The much-vaunted Treadler project of the H&M Group which had promised to usher in dramatic change is set to fall by the wayside. The reason being handed out is that the project, launched with much fanfare during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, has not been growing fast enough.
The promise had been big: "Via Treadler, H&M Group will begin to offer access to its global supply chain as a service to external companies." The promise had been backed by keywords that make for good copy: "Treadler will enable its clients to benefit from H&M Group’s expertise, long-term supplier partnerships and strategic sustainability work, thereby helping them to overcome initial business barriers and accelerate sustainable change."
The 4 March 2020 statement from the H&M Group had come at a time when the global supply chain was showing signs of falling apart, and most discussions on a post-pandemic recovery (a premature subject at the time) hinged on how to "fix" the supply chain. A well-oiled, readymade supply chain seemed a good solution. Or, at least those who bought the idea certainly thought so.
Higg Inc, which has been under fire for furthering H&M's interests, even has a case study on its website which tomtoms how "Treadler connects brands with manufacturing facilities that are using Higg to reduce their environmental impacts."
The case study says: "Treadler’s clients benefit from H&M Group’s expertise and its long-term partnerships with suppliers that approach sustainability strategically, supported by the locally-based sustainability teams. Access to these resources is helping brands to overcome some of the initial barriers that businesses commonly face as they try to scale responsibly and achieve sustainable growth."
The Higg Index was tied to, er, Treadler's "success story" as it were: "Analysis of Treadler’s Higg performance data shows their approach is making a difference. The facilities Treadler works with outperform average facilities that use the Higg Index. Treadler’s manufacturing partners are reporting higher than average environmental sustainability scores and showing greater improvements year over year than average Higg facilities. Treadler’s suppliers also outperform the fashion industry’s environmental benchmarks in five of the seven environmental categories that the Higg facility environmental assessment measures."
In hindsight, the "case study" would sound a lot of vacuous rhetoric. If the proof of the pudding is in the eating, then the Treadler project was clearly something that the target audience did not lap up.
And, this was reflected in the H&M statement: "As part of the ongoing transformation within the group and in order to meet developments and uncertainties in the world around us, we need to revise some of our priorities. When evaluating Treadler’s current position we conclude that it hasn’t been growing fast enough. Given our present and necessary reprioritisations we have taken the decision to discontinue. This means that the ongoing operations will be phased out during the coming months and the Treadler team supported in continuing their career within or outside the group."
What is certainly surprising is that the idea that H&M's supply chain infrastructure would save the world should have been bought at all. That's because H&M's own chain was broken, and various kinds of accusations have been levelled against the Group: from driving workers in the chains in South and Southeast Asia into desperation to outright wage theft.
That small companies across the world would flock to it in droves should have sounded far-fetched at the time. It's clear that the H&M Group could not encash its supply chain machinery. Maybe, we need another "case study."
