anita roddick

Peter Heslam's avatar
Posted by Peter Heslam Fri, 28/09/2007 - 12:00am :: People | more by Peter Heslam

When Anita Roddick founded the Body Shop in 1976, there was nothing remarkable about hippyish lefties dreaming of a new order. No one guessed that, in pursuing her dream, this particular eco-worrier would build a multi-million-dollar global brand with a dominant high-street presence.

The distinctives of her business are well known. None of her products was tested on animals or caused unnecessary environmental damage. She encouraged shop workers to join demonstrations and used her window displays to publicise campaigns. She was especially vocal against the purported evils of big business and took a prominent role in anti-globalisation activism pre-‘9/11’.

What was less well known, and was overlooked in the obituaries, was her lively spirituality, reflected in the title of her autobiography, Body and Soul. In another bestseller, Business as Unusual, she argued that because it has surpassed both church and state in power and influence, business should assume moral leadership in society. It has to shift its emphasis from the material to the spiritual, connecting with people’s sense of meaning and purpose.

To achieve this, business has to recapture a sense of ‘reverence’ – an attitude, not necessarily dependent on organised religion, that regards life as sacred and awe-inspiring. For an example of this, Roddick turned to the great Quaker industrialists of the past. Their spirituality was nurtured by their religion, of course, but what was key for her was that it inspired a highly effective combination of business acumen and moral responsibility.

Roddick was not always consistent, of course. She called for a boycott of China while importing Chinese products; she sold her stake in the Body Shop to L’Oréal, the cosmetics giant that sanctioned animal testing; and although she claimed to adhere to the Catholic faith in which she was raised, she was generally dismissive of Christianity.

But such inconsistencies do not overshadow her greatness. As an enlightened entrepreneur, she embodied her brand: principled, outspoken and daring. And like other great entrepreneurs, she deliberately disrupted conventional business thinking and practice. She was determined to use business to drive social change. ‘You never get remembered by what you do in business,’ she said once. ‘You get remembered for what you do for civil society.’

When she died this month, Dame Anita Roddick left us with a model of how to do business with attitude, in both senses of the phrase, for the sake of a better world.

Peter Heslam

Dr Peter Heslam is director of Transforming Business at Cambridge University, and an honorary associate of LICC.

additional resources

For all the gen on Dame Anita Roddick’s life and achievements, including her numerous writings and awards, see anitaroddick.com and wikipedia.org.

Read a round-up of tributes to Roddick from the Christian thinktank Ekklesia at ekklesia.co.uk.

For a revealing interview with David Batstone in Sojourners magazine in which Roddick refers to her Catholic upbringing, see sojo.net. Third Way’s slightly hostile interview of Roddick in 1996 (which she had reprinted and circulated to all her staff worldwide!) is posted at thirdway.org.uk.

Roddick admitted to the Church Times that she found her prejudices against religion challenged when she went to speak at the Christian arts festival Greenbelt in 2003. See greenbelt.org.uk.

Shoulds and Oughts
Posted by  Alan Bright on Fri, 28/09/2007 - 6:35pm.
"business should assume moral leadership in society"

I think we should be gently insistent on where a-theists get their 'must', 'should' and 'ought's from. Why, Miss Roddick 'should' businesses do anything? Who says?

For example, I look forward to asking Professor Dawkins if slavery was 'wrong' and whether western nations 'ought not' to have participated in it. I am not disregarding the terrible misery that slavery caused - also, I am sure that Professor Dawkins and other atheists think it was awful. It's just that I suspect they are not being consistent with their own beliefs in their reasons for opposing it.
"Greatness????"
Posted by  Bible Docrtine on Mon, 01/10/2007 - 11:28pm.
In her obituary it was mentioned that Anita Roddick did not believe in the afterlife and did not accept Jesus Christ as her Saviour. I do not know if this is true, but if so, how horribly sad; and in reality her life was pretty useless. The Scripture makes very clear all our righteousness is TOTALLY UNACEPTABLE to God. Isaiah 64:6. This doctrine is set forth in Article XIII of the 39 Articles of the Church Of England Religion:



Article XIII

Of Works before Justification

Works done before the grace of Christ and the inspiration of His Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ, neither do they make men meet to receive grace, or (as the School authors say) deserve grace of congruity: yea, rather for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but they have the nature of sin.


So, in reality, if Ms. Roddick had not accepted Christ as her saviour, her life is sad and should make all Christians weep. There is nothing to rejoice about her legacy.


I know this might sound harsh, but we need to be mindful of celebrating worldly achievements not done in the power of the Holy Spirit to Glorify God, even those that do some supposedly “social good”, whatever that is.

I am not familiar with "LICC-Connecting with Culture" as this article was sent by a friend. I note that in Romans 12:2 Christians are commanded to "be not conformed to this world" and I would respectfully suggest that Christians spend more time connecting with the mind of Christ (the Bible) than connecting with culture.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.

With love (and extra resources, group-work ideas and links...)
from
www.licc.org.uk/culture.