The CSR Newsletters are a freely-available resource generated as a dynamic complement to the textbook, Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation.

To sign-up to receive the CSR Newsletters regularly during the fall and spring academic semesters, e-mail author David Chandler at david.chandler@ucdenver.edu.

Showing posts with label Black Rifle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Black Rifle. Show all posts

Thursday, March 2, 2023

Strategic CSR - BRCC

The article in the url below checks-in on a company I have been following reasonably closely – Black Rifle Coffee Company (BRCC; see Strategic CSR – BRCC). The article makes the case that, although they may not be your values, BRCC is clearly a values-based business:

"You might call Black Rifle Coffee Co. a socially conscious enterprise. 'This is a veterans' corporation,' founder and CEO Evan Hafer, a former Green Beret, says in a Zoom interview. More than half of Black Rifle's employees have served in the military or are family of veterans. In 2021 the company put $5.3 million in shares toward starting the BRCC Fund, a charity dedicated to helping wounded or traumatized veterans and their families. That was on top of $1.2 million in charitable contributions and $3 million worth of coffee and related products to active-duty military and first responders."

In spite of BRCC's commercial success (revenues of "$233.1 million" in 2021), the firm has faced difficulty identifying more legitimate partners with which it can work:

"But Mr. Hafer says Black Rifle struggled to find banks and law firms to help it arrange an initial public offering. Since he founded the company in 2014, companies have told him that it was 'too irreverent' and poses 'reputational risk.'"

The ostracizing (perceived or real) has continued in terms of financial institutions:

"In 2019 and 2020, a Black Rifle spokeswoman says, company leaders were talking to Chase, Bank of America and Macquarie Group about raising capital. After initially showing interest, all three companies declined to work with Black Rifle, citing the company's image. In 2018 Black Rifle had tried to open an account at a Chase branch in San Antonio and had been turned away over reputational concerns. The spokeswoman says that Macquarie was particularly fixated on the name of its in-house magazine, Coffee or Die, which covers military issues and won the Military Reporters & Editors Association's 2022 journalism contest for overseas coverage."

The story is the same with law firms:

"Black Rifle hit similar roadblocks in 2019 and 2020 with Skadden Arps, Latham & Watkins and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. All three law firms passed on working with the coffee company because of its image. According to the Black Rifle spokeswoman, Latham & Watkins said that its reputational risk committee thought no one from top law schools would be willing to work at the firm if it took on Black Rifle as a client, especially because its name included the word 'rifle.' The name 'is an homage to the service rifle,' Mr. Hafer says. Like the guns he taught special-operations soldiers to shoot, he says, coffee is 'lifesaving equipment.'"

BRCC's founder and CEO, Hafer, extrapolates this exclusion to suggest it is indicative of the reaction all veterans face in seeking to engage with these normal elements of society. What I find interesting is that these banks and law firms would not doubt have no hesitation engaging with oil firms. So, why is it that a genuinely values-based business that is seeking to represent a population that society says it reveres (veterans) is excluded, when oil firms (which, by any measure have produced many times more harm than BRCC) are not shunned in the same way? The article suggests BRCC is being ostracized due to political correctness, but that seems less compelling if oil and gas firms are fine. Or, is perceived social and political 'harm' treated in a different way to environmental harm (which is much more damaging from a longer term perspective)?

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


A Socially Conscious but Politically Incorrect Company
By Megan Keller
September 16, 2022
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
A15

Tuesday, September 6, 2022

Strategic CSR - Roe v. Wade

As you will all no doubt remember, the U.S. Supreme Court was busy over the summer, in particular overturning Roe v. Wade – the 1973 decision that had allowed abortion to be legal across the whole country. This newsletter is not about that, as I am sure you all have firmly set views on the topic; instead, this newsletter is about the article in the url below that reports Patagonia's reaction to the decision. Understandably, it was emotional and demonstrates the firm's progressive views and its support for its employees (e.g., see also Strategic CSR – Patagonia):

"Outdoor clothing brand Patagonia said on Friday that it would post bail for any employees arrested at abortion protests. The company will provide 'training and bail for those who peacefully protest for reproductive justice,' it said on LinkedIn. The perk applies to both full-time and part-time workers, Patagonia said."

Apparently (and quite surprisingly, I think), this is not a new thing for the firm:

"The company offers protest training and has a policy of bailing out employees arrested at peaceful protests, according to Bloomberg."

What I was wondering as I read through the article is how this response would be received by the CSR community. My guess is it would largely be welcomed (and I certainly liked it), but that then made me wonder whether it is always ok for companies to encourage behavior that gets people arrested. The company softens it a bit by adding the "peaceful protest" qualifier but, after all, they are anticipating employees will be arrested, which is the only reason they would need bail. Specifically, I wondered what I would think if I saw a headline saying that Exxon was willing to bail out any employees caught protesting against a UN COP conference? Or, what if Black Rifle Coffee Company had offered to pay the court costs of any of its employees caught at the January 6 insurrection?

As long as my reaction would have been the same (i.e., similarly supportive), then I am being consistent in my views. But, if I liked the Patagonia response, but would have objected to a similar policy by Exxon or BRCC, then I am being hypocritical. Values are values, and it is hard to argue that one person's values are any less valid than someone else's. I might disagree with them and think the world would be much better off if everyone shared my values, but that is not how life works. And, this decision by the Supreme Court seems like a good issue on which to make the point.

If we want businesses to be values-based, then we have to recognize there will be some that advocate for causes with which we disagree. The battle comes in trying to 'win' the day on the issues about which we care the most. If we lose those arguments, it is not because the other side is 'evil,' it is because we disagree about something fundamental (however ill-informed you think the other side's position is).

So, my sense is that we should only be happy to see Patagonia inciting its employees to act lawlessly, if we are perfectly ok with Exxon, or BRCC, or Chick-fil-A, or whomever else doing the same. If acting based on our values and principles is objectively a good thing, then that applies to all the values and principles, not just the ones we support. In terms of strategic CSR, being "socially responsible" does not mean only firms doing things that we think are acceptable; it means creating value for the firm's stakeholders, according to their values and perceived self-interest (see Strategic CSR – Self-interest), even if that looks like something we oppose. In other words, just because we don't like something does not mean it is not socially responsible.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


Patagonia will post bail for any employees arrested at abortion protests
By Tim Levin
June 24, 2022
Business Insider
 

Thursday, November 18, 2021

Strategic CSR - BRCC

Following on from Tuesday's newsletter, the article in the url below announces the public listing of Black Rifle Coffee Company (BRCC). If you are unfamiliar with BRCC, I wrote about it earlier this year (see Strategic CSR – Black Rifle Coffee):

"The article in the url below profiles Black Rifle Coffee – a roasting company in Salt Lake City that, I would argue, is just as good an example of strategic CSR in action as Patagonia. … While enacting a very different set of values to Patagonia and, as a result, appealing to a completely different part of the population, the point is that Black Rifle stands for something and that thing is highly valued by a specific market segment."

In the article featured in today's newsletter, the company is announcing its listing via a merger with a special-purpose acquisition company (SPAC):

"Black Rifle Coffee Co. is going public by combining with a special-purpose acquisition company in a merger that values the coffee seller focused on military veterans at about $1.7 billion, the companies said. Known for its pricier coffee and firearms-themed products such as its AK-47 Espresso Blend, Black Rifle is combining with the SPAC SilverBox Engaged Merger Corp. I. Black Rifle also sells branded apparel and produces digital content to promote its products to veterans and first responders."

While SPACs have a spotty track record and are often associated with dubious business propositions, what is interesting about this announcement is that the merger is positioning BRCC as a social enterprise:

"Founded by former Green Beret Evan Hafer in 2014, Black Rifle has capitalized on consumers' desire to shop at brands that support social causes. Mr. Hafer vowed in 2017 to hire 10,000 veterans after Starbucks Corp. promised to hire 10,000 refugees following then President Donald Trump's executive order barring more refugees from entering the country."

More specifically, the merger is enabling the company to validate this claim by altering its legal status:

"As part of the deal, Black Rifle plans to reorganize as a public-benefit corporation, meaning it will have fiduciary duties both to shareholders and social good. Many startups have become PBCs, with investors increasingly giving priority to companies' missions. 'We want to do well for ourselves and do good for our community,' Joe Reece, the SPAC's executive chairman, said."

Relating back to the comparison I made back in March with Patagonia, and given that Patagonia is also a public benefit corporation (since 2012), I am struck by how different the values and guiding missions of these two companies are, but how they are equally appealing to their specific set of key stakeholders:

"Today, about half of Black Rifle's roughly 600 employees are military veterans, a total that Mr. Hafer said in an interview he expects to grow after the SPAC deal."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


Black Rifle Coffee, SPAC to Merge
By Amrith Ramkumar
November 3, 2021
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
B3

Tuesday, March 16, 2021

Strategic CSR - Black Rifle Coffee

The article in the url below profiles Black Rifle Coffee – a roasting company in Salt Lake City that, I would argue, is just as good an example of strategic CSR in action as Patagonia:

"Black Rifle Coffee Co. says its AK-47 Espresso Blend 'is here to conquer your taste buds.' Its extra-dark Murdered Out roast 'will fuel your midnight ops or your morning commute.' Another of the six-year-old company's blends promises to 'keep your freedom engine running.'"

While enacting a very different set of values to Patagonia and, as a result, appealing to a completely different part of the population, the point is that Black Rifle stands for something and that thing is highly valued by a specific market segment:

"With firearms-themed branding, unabashed support for police and the military and an irreverent founder who hasn't shied away from political debate, Black Rifle is a prime example of the way some businesses are capitalizing on politically engaged consumers' hyperpartisan shopping habits."

While we get the politicians we deserve, we also get the companies we deserve. As a result, the mix of businesses across the economy will reflect the values of the broader population. And, clearly, there is a market for some firearms with your coffee:

"Salt Lake City-based Black Rifle said its revenue nearly doubled in 2020 to $163 million, 70% of it from e-commerce. In 2015, its revenue was $1 million. The company said it is profitable but didn't provide further details. Of its 450 current employees, 55% are military veterans."

The point is value creation – meeting the needs and demands of your key stakeholders, rather than striving to implement a particular set of objectively-defined values:

"Justin Cheung buys Black Rifle's Silencer Smooth blend because he prefers a light roast—and because the company's message resonates with him, including its promise a few years ago to hire a huge number of veterans. 'I do feel better about my purchase knowing that they stand for things I believe in,' said Mr. Cheung, a Southern California-based wine buyer who describes himself as a constitutional conservative."

I can imagine an environmental activist saying exactly the same thing about shopping at Patagonia – while the values are different, the fact that stakeholders are loyal to a company that meets those values is what is important:

"Big American firms historically sought to stay above the partisan fray, an approach summarized by basketball legend Michael Jordan, who famously proclaimed: 'Republicans buy sneakers too.' Now more consumers want CEOs to take a stand. In 2019, 60% of American consumers would make a decision about whether to buy or boycott a company's product based on its stand on societal issues, according to a survey by public-relations firm Edelman—up from 47% in 2017."

As any effective strategist understands, the key to differentiation is market segmentation:

"Tom Davin, the former CEO of Panda Restaurant Group Inc. who was brought on as Black Rifle's co-CEO in 2019, said the company is targeting a specific segment of the population: military members and their families, first responders, sportsmen and gun enthusiasts. 'We're not going for the entire coffee market,' he said."

Rather than something to shy away from, I would like to see more companies adopt a defined set of values and work to enact them, genuinely. Then, the marketplace will decide which companies succeed and which fail. A company can only be socially responsible if it is meeting the needs of that society – what the people who live there actually want. The flipside of that is those companies that judge the societal mood incorrectly, or embrace values that go out of fashion, will quickly find themselves on the wrong side of history, and out of business. Whether we agree with the outcome is different from being able to understand the process by which value is created.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


Coffee with a Shot of Politics
By Zusha Elinson
March 13-14, 2021
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
B1