For companies, LUV is a three-letter word.

 

This editorial will appear on the Communicate issue 184, Q2 as I am the editor in chief of the magazine in question.

__________________________________________________________________________________

For companies, love is a three-letter word.

Is there an alphabet soup to make companies feel better? Let us try these:

•     CSR: Corporate Social Responsibility

•     DEI: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

•     ESG: Environmental, Social, and Governance

 

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives have increasingly become a focal point for organizations striving to align their operations with ethical standards and societal expectations. However, despite the growing emphasis on CSR, many companies encounter significant challenges that hinder effective implementation. The failure of CSR initiatives often stems from a lack of genuine commitment from leadership, insufficient stakeholder engagement, and inadequate resource allocation. These shortcomings not only undermine the intended impact of CSR efforts but also contribute to skepticism among consumers and communities regarding corporate intentions.

 

Furthermore, the divergence between assimilation and integration programs within an organization can exacerbate these failures. While assimilation involves the adoption of external social norms into corporate culture, integration requires a more profound transformation that aligns business objectives with social values. When organizations struggle to reconcile these two approaches, they risk creating disjointed initiatives that fail to resonate with both internal stakeholders and external audiences.

 

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs have become a staple in organizations aiming to foster inclusive environments and promote social justice. However, despite their widespread adoption, many DEI initiatives face significant challenges that hinder their effectiveness. Research indicates that these programs often fail to achieve sustainable change due to various factors, including employee resistance and the complex nature of measuring success.

 

One primary reason for the lack of effectiveness in DEI initiatives is the subtle resistance exhibited by employees. Researchers emphasize that resistance can manifest in ambivalent ways, complicating efforts to gauge support for these initiatives. Employees may outwardly endorse diversity while undermining it through passive-aggressive behaviors or disengagement. This duality suggests a deeper issue within organizational culture, where superficial compliance does not translate into genuine commitment to diversity goals.

 

I am trying to be very simplistic here, while untangling something legally very complex, but the gist of it is this: Corporations are considered “persons” under U.S. law. As a person, one is expected to be ethical toward their families, neighbors, and communities at large.

It has actually been proven, however, that inside every act of generosity lies an element of selfishness. Meaning: If I do good, will I be rewarded in the afterlife? Will God return my act tenfold? Will I gain good karma? Naturally, in the same vein, companies expect their contributions to society to ricochet back to their sales. (According to the World Economic Forum in 2021, across 25 countries surveyed, 70% of respondents stated they prefer to buy products from companies with values.)

 

According to the MIT Climate Portal, carbon offset credits “fund specific projects that either lower CO₂ emissions or ‘sequester’ CO₂—meaning they take some CO₂ out of the atmosphere and store it. Some common examples include reforestation, building renewable energy, carbon-storing agricultural practices, and waste and landfill management.”

 

Here are some examples of greenwashing:

•     In 2019, McDonald’s introduced paper straws that turned out to be non-recyclable.

•     The European court ordered Shell to reduce its carbon emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels. It was the first time a private company had been ordered to reduce emissions by a fixed amount within a defined time frame. (This ruling was overturned by the Court of Appeal in The Hague in November 2024.) Meanwhile, the company still claims in its ads that it supplies 100% of household energy—despite that energy simply coming from the grid.

•     Back in 2020, Delta pledged $1 billion for a plan that included carbon offset credits and supposed reduced jet fuel use to cut emissions. The company is now being sued over its claim to be “the world’s first carbon-neutral airline.”

•     As part of its pledge to recycle all packaging by 2030, Coca-Cola—through WPP Open X, led by Ogilvy New York—transformed its iconic script logo to encourage recycling. The logo, now appearing crumpled like a ready-to-recycle can, debuted in major Latin American cities. However, considering the company is the world’s largest plastic polluter, many question the motivation behind the campaign.

 

Some brands, on the other hand, end up playing both sides of the field, making any judgment incredibly complex.

 

Take Zara as a generic example. On the one hand, several factors bolster its reputation:

•     Sustainable Collections: Its “Join Life” line uses organic cotton, recycled wool, and other sustainable materials.

•     Textile Recycling Program: In-store recycling bins are available for customers to deposit used garments.

•     Energy-Efficient Stores: Many retail locations now run on renewable energy.

However, on the other side of the spectrum:

•     Fast Fashion’s Environmental Impact: Zara’s model of quickly producing trendy, cheap clothing in large quantities is inherently unsustainable.

•     Worker Exploitation: The brand has long faced criticism for poor working conditions and low wages in its supply chain.

•     Greenwashing: Its recycling schemes, while promoted, are relatively small compared to the business’s overall scale.

 

Another brand, Patagonia, is often seen as a beacon of environmental protection. However, paradoxically, it must still sell products to fulfill its objectives. Some of Patagonia’s positive factors include:

•     Recycled Materials: Many products are made from recycled content.

•     Fair Trade and Ethical Sourcing: The company partners with Fair Trade-certified factories.

•     Repair and Reuse Program: Customers are encouraged to repair and reuse products, promoting a circular economy.

 

That said, Patagonia is still a business, and like others, it has trade-offs:

•     Shipping Impact: The carbon footprint of global distribution remains high.

•     Synthetic Fibers and Microplastics: Even recycled synthetics release microplastics into water systems.

•     Pricing and Accessibility: High prices limit access to eco-friendly options for some consumers.

 

When it comes to DEI, the picture is, at best, a mixed bag. News cycles now proclaim that DEI is dead. Several major U.S. brands—including Bud Light, Target, John Deere, and Lowe’s—have faced pushback. The phrase “Go woke, go broke” is often repeated like a mantra.

Still, according to U.S. company data:

•     75% reported an increase in women in leadership; only 14% saw a decline.

•     56% saw an increase in senior ethnic minority executives; only 23% experienced a decline.

•     Companies sharing disability workforce data doubled in the past three years.

•     14% now have an LGBTQ+ board member.

 

Yet despite this progress, McDonald’s—like many companies—has pulled its targets for "aspirational representation goals" in senior leadership and supplier diversity. Still, 30% of its leaders come from underrepresented groups, and 25% of its suppliers are diverse-owned, fulfilling previously stated quotas.

 

Meta, meanwhile, dismantled its DEI program at the start of 2025, just before the investiture of the 47th U.S. president—who then issued a presidential order banning DEI programs in federal agencies. This move has sent shockwaves through the private sector. Some companies are pulling back entirely; others are reorganizing. But this is no laughing matter—it’s a directive from the top of the chain.

 

In our region, even gender balance remains a struggle. Just 31% of GCC marcomms (marketing communications) professionals report equal or near-equal male–female leadership representation (defined as 40–60% in favor of any gender). A majority (54%) report low representation, and almost a third cite very low representation, where women make up fewer than 25% of leadership. Only 30% say a woman holds the most senior role—CEO, CMO, MD, or founder—in their organization.

 

To call all of this “confusing” is an understatement. What one region struggles with isn’t even on the radar of another. There is no one-size-fits-all solution for CSR or DEI. Each society, community, and country faces its own unique set of challenges.

 

But for companies, sometimes, simplifying to three letters is more than enough.

A luxury that has lived a life - editorial for Communicate 183

This is my editorial for the issue number 183 of Communicate, enjoy!
 

In 2010, while I was visiting a friend in San Francisco, and on a whim, we went into thrift store. John, my friend who is the CEO of a huge company, absent-mindedly rummaged briefly through the racks and decided he did not want anything. I threw an eagle-eyed look at the store, went to that basket near the cashier, and immediately took out a tie. I paid 6,25 USD Dollars for it. Showed it to John, his jaw dropped. “Would you gift it to me? Please?” He said. Or rather pleaded. The tie in question was the ultra-rare, obnoxiously expensive vintage Versace Miami print in mint condition. He wore it the next day to his board meeting and returned with giddy glee to the rave reviews he received.

Another time, I was at a second-hand store in Beirut. I saw a pair of shoes, instinctively knew what they were and casually strolled to get them. Before I reached for them another woman grabbed them, and although they were in pristine condition, she – thankfully – decided against them and threw them back carelessly. I took the pair without even trying them on, went and paid for them – 2 USD if you want to know – and bang! Their original price was 340 Euros. The lady tried to buy them back from me at the store door (apparently she checked them online) and I kindly declined.

These are not isolated stories. My life – or rather closet and house - are full of them. In today’s world, the word luxury is loaded. Its meaning shifting and morphing from one generation to the next. Originally, and according to the Oxford dictionary, the word means “a state of great comfort or elegance, especially when involving great expense.”

Yet, paradoxically, Hermes artistic director Pierre-Alexis Dumas says that the brand is costly, not expensive. “Expensive is a product, which is not delivering what it is supposed to deliver, but you paid quite a large amount of money for it, and then it betrays you”. It feels as if this hinges on a technically. Yet, in 2024, major “luxury brands” were embroiled in a sweatshop scandal – in Italy no less - whereby a 2600 Euros bag was costing 53 Euros to make while using workers toiling in abominable conditions.

Speaking of Hermes, somewhere between Chirstmas and New Year’s Walmart, the discount department stores in the US, sold – what is technically a “dupe”. A product which looks like very expensive designer item is but is a copy, which is a tendency that invaded the markets when people could not afford the originals. The dupe in question was dubbed the Wirkin, or Walmart Birkin, for the price of 78 USD for the regular leather and 200 USD for its premium leather – literally at the 1/100^th of the price of the original.

Right now, the world of luxury brands however, is in full crisis. The Chinese – often the backbone of the clientele - found themselves in a wave of real estate crash and wave of youth unemployment. Currently, major houses, including LVMH (Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy), Kering, and other such empires find themselves playing catch-up for having lost 60 million “aspiring shoppers” and concentrating on their Very Important Clients (VIPs) who still found themselves short-thrifted on experience and treatment when compared to how much they were buying. Only Hermes rode the crisis high, still producing its extremely “costly” bags – the Kelly and the Birkin – and still enjoying the aura of their exclusiveness.

The more we delve into the word, the more complicated in becomes. If “vintage” is indeed luxury, then no wonder the world of second-hand, deadstock merchandise, upcycling, thrifting, and pre-loved is booming throughout the world. The value of that market is supposed to reach 113.2 Billion USD by 2030 up from 42.5 Billion in 2023. So much that major brands are initiating second-hand lines from their overstock, archive pieces or garments and accessories cosigned by their clients from previous collections.

Mona Ayoub, who in 2023 auctioned many items of her haute couture Chanel wardrobe, said of her coat which took 800 hours to make and embroider and which sold at 312000 Dollars: “I wore it at a venue when Karl [Lagerfeld – former chanel designer] was present”. She styled it open “over a turtleneck and a pair of pants. “When Karl saw me he was so shocked and asked me how could I do that. I told him that I gained weight and can’t close it. He then laughed and said to me, ‘join the club’.” Because even owning such exclusive pieces cannot negate you from gaining weight and not fitting into them.

Luxury is so multifaceted, it could be a nice meal, a good night’s sleep, a treasured sweater from high school, a simple wedding band with sentimental value, time spent with family (or “chosen family” as the expression goes), or time alone.

Speaking of time, in 1988, watchmaker Piaget came up with a series of ads which went "La plus belle facon de porter une Piaget c'est de n'en rien montrer" – “the most beautiful way to wear a piaget, is not to show any of it”. Because you are wearing it for yourself, not for bragging. Because self-appreciation beats all show-off.

In Antoine de Saint-Exupery’s lovely book “The Little Prince”, the titular hero meets up with a merchant selling pills that quench thirst. You only needed to take one per week and feel no need to drink. Apparently this saved 53 minutes a week. The prince, in his own logic said, “if I had fifty-three minutes to spend as I liked, I should walk at my leisure toward a spring of fresh water.”

Because walking at one’s leisure toward a spring of fresh water is, indeed a luxury.