How Target Fails the Vomit Test

Last week's un-apology by Target CEO Gregg Steinhafelfor the company's $150,000 donation in support of an anti-gay candidate in Minnesota -- which amounted to basically saying, "Sorry some folks are upset, but we’re still sticking with what we did," -- might have left another, and no less acidic, taste in your mouth.

Positive social change, or more aptly the recognition and application of what is right, often comes at the cognition of something that sickens one’s conscience, and catalyzed by a community at large feeling those same pangs. By now, it should be known that one thing sure to cause mass unease is money made dirty -- case in point, Target's $150,000 donation. But what makes Target's donation a truly a retching experience is that their money was made dirty by its advancement for the causes of hate and oppression.

Good leadership of any organization that represents the rights and interests of people (power hungry millionaires included) would be wise to apply a simple, yet effective test when it comes to supporting the causes of other groups or persons. This test does not require a degree, nor does it require a sacrifice that is not worth taking, for when applied it not only gives fair representation for those that you represent, but it also promotes the sense of a just conscience.

In her book “Fundraising for Social Change”, author and expert consultant for grassroots organizations Kim Klein, discusses how donated money can prove disastrous for a group if connected to another group that acts in a detestable way. In her text, Klein discusses her experiences with a nonprofit women’s justice organization trying to deal with a donation by a company that clearly seemed at odds with its mission, even though that group could help it meet some of its needs. What they decided upon was the application of a particular test for that and any future donations; if it makes you sick, don’t do it, even if the benefit might help you with another goal.

Here is a summarized version of Klein’s ‘Vomit Test’ for universal application:

Step 1. Understanding

As Klein states, “[m]oney is a tool. Similarly, a hammer is a tool. A hammer can be used to help build a house or it can he used to bludgeon someone to death”

Step 2. Recognize the signs

Does the group offering to help you (or in Target's case, the person you're looking to help) represent ideals that are antithetical toward the rights or interests of those you represent?

Simple enough? You either pass ‘Step 2’, or you FAIL.

And that's where we come in. Picture us like the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), at least when it comes to holding companies and organizations accountable for dirty, “vomit”-inducing behavior. When a company does something that fails the “vomit test,” it’s our job to make sure the company corrects its behavior, and gets back in line. But it’s also our job to make sure the bad behaviors of some corporations and organizations don’t become contagious, and spill over to other entities.

One remedy that may prove powerful enough to do in Target’s case is to join the thousands of folks intent on stirring up some tonic with a planned boycott of Target stores across the country.

Photo credit: dno1967
http://gayrights.change.org