After reading this article by Cheryl Davenport about the weaknesses of TOM’S one for one business model, I still agree and support the one for one business model. I disagree with Davenport’s first critique where TOM’S buy-one-give-one model does not actually solve a social problem. TOM’S aren’t obligated to solve this social problem; they are just contributing by helping. Davenport makes a mistake by saying that “it’s designed to make western consumers feel good.” I agree with James Poulos and I don’t like this ideology as no product was made to make consumers feel bad. They one-to-one model is raising awareness and are actually helping cure the problem.
TOMS having a one to one model, where they give away a pair of shoes to children in need for each shoes purchased. Photo: shoesvbuy
Although I agree with the one-for-one model, I believe it should be altered to create more shared value. More research should be conducted, as each business should have a different one-for-one model on how their business can aid the economy without causing more harm.
TOMS has also thrived with their one for one system addressing clean water, sight, and other issues. They took the critique and realized their business model is not effective and changed it. The company now value finding long-term solutions and are building a self-sustaining community, instead of short-term benefits of profits for themselves.
Work Cited
“Creating Shared Value.” Harvard Business Review. N.p., 01 Jan. 2011. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.
Davenport, Cheryl. “The Broken”Buy-One, Give-One” Model: 3 Ways To Save Toms Shoes.” Co.Exist. N.p., 10 Apr. 2012. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.
Poulos, James. “Toms Shoes: A Doomed Vanity Project?” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.
“The One-for-one Business Model: Avoiding Unintended Consequences.” Knowledge@Wharton. N.p., 16 Feb. 2015. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.