巴塔哥尼亚公司创始人依方·周依纳德(上)
依方·周依纳德不仅是个世界级的登山家、他更是个坚爱冲浪的冲浪好手与飞神钓爱好者。但除了以活力及大胆的户外运动精神着名外，他也是巴塔哥尼亚公司的创始人兼老板，更以他前卫的企业策略在商场中闯出了一片天。周依纳德出生於缅恩州，原本是位铁匠；他创立了巴塔哥尼亚公司──一家专门供应顶级户外用品的公司。令人钦佩的是，他无须让公司上柜，便使公司收入直达2亿3千万美金。现年60余岁的他，数十年以来一直依循着他对美国企业界一贯「不用我的方法就算了」的态度，使他得以带领同事以及竞争者走向共同维护环境的理想。
巴塔哥尼亚是第一个使用有机棉制造衣物，第一个使用回收的汽水瓶盖制造人工毛料，以及首位捐赠每年公司总收入1%给基层环保组织的大型零售公司。自此以後，这个举动便引发了其他大公司，例如GAP、NIKE、Timberland等着名服饰商开始采用有机素材，并着手於减少环境污染的计画。当然，巴塔哥尼亚仍然无法达到对环境造成零污染的理想。一个例子是：巴塔哥尼亚公司的主要制造工厂皆设於美国领土外，因此需要使用相当多的燃料才能将原料及产品运送到世界各地。
图说：依方正在深思地球的命运。（图片来源：Rick Ridgeway提供）
然而，过去几个月以来，巴塔哥尼亚又创造了一个前所未有的创举－即推动「50万元将票投给环境」的活动，希望藉此鼓励关心环境的民众於11月2日投下神圣的一票（编按：美国总统大选）。周依纳德在位於加州凡度拉的巴塔哥尼亚总公司接受了我们关於总统大选、推动公司运作环保化、为何他比比尔福特更具影响力、以及地球是即否将完蛋等议题进行访问。
问：是什麽促使你推动「将票投给环境」的活动？
答：嗯，昨晚我与耶稣对话时（大笑），耶稣告诉我大家都搞错了──他并不希望大家在北极圈野生动物保护区探油；我们把一切都搞砸了，需要从新探讨我们的生活。
问：你能直接与耶稣沟通！他还说了些什麽？
答：嗯，他并不常跟我说话－他说话相当的简短扼要。
你知道，我真的很失望没有人在针对环境保护问题进行讨论。纵使美国国防部已经站出来告诉民众对美国国家安全最大的威胁之一是全球暖化，也很少人注意。你听听看这些（总统）辩论的内容－真的是蠢到令人无法置信！提出来的问体本身就很愚笨，答案也很愚蠢，不论是布希或凯利都没有提出我们正要面对的重大且急迫的环保问题。这是很可悲的事。我希望环保问题可以在政治过程中占更重要的位置。然而，这个问题在政治议题中却只占了5%。5%！对我而言，那真的是底线了。
问：让我们再回到「将票投给环境」活动的相关细节上。我知道这个使命会启发户外爱好者去投票。你是如何招募投票者的？
答：我们协助他们在线上注册并在我们的零售店要求他们，再考虑把票投给谁时，可以把环保摆在第一位。我们并没有告诉任何人该选谁。
图说：「将票投给环境」的广告 （图片来源：www.patagonia.com）
问：你为什麽没有将活定命名为「不要投布希」？毕竟布希的环保政策相当不理想，甚致被批评拥有有史以来最不良的环保纪录，而凯利有关环保的纪录却是相当被推从的。
答：这麽做就已经构成承犯法行为－依法而论，企业不应该为任何政治人物作背书或表示认可。对我而言，最重要的是请人们看看候选人对环保政策的纪录，再以此自行做决定。
问：你能谈谈你自己对候选人的看法吗？
答：在这里不行－我现在代表的是巴塔哥尼亚公司。他们不会让我好过的。（大笑）
问：但只要人稍微想一下哪一位候选人政策对环保较有利，答案不就相当明显了吗？
答：是这麽说没错，但这关系着不只是总统候选人－除了总统大选外，还有许多人准备要竞选国会议员、市议员等。而我要说的是：请看看他们的环保纪录，因为这比他们说的或做的都来的重要。
问：甚至比反恐战争、医疗、教育、所有的东西都重要？
答：是的，因为环保跟所有的议题几乎都密切相关。我已经厌烦了这种社会－我谈的并不是政治，而是社会－一个只治标不治本的社会。我们的医疗问题与环境息息相关。拿乳癌为例子－美国现在8个女人中有1位罹患乳癌；而第二次世界大战战後时，30位女性中才有1位。因此，这个现象一定跟环境有关。然而，对乳癌的研究只有3%是针对环境因素做探讨的。他们现在只是想找出可以赚钱的治疗方法。对於反恐战争也是相同的道理。我们并没有厘清我们之所以跟中东有冲突的原因，即是对资源的依赖；我们只是在治疗症状罢了。
我发现关心环境的人基本上是比不在乎环保的人来得诚实。我觉得你可以信任他们。如果你可以把票投给一位拥有绝佳环保投票纪录的国会议员，或是另一位只有10%投票纪录的人，我相信那位只有10%（投票纪录）的人，很快就要被起诉了。
问：你的顾客对这个活动有哪些回应？
答：我们已收到上百封关於这个活动的电子邮件，而超过50%的回应是负面的。我收到很多顾客的信；他们相当愤怒，因为他们认为我们公司政治化了，并试图告诉顾客他们该想什麽，做什麽。
我这里有一封：「上帝以这块土地作为我们的礼物，并赋予我们自主权。那隐含的意思就是把它使用到一定的程度，并造成污染。上帝亦告诉我们不要崇拜偶像。一个纯净的大地意像，对於许多人已是准偶像了。因此对於环保而言，我们有一种变质的傲慢，甚至是一种负面的影响」。
问：那个人的耶稣肯定跟你的不是同一位！发现你那麽多顾客是反环保的，你会不会感到很惊讶？
答：这的确令人感到惊讶，但并不是惊恐。我其实并不在乎。我可以收到10,000封要求要「把我的地址从你们的顾客通讯录中删掉」的信，我也不会有特别的感觉。如果你没有收到这些信，那表示你不够努力－这就是我的看法。
他们不了解的是：我从事这门行业并不是为了要制造衣服。天啊，我从事这门行业也不是为了给自己赚更多的钱。巴塔哥尼亚公司存在的目的是为了实行我在书中看到关於如何避免环境崩溃危机的建议。这才是我做这一行的原因－试着要改善我们自己的做事方式，并藉此去影响其他公司，让他们也做正确的决策，也使我们的顾客去做正确的选择。所以，我们并不会因此而改变。他们如果无法接受，那他们可以去买别的厂商的产品。
问：将票投给环境的活动将如何影响你的行销？
答：这个活动动已经造成很大的正面影响了。我们因为这个活动，使得我们的曝光率大大提升，因为我们扮演的是领导者的角色，有许多社论把我们当讨论的对象。许多杂志也提供我们免费的广告版面。目前为止，我们并没有影响行销方面的确切数据－现在时机仍然太早－但我们知道这确实对投票人注册有影响。我估计大约有100,000 未投过票的人，会因为我们的活动而去注册。
问：如果你能在没有明确政党导向的州中，拉到足够的环保票，这足以影响整个的选举的结果。
答：那指的是没有投过票的新投票者而言。我们并不会试图改变任何已经下定决心的人的意见。但是大约20%的未婚女子从未投过票。那是相当可观的一群投票者。
问：把票投给环境将许多类似巴阿塔哥尼亚用来推销产品的商业手段，运用到推销政治的层面上。政治界是否可以从企业界学习到一些行销的实际知识？
答：可以的。当我看这些政治人物是如何推销自己时，我会想：我的天阿！拜托，这真的很悲哀。你看看凯利穿西装打领带，配上一件挺拔的白衬衫，对着 一群车工人演讲。这时你想：哦，天阿，他的衣服是谁帮他挑的阿？凯利需要做的，便是去钓钓鲈鱼，和多参加全美汽车比赛协会的赛车活动，让人感受他的亲和力。
问：你认为哪些环保问题是下一位总统最需要注意的？
答：其实，我是一位悲观主义者。说实在的，我觉得以一个社会而言，我们快完蛋了。我并不知道问题将出於水资源与表土的匮乏，或是疾病，或是为争夺资源而永无止境的战争。以色列人绝对不会放弃他们在西岸所占领的土地；那是水资源所在地。这一切都是关於资源和领土；而且这将会带来很多冲突。以上任何一件事都可能造成重大的危机，也可能全部同时发生。然而，当你谈到经济时，现在的经济状况非常不稳定，是因为它被建立在我们不断的消耗并丢弃不能再生资源的习惯上。我们不能这样无止尽走的下去。人们感到不安，是有原因的。
问：你认为以赚钱为目的的企业领导者是否根本无法在任何具争议性的议题上表达意见，因为如此可能会伤害到他们的企业基础与产销结果？
答：首先，如果他们是上市的公司，便什麽都不能做－因为他们必须对股东负责。巴塔哥尼亚是没有上柜的公司，而唯一拥有这家公司股权的人是我与我太太。因此，我们想做什麽就可以做什麽。但是，你若是上市公司的总裁，你必须接受董事会的指示，而董事会亦是受股东的意思行事。因此，你无法有机会在任何具争议的议题上自做主张。比尔?福特说他是个环保家，因此我相信他内心深处，一定觉得他并不应该制造休旅车。他不应该被股东的意见所牵绊。然而，他不能这麽做。他没有那个权力。与比尔?福特比起来，我的权力大多了。(待续) (2005-07-27)
原文：
Yvon Chouinard, world-class mountaineer, diehard surfer, obsessive fly fisher -- oh yes, and founder and owner of Patagonia -- is as famous for his brio and gutsy outdoorsmanship as he is for his visionary business strategy. A Maine-born blacksmith, Chouinard has built Patagonia, a purveyor of top-quality outdoor goods, into a $230 million company without taking it public. Now in his mid 60s, he has for decades maintained a tireless my-way-or-the-highway attitude toward corporate America that has helped him nudge both colleagues and competitors in the direction of sustainability.
Patagonia was the first major retail company to switch all its cotton clothing over to organic, the first to make fleece from recycled soda-pop bottles, and the first to pledge 1 percent of its annual sales to grassroots environmental organizations. It has since touched off a trend that has big-name brands such as the Gap, Levis, Nike, and Timberland incorporating organic materials into their products and taking steps to minimize environmental harm. Of course, Patagonia is not entirely free of environmental fault. For one, the multinational company does much of its manufacturing overseas, and therefore must burn a fair amount of fuel to transport its materials and products around the globe.
Yvon contemplates the fate of the planet.(Photo: Courtesy of Rick Ridgeway.)
But in the past several months, Patagonia has scored another notable first -- launching the half-a-million-dollar Vote the Environment project to rally outdoor enthusiasts to the polls on Nov. 2. Chouinard spoke with Grist from his Patagonia headquarters in Ventura, Calif., about the presidential campaign, the challenges of pushing a business toward sustainability, why hes more powerful than Bill Ford, and whether the planet is toast.
Q: What motivated you to launch Patagonias Vote the Environment campaign?
A: Well, I was talking to Jesus last night [laughter] and He told me that everybodys got it all wrong -- that He really doesnt want us to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil, that were screwing everything up and we need to live a more examined life.
Q: Youve got a direct line to Jesus! What else did He say?
A: Well, He doesnt talk to me very often -- He was pretty brief.
You know, Im just so disappointed that theres nobody talking about the environment. Even though the Pentagon itself has come out and said that one of the biggest threats to American security is global warming. You listen to these [presidential] debates -- theyre so stupid theyre unbelievable. The questions are stupid and the answers are stupid and nobodys talking about the massive environmental problems were facing, whether its Bush or Kerry. Its a sad deal. I want the environment to be a much bigger part of the political process. It only occupies 5 percent of the political agenda. Five percent! And to me it really is the bottom line.
Q: Lets get back to the details of the Vote the Environment campaign. I know the mission is to inspire outdoor enthusiasts to get out there and vote. How are you recruiting voters?
A: Were helping voters register online and at our retail stores and asking them to make the environment their No. 1 priority. Were not telling anybody how to vote.
A Vote the Environment ad. (Image: www.patagonia.com)
Q: Why arent you calling it the Vote Against Bush campaign, given that Bush is widely criticized as having the worst environmental record in history while Kerrys environmental record is widely applauded?
A: Legally we cant -- corporations are supposed to stay out of the endorsement game. And for me, all that matters is really to tell people to look at each candidates environmental record and decide for themselves.
Q: Can you talk about your own opinions about the candidates?
A: Not in this context -- Im a representative of Patagonia. Theyll nail me. [Laughter.]
Q: But if anyone took even one minute to try and figure out which presidential candidate represents the environmental vote, it would be obvious who that is, wouldnt it?
A: Yes, but its not just the presidential candidates -- there are a lot of people who are running for Congress and the Senate and city council races and all kinds of stuff. And Im saying look at their environmental records because its more important than anything else they say or do.
Q: More important than the war, health care, education, everything?
A: Yes, in that its deeply connected to almost every one of those issues. Im sick and tired of a society -- Im not talking about politics, Im talking about a society -- that is only dealing with symptoms of a problem and not the root cause. Our health-care problems are deeply connected to the environment. Consider breast cancer -- youve got one in eight American women who are going to get breast cancer, thats up from one out of 30 right after World War II, so theres got to be an environmental cause to it. And yet only 3 percent of cancer research funding goes to trying to find the environmental causes. Theyre trying to find treatments so they can make money off of it. The same thing goes for our so-called War on Terror. Were not looking at the root cause of our conflict with the Middle East, resource dependency; were treating the symptoms.
I find that people concerned about the environment tend to be a lot more honest than people who arent. I think you can trust them. If you are voting for a congressman who has a really good voting record on the environment and the other guy whos got a 10 percent [voting record], let me tell you I think that 10 percent guy is probably going to get indicted for something pretty soon.
Q: What kind of feedback have you gotten from your customers about this campaign?
A: Weve gotten hundreds of email responses on the campaign and more than 50 percent arent happy. I got lots of letters back from our customers really angry at us for getting political and telling them, they think, what to do.
I have one of the letters right here: "We are given the gift of our land by God in which to have dominion. That means to use and to a degree pollute. We are also called by God not to worship idols. The notion of a largely untouched pristine environment has become a quasi-religious idol for many. Hence with regard to environmentalism we have a distorted hubris, even dark influence."
Q: That guy must be talking to a different Jesus than the one youre talking to! Is it alarming to discover that so many of your customers are anti-environmentalism?
A: Its surprising, not alarming. I couldnt care less. I could get 10,000 letters saying "Take me off your mailing list" and it wouldnt bother me. If youre not getting those letters, youre not trying hard enough. Thats the way I see it.
What they dont realize is that Im not in the business to make clothes. Im not in the business to make more money for myself, for Christs sake. This is the reason Patagonia exists -- to put into action the recommendations I read about in books to avoid environmental collapse. Thats the reason Im in business -- to try to clean up our own act, and try to influence other companies to do the right thing, and try to influence our customers to do the right thing. So were not going to change. They can go buy from somewhere else if they dont like it.
Q: What will be the effect of the Vote the Environment campaign on your sales?
A: Its already having a huge effect on the good side. Were getting so much publicity off of it, a lot of editorials because weve taken a leadership position. Magazines have given us free ads. We cant tell exactly how its affecting our sales yet in terms of numbers -- its too early -- but we do know its having an effect on registration. My estimate so far is that were going to get 100,000 people to register that have never voted before.
Q: Thats enough to tip the election if you pull in pro-environment votes in the right swing states.
A: Thats new voters. Were not going to change anybodys mind whos already made up their mind. But something like 20 percent of single women have never voted. Thats a huge constituency.
Q: Your Vote the Environment campaign is applying the same marketing strategies to politics as Patagonia does to sell its products. Could the political world stand to learn some marketing savvy from the corporate world?
A: Yeah. When I look at how these guys are marketing themselves, the politicians, Im thinking, Oh my God! Oh man, this is pathetic! You see Kerry out there with a coat, tie, and a starched shirt giving a speech to a bunch of autoworkers and you think, Oh my God, who dressed this guy? All Kerry has to do is go bass fishing and go to NASCAR races to loosen up his image
Q: What do you think are the environmental problems that the next president should be most concerned about?
A: Well, Im a real pessimist. I think as a society were toast, to tell you the truth. I dont know whether its going to be running out of water or topsoil, or disease, or endless wars being fought over resources. The Israelis are never going to give up the West Bank -- thats where all the water is. Its all about resources, its all about territory, and its going to be a lot of gnashing of teeth. And any one of these things could be deadly serious, or it could happen all at once. And when you talk about the economy, the economy is so shaky because its based on all of us just consuming and discarding endlessly non-renewable resources and you cant do that forever. Theres good reason for people to feel insecure.
Q: Do you think that corporate leaders who are in business to make money simply cant take a stand on any controversial causes because it might hurt their bottom line?
A: First of all, if theyre a public company they cant do anything -- theyre beholden to their shareholders. Patagonia is a private company, and the sole stockholders are me and my wife, so we can do anything we want. But if youre CEO of a public company, the board of directors tells you what to do, and the stockholders tell the board of directors what to do, so theres no way you can take a stance on anything controversial. Bill Ford says hes an environmentalist, so deep down in his heart Im sure he believes he shouldnt be making SUVs, period. He shouldnt allow the stockholders to tell him what to do. But he cant do it. He has no power. I have way more power than Bill Ford does.
有关Grist Magazine：Grist Magazine是一线上环境杂志，总部设在美国西雅图。Grist Magazine尝试以诙谐、幽默的角度来切入环境议题与行动，希望能在传递环境资讯之余，也能够娱乐读者。
原文与图片详见：http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2004/10/22/little-chouinard/
版权归属Grist Magazine，台湾环境资讯协会 (余书莹 译，沈怡伶 审校)
