What McDonald’s did wrong, and Wal-Mart does better


by Caroline Rennie

McDonald’s could be doing smart, community-building work that builds brand value. But they’re not. Here’s what they’re doing – and what Wal-Mart’s doing better.

The story:
Nigel Haskel, a minimum wage, 21 year old employee, sees a man start beating a woman in the McDonald’s he works in. He intercedes on the woman’s behalf, gets the attacker to leave, and then blocks him from re-entering the restaurant. For his pains, the attacker shoots him multiple times, and Nigel has to have several abdominal operations to repair the damage and extract the bullets. He still has a bullet inside.

Six months and $300’000 later he is denied workers compensation benefits: McDonald’s refuses his claim as they say he should just have called the police.

What’s wrong with this position?
From a business point of view it is wrong because it tells customers that they may not be safe in a McDonald’s because McDonald’s will not protect them. That seems wrong-headed at a time when trust in business is at a low.

Secondly, it ignores fundamental human notions of protection, ‘doing the right thing’, standing up for decency and justice. This threatens their community standing.

Compromising your welcome in the community
When corporations forget the spirit of laws, and live for short term benefits based on the rule of law, they compromise their welcome in communities. That compromised welcome is what has driven Wal-Mart to embrace the environment and sustainability so powerfully and visibly: they needed to re-establish credibility with communities so that they could continue to expand. And in doing so, they have expanded among consumer classes who did not readily or happily shop at Wal-Mart before.

Wal-Mart seems to be learning that doing the right thing by community can build business [see next week's column on transparency]. McDonald’s, who made themselves the butt of 15 years of jokes and bad press when they pursued two activists through the UK and European courts in a case dubbed McLibel, seems to be struggling with learning.

Better to Do the Right Thing
Two thirds of McDonald’s revenue growth comes from upscale, healthy food*. This is exactly the kind of market that is most likely to be put off by insensitive behaviour and everything it implies. The public in general hasn’t taken kindly to the arrogance of bankers and car companies. Perhaps this is a time for McDonald’s to cede their “right” to do the wrong thing, and instead do the right thing- so that they continue to build brand value and affection.

*Dean Ornish, TED conference 2006

Related posts:

  1. Why is Wal-Mart Offering Environmental Audits to Government?
  2. Is Wal-Mart saving the planet?
  3. Retailers & Fortune’s Accountable 100
  4. EDF, Wal-Mart & Sunshine

1 Comment to What McDonald’s did wrong, and Wal-Mart does better

  1. catfood's Gravatar catfood
    February 27, 2009 at 15:44 | Permalink

    That’s right. Penalize people for doing the right thing, and they’ll stop doing the right thing.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

Something here bug you?

Let us know! Whether its font or content, a broken link, or different tags. You'll be compensated with our undying gratitude, the satisfaction of knowing we're sweating hard to fix it, and the possibility of a bonus from our developing library.

Thanks!

Font Size