It's great that Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL) has been exemplary at satisfying its most important constituents -- shareholders and customers -- because, right now, the company doesn't seem to be in the good books of some other industry observers, this time labor activists and environmentalists.
Greenpeace today joined the list of institutions, agencies, and individuals that have been sharply criticizing Apple in recent weeks, but this time the focus of the complaint is on the company's record in the area of environmentally friendly and low-energy footprint products and operation. In a statement today, Greenpeace said it did not include Apple in its latest "Cool IT Leaderboard" report because the company had not demonstrated commitment to helping reduce the impact of its products on the environment.
In its press release, it said further about Apple: "It has not demonstrated leadership or elected to pursue market opportunities to drive IT energy solutions that many of its competitors have, despite record profits and large cash reserves."
Facebook (Nasdaq: FB) is in the same black book, although recent actions taken by the company have improved its image with Greenpeace. The organization noted that Facebook "will be included in next year's Leaderboard" because it "has recently changed its policies and committed to a renewably powered Facebook and announced a partnership with Opower to use the Facebook platform to help its users compare their energy usage."
Essentially, getting a mention on Greenpeace's "Cool IT Leaderboard" requires a willingness by technology companies to leverage their real or presumed power and influence with suppliers to "transform the way we use energy, breaking our dependence on dirty sources of energy," according to the environmental watch organization. That's not all, the top companies on the Greenpeace Leaderboard also demonstrate commitment to the following goal:
By developing technology that allows users to monitor and prevent greenhouse gas emissions from everyday activities, ICT companies can provide society with solutions to phase out fossil fuels and drive the necessary changes needed to mitigate climate change impacts.
Many other technology companies got a ringing endorsement from Greenpeace for actions they've taken over the last years to develop a supply chain responsive to the environment. No. 1 on the overall Leaderboard this year was Google, followed by Cisco, Ericsson, Fujitsu, and Vodafone in that order. Also on the list are Alcatel-Lucent, Sharp, Softbank, IBM, Dell, HP, Microsoft, and Oracle. These companies outperformed because they not only actively introduced clean energy products in their operations but encouraged suppliers to adopt similar policies.
“Technology giants have a real opportunity to use their power and influence to change how we produce and use energy - Google tops the table because it’s putting its money where its mouth is by pumping investment into renewable energy”, said Greenpeace International IT analyst Gary Cook. “The IT sector might like to consider itself forward-thinking, but it is keeping far too quiet while the dirty energy industry continues to exert undue influence on both the political process and financial markets”.
It's interesting, Bolaji. I've been circulating some of our recent reports among my Facebook friends. Of those that have worked in the tech industry, Apple is viewed as an incredible innovator with a brilliant but tyrannical leader. Social responsibility does not not come up as top of mind. To casual consumers, there is very little awareness one way or the other. Quality is a given; ease-of-use is a given; and they even get caught up in the "must have" aspect of the products regardless of price. I've come to the conclusion that Apple's CSR reputation has largely been built by Apple. Until recently, their efforts have not been particularly groundbreaking in terms of human rights or the environment. I'm not sure that is wrong as long as they abide by the law. But they are not seens as particularly proactive either.
Barb, A business has fiducial responsibility first to the stakeholder but there are different ways to fulfill that and making a profit is often dependent upon having a good reputation with the public. Apple has a good reputation for making great products but does it have a good reputation as a socially responsible company? I have my doubts but would like to know what you think? Does Apple have a split personality, that is, a great company with good products but it is also seen as an aloof and self-engrossed company? Is that correct?
I still continue to struggle with the dilemma that Apple is first and foremost a business. Avnet's CEO Roy Vallee used to explain to me who the shareholders of a business are. They are customers, employees and shareholders. (Avnet does do a lot of great stuff outside of being a business, but this is about Apple.) Are Apple's customers, employees and shareholders being served? They are. Then again, who are the stewards of the environment? Organizations such as Greenpeace; governments and, of course, citizens. Greenpeace is targeting Apple. So I start again. Apple is a business...
Ashish, Apple doesn't generate good returns. It generates crazy returns and its investors so far are willing to cut the company a lot of slack. That's obvious. I am not inclined to say the company shouldn't pay attention to the environment. I was responding to your earlier question.
Apple, like other companies, has numerous obligations to investors and the society of which it is a part. The company shouldn't ignore its social responsibility but it won't make this a priority. That's obvious. I think the company can continue to do good by doing good, that is, it can continue to make money and still position itself as environmental friendly.
If that was the case,then Stocks like ExxonMobil,Tobacco companies,Alcohol Companies,Gun Companies,etc,etc would never be a core part of most Pension funds .
They generate reliable returns for investors Year after Year after Year.
Do they do good for the environment?
Not exactly.
So why can't we judge Apple along the same lines also???
Jenn, Apple doesn't have a "known" PR spokesman. Its recognized spokesperson has always been the man at the top. It was Steve Jobs until his death and now it's Timothy Cook. It would have been suicidal to fire Jobs and it would be crippling to fire Cook.
But you are right. There's a PR failure here. The company seems to be catching on fast, though. It has engaged with the Fair Labor Association to audit its suppliers' facilities. Apple may not want to elevate this to crisis level by addressing the issues directly with a conference call but my opinion is that it should; put everything on the table, tell the world what you've seen, how you are tackling the problems and introduce third-party verifiers. That should be satisfying.
Apple is certainly fulfilling its obligations to investors. I wouldn't complain if I owned shares in Apple. Today, the stock price briefly exceeded $500 for the first time and once that threshold has been crossed, you can imagine $600 is next. :)
So, Apple is doing what it promised to shareholders. But in order to continue that, it must also find ways to avoid being badly labelled. It could be easy to simply ignore the protesters but the drip, drip, drip could end up hurting Apple and its investors.
By moving to the core of the industry and offerings services that keep the system humming, a group within the electronics market has rendered irrelevant the question of ownership and control of the supply chain.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This