Lush's Naked Packaging

One common method used to understand such challenges is through rankings. Ranking is a process through which subjects are ordered into hierarchies based on criteria such as measurements or qualitative properties (Lower, 2013). The ranking process helps to establish what Elsbach (1996) describes as a set of ‘objective criteria’- minimising subjectivity which blurs our relative judgement. Often, a selector establishes objective criteria used in rankings (Wijnberg, 2004). Wijnberg notes that selectors may be classified as either belonging to an expert, peer or market group. In the context of ranking global challenges, market selectors have the potential to provide insight into a given challenge. Notable market selectors can include celebrity figures, social media influencers (and even everyday consumers). Such socially influential market selectors can perceive the relative importance of global challenges, then educate and communicate the causes and solutions of a challenge to their followers and fanbase. Market selectors may indeed have social clout and influence amongst followers, but lack credibility and the expertise. Instead, to increase legitimacy and to improve precision in establishing objective criteria in the ranking of such challenges, the task is often performed by those who are perceived as “expert” selectors (Wijnberg, 2004). Expert selectors are often large organisations pivotal in determining value and are seen as better equipped in determining  value, as opposed to non-experts. This is especially true in situations where non-experts, particularly market selectors, lack information about a topic and where ambiguities exist. In addition, large budgets and relatively enormous team sizes of expert organisational bodies often facilitate effective research at a level beyond that which peer groups of just several members can often attain.  As an example, the World Economic Forum (WEF), assembled a team of 900 experts to conduct its Global Risk Perception Survey in the ranking of global challenges. This adds to the credibility of expert selectors. As leaders of in ranking, expert selectors are vital in mitigating uncertainty (Wijnberg, 2004).

Building legitimacy has a significant impact on the viability of an organisation in their industry and environment. Suchman (1995) describes legitimacy as an “assumption that actions of an entity are desirable, proper or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs and definitions.” Whether or not an entity is seen as ‘legitimate’ depends on the willingness of stakeholders in their environment to associate themselves with this organisation. A major element of legitimacy is rankings and how they impact stakeholder perceptions of an organisation. How organisations compare with their competitors affects status and reputation (Wilmshurst & Frost, 2000). An organisation that ranks highly and is seen as legitimate has the power to attract consumers and suppliers, and thus, can gain competitive advantage within its environment.

Through analysing their in-store and online presence, it seems that Lush does not engage in any form of promotional activity that highlights the company’s ranking in terms of its contribution towards environmental sustainability via its plastic-free, ‘naked’ packaging (Lush Cosmetics, 2018). Rather than using competitive rankings to portray how Lush is actively involved in environmental business practices that are deemed superior to competitors, and explicitly displaying these rankings as a form of status signals, Lush instead, focuses its efforts on developing new innovations of sustainability. Although theory suggests that rankings tend to position organisations higher in terms of their competitive status (Elsbach & Kramer, 1996; Garcia, Tor & Gonzalez, 2006), Lush has been able to uniquely establish itself as one of the most recognisable brands for its ‘naked revolution’ and ‘zero-waste’ philosophy (Muttucumaru, 2018), without overtly comparing itself to others cosmetics brands such as The Body Shop, which still uses plastic packaging for most of its products.