Who Shapes Fashion’s Future? Our new report reveals how supplier exclusion in MSI’s is hindering our collective change.
Since 2020, we’ve emphasized the importance of a stronger supplier voice in fashion’s sustainability agenda, as their exclusion has led to strategies that fall short in addressing climate action and human rights. This is evident in all four of our deep dive reports to date. This year’s paper is an investigation into why this exclusion persists, focussing on Multi Stakeholder Initiatives (MSIs), which have a unique and enormous potential to drive collective action.
What we discovered...
For systemic reasons, few suppliers are actively engaged in MSIs. While MSIs did not cause the resource-based constraints suppliers face, their rules, norms, and governance often reinforce these barriers. This perpetuates a cycle of distrust and disengagement, making it difficult for suppliers to feel a sense of agency and ownership in the solutions these initiatives propose.
We see an opportunity for positive change.
MSIs are evolving, and the industry’s recognition of supplier voices is growing. This shift has been highlighted in the media, emphasizing that the industry is not listening to the people best positioned to help solve sustainability challenges: the suppliers. With this momentum, now is the time to transform MSIs into the true vehicles for change they claim to be, aligning their ambitions with genuine collaboration and supplier inclusion.
A Call for Fair Process.
The paper presents a model for fair and equitable decision-making within fashion MSIs, building on Ilishio Lovejoy’s adaptation of fair process. Our research supports Lovejoy’s insight that non-biased decision-making, equitable engagement, and transparency are key to addressing the deep-seated inequities that limit MSI effectiveness. By adopting this approach, MSIs can become more inclusive and better equipped to drive meaningful change in the industry.
Fair process: A How-to Guide for MSIs
How To Implement The Acknowledgement And Reduction Of Bias Principle:
Step 1: Acknowledge inequity and its impact on the way that MSIs currently function head-on.
Rather than positioning themselves as inclusive, MSIs should first recognize how structural inequity limits supplier engagement and affects outcomes. Acknowledging that, while MSIs didn’t create these inequities, their rules often favor large brands and perpetuate disadvantages for suppliers, would be a crucial starting point.
Step 2: Acknowledge and work towards reducing bias.
Addressing bias requires openness and empathy. During feedback, we encountered defensiveness and discomfort, often rooted in the privileges of systemic advantage. Recognizing supplier perspectives highlights the barriers they face in being heard due to structural inequities. Reducing bias could involve hiring staff with supply chain expertise and developing targeted training with suppliers, helping MSI staff understand why suppliers often feel excluded from decision-making processes.
Step 3: Commit to remediation and safe spaces.
There should be a clear process for addressing bias and protecting those who speak out against it. As one supplier noted, “Culture and attitude should be more of a focus, and [bad] behavior should immediately be called out.”
Step 4: Work with suppliers to launch a dialogue and a plan.
Our report only begins to explore supplier experiences within MSIs. Rather than offering prescriptive solutions, we recommend that MSIs collaborate with suppliers to initiate ongoing dialogues about these issues, focusing on recognizing and reducing bias. This could be through writing, meetings, or one-on-one discussions, ensuring consistent efforts to address and monitor progress over time.
How To Implement The Equitable Engagement And Decision-Making Principle:
Step 1: Take steps to amplify supplier voices within decision-making processes.
This could include facilitating connections among suppliers, enabling them to collectively amplify shared viewpoints, and supporting initiatives that promote thought leadership from the supply chain on sustainability issues.
Step 2: Take steps to design and prototype inclusive decision making processes and ways of working.
Work with suppliers to redesign the rules, norms, and functional ways of operating to ensure suppliers, alongside other stakeholders, have meaningful influence over outcomes such as programs, tools, strategies, standards, frameworks, and beyond.
Step 3: Be open to truly different outcomes.
MSIs must also be open to supplier inclusivity changing the core strategies and visions of their organizations, acknowledging that this is likely necessary to reach our collective goals.
How To Implement The Transparent Process Principle:
Step 1: Publicly disclose how decision-making works.
We advocate for transparent rules and reporting on decision-making processes, including who makes decisions, how members can influence those decisions, how final decisions are communicated, and the rationale behind them.
Step 2: Implement new feedback and self-assessment models.
Adopting a fair process model should empower suppliers to transition from passive implementers to active shapers of sustainability, leading to more effective solutions. This could involve monitoring suppliers’ perceptions—do they feel engaged as co-creators?
Step 3: Publicly report progress.
Publicly disclose the changes you are making in an effort to adopt a fair process, and the results of your monitoring.