In an article featured by Wharton,
the “one for one” business model is explored and analyzed, leading to the claim that they sometimes cause unintended negative consequences. A big chunk of the article is spent discussing this phenomenon with the example of Toms.
Toms’ company relies on the one to one business model by giving a free pair of shoes away to children in need for every pair bought. One of the conclusions of the article is that by doing this, they harm local shoemakers and cause dependence on their free shoes. Another shoe company, SoleRebels, takes a different approach to this. They manufacture shoes in Ethiopia and treat their employees exceptionally well. Employees at SoleRebels receive 3 times the industry average wage, full medical plans, and transportation to and from work. SoleRebels is also very sustainable and environmentally friendly.
I’m aware Toms has only the best intentions with their one for one model and are working on improvements, but I believe SoleRebels is winning on the social enterprise factor. They are genuinely helping give their Ethiopian employees a better, and more prosperous life. However, both of these companies are very sustainable and have created excellent shared value.