The Patagonia Clothing Company’s Anti-Growth Strategy
newyorker.com
newyorker.com
My mind spins on that statement. Kudos to the marketing genius who increases sales (= consumers) by convincing customers that they're being "anti-consumers". Companies that use group/political identity (in their case perhaps even 'cult') as part of their scheme take quite a risk in doing so, but Patagonia is one of the companies that has proved remarkably effective and successful in that genre -- consistently over a long time.
Regardless, I actually like their products.
I like the sound of Paramo jackets for that reason, but my partner won't be seen dead with me wearing one. Which is a shame.
Just because there's a local (Patagonia) increase in a metric (sales) doesn't mean there isn't a global decrease.
Patagonia could reasonably gain market share (number of people wearing Patagonia) while lowering sales-per-person with the net outcome being higher sales overall.
This only makes business sense if consumers _want_ durable goods and 'punish' businesses adequately that make shorter lived products. Consumers have to want it enough and have enough information in order to provide the correct market pressure.
And you know what, phones actually do last 6 years without needing replacing. All they'd have to do is simply point that out. heh
Many higher end brands seem to eventually reach a point where they have to figure out how to keep growing without 'diluting' the brand (ie becoming too mass market). The Coaches, Burberrys, etc. Some bring out sibling brands in order to accommodate both markets, some fail and fizzle out.
It's not only true, the truth of it makes it incredibly authentic, and if there's anything that appeals to the market these days, it's authenticity.
The supposedly 'crazy idea' that sustainability is, in fact, economically sustainable and even beneficial is a pretty amazing thing. It's a way to be more successful; it is not a cost. For more, check out Bill McDonough's excellent book "Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way we Make Things" -- http://www.mcdonough.com/speaking-writing/cradle-to-cradle/
Side note, I grew up extremely close to Patagonia for about 25 years (literally—went to kindergarten there), my father was highly influential in the leadership and direction of the company, helped come up with the "Don't Buy This Jacket" campaign and led many sustainability efforts. Ask me anything.
Wow, what an opportunity!
I'm intrigued by motivation: did they set out to make great clothing, or did it prove to be the most profitable (and morally acceptable to the owners) way to make money with which to do what they really wanted to do?
And did they have pointers that this approach (from "Don't Buy this Jacket" to now) would work, or was it a gamble that could've taken down the company if it hadn't paid off? Trying to apply it to my online business, I'm struggling to even start thinking this way.
http://www.prolificmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/P...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Tom_Frost...
They sold their gear off picnic tables in Yosemite. They themselves were (are) climbers, and they climbed on the gear they made.
(I think the answer to your question is "both")
Their history is also recounted here: http://www.patagonia.com/us/patagonia.go?assetid=3351
There was internal debate about "Don't Buy This Jacket." I heard some of it, and it was an amazing show of cultural strength that won out loud and clear above the concerns. It was a re-commitment to Patagonia's roots and values, and they really believed in it. There was not really a concern that it was going to fail, nor did it matter for them. They're a private company for a reason; they can do things like that for a greater purpose beyond short-term shareholder value, and because of that it makes a sort of self-perpetuating positive feedback cycle of value internally. The company believes in what it does, and does what it believes is right, and it's no accident that that genuineness and authenticity resonates with a market seeking quality.
The realization that may be relevant to your business is that authenticity and genuine value and quality are all different names for the same thing. When they all line up, there's no gambling—there's just a clear vision of what's right for the customer, the company, the employees, and ultimately, the world. There aren't actually trade-offs if you don't create them.
It may sound lofty, but getting all those things to line up really is the answer to many elusive and complex problems in business. Your market needs to both know about and understand your company and the value it provides in the most honest way possible. Likewise, you need to understand and respect your market as close to reality as possible, and balance leading and following it. At the same time, your employees need to understand that same value and be enabled to provide it proudly and without barriers, which is what most companies call 'culture' and find by accident or not at all. Be brave with the truth, and your customers, employees, and the world will respect you for it.
I think that's why Patagonia launched this campaign so proudly. There was never really any risk involved, since it was simply an external projection of what they already believed strongly: the principles and values and most importantly knowledge that were already extremely in sync internally. Since they knew their internal representation of the world was the right one (a human truth, larger than themselves), they were proud to share it with their customers. Find those things that are bravely true and that you're proud to share with the world, and even when other companies with less knowledge and less confidence might think it risky, you'll know better.
That said, there's a lot that needs to happen before that. Patagonia wasn't taking a giant risk with that campaign because it was already ingrained in their culture and way of business. They had something they believed in strongly, that they had proven and trusted over thirty years, and they just articulated it in a new way to new people.
Two pieces. First, build your culture toward something you, your employees, and your customers can believe in strongly and truthfully. Understand your value and make it tangible. Second, look deeper: see your company, your customers, and your employees as a complex system that needs profound human leadership toward a common goal to reach a confidence that makes the big leaps into easy and confident single steps.
They tend to value the places that matter.
But the company is also renewing the moral legitimacy of free markets. Depending on your point of view, you might think that turning left-leaning consumers into market fundamentalists is a bad thing even if the marketing about the product is true.
Isn't this every brand since Bernays came along?
They don't have an anti-growth strategy, they have a marketing strategy with an "anti-growth" message, targeting rich people who are willing to dump money into anything that will clean their consciences.
And that isn't bad, it is a brilliant marketing strategy!
They are purveyors of poor satisfaction garbage dump filler products that only barely fulfill their stated purpose. Most consumers have become so accustomed to this that they don't even realize there's an issue.
It's a serious problem. A minimum level of durability for a given purpose is one of those things that is a benefit of the commons -- it is good for the entire planet.
It's not just marketing. With stuff that last longer you just buy less, and actually spend quite a bit less money in the long run.
http://fourpins.com/style/is-outdoors-menswears-new-heritage...
For reference, the image of the "Don't Buy This Jacket" ad is in this article: http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/ad-day-patag...
EDIT: Another anecdote - In 2010 I bought one of Patagonia's new wetsuits. At 600$ it was twice as expensive as the nicest suits on the market, I'm lucky enough to live near a Patagonia store though and they had a yearly wetsuit sale so I paid 450$. Still an outrageous price for a suit. Most wetsuits last me about three seasons, I still wear that first Patagonia suit though. It was starting to show it's age last year so I brought it to the store and they shipped it to their repair shop up north, and then back to my house. They replaced all of the inside seams, a zipper, and added a key loop (a feature the original didn't even have). They did all this FOR FREE.
I wouldn't describe them as anti-consumerism, because they sell stuff. I do think the brand encourages thoughtful consumerism though, and mostly by producing products and services that reset your bar for value against cost.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Let-People-Surfing-Education-Businessm...
I think Patagonia is growing primarily because they make really nice stuff, and a little bit because of their great PR. Basically, their products deliver on the promise of their PR. They really do work well and last a long time. I have Patagonia jackets, gloves, socks, even lightweight cotton Hawaiian shirts from the late 90s that I still wear today.
More about the 'worn wear' tour here:
http://www.notcot.com/archives/2015/04/patagonia-worn-wear-t...
Names? I'd be interested to know some, so I can check them out.
It's kind of like generic programming frameworks: the more generic a framework is, the more generic its output, and the less tailored to the needs and human nuances of the end user. The highest quality experiences are often layers of abstraction gradually growing more human and more unique as they get closer to the user.
3D printing can achieve a level of quality in many ways and for many purposes, but it remains to be seen if it can reproduce the important levels above the logical.
I think Industry 4.0 is a more likely factor for change than 3d printing, though.
I've always thought patagonia was a cheap, generic branch from china. Since all they seem to sell are ugly jackets made from the shortest polyester fibers.
i'm actually shocked that patagonia is supposed to be a high end shop. now thinking of it, i recall seeing one or two boutique stores from them. but mostly, i just encountered their products in costco or some corner of department stores.
Being born there, I was also surprised, specially because Patagonia economic activity is surging thanks to both fracking and (ironically) wind farms.