He Ran an Empire of Soap and Mayonnaise. Now He Wants to Reinvent Capitalism.

Would have been nice to ask what he thought of the work of the late Ray Anderson who remade Interface.

I know nothing about this man other than what is in this interview but I find his assessments are sound. They make sense for the general welfare of the workers and communities in which they reside as does a “long term” view of business. I’m amused by his take on Jack Welch, whom I’ve seen interviewed too many times and who never once seemed to care about anything other than profits. It’s rare to hear a CEO of one company criticize another. It’s also refreshing. Having worked in radio broadcast management and sales and for some of the biggest companies in that field, the quarterly profit mania was exhausting and counter-productive to content, consumers and advertisers. The industry went from being a predominantly celebratory arena for new talent and brilliantly conceptualized albums to a one-size-fits-all format by category. The result was a loss of productive original individuals with great ideas to share and a homogeneous playlist of repetitive burnout, all in the name of corporate profits.

I have to take great exception to this article portraying the man as the saviour to the company and withholding the founders values - “Yeah, he’s bringing back values that were at the roots of the success of this company.” Ask any of the UK staff that have all been replaced by substandard cheaper offshore labour if they agree. Maybe he misheard what people where saying? The quote should have read "Yeah, he's destroying all of the values that were at the roots of the success of this company" I sound bitter, I'm not, I'm truly not. I understand that businesses and those at the top want to make money. What I object to is the narcissistic posturing and trying to use the founders vision with the goal to disguise what he knew deep down was and still is wrong. The branding the company deployed was a genius move and one that still assists all former employees to avoid purchasing the companies products. Branding can backfire......

There is no doubt of my full respect to guys like Paul Polman, who worked their way up, and depended on themselves, however, at the end of the day, it is all about money. People work to earn money, with their different goals, to spend on good education to having dozens of houses and properties. So please nobody, specially rich people, in corporate business, is interested in environmental issues and problems, nobody care about other people struggles and agony. All about money and how to make more money.

Over the long term, those companies that focus on the long term will tend to do better. It stands to reason, and the contrast of Unilever and Heinz is a plain example of it. Warren Buffett invests on the same basis. He suggests buying a stock you will want to own in 10 years, and then helping it become what you'll want it to be in 10 years. It is the same idea of long term profits coming out of long term thinking. Of course, in the longest term, we are all dead. There is a lot between that and the end of this current 90 day cycle.

One of my heros! Thanks Paul for all that you do.

We Democrats need to recognize that a whole lot of very rich people, including many corporate CEOs, are good people and good partners for our general vision. This is one very bright example. I can think of others like Michael Bloomberg. Constantly harping about "billunaires" (doing my best Bernie Sanders impression) is not going to solve one single problem. Not one.

Why does the Times give Polman such fawning coverage? What has he really accomplished? He's done nothing substantive to stop Unilever's huge part in destroying Indonesia's rainforests and the painful and violent killing of hundreds of thousands of orangutans. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/29/world/asia/orangutan-indonesia-palm-oil.html https://www.cosmeticsbusiness.com/news/article_page/Greenpeace_occupies_Unilevers_dirty_palm_oil_supplier/147524

I think this is all pablum for the masses. It’s much more telling to see the actions of corporate greed and how it has impacted blue collar jobs starting in the early 1970’s. Jobs that allowed me to join the workforce in 1971 provided a pathway to home ownership, retirement and medical insurance. The wages essentially remained stagnant until I retired. The generations behind me don’t have the opportunity to own homes, don’t have paid retirement plans and don’t even think about a paid health plan. Corporate America be afraid. People are starting to wake up to your greed. A few “we have seen the light articles and statements” are not going to get it.

One can only imagine how hard it must have been for Mr. Polman to end quarterly reporting for a company as visible as Unilever. The pushback from the establishment must have been immense. Beyond the results that speak for themselves, what will it take to inspire more companies to do the same?

"Reinventing capitalism?" I read this piece with interest; is Polman another Elizabeth Warren but in the guise of a CEO? Would he parallel Warren's thinking or have even better ideas on reinventing capitalism? To my disappointment, Polman's "reinventing capitalism" only adds a dash of social conscience to the basic goal of getting rich. There is no recognition of our vast and really unsustainable economic inequality. A bit of environmental conscience might just be good for profits in the long run: it could delay the pending disasters of environmental degradation and extend the lives of corporations. Warren, in fact, is not out to reinvent capitalism but to make capitalism safe for the public; her goal is to have the extremely wealthy pay some taxes for the general good. Would even a CEO with a bit of social conscience back Warren's economic plans? That would be my test of how much conscience a CEO has.

Never could understand why corp. insisted on 1/4 earnings reports and "guidance" for Wall St. Paying attention to such things is for suckers. Most businesses and major corp. hope to exist for a long time. Why should they worry about short term results? They are only playing into the hands of the Wall St. traders, not their investor/owners.

Proof that capitalism can exist hand in hand with environmental stewardship and employee goodwill. It would have been helpful to include more details about Imagine.

He appears to have a better sense of management in terms of a more compassionate capitalism but where is the encouragement of employee ownership? What were the employment conditions for example hours of work week, vacation, sick leave, childbirth time off, retirement? The company did well but how were the lives of the employees better than at any other company. I wish the author would have included more specifics on that. Nevertheless, he seems to be a step or two ahead of many CEOs to day. That piece is refreshing.

It would be interesting to hear what Mr. Polman has to say about the role of government regulation.

It's a shame Mr. Polman wasn't born in the U.S. He's a REAL businessman, with heart and intelligence and foresight, who would probably make a great president.

I hope more in the corporate world will come to understand that humane treatment of workers and a corporate culture of industry and compassion can have such a positive effect on the bottom line.

I might start to believe you if you slashed CEO salaries permanently and decisively, and started a major representation of labor on the board of directors. In truth, only voters can "reinvent capitalism."