Introduction

CSR

The Business Case

Ethics v Performance

The Customer is Always Right

put side content here if visible

 

Ethics v Performance

The most important thing about performance clothing is that it should, well, perform. The anti CSR brigade would argue here that any production issue that is not directly aimed at improving performance is a waste of time and a dilution of the main focus. No one is really going to buy an ‘ethical’ garment that is worse than the shiny non ethical one sitting next to it, especially if it’s more expensive.

But are ethics and performance actually mutually exclusive, or are they two sides of the same coin? Materials wise, the first recycled outdoors garment was fleece, which was mechanically reprocessed. This shortens the polymers in the fibres and results in a garment that is worse quality each time. But technology has come a long way since then. Polyester recycling can now chemically break down and remake the polymers, resulting in a fabric of equal quality to the original incarnation. Renewable fibres like merino have indisputable high performance qualities. And new technologies are being developed all the time. A US company has recently developed Cocona, a natural alternative to the chemical antibacterial coating used in base layers, which is made from old coconut husks. Brands working with this company include Marmot, Mammut and New Balance. There’s never going to be a universal solution to anything, but there are realistic options out there.

An obvious expectation of something that is meant to be high quality is that it is going to last a long time. So if you don’t want your seams to rip, you might want to know who made the seams in the first place. We all know about the decline of manufacturing in the UK, and have seen something about sweatshops, child labour or working conditions in the Far East. Are there connections between these issues and being able to make decent clothing?

Making a high quality product requires expertise, and expertise generally demands remuneration. However this not the only option - there are other, cheaper, ways to improve quality. It can be controlled in to a factory production line through measures such as statistical process control, which measures each worker’s qualitative and quantitive production in real time, so that problems can be picked up well before end of line quality inspections. In theory this is all very efficient, but if it is not accompanied by effective training for the workers, it understandably hugely increases the pressure under which they work. In many cases the net result of using statistical process control is a higher turnover of workers, and then there is definitely no chance of any of them developing any skills.

Other issues in the way the factory is run can cause problems. Poor planning and communication between management and workers can result in low productivity and hours wasted re-working garments. Poor human resources management means no systems to identify and build on worker’s existing skills.

We could just go on ignoring these issues. After all, the garment industry has been operating this way for decades. Then again, if you are going to buy an expensive new piece of gear, wouldn’t you rather that it had been not just designed by someone who knew what they were doing, but made by someone who did too? While we may not all be able to have custom made clothing like George Mallory and Steve House, we could at least rest assured in the knowledge that we were wearing premium, quality goods made by a real artisan.

To get to this situation is hard work, but by no means impossible. With better quality management systems, productivity can increase and excessive working hours can be cut. Human resources can manage positively through skills premiums and quality bonuses rather than negatively through fines and deductions. Cases where this has happened have resulted in lower worker turnover.

It is important that factory owners in the Far East or anywhere are not painted as the villains here. They are reacting to their circumstances the same as any of us would. Some issues, such as excessive overtime hours, are culturally endemic in places such as China, where labour is scarce as the younger generation does not want to work in factories. However brands can work with their suppliers and support them to make positive change. For this to work though, the brand needs to make a long-standing commitment to a supplier, giving them both support and motivation.

It is perhaps easier for larger companies and suppliers to do this, and many outdoor brands do not fit into this category. While it would also be nice to imagine that all smaller brands could hold hands and work together, competitively this is unlikely to happen. It is a real problem for smaller brands, many of whom will find it easier to instil an ethical ethos through the company, that the cost of acting ethically can just be too great. This is where the trade groups need to step in and support their industry.