IKEA's CEO, Anders Dahlvig, on Hardtalk

I just watched the "interview" of Ikea's CEO, Anders Dahlvig, on Hardtalk (BBC). What a disappointment! Although there would have been a lot to say and learn about this highly enigmatic and succesful company, both Stephen Sackur (the interviewer) and Anders Dahlvig missed a great opportunity. Most of all, Stephen Sakur in his inquisitive (anglo-saxon) way of conducting interviews didn't manage to get any valuable answers. Rather the whole show turned out to be a succession of accusations of unethical practices, may be founded, and questioning about whether or not the company should go public to put itself under shareholders scrutiny.

However, if we didn't get answers I think that this interview revealed a couple of very interesting issues:

• First, regarding the accusations about Ikea's lack of control over its suppliers in term of possible child labour and unsustainable forest management. Ikea admitedly fails to control all its suppliers on these issues (only 30% of its suppliers are regularly contolled). My question is how much ethical control should we expect/demand from private companies, and how much from government and ourselves? The problem here is that control comes at a cost and nobody is really willing to bear it! should the cost be covered by Governments (that is tax payers money of the sourcing countries)? By private companies out of their profit? Or by the consumers out of their pockets? The right answer is probably all of them.


• Second, on the legal form of enterprises. Stephen Sakur argued that shareholders' control and screening over public companies is more efficient than that of stakeholders over private companies (such as Ikea). He further stated that given the private status of Ikea allowed it to avoid pressure on ethical issues. Does that argument really hold? If I admit that public companies are subject to very tight disclosure regulations and thus have to act in a more transparent manner, I still feel that private firms whose shares are in the hands of a few can more easily be held accountable for their wrong doings. Or am I wrong?