Hi Harish, I just happened to see the talk you gave at TED in 2014 on Corporate Social Responsibility. Your talk was spot on and pioneering as now (2016) leading companies are starting to embrace this. The point of brands & products changing lives is so true, lasting brands are the ones that solve consumer problems and continue to innovate. It is so true, it is not about just profit, it is changing lives.! Where would we be without cars or electricity or mobile phones. Best wishes. Nabil
Like 90% doesn't think this way. Everyone just thinks about's what's best in their interest. Money makes people lose all solidarity towards other humans and environment.
Humans are emerging from a primeval environment of scarcity and conflict. It is difficult for many humans to birth themselves from the shackles of modernity, especially since much of the culture we see today still uses obsolete practices which were in effect since the beginning of human civilization. These practices would include the use of force over intellect, justice over compassion, disunity over cooperation, addiction over freedom, superstition over science, and many more retardants.
Everyone thinking for their interest increases welfare for the society. Basic economic concept. Why you may ask? It's because let's say, A butcher, He provides meat so he can make profit. He gains money which he can use to expand his business or spend it on leisure goods while you get to buy delicious fresh meat with the money you made from working for a company where your Marginal output (Change of output as an additional worker is added) Is higher than your cost which helps the company make profit and maybe invest it in expanding it's buisness, which inturn leads to more employment and companies are ALWAYS trying to maximise profit. When someone works for his individual interest, It benefits the society.
Yes, In theory you are absolutely correct. No doubt. But corruption and extreme greed and disregard for population and environment still is a HUGE problem. It might not look like it on the surface in the western world, but look at the financial system. It has become inherently unstable with a boom-bust cycle. Growth ,as you put it, is what the system is running and depending on. But there is one problem.. Most of the growth we've experienced in the last decade or more, have been funded by debt. All European countries have increasing national debt (not to mention the US) in an attempt to stabilize the financial sector so we can continue with our ideals of unlimited growth. There is a catch tho.. The reason that we are putting ourselves in debt to get things going is that we have an idea of infinite growth in a finite world. A world that only have that amount of resources it has now. We can't expect to continue this rate of growth indefinitely unless we are prepared to look for resources in the universe indefinitely. Again.. We are not able to harvest resources from outer space yet. We are decades (if not more) away from having technology to do that. So how would you make growth without having more resources? You can't. Or, yes you can, but the system would self destruct over time because any real value would in the end be such a small amount compared to the "made up" value. That is what we are doing now. We do need change!
Harish Manwani eloquently explains why 'Profit's not always the point'. I wonder how many of his peers will listen and 'be the change' he talks of. We can but hope.
I'm glad to see Unilever is conscious of its impact on health, ecosystems, resources, etc. I hope they continue to change and help in any way they can... Unfortunately, I am left to conclude that this company is intentionally trying to kill customers instead of unintentionally, by using poisonous materials in its "food" and hygiene products. (HFCS, Titanium Dioxide, GMOs, Dioxins, PCBs, Hydrogenated oils, etc, etc)
the unspoken here is that for other companies ( perhaps chinese ones ) it is just about selling soap...unilever is big enough to do this kind of work that will help them in the long run but other smaller one cant and a lot just dont want to do it this way
Well, this has certainly created some discussion. I like that some people are at least attempting to help the wider community and that in itself has prompted others to think about it. In a world where greed and selfishness are running rampant, companies that help people instead of just ripping them off will get my cash. ;)
Steven Lacroix yeah right unilver save lives because they make soap. give me a break. they're only saying that to draw attention from the lives they destroy by polluting the earth on a massive scale and paying slave wages
He's using his products to show all which one little company can do in the world, think you're missing the brilliant things they're doing by focusing on criticising. Also, it's all well and good criticising but what about the companies that do fuck all - isn't it just that touch better that they actually do something good instead of going "oh well, we can't be fully ethical so fuck it, let's just not bother trying to make a little difference for the better" as opposed to companies that kill, intimidate, relocate and reduce people to starvation for the sake of profit (ie. Shell) . I think this company's setting a really good example and he's got every right to be proud of his work in my opinion. They've empowered women, they've provided essential sanitation which prevents children from dying from horrible diseases, they're saving drinkable water which is an ever-shrinking resource, using sustainable resources and avoiding ecologically damaging resources. Not to mention the programmes that they have in place, showing it's not just a few one-offs but on-going
Corporations will never reassess their unethical business practices as long as they’re overseen by corrupt governments. Governments and corporations essentially work for the people/consumer, but nothing will change without the people demanding it. In a democratic societies and as consumers, it is our responsibility to be aware of the organisation’s we support (corporations and governments) and to be informed of how they conduct their business. Education is always the first step to solving all the world’s problems.
It's all PR. They would not do any of that if it didn't bring any profit to the company. Unilever is actually the greatest monopoly in the world! If they really cared about society, they'd break themselves up to allow for a competitive, capitalistic market (or they would've never become this big, to begin with).
Well, Its not about making no profit or running a business that is having 0 profit. The thing is, you and your business should have a purpose through which you are making money, but more than you are contributing to the world or you are doing something that changes other's life or at least make difference in it.
I'm not saying it's bad , I'm saying it's unrealistic , and the talk overall is useless (if you haven't lived in a cave the past 10 years). If there was a solution in the video - how to pursue said companies to be good, eco-friendly, etc. - ok , but there was none, just a good example from one company. Yes , that's not bad, but it's neither that interesting, nor revolutionary.
Isn't this exactly the same story we keep hearing over and over and over again 365 days a year? What about the millions of people who have to choose between soap, soup in a package, and a bowl of rice cooked in dirty water because that's all they can afford?
It is great that this company is doing this but I bet they would make more money if they didn't care. That is the problem with ultimate capitalism. This is an exception rather than the rule and it is not easy to convince share holders that making less money is a good idea.
Ok, I am buying Mr. Harish Manwani word with the *responsibility* part. But companies can only be responsible for themselves; they cannot be a substitute for people's responsibility; that will be irresponsible.
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions". If society keeps placing hurdles in front of businesses, in the name of "responsibility" and other very subjective terms - we will end up will less business activity in places that need it most, like Africa and large parts of SE Asia. Milton Freedman got it right, rational self interest is still the best way to eliminate poverty, and there is very little that needs to change. Even the soap example this guy gave is easily addressed by self interest. If companies that are driven only by their bottom line, want a bigger market share in soap - they need to lower their prices and make them more accessible to the poor, getting raw materials from long term sustainable sources, by operating efficiently and using less resources. We DON'T need new leadership, we DON'T need new partnerships or ways to redefine the way we transact. We just have to concentrate on being the best we can be. Everything else around us will improve as a result.
I'm glad, yet very confused, that he explains how markets and capitalism changes the world through profit. Yet he denounce all of them. Thus this seems more like a confusing advertisement for his company.
The problem with all this is globalization. Emerging nations won't participate, some asian nations wont take part in this and that is why many other countries won't do it. But thats just my opinion. I really do hope i am wrong
you are wrong. All the power block of the world won't participate, naming America for an example (the country has the biggest global warming denier fan club).
US have some enormous problems with trust to the government, plus the government system is hopelessly outdated. Movements like the Tea Party have great influence on politics, so does lobbyists whom spends billions of dollars to lie to both government and the public. This is a huge problem, but a paradigm shift is under build-up. A paradigm shift that will change the whole world structure through the people that are beginning to realize that they don't have power or anything to have said in politics anymore. Mark my words. The next 50 years will turn the world upside down.
Blah blah blah. What companies do is provide a service that is desired with the desired traits, be it price, customer service, convenience, etc. These are what makes society better and improve everyone's quality of life over time. Profit is just an indicator of success and efficiency. Responsibility is relative and the masses determine it by buying your product. Unlike Government, who you have to pay unless you want to get shot or imprisoned, you can vote with your dollars when it comes to a business. There are only lasting monopolies with government assistance, so that isn't as much of a problem as we are led to believe.
profit is the difference between value and price. if its always on the upside it becomes fraud, then theft, then a debasement of the value of money. welcome to the current economic crisis. the theory was implemented, the experiment is over and it has failed.
Probably one of the worst TedTalks I've ever seen. Too much subjectivity. Not enough data or counter-examples (if any in the lecture). Tell me again what exactly are corporations doing wrong. All I see is someone who thinks corporations are people. SPOILER ALERT: They're not. People who make decisions in a corporation will go to great lengths to keep their company afloat and therefore not sink. That is what they do because that is their job. My point is that they will only care about resposibility when you have information NOT experience but actual data that can be utilised empirically and therefore communicated more effectively. Anyway uneducated rant over... for now.
I'd give you that there are very little fact in this talk, but he has good points. And just try to look at our world today. Europe and the US can't have any more growth. The resources are just not there. We try, but it keeps breaking down into economic recessions and crisis. The world is changing. This talk is a beginning of a paradigm shift. Old forms Capitalism cannot solve the problems in society anymore. Just as he said.
Let's cut through all this bullshit. At the end of the day, it's about the bottom line. You can convince yourselves that you have a "higher" purpose but profit is ALWAYS the point, a company's survival is tied to it. P.S. Fuck Monsanto.
what nonsense. when Adam Smith spoke of "self-interest" in the book Wealth of Nations he was referring to the need to satisfy the self-interest of the customer (the brewer, the butcher, etc.). capitalism is about satisfying someone else's need, not ripping off the customer. enough with this socialist culture that only produces poverty
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
Hi Harish, I just happened to see the talk you gave at TED in 2014 on Corporate Social Responsibility. Your talk was spot on and pioneering as now (2016) leading companies are starting to embrace this. The point of brands & products changing lives is so true, lasting brands are the ones that solve consumer problems and continue to innovate. It is so true, it is not about just profit, it is changing lives.! Where would we be without cars or electricity or mobile phones. Best wishes. Nabil
Like 90% doesn't think this way. Everyone just thinks about's what's best in their interest. Money makes people lose all solidarity towards other humans and environment.
As simple as it can be said. Nice one
Humans are emerging from a primeval environment of scarcity and conflict. It is difficult for many humans to birth themselves from the shackles of modernity, especially since much of the culture we see today still uses obsolete practices which were in effect since the beginning of human civilization. These practices would include the use of force over intellect, justice over compassion, disunity over cooperation, addiction over freedom, superstition over science, and many more retardants.
Agree
Everyone thinking for their interest increases welfare for the society. Basic economic concept. Why you may ask? It's because let's say, A butcher, He provides meat so he can make profit. He gains money which he can use to expand his business or spend it on leisure goods while you get to buy delicious fresh meat with the money you made from working for a company where your Marginal output (Change of output as an additional worker is added) Is higher than your cost which helps the company make profit and maybe invest it in expanding it's buisness, which inturn leads to more employment and companies are ALWAYS trying to maximise profit. When someone works for his individual interest, It benefits the society.
Yes, In theory you are absolutely correct. No doubt. But corruption and extreme greed and disregard for population and environment still is a HUGE problem. It might not look like it on the surface in the western world, but look at the financial system. It has become inherently unstable with a boom-bust cycle. Growth ,as you put it, is what the system is running and depending on. But there is one problem.. Most of the growth we've experienced in the last decade or more, have been funded by debt. All European countries have increasing national debt (not to mention the US) in an attempt to stabilize the financial sector so we can continue with our ideals of unlimited growth. There is a catch tho.. The reason that we are putting ourselves in debt to get things going is that we have an idea of infinite growth in a finite world. A world that only have that amount of resources it has now. We can't expect to continue this rate of growth indefinitely unless we are prepared to look for resources in the universe indefinitely. Again.. We are not able to harvest resources from outer space yet. We are decades (if not more) away from having technology to do that. So how would you make growth without having more resources? You can't. Or, yes you can, but the system would self destruct over time because any real value would in the end be such a small amount compared to the "made up" value. That is what we are doing now. We do need change!
Harish Manwani eloquently explains why 'Profit's not always the point'. I wonder how many of his peers will listen and 'be the change' he talks of.
We can but hope.
I'm glad to see Unilever is conscious of its impact on health, ecosystems, resources, etc. I hope they continue to change and help in any way they can... Unfortunately, I am left to conclude that this company is intentionally trying to kill customers instead of unintentionally, by using poisonous materials in its "food" and hygiene products. (HFCS, Titanium Dioxide, GMOs, Dioxins, PCBs, Hydrogenated oils, etc, etc)
I did not know TED channel is open to do commercials.
I think that its both an advert for unilever, and a great TED about ethical behavior.
Is this a commercial for your company?
the unspoken here is that for other companies ( perhaps chinese ones ) it is just about selling soap...unilever is big enough to do this kind of work that will help them in the long run but other smaller one cant and a lot just dont want to do it this way
Well, this has certainly created some discussion. I like that some people are at least attempting to help the wider community and that in itself has prompted others to think about it. In a world where greed and selfishness are running rampant, companies that help people instead of just ripping them off will get my cash. ;)
The way those two guys looked at each other when he mentioned palm oil.
because they know he's lying about unilever's sustainable sourcing
is this a ted talk or an advert for unilever.
so how many lives do save on average a day? the anonymity of the internet is an easy way to criticize opinions you don't agree with isn't it.
Steven Lacroix yeah right unilver save lives because they make soap. give me a break. they're only saying that to draw attention from the lives they destroy by polluting the earth on a massive scale and paying slave wages
artifactingreality
thats like me saying I save lives because everytime I kill someone I give their money to charity
He's using his products to show all which one little company can do in the world, think you're missing the brilliant things they're doing by focusing on criticising. Also, it's all well and good criticising but what about the companies that do fuck all - isn't it just that touch better that they actually do something good instead of going "oh well, we can't be fully ethical so fuck it, let's just not bother trying to make a little difference for the better" as opposed to companies that kill, intimidate, relocate and reduce people to starvation for the sake of profit (ie. Shell) . I think this company's setting a really good example and he's got every right to be proud of his work in my opinion.
They've empowered women, they've provided essential sanitation which prevents children from dying from horrible diseases, they're saving drinkable water which is an ever-shrinking resource, using sustainable resources and avoiding ecologically damaging resources. Not to mention the programmes that they have in place, showing it's not just a few one-offs but on-going
Well I suppose it's all about your frame of reference.
Corporations will never reassess their unethical business practices as long as they’re overseen by corrupt governments.
Governments and corporations essentially work for the people/consumer, but nothing will change without the people demanding it.
In a democratic societies and as consumers, it is our responsibility to be aware of the organisation’s we support (corporations and governments) and to be informed of how they conduct their business.
Education is always the first step to solving all the world’s problems.
It is true that self hygiene is so neglected that many people are getting so sick and devastated
It's all PR. They would not do any of that if it didn't bring any profit to the company. Unilever is actually the greatest monopoly in the world! If they really cared about society, they'd break themselves up to allow for a competitive, capitalistic market (or they would've never become this big, to begin with).
Soo every company should become charitable and eco-friendly ? Yea that's super realistic and not trivial at all...
Neither is tearing the planet and society to shreds for wads of paper I'm afraid.
Yes, they should. Especially the ones that can afford it.
SAsgarters No, they shouldn't.
Well, Its not about making no profit or running a business that is having 0 profit. The thing is, you and your business should have a purpose through which you are making money, but more than you are contributing to the world or you are doing something that changes other's life or at least make difference in it.
I'm not saying it's bad , I'm saying it's unrealistic , and the talk overall is useless (if you haven't lived in a cave the past 10 years). If there was a solution in the video - how to pursue said companies to be good, eco-friendly, etc. - ok , but there was none, just a good example from one company. Yes , that's not bad, but it's neither that interesting, nor revolutionary.
wonderful inspiring lecture :)
CSR..leading intent and sustainabilty through responsible corporate planning & governance..
This from the person who (at the time of the TED Talk) headed up Unilever, a beauty product company that tests on animals. CSR at its finest.
Good speach. Thank you.
Isn't this exactly the same story we keep hearing over and over and over again 365 days a year? What about the millions of people who have to choose between soap, soup in a package, and a bowl of rice cooked in dirty water because that's all they can afford?
This is great
Ideas that have been around for some time now, so nothing new... I can't help but think this is TEDvertising for Unilever
It is great that this company is doing this but I bet they would make more money if they didn't care. That is the problem with ultimate capitalism. This is an exception rather than the rule and it is not easy to convince share holders that making less money is a good idea.
Ok, I am buying Mr. Harish Manwani word with the *responsibility* part. But companies can only be responsible for themselves; they cannot be a substitute for people's responsibility; that will be irresponsible.
Word.
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions".
If society keeps placing hurdles in front of businesses, in the name of "responsibility" and other very subjective terms - we will end up will less business activity in places that need it most, like Africa and large parts of SE Asia.
Milton Freedman got it right, rational self interest is still the best way to eliminate poverty, and there is very little that needs to change.
Even the soap example this guy gave is easily addressed by self interest. If companies that are driven only by their bottom line, want a bigger market share in soap - they need to lower their prices and make them more accessible to the poor, getting raw materials from long term sustainable sources, by operating efficiently and using less resources.
We DON'T need new leadership, we DON'T need new partnerships or ways to redefine the way we transact. We just have to concentrate on being the best we can be. Everything else around us will improve as a result.
I'm glad, yet very confused, that he explains how markets and capitalism changes the world through profit. Yet he denounce all of them. Thus this seems more like a confusing advertisement for his company.
It's going to be difficult, to say the least.
6:29 i have a feeling that guy didnt agree.
Dude at 1:50 is like 'bitch please'
Profit's not always the point when you're already rich!
soup is the key to world peace
Guy making advertisements on Ted. Naming it profit's not the point. Ridiculous.
I watched an entire video of "me me me me me" and soap. :|
There is such a thing as a company that is both profitable and does good to society. It is Google.
The problem with all this is globalization. Emerging nations won't participate, some asian nations wont take part in this and that is why many other countries won't do it.
But thats just my opinion. I really do hope i am wrong
You are right, but does that mean we shouldn't try to change things? Just because it is hard and there are others that doesn't wanna see the light?
you are wrong. All the power block of the world won't participate, naming America for an example (the country has the biggest global warming denier fan club).
US have some enormous problems with trust to the government, plus the government system is hopelessly outdated. Movements like the Tea Party have great influence on politics, so does lobbyists whom spends billions of dollars to lie to both government and the public. This is a huge problem, but a paradigm shift is under build-up. A paradigm shift that will change the whole world structure through the people that are beginning to realize that they don't have power or anything to have said in politics anymore. Mark my words. The next 50 years will turn the world upside down.
Blah blah blah. What companies do is provide a service that is desired with the desired traits, be it price, customer service, convenience, etc. These are what makes society better and improve everyone's quality of life over time. Profit is just an indicator of success and efficiency. Responsibility is relative and the masses determine it by buying your product. Unlike Government, who you have to pay unless you want to get shot or imprisoned, you can vote with your dollars when it comes to a business. There are only lasting monopolies with government assistance, so that isn't as much of a problem as we are led to believe.
profit is the difference between value and price. if its always on the upside it becomes fraud, then theft, then a debasement of the value of money. welcome to the current economic crisis. the theory was implemented, the experiment is over and it has failed.
support open source
Soap, soup, and salvation.
ENG 102 !
Probably one of the worst TedTalks I've ever seen. Too much subjectivity. Not enough data or counter-examples (if any in the lecture). Tell me again what exactly are corporations doing wrong. All I see is someone who thinks corporations are people. SPOILER ALERT: They're not. People who make decisions in a corporation will go to great lengths to keep their company afloat and therefore not sink. That is what they do because that is their job. My point is that they will only care about resposibility when you have information NOT experience but actual data that can be utilised empirically and therefore communicated more effectively. Anyway uneducated rant over... for now.
I'd give you that there are very little fact in this talk, but he has good points. And just try to look at our world today. Europe and the US can't have any more growth. The resources are just not there. We try, but it keeps breaking down into economic recessions and crisis. The world is changing. This talk is a beginning of a paradigm shift. Old forms Capitalism cannot solve the problems in society anymore. Just as he said.
Pie in the sky typical Liberal think.
Let's cut through all this bullshit. At the end of the day, it's about the bottom line. You can convince yourselves that you have a "higher" purpose but profit is ALWAYS the point, a company's survival is tied to it. P.S. Fuck Monsanto.
:) :)
what nonsense. when Adam Smith spoke of "self-interest" in the book Wealth of Nations he was referring to the need to satisfy the self-interest of the customer (the brewer, the butcher, etc.). capitalism is about satisfying someone else's need, not ripping off the customer. enough with this socialist culture that only produces poverty
Worst TED talk I've ever seen
Agreed.