.
It was an unusual target from the start. “Some of our members had family members that were working there, and they described kind of a crazy scene,” Coulter recalled. “The owner would ride around the factory on a skateboard. He was a gringo from Canada who spoke Spanish and didn’t wear a suit and tie, the classic patrón model: you drive people hard and then show great fits of generosity.
6.
It’s an important business practice to treat your workforce well, as Henry Ford discovered nearly a century ago, when he began paying his workers a wage high enough that they could afford to buy his Model Ts.
7.
Greenpeace, Rolf Skar said, doesn’t try to tackle the basic philosophy of consumerism. That would be too overwhelming. “We’re looking at pretty discrete questions,” he said, like the deforestation caused by one pulp-and-paper mill or one cattle ranch in the Amazon. One acre of rain forest at a time.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 13, 2018
A very enjoyable read, extensively researched but also casual and conversational in its evaluative technique-- which is nice, as the author veers away from holier-than-thou rhetoric in favor of being flexible, informative and accessible. I disagreed with some of these conclusions, but it would be a shame to recommend a book according to whether or not you're in complete sync with its author. I so value having read this because I believe it breaks good ground as an overview in CSR... And while no book on this topic can stay relevant forever, I so much enjoyed looking into the 2017 status of each company and stacking that up against Hawthorne's 2011 reflections.
To be an informed consumer, it's good to know where to start in your research.
This book can provide that insight for the curious, while telling a compelling story about companies that we all feel we know.
I'm so glad to have stumbled upon it. :)
To be an informed consumer, it's good to know where to start in your research.
This book can provide that insight for the curious, while telling a compelling story about companies that we all feel we know.
I'm so glad to have stumbled upon it. :)
October 5, 2021
Nothing mind blowing
Decent reviews of companies as they were 10 years ago. The discussion of CSR may still be relevant, but the takeaway is “nobody’s perfect, and everyone should have unions looking out for them.”
Decent reviews of companies as they were 10 years ago. The discussion of CSR may still be relevant, but the takeaway is “nobody’s perfect, and everyone should have unions looking out for them.”
June 17, 2018
Some interesting details, but doesn't seem to have a solid coclusion or a call to action the way that you would expect a book like this to do.
February 3, 2020
read about some well known companies and find out how environmentally aware they are
March 22, 2020
Informative and well written!
August 30, 2023
Physical - I skipped around and skimmed this, it just wasn’t as interesting/informative as I expected
October 28, 2012
The main reason I picked up this book was because it had a chapter on Trader Joe's. While I know lots of people who RAVE about Trader Joe's I think they are mainly hype and not the perfect place to buy food. But, I decided to read the whole book since the author was going to look at 6 companies to see if they live up to their hype. Overall, the book was OK. In some of the chapters there was a LOT of detail and information, but I felt like some of the chapters left you wanted to know more. It wasn't a book I flew through reading since it was full of details and facts about each company. While it was interesting to see how badly some of the companies scored in reality vs. the hype I wouldn't really recommend this book.
There were a few quotes that I did find interesting though:
"Apple has historically been less environmentally responsible, less worker friendly, and much less open than other tech companies and merely average in the conditions of its overseas plants, even as it has been more beloved by the public. Nor do activists expect that corporate emphasis to change significantly now that Jobs has died. But, here's the hopeful part: starting around 2005, even while Jobs was still alive and in charge, the company, concerned about its poor image, began paying more attention to environmental and sweatshop problems. And if there's one thing Apple knows, it's image." (p. 74)
"'They have to be the first, and once they're not the first, I think they fight tooth and nail against being pressured into doing anything,' [Wood Turner of Climate Counts] said. So, if all of its tech rivals are already recycling old computers or pressuring their suppliers to reduce packaging, Apple certainly isn't going to copy them, no matter how much better that would be for the environment." (p. 95)
"Perhaps most important, this is an industry where ethical shoppers have lots of good choices, including food co-ops, farmers' markets, health food stores, community-supported-agriculture programs, local specialty shops, and - easiest of all - unionized supermarket chains. Surely we can find enough to eat in those places [instead of Trader Joe's]." (p. 121)
"Food is another area where questionable marketing abounds. Food writer Michael Pollan, in his book The Omnivore's Dilemma, described buying a free-range, organic chicken at Whole Foods, sold by a company called Petaluma Poultry, whose packaging boasted that Petaluma's 'farming methods strive to create harmonious relationships in nature, sustaining the health of all creatures and the natural world.' The label even gave the chicken a name: Rosie. But when Pollan tracked down his chicken, its ostensibly 'harmonious' farm 'turns out to be more animal factory than farm,' he wrote. 'She lives in a shed with twenty thousand other Rosies,' and her supposed free range is a door that 'remains firmly shut until the birds are at least five or six weeks old.' The mass-production chicken giant Perdue Farms ran a TV commercial in 2009 showing company chairman Jim Perdue strolling through a barn with a bunch of happy hens waddling around, while bragging that all Perdue chickens are cage-free. Wow. So Perdue has become, like, organic and stuff? No. All factory-farmer roasters are technically cage-free. The only time that 'cage-free' matters is for egg-laying hens." (p. 162)
There were a few quotes that I did find interesting though:
"Apple has historically been less environmentally responsible, less worker friendly, and much less open than other tech companies and merely average in the conditions of its overseas plants, even as it has been more beloved by the public. Nor do activists expect that corporate emphasis to change significantly now that Jobs has died. But, here's the hopeful part: starting around 2005, even while Jobs was still alive and in charge, the company, concerned about its poor image, began paying more attention to environmental and sweatshop problems. And if there's one thing Apple knows, it's image." (p. 74)
"'They have to be the first, and once they're not the first, I think they fight tooth and nail against being pressured into doing anything,' [Wood Turner of Climate Counts] said. So, if all of its tech rivals are already recycling old computers or pressuring their suppliers to reduce packaging, Apple certainly isn't going to copy them, no matter how much better that would be for the environment." (p. 95)
"Perhaps most important, this is an industry where ethical shoppers have lots of good choices, including food co-ops, farmers' markets, health food stores, community-supported-agriculture programs, local specialty shops, and - easiest of all - unionized supermarket chains. Surely we can find enough to eat in those places [instead of Trader Joe's]." (p. 121)
"Food is another area where questionable marketing abounds. Food writer Michael Pollan, in his book The Omnivore's Dilemma, described buying a free-range, organic chicken at Whole Foods, sold by a company called Petaluma Poultry, whose packaging boasted that Petaluma's 'farming methods strive to create harmonious relationships in nature, sustaining the health of all creatures and the natural world.' The label even gave the chicken a name: Rosie. But when Pollan tracked down his chicken, its ostensibly 'harmonious' farm 'turns out to be more animal factory than farm,' he wrote. 'She lives in a shed with twenty thousand other Rosies,' and her supposed free range is a door that 'remains firmly shut until the birds are at least five or six weeks old.' The mass-production chicken giant Perdue Farms ran a TV commercial in 2009 showing company chairman Jim Perdue strolling through a barn with a bunch of happy hens waddling around, while bragging that all Perdue chickens are cage-free. Wow. So Perdue has become, like, organic and stuff? No. All factory-farmer roasters are technically cage-free. The only time that 'cage-free' matters is for egg-laying hens." (p. 162)
March 10, 2020
This contain enormous amount of information and that makes it more difficult to process. I frequently lost my concentration and enthusiasm about what will happen next. However, in terms of authenticity, this book builds up solid reasoning and logic behind a claim. But to be honest, since this book is really old, there is no so much necessity to read this in 2020.
August 22, 2012
Ethical chic exposes the dirty little secrets of six beloved companies: Tom's of Maine, Timberland, Starbucks, Trader Joe's, Apple and American Apparel. By far, American Apparel is the worst contender to be crowned hardly ethical in reality, and its fiscal management is hardly sane either.
Starbucks gets excoriated because most people take their coffee to go and the paper cups aren't recycled plus there's no option of being served their coffee in a ceramic mug if you're dining in one of their stores.
Apple's prime unethical practice was its sweatshop scandal recently. Trader Joe's sources their products from around the world, so they use exorbitant amounts of fossil fuel to transport the goods instead of buying local food.
I admit, I buy one of the Bistro Boxes from Starbucks once a week for lunch. I buy a hot chocolate or other drink from Starbucks about three times a year. I don't drink coffee, and I wouldn't pay $4 for a latte for the pleasure of adding 300 calories to my waistline.
I'd like to read a book about ethical companies that get ecology and economics right.
Starbucks gets excoriated because most people take their coffee to go and the paper cups aren't recycled plus there's no option of being served their coffee in a ceramic mug if you're dining in one of their stores.
Apple's prime unethical practice was its sweatshop scandal recently. Trader Joe's sources their products from around the world, so they use exorbitant amounts of fossil fuel to transport the goods instead of buying local food.
I admit, I buy one of the Bistro Boxes from Starbucks once a week for lunch. I buy a hot chocolate or other drink from Starbucks about three times a year. I don't drink coffee, and I wouldn't pay $4 for a latte for the pleasure of adding 300 calories to my waistline.
I'd like to read a book about ethical companies that get ecology and economics right.
January 12, 2024
This one was on my TBR pile long enough that I forgot why I put it there originally, which happens. I don't patronize most of these businesses, nor are the concerns of many of those who do foremost in my mind.
Overall, not as dry as I'd feared in a business-focused book. For me, more that there wasn't a lot of real differentiation here, the stories proved largely similar. For all but the last one, American Apparel, almost seemed more likely the author had to search for controversy to play devil's advocate. (Pleased to see that that the one that has earned my loyalty, Trader Joe's, came off relatively well.) The clothing company was beset with problems stemming from the antics of its founder and longtime CEO which didn't need any scrounging to discuss.
So, I suppose one could say it's a bit dated. But, I found the verdict of "flaws, but no one's perfect" for all but the final entry a fair conclusion regarding deserved reputation, or not?
Overall, not as dry as I'd feared in a business-focused book. For me, more that there wasn't a lot of real differentiation here, the stories proved largely similar. For all but the last one, American Apparel, almost seemed more likely the author had to search for controversy to play devil's advocate. (Pleased to see that that the one that has earned my loyalty, Trader Joe's, came off relatively well.) The clothing company was beset with problems stemming from the antics of its founder and longtime CEO which didn't need any scrounging to discuss.
So, I suppose one could say it's a bit dated. But, I found the verdict of "flaws, but no one's perfect" for all but the final entry a fair conclusion regarding deserved reputation, or not?
April 14, 2013
The biggest issues in determining whether companies are ethical are: which criteria one is using (what ethics matter most in your assessment), corporate transparency, and our individual attachment to the company being rated. Big points to Fran Hawthorne for trying to name the good as well as the bad in the six companies she profiles. I still found her skewing a bit to the negative, but I don't want to underestimate the enormity of the job in writing these profiles.
Readers will want to discuss what makes a business ethical and the consumer ethics of purchasing and supporting companies that do not act ethically. Shareholder activists will want to further engage around identified issues and consider their investments. And investment clubs will want to read and reflect on what makes an ethical investment.
Readers will want to discuss what makes a business ethical and the consumer ethics of purchasing and supporting companies that do not act ethically. Shareholder activists will want to further engage around identified issues and consider their investments. And investment clubs will want to read and reflect on what makes an ethical investment.
July 20, 2013
The concept of the book is good. I found it overloaded on information in some respects, and leaving me wanting to know some more information in others. I didn't actually finish the entire book, pretty much ended up skipping to the summaries to get the author's take at the end of the chapters.
I am not in agreement with her assertion that a non-unionized workforce cannot be part of a completely ethical company. To the contrary, I would argue that a workforce and employer that can reach an agreement without an outside force are probably better for everyone. I believe that collective bargaining and representation are needed in some cases, and certainly were back when most of our organized labor was formed, but I believe that sometimes the unions cause more trouble than they resolve in modern instances.
I am not in agreement with her assertion that a non-unionized workforce cannot be part of a completely ethical company. To the contrary, I would argue that a workforce and employer that can reach an agreement without an outside force are probably better for everyone. I believe that collective bargaining and representation are needed in some cases, and certainly were back when most of our organized labor was formed, but I believe that sometimes the unions cause more trouble than they resolve in modern instances.
September 24, 2015
I was interested in this book since I often wonder about companies that market themselves in certain light but are far from what they seem. I also was interested in some of the independent, organic companies being bought out by large corporations and seeing if it really changes them.
The author covers Toms of Maine, Timberland, Starbucks, Apple, Trader Joe and American Apparel. She examines if they are socially and environmentally responsible, how they treat their employees, union or nonunion and different aspects of each of the companies. Some of the information didn’t come as a surprise since they’ve made the headlines.
A lot of the information was pretty interesting but some of it seemed rambling and disorganized. I still got a decent amount of information and it will make me think twice about buying products from them.
The author covers Toms of Maine, Timberland, Starbucks, Apple, Trader Joe and American Apparel. She examines if they are socially and environmentally responsible, how they treat their employees, union or nonunion and different aspects of each of the companies. Some of the information didn’t come as a surprise since they’ve made the headlines.
A lot of the information was pretty interesting but some of it seemed rambling and disorganized. I still got a decent amount of information and it will make me think twice about buying products from them.
August 10, 2012
I really enjoyed this book! It's breezy style makes it very readable and the subject matter is important enough that it shouldn't be limited to B-School types. Who hasn't tried to balance the concerns for social responsiblitiy and ethical policies with price, quality and accessibility? It's nearly impossible for the average consumer to know what to believe when it's in the best interest of businesses to hype themselves as "green" and "family friendly" workplaces. In the end, the results are still fuzzy, but I feel I have a better handle on the whole question, at least as far as Tom's of Maine, Apple, Starbuck's, Trader Joe's and Timberland are concerned. American Apparel is a whole other ball game!
July 19, 2012
I enjoyed the read, but would have found it more interesting if the author had included chapters on other companies that she opted to exclude from her work. She gives a verdict as to whether or not the companies she discusses have earned their ethical reputations at the end of each chapter, but seems to be reluctant to highlight any company as an example of a truly ethical company. Do any exist? I also believe that Hawthorne skimmed the surface of the issues that she presents. Her book weighs in at around 150+ pages, leaving plenty of room to discuss the role that our consumer habits plays in the behaviors of any company trying to pursue some sort of moral high ground.
October 16, 2012
Fran Hawthorne takes a look at several popular companies: Tom's of Maine, Starbucks, Apple, Trader Joe's, Timberland, and American Apparel, all of which promote and trade off their ethical business models. Hawthorne explores beyond the standard questions of eco-friendliness, hiring practices, animal testing, etc. to political activeness, pricing for accessibility, and community leadership. This is not an exhaustive look at corporations touting social consciousness, but it does give insight to some of the more popular companies, and will affect how you think about products and the companies you give your money to.
August 18, 2012
Very disappointing. While I certainly agree with the exposure of business practices from companies we think are above the fray, the author is just too flippant to take seriously. For instance, when discussing Starbucks author-worker Michael Gills, she states that in his memoir of working at Starbucks, he reported that he 'hobnobbed with Jackie Kennedy, Ernest Hemingway, and Queen Elizabeth. (Really. Or so he says.)" --what kind of statement is that? This is supposed to be a serious business book. Really. Or so I thought.
January 30, 2013
This was a pretty good read. It was good to know a little more about some of these companies even though I felt kind of bummed near the end of the book.
I think that some of the chapters had some misleading information, for example, Foxconn does not have armed guards.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio...
Clear writing, easy to understand. I'm not going to hate on Hawthorne too much for the Foxconn mistake as it's one that several journalists have made. It did make me question some of the other information in her book though.
I think that some of the chapters had some misleading information, for example, Foxconn does not have armed guards.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio...
Clear writing, easy to understand. I'm not going to hate on Hawthorne too much for the Foxconn mistake as it's one that several journalists have made. It did make me question some of the other information in her book though.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews