So we've talked about a variety of different ways that companies create impact. We've talked about the ways they can do this through their practices. We've talked about the ways they can do this, and had some examples of how they do this through their products or services. Let's talk about philanthropy. It's probably one of the oldest ways or most traditional ways that we think about impact. People have been thinking about corporate philanthropy for a long time. Certainly 20, 30 years ago, corporate philanthropy was a term we heard more often, much more often than social impact. And still, there's been a real evolution. I think there are companies that have gotten better and better at how they do philanthropy. They're a little more strategic about their philanthropy. So give us an example of a philanthropic model that you think is interesting. Sure. And I think that's a really interesting point that you make because so many companies do focus on just giving money to local nonprofits, which is great in and of itself, but it doesn't feel as strategic or fit in line with the business as to what we're talking about today. Or maybe their employees volunteer at Habitat for Humanity or something. And that's all great and can be great for employee engagement in communities. But it's not as strategic for the business as we've been talking about today. Right. And there's a sense that if a company can, and we'll explore some of these examples I think, but if a company can find a way to use their skill set to give, they can actually have more impact, but they can also get some more benefit for their brand and for their employee motivation, employee engagement, and so on. Right. And so one company that we love at Wharton is a company called Warby Parker. Founded by Wharton alumnus. Exactly. And I touched on the one-for-one model earlier. But what this is is that, Katherine, you buy a pair of Warby Parker eyeglasses. I've done that. As have I, actually. And then Warby Parker gives a pair of glasses away to folks in need in developing countries or emerging markets. And so, Warby Parker is not the first to do that model. TOMS Shoes has done that model for shoes. But what Warby Parker has done in terms of this model, and they've given away more than 3 million pairs of glasses to date, and they're still a relatively young company. What differentiates Warby Parker so far is that they're also enabling entrepreneurism through this. So they've partnered with an NGO called VisionSpring, who has extensive experience working with people who are visually impaired or how we can improve sight in emerging markets. Because that has productivity implications as we talked about in another segment too. But they have partnered with VisionSpring to bring training opportunities to folks in local communities to administer basic eye exams, and then sell the eyeglasses. So there's some giving away and then they can also support entrepreneurism by, like, they can sell the glasses as well for what they consider ultra-affordable prices. Right. Right. Right. So I talked in an earlier module about TOMS Shoes. And that there was some push-back when TOMS Shoes began just giving away shoes. TOMS Shoes has actually evolved to a model where they're manufacturing shoes in emerging economies, so that the places where they're giving away shoes are also manufacturing shoes, creating jobs. So this is a similar strategy. We're not just giving away glasses, we are finding a way to support entrepreneurship in these local communities. Right. Right. Yes. Good example. So another company that has always impressed me with its philanthropy is MAC Cosmetics. So MAC Cosmetics, now owned by Estée Lauder, founded in 1984. In 1994, they created the MAC AIDS Fund to support nonprofits around the world that are working to combat and overcome AIDS and HIV, and particularly focused on the connection, the link from high poverty to the risk of getting HIV and AIDS. So they were actually a really early pioneer of a buy-one-give-one model but it's actually, it's different than that. And cause marketing. Yes, and cause marketing. Right. So the way this works is they have a particular line of lipstick, the Viva Glam lipstick. And when a customer buys the Viva Glam lipstick, and there's different lipsticks that come out every year, when a customer buys the Viva Glam lipstick, the full price of that product, whatever you pay for that product is what the MAC company donates to the MAC AIDS Fund and which in turn donates to fight HIV and AIDS around the world. So through this, and we'll talk in a moment about the marketing campaign of how they get out the word about this Viva Glam lipstick, but since 1994, they have contributed over $400 million to fight AIDS and HIV around the world. So they are, I think I recall that they are one of the largest funders in the space after the Gates Foundation and after maybe one or more pharmaceuticals. But they are a huge funder in combating HIV and AIDS around the world. And we've talked about how companies are successful or can be successful in promoting their philanthropy and getting some marketing and branding out of this. In this case, Viva Glam has had this annual spokesperson. They began with RuPaul. They've had Cindi Lauper, they've had Boy George, they've had Christina Aguilera, Lady Gaga, Rihanna as their spokesperson, attracting customers to buy their lipstick which, again, fuels their philanthropy. And what I think is interesting about Warby Parker and Viva Glam is that they are, it feels a little more integrated into who they are and what they do as a business. So the celebrities that you mentioned for Viva Glam really have been outspoken for LGBT rights, and Viva Glam has been really active in the drug community. And so, if you look at that list of stars, it makes sense that they would be the faces of this campaign to combat HIV and AIDS, although of course, it does not just affect these LGBT communities but is a crisis around the world. But that's where I think is interesting in terms of how it aligns with their business. Right. Absolutely. Good examples and I think that's where you get some of the internal benefit for the company of when it's authentic, when it's part of the brand and doesn't just seem one-off. Right. Right. Great. Thank you.
