Waitrose Codes of Conduct

Institution:

Founded by Arthur Rose, Wallace Waite and David Taylor in 1904, Waitrose & Partners (W&P) is the largest employee-owned Retailer Company in Britain (Fink & Jenkings, 2017). The chain of supermarkets headquartered at Bakshire UK (John Lewis Partners, n.d) operates in the UK and deals in food and other supermarket products. Similarly, according to John Lewis Partners (n.d), the company exports products to more than 50 countries worldwide and is considered among the ten largest supermarkets in the UK. Its parent company is John Lewis Partnership and has more than 350 outlets spread in various UK townships such as Enfield, Barry, Cheadle Hulme and Marlborough among others. In the past few years, W&P has seen a series of issues bordering ethics and codes of conduct (e.g. the 2009 Facebook abusive messages posted by its employees) that has put it on the spotlight of business commentators and ethicists. Hence, the main aim of this report is to evaluate W&P’s codes of conduct. The report will cover a wide scope of ethical and code of conduct issues within the company’s business operations. Some of the areas targeted by this report include W&P’s codes of conduct in the marketplace, contracts, communication and public relations and customer care, as well as the company’s staff code of conduct, management structure, and responsibilities. This report is informed by the experience is I had at the company as part of the requirement to gain my degree certificate. For students who are struggling with their business dissertation, seeking professional business dissertation help can be beneficial in navigating complex ethical issues and code of conduct evaluations within companies such as Waitrose & Partners.

2.0 Conduct in the Market Place

One of the few elements that reveal W&P’s determination to have effective marketplace codes of conduct is the company’s pricing policy, termed as ‘price match’ in its website. Ideally, the price match policy aims to ensure that products are fairly priced without compromising on service or quality (Fink & Jenkings, 2017). To keep up with this policy, the company has maintained a regular check at the competitors’ pricing since the year 2006 as well as a specific comparison with Tesco, another retail chain used by W&P for price benchmark. According to Clayton (2016), this activity not only ensures that customers buy products at fair prices but also helps maintain a competitive advantage of the company because its customers do not have to look elsewhere for lower prices. However, whereas most customers appreciate this policy, it is a ‘double edged sword’ because by offering a ‘best’ price guarantee, customers are incentivised to look for products elsewhere whenever the retailer is not offering the best price in the market, a phenomenon that has a potentiality of undermining the customer’s confidence in shopping with the retailer (Popescu, 2016). Moreover, maintaining this code of conduct means that W&P always has to play with its profit margin. All in all, according to Kim & Cheong (2016) and Oqvist et al (2018), price matching is a good marketplace code of conduct because it depicts the company positively in the face of the public and helps to maintain ethical pricing as a corporate social responsibility.

The other general pricing policies of W&P is that the price quotes on all products are made under consideration of various factors. For instance, prices consider the availability of any special offers on the product. Similarly, the company determines the unit price of the weighed product based on drained weight. However, these products (e.g. fruits) may vary in weight when delivered.

Thirdly, when a client accepts to exchange a product with one that is of a higher price, they will only pay an equivalent of the lower price of the two, especially of the item being substituted is of a fixed weight and has a known price. According to Statler & Oliver (2016), this pricing policy promotes customer satisfaction because they give the customer a psychological satisfaction that even if the product is unsatisfactory, there are policies that will guide them in selecting other satisfying products. However, a major limitation of this policy is that the customers might not understand the terms of these policies, thereby causing customer discontentment.

3.0 Communication

Communication is one of the most important aspects of every retail business. According to Scherrer et al (2018), communication within a business context is broad and may include the exchange of information or data between the customers or the general public and the company; verbally, electronically, or through print media. As a result, companies must establish effective communication codes of conduct that not only regulates their interaction with the customers but also ensures customer satisfaction.

An evaluation of W&P’s communication code of conduct reveals that the company is clear about handling customer data, and has zero tolerance for the infringement of customer privacy in terms of handling personal information. For instance, the company has a legal basis upon which customers’ personal data may be collected and used. It only collects personal information with the consent of the customers albeit in specific situations (Smits, 2017). A typical scenario is when the customer is required to tick a box allowing or declining the receipt of the company’s newsletter via email. Similarly, the company does not collect any customer’s personal data unless the customer has entered into a contractual relationship with them, and only if this information will facilitate the fulfilment of the contract. A typical example is that the company only collects the customer’s address or telephone contacts when they have booked a home delivery service. Also, the company only collects or uses the customer’s personal information/details when it has a legitimate interest. For example, it is W&P’s policy that the customer’s purchase history can only be used to make customized offers or send the customer these offers.

As part of the professional code of conduct, all employees at W&P must address customers warmly and cordially, avoiding the use of any vulgar or abusive language in the presence of the customer. Adherence to this policy was demonstrated by an investigation launched by the company against some employees who described customers as “pikey skanks” on its Facebook social media networking site in 2009 (Leach, 2009). According to Leach (2009), this investigation targeted employees from different outlets who posted abusive words against customers. This incident was termed as ‘completely unacceptable’ by Waitrose spokesman, who also commented that the incident goes against the company’s codes of communication.

Evidently, these communication codes of conduct maintained by Waitrose not only helps them keep an eye against violation of customer’s rights but also maintain a good customer relationship and promotes customer loyalty (Kawakami, 2017). However, maintaining these professional codes of communication comes with an extra cost to the company. For instance, Nygaard et al (2017) assert that it requires significant financial investment to develop digital platforms that handle customer personal information without infringing their privacy. Developing websites and mobile apps that seek customers’ consent before acquiring any personal data is expensive because such functionalities require high level expertise and take times to establish.

4.0 Customer Care and Quality Assurance
4.1 The Goodwill Policy

There are several codes of conducts at W&P that must be adhered to in relation to customer care and quality assurance. In fact, an evaluation of the company’s codes of conduct reveals that it puts more emphasis on the customer care and quality assurance that on any other area of operation. For instance, a major service code of conduct at W&P is revealed within its goodwill policy. P & W holds a service conduct that if a customer is not satisfied with a product within 35 days after purchase; they are at liberty to return the product at the nearest branch or at the headquarters for refund or exchange. This service takes the form of goodwill because the goods are allowed in for exchange or refund even if the customer may no longer have the legal rights of doing so. According to Beckers & Kawakami (2017), this service not only helps improve customer satisfaction but also helps promote quality assurance because the customers are assured of getting a product of a better quality upon return. However, the company is very clear about the exceptions to this service. For instance, the goods are only exchanged or refunded if the customer produces proof of purchase. Similarly, the goodwill service does not cover goods that are damaged by the customer, whose seals of packaging are broken by the customer, perishable products or customised products.

The company also ensures that the goods are supplied according to the customer’s descriptions, and those that fit their purpose. Part of this conduct is also to deliver goods with satisfactory quality, and the delivery is done under reasonable skill and care of the deliverer. Similarly, P&W’s customers are entitled to return the goods within 6 months if the goods are faulty and irreparable. However, the company might require the proof that the product is faulty (Lather, 2018).

4.2 Return of Goods

The company’s quality guarantee gives the customers the assurance that the goods will be of satisfactory quality and fit the descriptions given by the customer during purchase. However, if a product is delivered but does not meet the quality guarantee; the client is at liberty to return the goods for exchange or repair. Also, if the customer is not satisfied with the product, they can they are at liberty to reject the goods at the point of delivery.

Statler & Oliver (2016) assert that because online sales require customers to rely on retailer’s quality assurance and product descriptions, it is necessary for the retailers to give their customers a window period to decide whether the delivered product is actually what they wanted. Hence, companies like P&W have adopted such policies to enhance customer satisfaction. An effective return good policy gives P&W customers a sense of security that what they are purchasing is what they intended it to be, and therefore if Waitrose fails to give this guarantee, customers, especially online purchasers may be suspicious or decline buying the products (Fink & Jenkings, 2017).

Nonetheless, there has been an increasing trend of businesses applying techniques that track the return habits of customers. According to Beckers & Kawakami (2017), this is meant to remedy fraudulent customers with a habit of returning goods, for example, expectant mothers who receive too many gifts and want to return them fraudulently for refunds. However, this remedy should not target innocent customers.

4.3 Product Specification

P&W has specific policies and codes of conduct guiding product specifications. These policies are enshrined within amendment orders, country of origin information, and service counter veal and beef traceability. In regards to amendment orders, customers who would like to amend their orders must do so before 11 am of the delivery or collection day. The company also has specific periods within which non-grocery orders are amended. On the other hand, country of origin information entails a description of for pre-packed and loose vegetable and fruit produce (Fink & Jenkings, 2017). If the customer is not satisfied with the product’s country of origin, they are allowed to reject the product at the point of delivery. A major limitation of amendment orders is that they might interfere with the operational schedules of the company. For instance, the company may have to restock if it had run out of stock of the amended order. However, amended orders are effective in enhancing customer satisfaction and show the company’s ability to meet customer demands within a short notice.

5.0 Staff Codes of Conduct

Waitrose’s staff code of conduct is aligned with its vision of making the world “a bit happier and a bit more decent.” Hence, the code of conduct is meant to build effective relationships between and among internal and external stakeholders. This is highlighted in the company’s partnership constitution which states that:
“The Partnership’s relationships with its suppliers must be based, as with its customers, on honesty, fairness, courtesy, and promptness. It looks for a similar attitude throughout its supply chains. In particular, the Partnership expects its suppliers to obey the law and to respect the well-being of their employees, their local communities and the environment.” (John Lewis, 1928:n.p) Thus, the company seeks to establish an effective relationship with both its suppliers and employees within its service and product supply chain, create fairly paid jobs and improve the employees’ labour standards within the framework of Responsible Sourcing Code of Practice (RSCOP).
Specifically, the RSCOP advocates for a freely chosen employment. This implies that no employee is supposed to be engaged in forced labour. The framework also provides for freedom of association of employees, hygienic and safe working environment. It is also a policy at P&W that working hours should not be extended – so that employees can achieve an appropriate work-life balance. Similarly, it is stated in the company’s labour policy that there should be no form of discrimination, and all workers should be treated, or treat others equal regardless of their gender, race, or sexual orientation. However, Storey (2007) identifies a limitation within the company’s compensation policy, where there is a significant inequality in employee compensation between fresh staff and those who have worked in the company for longer periods. Moreover, evidence by Storey (2007) reveals that the company employees undergo too much supervision.

6.0 Management Structure and Responsibilities Policy

The company’s management structure is tailored to make it last in the future. According to Statler & Oliver (2016), the company’s partnership structure is also designed to uphold the highest levels of integrity and this is partly made possible by the company’s three governing authorities namely: the chairman, the partnership council, and the chairman.

There are specific codes that guide the formation of each governing authority. For instance, the council s formed through an election done by the partners, and its main role is to hold the chairman into account. The council is also responsible for the appointment of five directors into the board. On the other hand, the chairman is responsible for appointing five executives (e.g. group development director, personnel director, finance director, and the managing director). Apart from the executive directors, the board also has three external non-executive directors.

The company’s partnership structure was developed for the commercial and democratic purposes – to ensure that the company is swift in developing and maintaining industry leadership, and to enable easy decision-making process where each partner has a say in the co-owned business. According to Wood (2012), the company’s management structure policy is unique and one of a kind because it provides an opportunity to develop entrepreneurial ideas for achieving long-term success while its democratic nature gives the partners an opportunity to actively participate in running the business through their rights and responsibilities of ownership.

Instead of ploughing back the profits into the business as in both private and public organizations, the company’s profits are distributed to the co-owners (i.e. the employees) in form of bonuses. Ideally, all the company’s 76,500 permanent employees own the 272 supermarkets and several other department stores, generating around 8 billion pound worth of sales annually. Indeed, according to Wood (2012), the company’s structure enables employees to share the profits and benefits of a company that gives them the first priority, with a formally recognized mission to guarantee happiness to the staff. In fact, the company’s structure also includes a staff council whose main role is to pass the employees’ complains and ideas to the board, and this is done through a weekly magazine where the staff can make comments about organizational policies.

In conclusion, this report has highlighted a series of company policies and codes of conducts observed in P&W. it has revealed that the company maintains codes of conduct that guide its conduct in the market place, communications, customer care and quality assurance, management structure and staffs behaviour. However, the report has also established that maintaining some of these codes of conducts have limitations and cost implications. Therefore, the report considers these recommendations:

The company should develop an effective policy that guides compensation and minimizes the compensation gap between the old and fresh employees. Although not inappropriate, the company should develop effective codes of conduct that minimizes the intensity of employee supervision.

References

• Beckers, A. and Kawakami, M. T. (2017) ‘Why Domestic Enforcement Of Private Regulation Is (Not) The Answer: Making And Questioning The Case Of Corporate Social Responsibility Codes’, Indiana Journal Of Global Legal Studies, 24(1), Pp. 1–13.
• Clayton, P. (2016) ‘John Lewis saves £2 million through OH physiotherapy intervention’, Occupational Health, 68(2), pp. 24–25.
• Fink, J. and Jenkins, D. (2017) ‘Takes Two to Tango: Essential Practices of Highly Effective Transfer Partnerships’, Community College Review, 45(4), pp. 294–310.
• John Lewis Partners (N.d) Waitrose & Partners: [retrieved on 23rd Oct,2018]
• Kim, S. Y. and Cheong, Y. S. (2016) ‘A Study on Conduct Barring Limitation of Shipowner’s Liability Based on the Korean Commercial Code’, The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, (4), p. 229.
• Kawakami, M. T. (2017) ‘Pitfalls Of Over-Legalization: When The Law Crowds Out And Spills Over’, Indiana Journal Of Global Legal Studies, 24(1), Pp. 147–179. Available At:
• Lather, S. (2018) ‘Corporate Social Responsibility And Its Adherence To The Human Right Laws’, International Journal Of Recent Research Aspects, Pp. 236–238.
• Leach B. (2009). Waitrose Staff Post Abusive Messages About Customers On Internet, The Telegraph, 21st Jan 2009
• Nygaard, A. Et Al. (2017) ‘Leading By Example: Values-Based Strategy To Instill Ethical Conduct’, Journal Of Business Ethics, (1), P. 133.
• Öqvist, E. L. Et Al. (2018) ‘Seal Watching: An Investigation Of Codes Of Conduct’, Tourism In Marine Environments, 13(1), Pp. 1–15.
• Popescu, A-I 2016, ‘In Brief: Pros And Cons Of Corporate Codes Of Conduct’, Journal Of Public Administration, Finance & Law, No. 9, Pp. 125–130, Viewed 23 October 2018,
• John Lewis (1928) Partnership Constitution.
• Statler, M. And Oliver, D. (2016) ‘The Moral Of The Story: Re-Framing Ethical Codes Of Conduct As Narrative Processes’, Journal Of Business Ethics, (1), P. 89.
• Storey, J. (2007). Human Resource Management: A Critical Text. London,Thomson.
• Scharrer, B., Neuert, J. And Woschank, M. (2018) ‘The Impact Of Ethnicity On An Employee’s Readiness To Comply With A Code Of Conduct: Differences Between German/Austrian And Chinese Employees’, Journal Of Applied Business & Economics, 20(2), P. 82.
• Smits, Jm 2017, ‘Enforcing Corporate Social Responsibility Codes Under Private Law: On The Disciplining Power Of Legal Doctrine’, Indiana Journal Of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1, Pp. 99–113.
• Wood Z. (2012) The John Lewis Model And What Others Could Learn From It, The Guardian, 16th Jan 2012.

Continue your exploration of Volkswagen's Supply Chain and Strategic Partnerships in the Global Market with our related content.