Skip to content

JA8. Enhancing Livelihoods

Statement

Please read the case study “Unilever “Enhancing Livelihoods” through Project Shakti” from chapter 4 of the Business ethics textbook that you find in the reading assignment. Based on what you have learned in this unit, answer the following questions:

  1. Do you believe Unilever sponsors the Shakti program to help women, boost its own profits, or both? Explain your answer.
  2. If Unilever has mixed motives, does this discredit the company in your eyes? Should it?
  3. How is this program an example of both corporate and personal sustainability?
  4. Could this model program be duplicated elsewhere, in another area and with different products? Why or why not?

Answer

Unilever is a multinational corporation headquartered in London, UK, that produces consumer goods. The company has a long history of social responsibility and sustainability, and the Shakti program is a prime example of this. The Shakti program supports people from devastating backgrounds, especially women, to start their own businesses by selling Unilever products in their communities. This program is a win-win situation for both Unilever and the participants in the program (Unilever PLC, 2021).

1. Do you believe Unilever sponsors the Shakti program to help women, boost its own profits, or both? Explain your answer.

Unilever sponsors the Shakti program to help women and also to boost its own profits, as these two goals are not mutually exclusive and do not contradict each other. By helping program participants to sell Unilever products, the company is expanding its market reach and increasing its profits as there is no price reduction for the end consumer. At the same time, the program is allowing its participants to start their businesses and improve their livelihoods by giving them some miro-loan to start their businesses and then people support themselves with the profits of the newly-created micro-business.

2. If Unilever has mixed motives, does this discredit the company in your eyes? Should it?

No, as we stated in the previous question; maximizing company profits and helping people are not -usually- contradictory goals. In fact, the Shakti program is a shared value program that is a win-win for both parties. All corporations should know that having a positive impact on society is a good business strategy and usually leads to more profits in the long run. Also, societies should encourage corporations to help people by making it obvious that making profits by helping people is a good thing and does not discredit the company.

3. How is this program an example of both corporate and personal sustainability?

corporate sustainability is achieved as the company builds a long-term relationship with a large base of consumers, increasing its brand awareness, and customer loyalty and finally, increasing its profits. The program participants and their families and anyone related to the program will be loyal to the company; participants will help the company to sell more products; and the company can use that in its advertising campaigns and improve its brand image in wealthier communities.

personal sustainability targets the program participants and it is achieved as those participants build businesses that generate a steady income for them and their families; the skills they learn while participating in the program are life-long skills that can be used to increase the person’s market value and make them more hirable; most of the participants are women who have no chance in their societies, so the program will help them to be more independent, increase self-esteem, and be ready to face the world (Byars & Stanberry, 2018).

4. Could this model program be duplicated elsewhere, in another area and with different products? Why or why not?

Such a program can be replicated in other parts of the world and even in the same area with different products and companies; however, the success of such programs depends on the company’s willingness to help people; if the company is only motivated to increase profits and they don’t care about the results; these programs will fail. Also, the program is designed to help communities and not just individuals; that is, if the program participants leave the area (e.g. migrated) after the program ends, then communities may not benefit as intended.

References

‌