Patagonia’s key drivers for being sustainable are client values, stakeholder pressures, capital facility investment, employee retention, and brand reputation these drivers have worked for Patagonia but the supply chain depth continue to be a challenge and may erode the positive strives, they have made in these areas of their organization. In 2011, Patagonia was the first Benefit Corporation in California this embed the company’s environmental and social values into the corporation, signifying the stakeholder’s perspectives. This one step has given Patagonia a rigors foundation to embed corporate responsible into the company’s governance, as a certified B-corp their environmental and social performance is verified by a 3rd party with their …show more content…
Although this is not clearly outlined in their annual report they have many additional resources available online. Through organized systems they have integrated ecosystems goods and services into their sustainability program. This is accomplished by delegated responsibility through all levels of the organization and then dispersing that responsibility through the community in forms of grants to non-profit organization, at the rate of 1% of sale; this has totaled $7.1 million in 2017 and continues to grow. This has not come without it’s challenges, as the company succeed the grants increase and resources to deliver the program are stressed, additionally, they risk brand reputation through activism and need to continue to engage with stakeholder to avoid alienation. On the social front, they recognize the value of a stable work force and have improved working condition at all lives strive to improve and measure impact along the way. Although, I believe they are measuring impact I have not seen data collection and management that can validate this claim. I think this is a huge opportunity for Patagonia to account for how their grant program is contrubting to …show more content…
Their commitment goes beyond social involvement and can seen in the initiative for example, their commitment to conduct operations causing no unnecessary harm (Patagonia, 2016). This starts in their design phase and is verified through a quality control process, ultimately determined to make a durable and functional piece of clothing to avoid future unnecessary purchases. They reinforce this practice by offering repair facilities and instruction. Patagonia measures “quality return rates”, this is one area in the report which offered an effective data measurement, which can be used as a proxy to demand the impact of their design. This poses and interesting challenge for Patagonia, as they potential reducing future sales which puts them in conflict between environment and performance and social responsibility. In the United States, they have information and completed significant facility investment to reduce their impact on the environment but have no defined goals or targets or reported data that demonstrate how effective the investments in facilitates was at reducing impacts and consumption of ecosystems goods and