Author Archives: brucescribe

A bitter lesson in corporate responsibility

Death in Dhaka...600 and counting

Death in Dhaka…600 and counting

Galen Weston’s remorse notwithstanding, it’s tempting to think the man who runs one of the largest retail organizations in Canada should have known how dangerous conditions were for the Bangladeshi garment workers who died when their building – where some of the Loblaw-owned Joe Fresh apparel was manufactured – caved in on them.

There was even a hint of self-recrimination in remarks he made separately to reporters and investors last week, as reported by CBC News and The Canadian Press. Referring to his company’s commitment to safety standards at the overseas facilities it contracts to produce its goods, the executive chairman said, “Nothing in (the) reports suggested a problem, but the scope of the audits does not cover structural integrity. . .I am deeply shaken by the event. . .Our thoughts and prayers. . .go out to those who were injured and to all of the families who have lost loved ones.”

More than 500 perished in the collapse outside the Bangladeshi capital of Dhaka last month. As many as 150 remain missing. The tragedy made headlines around the world. And, still, Mr. Weston wondered about “the deafening silence from other apparel retailers on this. . .I’m very troubled. . .Thirty companies were having goods manufactured, but only two have come forward to speak publicly.”

But whether or not he and his industry counterparts should have known about the perilous condition of the edifice (and if, by knowing, done something about it before the dreadful accident occurred) is lamentably moot. What matters is what they do now.

Other than remaining mute, they can exit the country altogether. According to an item in The Independent, “Executives at Disney were so concerned about labour conditions in Bangladesh that they ordered a halt to operations in the country, before the clothes-factory collapse. The decision to stop production of branded merchandise was taken in March and was prompted, in part, by the factory fire in Bangladesh in November last year that killed more than 120 workers.”

The news source quoted Bob Chapek, president of Disney Consumer Products: “We felt this was the most responsible way to manage the challenges associated with our supply chain.”

The third option is a version of staying the course, sadder but wiser. Reports suggest this will be Loblaw’s approach, with renewed vigilance. The company plans to enhance its facility audits, engage its own people directly in inspections and create a disaster relief fund for the victims and their families. “We have taken action to address the situation,” Mr. Weston said last week, according to CP. “(This includes) the announcement of a fund to provide relief. . .There is more we will do and we will make that public over the next few days.”

Crucially, the company will remain in Bangladesh because Mr. Weston and his senior executives believe the garment industry can be a “force for good” in the otherwise impoverished Third World. Under the circumstances, this is the most responsible course of action.

Globalization has changed the rules of the road for western corporations that avail themselves of cheap labour overseas. The vast and integrated nature of their supply chains demands that, if they choose to do business with poor countries such as Bangladesh (where, paradoxically, the apparel industry generates $20 billion a year), they are also obliged to assume a more direct role in overseeing manufacturing processes and infrastructure.

The disaster in Dhaka illustrates that globalization’s evolution is halting and still fraught with atavistic, hands-off ignorance of, or indifference to, working conditions around the world.

But it also stands as a wake-up call to rich retailers who can no longer afford, either morally or financially, to shirk their duties abroad. The Internet and near-ubiquitous mobile communications is seeing to that. So, increasingly, are consumers who, in virtue of the options they enjoy, can and do make mincemeat of a company’s most important asset: its brand.

Mr. Weston’s remorse is genuine. He might yet take some comfort in the fact that, in exercising his presidential choice, he is doing the right thing in Bangladesh.

Tagged , ,

Time to quit the Mickey Mouse Club

DSC_0052

Banding together in common purpose was once the stuff of boys’ adventure stories and early morning kids’ television programming. In the zeitgeist of popular culture, you could either be a mouseketeer or a muskateer; but never both.

It’s a little like that today in the real, hardscrabble world of Atlantic regional politics, where two distinct “groups of four” are forming to promote two competing conceptions of what it means to be a citizen of Canada’s most easterly realm.

In one corner, lately nestled along the white beaches of a certain Nova Scotia south shore resort, is the Council of Atlantic Premiers whose members seem to think that the most productive use of their time and energy is to issue stern denunciations of federal government labour market policies, and little else.

In another is the brand, spanking new “U4 League”, a group of mostly Maritime superheroes masquerading as university presidents whose initiates actually believe that the only way to improve life in this relentlessly unpromising pasture of the Great White North is to cooperate and. . .gasp! . . .get things done.

The League comprises Mount Allison University’s Robert Campbell, Acadia’s Ray Ivany, St. Francis Xavier’s Sean Riley and Bishop University’s Michael Goldbloom. Yesterday’s Globe and Mail story explains the unlikely collaboration as a marriage of virtue and necessity: “With public funding under strain and concerns about the quality of undergraduate education getting louder across Canada, the partnership is meant to get the most out of each school’s strengths.

Specifically, “The schools’ leaders aim to make it easier for students to tap the expertise of each university from their home campus, encourage faculty to work together across campuses, share ideas and find back-office savings – all without growing enrolments or eroding the intimate campus experience that is their hallmark.”

Does this suggest that these small institutions of higher learning are plotting a formal merger? Hardly. The point their head masters seem to be making is that forging closer ties – judiciously selected – will, in fact, strengthen their institutions’ individuality and independence. The approach could even cut costs without undermining the quality of the education they provide.

After all, as Mr. Goldbloom told the Globe, “At a time of limited public resources for public education, you had better be really good at what you do.” Meanwhile, added Mr. Campbell, “We’ll remain autonomous. It’s the competition that keeps us all sharp.”

Naturally, there is some tongue-in-cheekery in all of this, but there is a broadly good example to draw, as well: It has something to do with lemons and the making and serving of a tasty, refreshing drink, when one finds oneself in hot water.

Now, flash to Atlantic Canada’s sullen band of premiers, whose sole contribution to the process of transforming the region’s economy is their threadbare, bankrupt argument that bad dad Ottawa is determined to keep our seasonal workers under his hob-nailed jack boot until we run out of fish to catch or trees to cut or tourists to bed and breakfast.

Even if that were true (it is not), there’s nothing they can do about federal reforms to employment insurance or joint labour market agreements. And in their disingenuous hearts, they know this. But it’s a whole lot easier to take pot shots at the unfeeling “center”, than it is to roll up their sleeves and get down to the tough, necessary business of building, with the private sector, a competitive, durable, sustainable East Coast – one where home-grown innovation replaces tax-funded dependency in the lingua franca of the region.

The premiers’ implicit argument that changes to EI will make Atlantic Canada even less competitive than it is already relies, for its premise, on the absurd calculation that seasonal unemployment fuels economic growth.

But what, in fact, do they know about it? Which entrepreneurs have they consulted? How many full-time professionals and wage-earners have they tapped for advice lately?

The choice for Atlantic Canadians twas ever thus:

We can remain as mousketeers, or become, instead, musketeers.

Pick one; not both.

Tagged , , ,

Canada’s future isn’t what it used to be

cropped-img-20120922-000031.jpg

When, exactly, the Conference Board of Canada decided it would serve the interests of policy makers better by dusting off its crystal ball and throwing caution to the wind is not immediately clear. But wonks and pundits of all stripes owe this sturdy think tank a debt of gratitude for producing its first report under its Strategic Foresight Initiative.

This slim study, which weighs in at only 12 pages, posits four possible “energy futures” for The Great White North, and each one makes for fascinating reading. But first, the obligatory disclaimer: “Unlike traditional economic forecasting that focuses on development of a probable or most-likely future, strategic foresight aims instead to develop a series of plausible futures. Its goal is not to predict the future – or even suggest which direction might be most desirable.”

Rather, the authors state, “The goal. . .is to offer insights to decision-makers in governments, businesses, and other organizations on how best to prepare for all possibilities, what they might do to shift toward a future they prefer, and how to recognize and adapt to events and trends that may point toward a specific future.”

That dutifully said, the Board can’t disguise the delightful fact that it had a ball conjuring four distinct scenarios for the shape of things to come “out to 2050” or that the document reads, in places, like Hugo Award-winning science fiction.

Consider scenario number one, also known as “Hockey Stick”.

It’s a world in which “the Greenland ice cap has shrunk, as has Antarctica. Rising sea levels and an increased frequency of extreme weather events are forcing coastal cities to build massive dykes, with low-lying countries suffering extensive damage from storm surges. The Gulf Stream has shifted south, leaving much of Europe to shiver even as former breadbaskets like the American Midwest have baked into desert. Extreme weather has become frequent – damaging crops, disrupting transportation, and eroding infrastructure.”

As for Canada, where “personal vehicles have become a luxury”, we’ve been hit hard. Fortunately, we anticipated “a world of energy scarcity and environmental trauma,” and so “recognized the need to shift” our economic centre of gravity beyond both resources and manufacturing, toward a competitive post-industrial base.”

The section entitled “Superpower” describes a somewhat happier condition for the nation. This is a world in which, “The opening of Arctic waters has enabled exploitation of other energy pools as well as easier access to mineral deposits, and Canada’s North has become a booming frontier. Canadian producers have been able to reap the higher world prices for oil and gas. But even as export pipelines were planned, reviewed, and built, Eastern provinces have moved quickly to build up their own energy sources.”

Life is, indeed, grand for Canadians. But, as the paper warns, it may be too grand: “For more than a generation, they have been getting rich by selling the world what it wants. But most of what they have been selling is finite. Eventually the party must end. The question now is whether Canadians are setting aside enough of their current income – and investing it well enough – to fund their future well-being in a post-resource world.”

Perhaps, a better, more sustainable, future for the country is the one outlined in “Green Machine”. This states that “Governments have quickly recognized the importance of supporting clean energy development through a combination of technology investments and regulation. Major breakthroughs have been made in energy storage technologies for variable energy sources and massive efficiency improvements for renewable energy generation and transmission.”

As a result, “there is a sense of balance across the country, and general optimism about the ability of technology to handle the continuing evolution of the global environment.”

Then, of course, there is the status quo of “Made in Canada” in which economic stagnation in formerly growing and emerging economies has secured Canada’s role as the world’s premier location for immigrants. Moreover, “With gas cheap and the economy strong, there has been little constraint on urban sprawl and lots of money for more roads in provinces with significant energy resources.”

Will any of these scenarios play out in the years to come? Crystal balls are notoriously cloudy. Still, the fun is in the peering.

Tagged , ,

Atlantic Council’s relevance needs repair

Who books the hall for a day of feckless gabbing?

Who books the hall for a day of feckless gabbing?

Before the Council of Atlantic Premiers lectures Ottawa about the devastation federal policies for skills development and employment insurance are wrecking along the East Coast, it might consider the role its own fecklessness plays in the steadily unravelling regional economy.

According to its website, which appears frozen in time like grandma’s fine china, the Council sputtered to life in 2000 with a “mission” to “promote collaboration among the four Atlantic provinces.”

In this hopeful version of reality, “Premiers are committed to working together and with the federal government on issues of importance to all Atlantic Canadians, including enhancing trade opportunities, supporting research and development, investment in renewable energy initiatives, and economic and social cooperation.”

The useful context of history reminds us that its near-doppelganger, the Council of Maritime Premiers, established in 1972, “was the first agency of its kind to provide an effective legal framework for cooperation among provinces.”

Again, the website crows triumphantly, “The goal of the Council is to ensure maximum coordination of the activities of the governments of the three Maritime provinces, and their agencies. There are three primary ways that the provinces advance their interests through cooperation: creating regional organizations; harmonizing provincial policies and programs; and having common positions on matters involving other parties, such as the federal government.”

In fact, would that more of this were so. Anyone who wants to comprehend why Maritime economic – let alone, political – union is currently impossible need only observe the functioning of these two councils. Putatively committed to forging pragmatic solutions to shared problems, they are far more adept at issuing weak statements of principle about “joint collaborations” when they are not channeling regional grievances against their common enemy, the federal government.

As platforms for political polemics, they are marvelous institutions. As purveyors of useful policy. . .well, not so much. And, given the stench wafting from provincial ledgers in this part of the country, that’s a shame.

Can anyone explain, with a straight face, why the Maritimes, hosting a total population of 1.8 million, requires three separate motor vehicle departments, corporate registries and liquor commissions, to say nothing of securities administrators?

Instead, the Council pats itself on the back for its school bus deal. “Joint procurement is an important tool in seeking best value and efficiencies for their governments,” its website declares. “The joint purchase of school buses is an excellent example of positive results achieved through joint procurement. Atlantic Canada currently saves $30,000 per bus purchased. In 2012, this arrangement resulted in $7 million in savings for the region.”

That, at least is a start. But, as Paul McLeod, Ottawa bureau chief of the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, wrote in a piece for The Herald Magazine last month, this “and a Nova Scotia-Newfoundland bulk deal on firehoses. . both. . .date to the 1990s, before the council existed.”

Mr. McLeod also quoted one of the Atlantic Council’s founding fathers, former New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord, who sounded a somber note: “Part of the reasons I wanted all of us to create this is to streamline regulations, red tape and obstacles that exist between provinces. Early on, there were some wins. But if you ask me did we fulfill the complete promise of what we could have achieved, no, I don’t think we have because there are still too many barriers. There are still too many obstacles.”

Granted, getting out of their own way to get something done is not what politicians do best. But the bitch-fest earlier this week at the Council of the Atlantic in White Point, N.S., served little useful purpose.

New Brunswick Premier David Alward may have reflected the opinions of his provincial counterparts when he told Brunswick News, “the question of EI is on the agenda,” but he skirted the larger issue of building economic capacity in the region with the tool he and his colleagues already possess: The freedom to drive real change amidst their own company, without regard for either cutbacks by, or parting gifts from, the federal government.

Tagged ,

Fare thee well, sociable media

Adieu to the feeding frenzy that is social media

Adieu to the feeding frenzy that is social media

My on-again, off-again romance with social media is off-again. This will be my first trial separation from LinkedIn and Twitter, my second from Facebook. I’m even reconsidering the role my blog plays in my newly simplified life.

I’ve deactivated my accounts for a couple of reasons: First, I’m genuinely interested in discovering the degree to which I have become hooked on these seamless communications platforms. But, mostly, and in the words of Greta Garbo, I just want to be alone. It’s time to leave the cocktail party that never ends, at least for awhile.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s not that I have grown to dislike my online friends, followers and contacts. On the contrary, I’m quite fond of them (from a distance, naturally, as I don’t know most of them personally). It’s simply that I can’t get myriad updates and “timelines” and status reports – theirs and mine – out of my mind. The busy work of social media is taking over.

It wasn’t always this way. As a tenderfoot in the online world, I was happy to ignore the dozens of ways I could use it to distract myself from the actual business of making a living (or, simply, living). I was happy because I was ignorant. I didn’t really understand how Twitter worked, or what distinguished it from Facebook.

The more I learned, however, the more determined I became to wield these instruments of my virtual identity as they were designed: with near consuming attention to detail and timeliness, regardless of need or import. (Does the world really need me retweeting somebody else’s observation of a junior league hockey game?)

In fact, I am not alone in hooking off. About a year go, just prior to Facebook’s initial public offering, CNN reported, “With a website that boasts 901 million active users,  it seems unlikely that once you get on Facebook, you’d ever leave. But deactivating from the social networking site is not that unusual. Close to half of Americans think Facebook is a passing fad, according to the results of a new Associated Press-CNBC poll. More and more people are stepping away from the technological realm and de-teching. There are even sites where they can pledge to delete their Facebook accounts.   And tech writer Paul Miller from The Verge decided to leave the Internet for a year to reassess his relationship with it.”

Regarding his decision, Mr. Miller explained on his blog last April, “I’m abandoning one of my ‘top 5’ technological innovations of all time for a little peace and quiet. . .By separating myself from the constant connectivity, I can see which aspects are truly valuable, which are distractions for me, and which parts are corrupting my very soul. What I worry is that I’m so ‘adept’ at the internet that I’ve found ways to fill every crevice of my life with it, and I’m pretty sure the internet has invaded some places where it doesn’t belong.”

I’m, not especially “adept” at any of this stuff, but I appreciate his point. Just as I do Jonathan Minton’s. According to Dahlia Kurtz, Sun Media’s social media columnist, in a piece she wrote in January, Mr. Minton, “calls Facebook mental junk food. He twice de-activated and re-activated his account. ‘It became a mind-numbing and addictive distraction,’ says the 31-year-old. So why did Minton return? ‘Because it’s a mind numbing and addictive distraction.’”

As for Mr. Miller, now that his year-long hiatus is nearly up, what has he learned? In his latest column (a colleague posted it for him) he writes, “Leaving the internet was so great. . .at first. It was the relief of pressure that I’d wanted for years. No more push notifications, no more calendar invites, no more reply-all’d email threads, no more retweets, friend requests, text messages, or rabbit holes. I was alone with my thoughts. . .But then old habits reared their ugly heads. Time-wasting habits like video games and pulpy sci-fi novels, and then more disturbing signs like a general avoidance of social activities.”

So, then, maybe there is no solution, no real escape from the inescapable. Technology is not the enemy. As American cartoonist Walt Kelly once wrote, “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

I’ll mull this over in the weeks ahead, while I’m not updating my Facebook status.

Tagged , , ,