Oxfam and Unilever: understanding the BoP

I was just at a meeting with Oxfam representatives, who came to Harvard Business School for feedback on a recent report, for which they had partnered with Unilever to study they company's impacts in Indonesia. The report covers a broad range of impacts - supply chain practices, value to consumers, the distribution of company profits among stakeholders, and much more. It's very lengthy, and full of useful data.

Essentially, Oxfam wants to figure out how to calculate a "poverty footprint" for a given company in a given country, and this report is the first attempt. They are now examining the methodology, and looking at what might be done better in the future.

This sort of exercise seems especially wise and timely as people in all sectors are getting excited about the "BoP" - or the Bottom of the Pyramid, a phrase coined by author C.K. Prahalad. The excitement has been good for getting business engaged in poverty reduction, but I've also been bothered by the lack of critical thought in some of these discussions. More business doesn't always or automatically help the poor. I'm glad Oxfam is trying to understand when it helps, when it hurts - and what can be done better.