Socially Conscious Companies: Good or Bad?
Posted by Gabe on July 6, 2009 under Kids are Heroes, Non-Profits, Social Media | 
33 Comments to Read
On February 12, 2008 I happened to be watching an interview with Sir Richard Branson conducted by Charlie Rose. I was fascinated by it as this was the first time I had heard the term “social entrepreneurship”. This concept basically means that individuals and/or companies use their technology, skills and hard work to solve issues instead of just throwing money at a problem. I became totally enthralled by this idea. As a matter of fact, it was (and still is) one of the main influences behind the creation of Kids Are Heroes. But what happens when the word “profit” is brought up?
For over a year now, Kids Are Heroes has been an effort that my 10-year-old daughter and I hold exclusively. There is no company, no income, just a web site that inspires children all over the world to include philanthropy as part of their everyday life. If you know me personally then you know how passionate I am about this site and the kids that are featured on it. In the first year we have grown substantially, keeping expenses to a minimum but still paying the bills. We know we can do much more once we are funded, so that is why we submitted our two minute video “pitch” to Richard Branson for his new PitchTV show. Thanks to all the support we have on Twitter, we won the contest and are featured on his web site. One of the comments on our pitch suggested we take out ads on our site to help fund our efforts. Another person countered this idea saying “please do not [do this] …this will make people suspicious that your intentions are commercial at heart.” She goes on to say, “…I don’t think you need to. This idea is a winner!”
Hmmmm.. I am wondering what the second part of that comment meant: “I don’t think you need to.” How do we get funded? Where will this funding come from? Is someone with deep pockets going to give us money? What happens when that runs out? Wouldn’t it be better if we worked for the money instead of asking for a handout? Interestingly enough, the second PitchTV show featured an effort called Project Rhythm Seed (which I voted for by the way). They align themselves with Paul Newman in that they plan to create a “Newmanesque” type company that once funded it will no longer need donations. They will sell products and with the proceeds they will fund other non-profits. This is a wonderful idea. Will they have expenses? Will people get paid? I would imagine so unless they are independently wealthy. Richard Branson was asked in the interview in 2008, “Would you be in favor of a huge taxation on those who have benefitted the most from the system and redistribute it through the state?” His reply was interesting: “I’m not sure it would work…It sounds right and it sounds fair, but the state is not that good at redistributing money. So I think it does mean that those of us who have got money must make sure that we really use it properly and put it to good use.” As I watched this program I was a bit jealous that I didn’t have the resources he did to make such a positive effect on the planet. But I do have a small talent that can be leveraged which is that I can build a web site. Interestingly enough, at that very time my daughter asked me to build her a web site that helped animals. That is indeed how Kids Are Heroes was born. If I had Mr. Branson’s money there would be no question. I would fund it and make it my life’s work. But would it be better to do that or to build a company that creates jobs and still funds the non-profit end of it?
So why are some companies questioned by others as to their true motives when they give away part of their proceeds to non-profits? A friend on Twitter, Zephora Haddon, owns a company called “Amber Alert Registry” which offers the service of a secure database with key data and photos to assist law enforcement if a child were to go missing. AAR had decided from the get-go that, not only did they want to help protect children in a vital way, but equally work to aid nonprofits and the education system in their own deepest issue: raising funds for their own purposes. At the same time, they donate significant sign ups so that their secure database reflects all economic fronts and that their service is available in a balanced way to everyone. Says Zephora: “I think it’s interesting that people may think to judge us for making money from the potentially life-saving service we provide. As a parent myself I would think a few dollars a month (less than $2) for this important peace of mind is priceless. Additionally, we raise funds in a tough economy where 501c3′s are struggling – and we do it by providing a great service. And we give it away to those who can’t afford it. Shouldn’t this integration of business and giving just be the way business is now performed?”
Another great effort you might have seen is Tom’s Shoes. They have a simple tag line that I quote from their web site: “For every pair you purchase, TOMS will give a pair of new shoes to a child in need.” Is this person making money? To be honest I certainly hope so because I feel he deserves it. I just wish more companies lived by these rules. Wouldn’t it be great if more jobs were created that in some way worked for the greater good? This, I hope is the dawning of more “philanthropreneurial” companies, those that are socially aware and conscious, and actually have a culture where everyone is working to help benefit the planet in some way.
So I am really curious as to what you think about this subject. Your candor is both welcomed and appreciated.
Update (7/9/09): Was sent this article by @tmdesigninc that is directly related to this subject. A very good read.
