Problem: Do You Agree With This Scenario?
"We see the world a little differently and throughout our history have made our mark when we've had the courage to challenge convention" (Reebok Mission, Vision & Values). This is part of Reebok's mission statement, and seeing their 2012 marketing ad, "Cheat on your girlfriend, not on your workout," clearly demonstrates how they challenge the status quo.
According to Lamb, C. W. (2018), ethics and social responsibility co-exist and drive a company's decision-making. When this marketing decision was being made, I questioned how such a large organization could not have known about the wording before going to print. There are usually several levels of approvals before an ad goes to print, especially in a company of this magnitude and with public influence. For this reason, when reading that Reebok spokesperson Dan Sarro said that the signs were removed "as soon as they were made aware," it felt disingenuous. (Stampler).
Is the blame totally on Reebok and its marketing team? I would submit that the facilities that agreed to post the ads throughout the gym missed the mark on their responsibility of how this would impact their clients. Ironically, in business, reach matters. These gyms took the posters down and carried on with new ones, likely never losing a member over the ad; however, Reebok saw sales drop while its competitors rose.
Reebok stated that "they define their own code" and "they risk everything" as part of their list of values. (Reebok Mission, Vision & Values). In my life and as a business people leader, the foremost essential values are respecting and treating others as I want and expect to be treated. Stepping outside of the impact for a moment, it's clear the intention behind the ad was to promote consistency in a workout and regime.
Ultimately, this was a bad idea and a deplorable lack of judgment.