I Fought the Law and the Law Won

Talk about a brave new world: when my grandfather started this company more than 30 years ago, he was concerned about making a profit, not making headlines ... "sustainability" meant staying in business, not saving the environment.

The challenges I face as a third generation bootmaker are very different ... not necessarily bigger or smaller than the ones that kept my grandfather awake at night, but probably more complex. The good news, in my unwaveringly optimistic mind, is that the more complex the problem, the greater the possibilities for creating meaningful solutions.

Take deforestation in the Amazon rainforest. You might think, as I did, interesting issue. Deforestation is never good, and the Amazon deserves to have its natural environment and ecosystems protected as much as the next region, so no -- deforestation in the Amazon is not okay. But -- how is it our problem? We're a U.S.-based bootmaking business - sympathetic to the cause, but certainly not responsible for it. Right?

Not according to the environmental activists at Greenpeace, who recently issued a report detailing the impact of deforestation in the Amazon and tracing the deforesting activity to major brands and businesses that benefit in some way from the deforesting activity. Timberland is a company that buys a lot of leather ... and leather is a bi-product of cattle farming ... and the cattle industry in Brazil is huge. Ah-ha. We source some of our leather from a supplier in Brazil -- a supplier that may or may not (more on that ambiguous statement in a minute) purchase leather from cattle farms in illegally deforested areas of the rainforest. It didn't quite take 6 degrees of separation to get there but this explains how, through out supply chain, Timberland and the Amazon are connected.

In response to this news we said, "Good to know. We'll most definitely look into this issue with our Brazilian supplier and thanks for bringing it to our attention." Not meant as a kiss-off, not meant to be empty promises -- in fact the discovery was pretty startling and it did lead to some candid conversations with our supplier in which we learned just how difficult it is to trace leather back to a particular cow on a particular ranch in a particular region of the Amazon. That's roadblock number two. Roadblock number one was Greenpeace's response back to us which in essence was, "Not good enough. You can act stronger, faster, harder on this issue." And to further their point, they launched an email campaign which resulted in a ton of emails coming into our company over a period of several weeks from Greenpeace supporters urging, "Stronger, faster, harder."

This is about the time when I found myself wishing for the seemingly simple challenges my grandfather faced, like how to sell enough boots in a week to put food on the table. I've got a hard-nosed activist organization on one side shouting for immediate action and a major supplier on the other side pleading a complex sourcing system ... and in the middle, the Amazon rainforest is diminishing by the minute. What's a CEO to do?

There's no magic to the answer, only a lot of hard work. Painful, frustrating, bang-your-head-against-the-wall work requiring supplier, brand and activist NGO to come together in the spirit of doing the right thing. And that shouldn't be so hard, considering we all three want to do the right thing ... except for our very disparate beliefs about how to make the "right thing" happen -- and how quickly. It would be easier for us to take an all-or-nothing approach which demands immediate compliance from our supplier "or else" - but what would walking away accomplish? It wouldn't do anything to save the rainforest and furthermore, wouldn't preserve jobs in an area where they're much needed. Collaboration might not be as easy or as immediate as disengagement, but that's our path of choice -- and, we believe, our best hope of creating the most positive outcomes.

Bobby Fuller sang, "I fought the law and the law won" -- seems fitting enough, when you consider the combative manner in which big bad corporate titan and extreme activist group have been engaging in what could have been a much more civilized and collaborative effort from the beginning. Did Greenpeace "win" because we've adopted some of the terms and guidelines they proposed in working with our Brazilian supplier on this issue? I guess - it certainly makes for good headlines in advance of their next fundraising campaign. But I'd rather think of it as a win for the law that is commerce and justice -- the law that prescribes that the business of business is to create a profit and create a positive impact in the world -- because that's ultimately what has happened here. We've been given an opportunity to leverage the power of our business to create sustainable change on the environment ... that's a law I'm more than happy to concede to.

To be clear, the real work is still ahead of us. What happens after the noise dies down and the headlines fade is what will make the real difference: is this just another publicity campaign, or are we all committed to a long-term, collaborative process to influence real-life impact?

My grandfather wouldn't have appreciated it as much as a record-breaking sales day, but just imagine: major supplier, global brand, diehard activist, working together to create meaningful change. Not a bad day at the office.

Comments

[Eric Crawford]

And you must be aware of the fact that it takes nearly 8000 liters of water to make the average pair of shoes - an ungodly amount. Your New Standard for Product Transparency blah blah blah does not even mention this most-precious resource. Sorry to be so cynical about a message from you being posted on a site that is supported by a Google Ad for your product. Keep up the struggle..­.!
Eric Crawford, President, Greenman Alliance LLC
Also member of the Milwaukee 7 Water Council

[Squaker]

I don't understand why you are saying the issue is so difficult

You choose to outsource your business to foreign countries where labor and resources are cheaper specifically because you don't want to treat the land, cattle, and labor in a manner that you would have to here in your home country.
There is no other reason to outsource. We have a thriving cattle industry here in the United States. Only if you don't want to play by our standards does outsourcing make sense for your business.

[JSwartz]

Appreciate your opinion, but the reality is more complex than you describe. The reason we source leather from different places has to do with 2 things: Much of the leather tanning business has moved to Asia and South America leaving a limited # of US tanneries still in business. We buy leather from 2 US tanneries, however they can not offer the range of leathers nor the capacity required to support our annual needs. Which brings me to point 2, which is different countries offer different types of leather, some suitable for linings, some better for uppers, etc. The US does have a thriving cattle business, but the vast majority of that raw material is exported out of the US to Asia and S. America. I hope that helps clarify, but let me know if not.
Jeff

[MisterHands]

Like Timberlands initial response, it's more excuse and finger pointing than solutions. I had worn several styles of Timberlands for years- but took my business elsewhere. I ordered a pair of custom Russell Moccasins for kicking around town, and bought Danners to work around the house.

[JSwartz]

If you're referring to the context I give for the complexities that exist, I mean only to illustrate that's it may not be as easy as it looks. Did not mean to deflect blame, which lies squarely with us for the entirety of our supply chain. The work we're doing in Brazil is designed to make real change and we'll work to see that it does.
Jeff

[ghettoplainsman]

Thank you for actually diving into this issue. That level of diligence and sincere responsibility from a CEO of a large for-profit company is not something we see everyday. Also, another option forward is sourcing vegan leathers for your excellent quality boots,, as well as vegan materials for your other shoes.

I bought a pair of vegan Timberland sneakers on 125th Street in Harlem back in 2002 and while I no longer wear them on the street, they are so well made and so comfortable that they are my primary hiking shoes that I always wear whenever working with our Youth InterACTION team on our hard-core prairie restoration projects or leading tours to save the Fort Worth Prairie Park, or working west of Houston on the Katy Prairie. They'll prob last me a couple more years. As a vegan athlete, I'd love for you to expand such a quality product. And less leather = less greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and livestock methane and also less loss of critical biodiversity.

Jarid Manos, Founder/CEO Great Plains Restoration Council www.gprc.org
Author: Ghetto Plainsman www.ghettoplainsman.com

[Linda Buzzell - Huffpost Blogger]

I agree, Jeffrey, that there is lots of change ahead. There is no longer a place called "away" where we can send our trash or buy our resources or manufactured good without counting the cost to everyone and to the planet. That whole way of thinking is fading into the past.