The storm surrounding bankers’ bonuses represents the most overt example of a developing public antipathy towards capitalism. Political leaders have been seeking to define a more responsible model of the market economy.

Grocery retailers may argue that, unlike the banks, they have been responsible. Indeed, a quick review of the majors’ CSR policies shows a broad sweep of activities being undertaken from apprenticeships to animal welfare standards. Many have come to see a commercial benefit in developing longer-term relationships with suppliers, fearing a threat to the integrity or security of their supply base if they do not.

Yet there is still a palpable gap between corporate theory and commercial practice. The recent intensification of price competition between the multiples is being manifested in a distinct squeeze on suppliers as retailers seek to recover lost margins. To echo Ed Miliband’s recent remarks in the FT, grocery continues to bear all the hallmarks of the short-termism that blights British enterprise.

I disagree with those who argue that the market economy keeps greed in check. In reality, major investors and, dare I say it, retail buyers, are still driven by the short-term yardsticks of profit and loss. Arguably, government has to step in to address abuse of the market through legislation like the GSCOP and the Groceries Code Adjudicator. But the limits of state intervention, fiscal consolidation and the need to drive private sector growth mean there will be a greater expectation on major companies to conduct their business more responsibly.

What would a more responsible form of capitalism look like in the grocery supply chain? For a start it presupposes a less intense form of competition, with investors and shareholders recognising they are playing a long game. Contracts that hold for years, not months, would address growing concerns about security of supply in more volatile markets.

Deeper relationships are needed across primary production. Some attempts have been made by retailers to get closer to farmers, but all too often these relationships have little reciprocal benefit. Why not consider offering suppliers share incentives with major customers so they feel part of the business?

Grocery retailers are still fantastically profitable. There is more scope to use their capital to boost on-farm investments through low-interest loans for young farmers, growers with rented land and more. It could also foster more productive businesses, thus delivering on environmental objectives.

Some suppliers say they have been discouraged by their UK retail customers from looking to diversify into exports. How short-sighted is this? Rather than see it as a threat, it should be promoted as an opportunity to add value to the economy and help manufacturers become more resilient by having a portfolio of customers.

Short-termism is a habit retailers must kick. The risk is that if their performance is judged on immediate changes in market share or share price, not only will they damage their supply base, but they may also come to be seen as future pariahs.

Topics