Has being a B Corp lost its value? As brands drop the certification, its criteria face scrutiny.
In 2006, three friends — Jay Coen Gilbert, Bart Houlahan, and Andrew Kassoy — founded B Lab, a nonprofit organization dedicated to harnessing the power of business to solve social and environmental problems. The following year, they certified the first cohort of 82 companies as B Corporations, or B Corps, signaling a new era where businesses committed to rigorous standards of social and environmental performance, accountability, and transparency.
The B Corp certification quickly became a symbol of responsible business practices, attracting companies that sought to balance profit with purpose. Brands like Patagonia and Ben & Jerry’s proudly displayed the B Corp logo, signaling to consumers their dedication to ethical operations. The certification process involved a comprehensive assessment across various impact areas, including governance, workers, community, and the environment. Companies were required to score at least 80 out of 200 points to achieve certification, a threshold designed to ensure meaningful commitment without being prohibitively exclusive.
However, as the movement expanded, concerns emerged about the certification’s rigor and the potential for it to be used as a marketing tool rather than a genuine commitment to responsible practices. Critics argued that the scoring system allowed companies to excel in certain areas while neglecting others, potentially enabling businesses with subpar environmental or social practices to achieve certification by compensating with strengths elsewhere. This flexibility, while accommodating diverse business models, also opened the door to accusations of greenwashing.
The certification of large multinational corporations further fueled these concerns. For instance, Nespresso’s attainment of B Corp status in 2022 was met with criticism due to allegations concerning labor practices and environmental impact. Critics, including fellow B Corp coffee brand Glen Lyon Coffee, have pointed to allegations that some of the farms in Central and South America used by the company have paid poverty-level wages and employed children. Nespresso says it has launched an internal investigation, pledging to immediately sever ties with any farms found guilty of such practices.
In response to these developments, some companies have chosen to dissociate from the B Corp movement. Last year, Dr. Bronner’s, the leading natural soap brand, announced its decision to drop its B Corp certification, citing concerns over the standard’s dilution. In a statement, CEO David Bronner and President Michael Bronner emphasized that sharing the same certification with large multinational corporations possessing histories of ecological and labor issues is unacceptable.
“To Dr. Bronner’s and many Certified B Corps, ‘Business for good’ is more than a trendy and profitable marketing strategy,” the Bronners said. “As a purpose-driven company, we do business to model a more just economy, and to demonstrate that a truly constructive multi-stakeholder approach to capitalism could be the norm. The integrity of the B Corp Certification has become compromised, and remaining certified now contradicts our mission.”
These departures highlight a tension within the B Corp community: the balance between inclusivity and maintaining rigorous standards. As the movement seeks to scale and influence mainstream business practices, it faces the challenge of ensuring that growth does not come at the expense of credibility. The certification’s appeal lies in its promise of meaningful commitment to positive impact, but as more companies join, maintaining that promise becomes increasingly complex.
A significant criticism of the B Corp certification pertains to its handling of supply chain accountability. While companies might score well in areas like governance or community engagement, their supply chains may still be fraught with environmental degradation or labor exploitation. The certification’s current framework allows companies to achieve the minimum required score by excelling in certain areas, potentially overshadowing deficiencies in others. This loophole has led to situations where companies with questionable supply chain practices still attain B Corp status, thereby undermining the certification’s integrity.
The B Corp has also faced accusations of enabling this behavior, especially when companies with significant environmental footprints obtain certification without substantial changes to their core operations. Critics argue that the certification’s criteria are too lenient, the evaluation process is subjective, and the organization lacks effective accountability mechanisms.
The Havas Controversy
In 2024, four agencies within the Havas network — Havas London, Havas Lemz, Havas New York, and Havas Immerse — had their B Corp status revoked due to their association with Shell, a company with a controversial environmental record.
B Lab, the certifying body, deemed that decisions taken at the group level were relevant to their B Corp status since Havas used a common brand across its agencies. This incident highlighted the challenges B Lab faces in maintaining the certification’s integrity, especially when dealing with large conglomerates.
The Path Forward
As the B Corp movement expanded, the influx of companies seeking certification led to concerns about the dilution of its standards. The certification’s inclusivity, while promoting widespread adoption, also opened the door for companies to achieve certification without fully embodying its principles. This inclusivity has led to a perception that the certification is more accessible, potentially at the expense of its rigor.
For the B Corp certification to regain its esteemed status, a reevaluation of its standards and enforcement mechanisms is imperative. Implementing stricter criteria, especially concerning supply chain practices, and ensuring continuous monitoring can help restore trust. Additionally, introducing a tiered certification system could incentivize companies to strive for higher standards, distinguishing those that truly excel in ethical practices.
“We have not seen adequate, transparent, and timely action from B Lab to update the standards or certification process to address our concerns,” wrote the Bronners. “Now, our only recourse is to drop our certification. We hope our exit will prompt necessary and overdue action, and that allies who remain B Corp Certified will continue to push to improve the standard from the inside.”
Related on Ethos:
