WargoTex – Research Findings and Method Evaluation

In my last blog post, I mentioned that I am currently waiting for the responses from the three collaborating companies of the WargoTex project in order to assess the opportunities and challenges for joint business model development in the fashion and textile industry. As it turned out, the current circumstances strongly influenced the company’s ability to cooperate, resulting in just one company submitting sufficient results. However, Björkåfrihet’s input was fortunately very valuable and helped me finalise my research findings. Besides their international engagement in sustainable development and social solidarity, Björkåfrihet operates several second-hand stores across Sweden and is already involved in a number of circular initiates that aim to reduce textile waste. 

While Björkåfrihet agreed to the high potential of joint business models for circularity to sustainably transform the fashion and textile industry, a number of current issues are yet to be solved. For Björkåfrihet, the main challenges are reported to lie in the pricing of the redesigned garments, the time capacity for the redesigning process, the access to skilled designers, the input quantity of post-consumer textiles, as well as the difficulty to scale up redesigning operations. The challenges for a successful development and implementation of a joint business model for circularity seem overwhelming compared to its opportunities, however, initial reluctance lies in the nature of change, particularly when aiming to achieve substantial change in an industry with a complex supply chain. The main opportunity for a joint business model for circularity is indeed the achievement of a sustainable transformation of the whole fashion and textile industry and if regarded as a flexible umbrella business model rather than a static determination of corporate responsibilities, a joint business model can avoid negative implications such as a loss of corporate autonomy and operational flexibility. 

Although the findings of my research proofed to be sufficient, I can confirm the expected difficulties an open-answer questionnaire might entail in comparison to in-depth interviews. While an open-answer questionnaire indeed gives a deeper insight into the respondents’ answers, it can definitely not be compared to the level of detail you would achieve in an in-depth interview. What has been revealed as particularly difficult is the risk of the respondent misunderstanding a question and as a consequence, providing empirical data that is not sufficient for content analysis. Therefore, even in times of social distancing, I would definitely recommend conducting interviews either online or over the phone rather than utilising an open-answer questionnaire, or alternatively, excessively explain the meaning of every question in order to avoid misunderstandings.