A Company That Preaches Integrity (and Then This Happened)
To understand why the Buchanan scandal matters as much as it does, you have to know what kind of company Kohl's has built itself up to be. Not just as a business, but as a brand identity. Because what makes this case so uncomfortable isn't just the conflict of interest. It's the gap between what Kohl's says about itself and what its own CEO did.
So let's start with the company.
Kohl's mission statement is "to inspire and empower families to lead fulfilled lives" (Kohl's Corporation, 2025b). Their corporate values are organized under something called the CARE framework: Customer First, Accountable, Resourceful, and Empathetic. In September 2024, the company launched a branding campaign called "Where Families Come First." Through their Kohl's Cares program, they've donated over $440 million to communities nationwide focused on family health and wellness (Kohl's Corporation, 2025c).
And among the values they list for associates, one stands out: "Act with Integrity." Kohl's defines this as earning trust by living up to the company's commitments, treating people with respect and fairness, and making decisions that support the organization's reputation (Kohl's Corporation, 2025b).
| Kohl's ESG |
Read that definition again. Act with Integrity. Living up to commitments. Making decisions that protect the company's reputation. Then think about what Buchanan did: secretly steering multimillion-dollar vendor deals to a romantic partner, hiding the relationship across three companies, and doing it all within his first few months on the job.
If your values only exist in documents and press releases, do they actually mean anything? That's the question I keep coming back to. In the next post, I'll look at how Kohl's responded to the scandal, what they got right, and where I think they fell short.
References
- Howland, D. (2025, May 1). Kohl's fires CEO Ashley Buchanan over conflicts of interest. Retail Dive. https://www.retaildive.com/news/kohls-ceo-ashley-buchanan-fired-conflicts-of-interest-vendor-transactions/746843/
- Immigrant Learning Center. (n.d.). Maxwell Kohl. https://www.ilctr.org/about-immigrants/immigrant-entrepreneurs/hall-of-fame/maxwell-kohl/
- Kohl's. (2026, February 15). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohl%27s
- Kohl's Corporation. (2025a). Form 10-K. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
- Kohl's Corporation. (2025b). Environmental, social & governance. https://investors.kohls.com/esg/overview/default.aspx
- Kohl's Corporation. (2025c). Who we are. https://careers.kohls.com/who-we-are
I like how your post emphasizes the difference between what the company claims and what actually happens in real life, because businesses frequently try to protect their reputation even when they are incorrect.
ReplyDeleteThis is related to corporate social responsibility because companies should act on their principles rather than simply stating them.
I also learned that having beliefs on writing is not enough, leaders must demonstrate them through their actions.
Thanks for your feedback Mandip!
DeleteQuestion: How can a company make sure that its leaders actually live by the values they say they stand for?
ReplyDeleteGreat question Mandip!
DeleteI think companies can ensure this by aligning incentives with values. Like tying promotions and compensations to ethical behavior, not just performance. Regular audits, 360° feedback, and strong accountability systems also could help ensure leaders stay consistent with those values.
The company
ReplyDeleteYour post does a great job explaining Kohl’s background, values, and mission using clear facts, numbers, and evidence, which makes your argument stronger and more believable. I really liked how you used the CARE framework and “Act with Integrity” to show what the company claims to stand for, because it clearly sets up the contradiction with what later happened in the scandal. The structure and details made it easy to understand why this situation is such a serious transparency and integrity issue, especially for a company that promotes trust and family values.
Do you think situations like this damage the company’s long-term credibility more because of the actions themselves, or because they directly contradict the values the company publicly promotes?
Also, do you believe that our government needs to enforce laws that hand out more harsher and stricter punishments such as hefty fines and possible jail terms if convicted to such fraudulent activities done by the top-level CEO and other c-suite members?
The reasons I asked this specific question here is … many of the powerful and rich people involved in this type of activity avoid punishment or get minimal … and is quite astonishing to think about the damages their actions have done.
Thanks for such detailed feedback!
DeleteRegarding the credibility question, I think the damage is greater when actions contradict publicly promoted values. It's hypocrite, and this can break trust more deeply than the action itself.
As for regulatory question, I think stricter enforcement is important, especially for top-level leaders whose decisions have wide impact. And I get your frustration. However, we should take into account that punishment alone isn’t enough. There also needs to be stronger governance, transparency, and internal accountability to prevent these issues before they happen.
This post does a really good job explaining exactly what went wrong, which is that the company had all the rights visions, ideas, and promotions, yet the leadership on the inside was what caused the company's further downfall. Do you believe it is possible that Kohl will fail entirely due to the unfortunate leadership it's dealt with recently?
ReplyDeleteThank you! I appreciate your feedback.
DeleteI don’t think Kohl’s is likely to fail entirely just because of recent leadership issues. I think the company of this size has enough resouces to recover if the right leadership steps in.