I believe that the initiative Toms has started with its “one-for-one” shoe campaign, is beneficial to the company and the impoverished communities around the world. Criticism towards the company’s campaign typically contains the negative outcomes that could potentially damage local shoe makers. I agree that this could possibly be an outcome, but the trade off between that and the notion of clothing unfortunate individuals, makes the initiative worth it. However, I do understand and agree with the fact that this movement fails to address the problem as a whole. For example, providing shoes for one child in an impoverished community will not help that community lift itself out of it’s current situation.
In comparison to SoleRebels, Toms’ campaign could benefit from incorporating certain aspects of SoleRebels’ business model, in order to address the problem as a whole. SoleRebels is aware of the lack of education that people in poor communities receive, so they provide knowledge and skills that will help them provide for themselves. I feel that this is a better approach to accomplishing what Toms’ hopes to accomplish. In conclusion, I support Tom’s initiative with their one-to-one campaign; I just think that they should build upon it and focus it’s attention on helping the entire issue.
-Timmy Drabble
Reference: SoleRebels
