How to Improve the TOMS Shoes Model

TOMS Shoes is a philanthropic business that donates a pair of shoes to a child in a developing country for every pair bought in the United States. Founded by Blake Mycoskie—a former business student and competitor on “The Amazing Race”—in 2011 saw shoeless children in Argentina and decided that he wanted to make a difference (One). Since the start of the movement, Mycoskie and TOMS has undergone extreme amounts of criticism. Some of the criticisms directed immediately towards Mycoskie include the fact that he rushed into this, not really focusing on what developing areas needed, the environmental distress related to the shipping to the areas being donated to, and the possibility of the TOMS model going out of style and losing momentum. Aside from that, the real criticisms lie in the poor quality of the shoes being given out, undermining local business, and focusing on the wrong side of poverty. TOMS is not as bad as people portray them as; there are a lot of good things that TOMS does do now and could do a lot better. TOMS Shoes has intentions of changing the world, but the misdirection established by the company is preventing it to make a lasting impact.

The whole premise surrounding wearing shoes in developing countries are based off the fact that children are exposed to disease and sickness while walking to school. Poor sewage systems cause poorly drained land, infested with hookworm. Hookworm is a small parasite that digs into the skin and causes major health problems. The issue presented, is that TOMS doesn’t make shoes that are efficient for children that travel many miles—through hookworm infested land—to get to school. The soles of the TOMS model given out are less than an inch thick, with a stretchable canvas material covering the top of the foot. The shoes, running for nearly $60 dollars in the United States, have a tendency to wear out within a year, if worn recreationally. Children walking miles every day in more difficult terrain will tend to wear out shoes faster, due to the circumstances. With this being said, the money being used to make ill-fit shoes could be going to another cause, fighting the sanitation issue. John Favani mentions in his article, “Some Bad News About TOMS Shoes:”

Imagine there is a school of 1,000 students in rural developing anywhere. Hookworm and infections are common among the population, as the students must walk through an area some in the community have begun to use as a latrine. Assuming each pair of shoes is about a $27 value (half the cost of the average buy-one-give-one TOMS shoe), you can give each child a pair for $27,000, a fix that would likely prevent any continued hookworm incidence for the next two years until the shoes inevitably wear out (that’s a generous time frame). Alternatively, if this money was instead donated to a local public health organization, cement latrine facilities could be built nearby for an estimated cost of $2,000. In essence with the same funds ($27,000) one could temporary postpone hookworm incidence for two years in one community, or eradicate them for decades in 13 (Favani).

Going with the statistics above, the money being put towards the cause with every pair of TOMS bought is substantial, considering the fact that TOMS recently sold their 2,000,000^th pair in 2013. The money should be put towards new, innovative ways of tackling this problem (Favani). Ways like building factories, helping local economies flourish, and building sturdier shoe models.

Aside from the problems with sanitation, the local economies of the areas receiving aid are being greatly influenced by the incoming donation of shoes. The already struggling communities are undermined by handouts, instead of opportunities. Sending shoes is just a temporary band-aid to a deeper wound. A study done by Garth Frazer of University of Toronto shows that donated clothing caused 50% employment reduction in African countries (Frazer). Kiera Butler writes in her article “Do TOMS Shoes Really Help People?” ” When the tsunami of 2006 struck Indonesia, donations of rice flooded in from aid groups all over the world. Instead of feeding hungry people, it created competition for the local rice farmers (Butler).” This is an example showing that handing out aid, while perceived to be outstandingly good, can harm local economies and send communities into deeper depressions. A solution to this lies within the very problem, create jobs for local people and help the economy grow.

Oliberte is a Canadian shoe company, based in Africa. This company employs local workers to make boots for western countries, and pays to supply for a family. Using the “teach a man to fish” proverb to create a system of self-reliant workers that can provide for a family (Cheeseman). Forming to a model similar to Oliberte, TOMS shoes are cheap enough to make in mass quantities, and still provide discounts for employees. This figuratively kills two birds with one stone: creates jobs and gives people shoes. Not to mention, the money offers an opportunity to pay for sanitation and education as well.

While widely criticized, TOMS isn’t an entirely bad company. The mission statement provides a sense of good intentions, and Blake Mycoskie is nothing but positive towards giving. The actual model itself—from a business standpoint—is incredibly profitable. The idea of making the customer participate in the giving of aid, gives the buyer a feel good experience, and causes people to return in the future with their business (Zimmerman). Aside from that, TOMS actually launched an eyewear campaign that has already been successful in giving the gift of eyesight to a large amount of people so far (One). By teaming up with SEVA Foundation, a charity focusing on giving sight, for every pair of sunglasses or glasses frames bought, sight is given to someone in a developing area. Either prescription glasses, eye saving surgery or other medical treatment is paid for with every purchase (TOMS). Criticisms of TOMS shoes are very one-sided, and don’t always shed a light on the good that TOMS is doing, while still having room to adjust to a better shoe giving model.

So TOMS has some work to do; giving shoes away to children is not the most effective way to tackle the situation. TOMS shoes is a household name, and should use the notoriety gained through the years to adjust their model. By using the funds from buying shoes, TOMS should focus on bringing factories to developing areas and providing employment to the local people, which would boost the economy. Not only would people buy shoes made by hard-working employees, but they would be funding costs that include sanitation, food, education, and of course, shoes.

Works Cited

Butler, Kiera. “Do Toms Shoes Really Help People?” Mother Jones. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.

Cheeseman, Gina-Marie. “The Problem with the TOMS Shoes Charity Model.” Triple Pundit RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.

Collins, Patricia Hill. “Controlling Images and Black Women’s Oppression.” Seeing Ourselves:

Classic, Contemporary, and Cross-cultural Readings in Sociology. By John J. Macionis and Nijole V. Benokraitis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998. 259-64. Print.

Davenport, Cheryl. “The Broken.” Co.Exist. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.

Favani, John. “Some Bad News about TOMS Shoes | Whydev.org.” Some Bad News about TOMS Shoes | Whydev.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 May 2014.

Frazer, Garth. Used-Clothing Donations and Apparel Production in Africa. University of Toronto, 2008. Web.

Giddens, Anthony, Mitchell Duneier, Richard P. Appelbaum, and Deborah Carr. Introduction to Sociology. 8th ed. New York: Norton, 2012. Print.

Hackel, Joyce. “TOMS Shoes Rethinks Its ‘buy One, Give One’ Model of Helping the Needy.” Public Radio International. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.

Hendricks, Topher. “Why I Hate TOMS Shoes.” Buzzsaw Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.

“One For One Movement – A Pair Of New Shoes Is Given To A Child In Need With Every Pair Purchased | TOMS.com.” One For One Movement – A Pair Of New Shoes Is Given To A Child In Need With Every Pair Purchased | TOMS.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 May 2014.

“TOMS Eyewear Launches “Summer of Sight” Campaign to Help Save and Restore Sight to 100,000 People in Need.” TOMS Eyewear Launches ‘Summer of Sight’ Campaign to Help Save and Restore… N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.

Zimmerman, Mike. “The Business of Giving: TOMS Shoes.” SUCCESS. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.