The Dangers of Fashion

Towards Ethical and Sustainable Solutions

Sara B. Marcketti, Elena E. Karpova, Sara B. Marcketti, Elena E. Karpova

• Publisher: Bloomsbury Visual Arts
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781350052031
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Betriebswirtschaft
• Subtopic: Mode- & Textilindustrie

From sweatshops to fur farming, from polluting chemicals to painful garments, the fashion industry is associated with activities which have had devastating effects on workers, consumers, and the natural world. This ground-breaking volume provides a framework for examining the ethical, social, and environmental dangers that arise as fashion products are designed, manufactured, distributed, and sold within retail outlets, before being consumed and disposed of. Encompassing the cultural, psychological, and physiological aspects of fashion, it offers a comprehensive exploration of the hazards of a global industry. Drawing together an international team of leading textile and apparel experts, The Dangers of Fashion presents original perspectives on a wide range of topics from piracy and counterfeiting to human trafficking; from the effects of globalization on local industry to the peer pressure that governs contemporary ideals of beauty. Rooted in research into industry and consumer practices, it discusses innovative solutions-both potential and existing-to fashion's dangers and moral dilemmas from the viewpoint of individuals, companies, societies, and the global community.

Part One

The Moral and Ethical Dangers in Fashion

1

Moral Dilemmas in the Fashion Business

Jung E. Ha-Brookshire

To start with …

In many situations in our lives, there are conflicting views of a person’s moral (or amoral) behavior. Even in a business setting, a decision that seems to be detrimental to one group may save the livelihood of many people in another place. Something that is nearly harmless at home could result in morally-challenging situations in other areas. Furthermore, not everyone, not every culture, and not every society has the same set of moral values to recognize, judge, and act upon in complex situations. Especially where business profits are emphasized, morality is difficult to find. Shirley Anita Chisholm was an American politician, educator, and author who noted that “When morality comes up against profit, it is seldom that profit loses.” This highlights the perception that, somehow, when we become business professionals, our morality loses out to profits. Is that a universal truth?

Given that the fashion industry is so widespread and involves so many people, from top executives of global brands to factory workers, professionals in the industry face many morally-challenging situations. For example, a model agency may encourage fashion models to stay thin even if it physically harms their bodies. A designer may take a company sample home without paying or telling others. An apparel buyer may have to work with factories that do not pay the workers on time because of the low costs the factory offers. A retail buyer may issue a chargeback to the vendors (or ask the vendor to give money back to the retail buyer) for mistakes that are not even the fault of the vendor. Are these all examples of bad behavior? To answer this question, one has to consider the boundaries of such behavior and evaluate the moral consequences.

Morality refers to principles related to right or wrong and good or bad behavior (Merriam-Webster, 2017). People start developing their morality from their childhood years via social learning; they do so by experiencing different stages of moral reasoning and moral behavior (Blasi, 1983). Lawrence Kohlberg (1987), an American psychologist, proposed that humans experience six stages of moral development. At each stage, people are able to judge different levels of good or bad, and act accordingly. Although his theory mainly focuses on children’s development stages of moral development, this theory can also be applied to the moral development of professionals learning new workplace principles or norms. Indeed, many professions have their own codes of conduct, and college students or young professionals are required to learn discipline-specific principles and norms. So, what happens if business professionals are not morally sound and not able to make morally sound decisions? Other people would get hurt and suffer from such bad decisions. US buyers’ decisions may negatively affect factory workers’ lives. Retail buyers’ chargeback decisions may hurt the vendor’s financial performance. The next section explains the different stages of moral development which business professionals could experience while they are going through different stages of their careers.

Growing your morality

Kohlberg (1987) is one of the key psychologists who came up with the three levels and six stages of moral development that we all go through as we grow up. Level 1 can be described as pre-conventional. At this level, you just follow moral rules set by others. That is, moral rules and expectations are given to you and you must follow the rules. You don’t have to figure out what the good or bad behavior is because the decision is already made for you by your parents or others. Level 2 is called conventional. At this level, you are now able to internalize the expectations that others have for you. That is, you are aware of and expected to follow their rules and you are motivated to do so because you do not want to upset your community. Finally, level 3 is called post-conventional. At this level, your own moral rules and what others expect from you are clearly distinguished. If these two are not consistent, you would be able to challenge others’ rules and try to change their rules for the greater community. More specific descriptions of each of Kohlberg’s levels follow below.

Stage 1: Do what you are told!

Stage 1 is called heteronomous morality. What that means is that, what is right or wrong is defined by people who have authority and power over you. For example, parents hold authority on moral issues over children; or, senior executives do so over a first-year associate at work. In this case, moral rules are not the products of collaboration with others; rather, they are given to the individual from the outside or from above. In this light, certain actions are completely good or completely bad in an absolute sense, depending on who performs the actions. At this stage, you are not or cannot be involved in constructing or developing your own moral rules.

In a business setting, we could see this level of moral judgment in a brand new employee. In the following example, Peter is a new employee and Max is his immediate supervisor. Because Peter has no prior experience in the field or in the company, Peter may seek all cues and norms from his supervisor. Max told Peter, “Do what you are told.” To Peter, Max is the authority, so whatever Max does is right. For example, Peter saw Max accept a $500 gift card from a vendor. Peter didn’t ask Max if it was appropriate to do so. Instead, Peter accepts Max’s behavior as right and, therefore, Peter would also accept similar gift cards from other vendors. In this situation, one might say that Peter’s behavior is morally challenging; however, Peter does not regard it as such because rules are made by “adults”—in this case, Max and other senior executives. Peter is simply following the rules. At this stage, Peter’s morality could be said to be in its infant stage, without any thoughts or reasoning behind his actions. However, Peter’s behavior, accepting a gift card in exchange for a favor for vendors, could perpetuate corruption and non-transparent transactions in business settings.

Stage 2: Let’s make a deal!

In stage 2, you are now able to gain the social perspective of other individuals. Kohlberg (1987) thought that a person at this stage can understand that others have their own interests and desires, and these are as important and valid as your own interests and desires. Therefore, you now realize that other people may have different rules guiding their moral (or amoral) judgment, so you may have to solve conflicting interests between you and others. One way to tackle this problem is to come up with a reciprocal exchange agreement, such as “Let’s make a deal,” “If you scratch my back, I will scratch yours,” or “If you get away with it, I should get away with it, too.” In this case, there is no intrinsic value in good and bad. Rather, by exchanging equal goods or values, both the self and the others’ needs and desires are satisfied in performing good or bad behavior (see Figure 1.1).

Figure 1.1 Making a deal with others to achieve self-interest is one of the main characteristics in stage 2 of moral development. Source: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/me-you-selfish-contest-compare-1767683/.

We can readily encounter examples of stage 2 in a fashion business setting. For example, Sally has been in the workplace for a few months and noticed another employee, Jenny, taking a fairly expensive Italian leather jacket sample home without anyone’s approval. Sally asked Jenny if she could take one, too, and Jenny responded, “Let’s make a deal. Why don’t you take one, too, since I am taking one.” Sally thought that was a good exchange in that she gets to have a jacket she loves, and Jenny also gets one that she wanted. If Sally’s moral reasoning level had been at stage 1, she would have just followed Jenny’s behavior and taken the sample without even asking. At this stage, Sally at least questioned Jenny’s behavior; yet, her solution to this situation was to take another sample to have an equal transaction without contemplating the consequences of this action. Therefore, at this stage, Sally’s morality can be said to be individualistic and does not extend beyond the boundaries of Sally herself. In Sally’s mind, taking samples home does not pose a moral dilemma.

However, if all at work behave like Sally, then such a work environment could become dangerous because it would be made up of people who only think about their own interests. Taking a garment sample or even paper clips from the workplace seems harmless. However, using company real estate or vehicles for personal vacations is a misuse of company resources. When business professionals travel all over the world without close oversight via expense reporting systems, the result may be more challenging situations that require a more advanced level of problem evaluation.

Stage 3: Be nice to others!

At stage 3, your perspective is now extended to other people with whom you have relationships. This makes stage 3 the first part of level 2, in that social and community expectations affect your moral decisions. For example, when you meet with someone else and form a relationship, or “coupleship,” you now operate with shared expectations and norms, which might be different from those of your own. For example, as a good person within the coupleship, you are expected to be faithful, loyal, altruistic, and committed to the other person, beyond being a good person in yourself. This is the stage of “Be nice and kind and then you will get along with others” (Rest, 1983). Hence, researchers refer to this stage as interpersonal normative morality.

Such couple-like relationships can also be found in business settings. For example, Janell and Lauren used to be colleagues in a business and recently founded a new start-up fashion company called Imagine. Janell has expertise in fashion business management while Lauren is known for her creativity. Before forming this new business, even when they worked together as colleagues, they did not have to watch each other’s work schedules or work ethics. As co-owners of Imagine, they now realize that they must create new norms or expectations of the partnership to ensure that they are equally committed to the success of the new company.

To accomplish this, they discussed basic norms such as: 1) neither will look for another job or business opportunity as long as they are a co-owner; 2) they will be in the office at least four days a week in the morning to discuss new developments or business options; and 3) when meeting vendors or buyers, each must consider what the other would do before making any big decisions. Once these expectations were set, Janell and Lauren tried their best to honor these commitments as a good partner should do. At this stage, the coupleship expectations become the guiding principles of a new partnership. Any behavior that violates these expectations, such as looking for another partner without telling the other or making buying decisions without checking with the partner, are considered to be bad behavior.

There are many real-life business examples of partnerships breaking up or of the separation of personnel due to non-loyal behavior by the membership. There are many instances of CEOs resigning because of unacceptable or amoral behavior such as sexual harassment, covering up accidents, or even faking accounting books. When violations of interpersonal expectations within a company occur, the company could be in a dangerous moral position.

Stage 4: Morality becomes laws!

At stage 4, the coupleship boundary goes beyond friends or family. Morality now rules the whole society, which includes all who share general social institutions. In this case, moral norms are not just set by those who have close relationships, as in a partnership, but rather by legal codes, so they apply to all people within society, impartially. At this stage, the rights and obligations of social members as described in legal codes are equal before the law, and the sense of duty, loyalty, and faithfulness is not only applied to each other, but also to the entire society. At the same time, all citizens have a debt to society by virtue of participating in social institutions and receiving benefits from society. Therefore, “everyone is obligated and protected by the law” at this stage (Rest, 1983). Therefore you now have to make moral decisions based on the philosophy that your actions must meet all social standards and rules.

In a business setting, the moral expectations of stage 4 can be found in professional codes or employee handbooks. For example, Janell and Lauren’s partnership grew and now they have more than fifty employees at Imagine. It is now much harder to control all employees’ behavior but both partners want commitment and loyalty from all their staff. So, they created an employee handbook as a code of conduct for Imagine. This handbook clearly states that employees shall not accept any gift worth more than $100. It also states that the $100 l...