Provide an analysis for this case study:

Clearly the end goal behind the Improving Worker Well-Being initiative is laudable. The stickier question is how to achieve that goal in 72 different factories. A natural temptation would be to focus on interventions with universal appeal and to roll out those same interventions in all 72 places. That sounds both efficient and consistent, doesn't it? Levi's is taking the opposite approach. It offers funding and guidance but lets the specifics vary by supplier and by region. For example, the company connected one of its suppliersApparel Internationalwith a nonprofit to help it identify need areas. The resulting feedback led to better water fountains, better overhead fans, microwaves and griddles in the cafeteria, and a new soccer field.

The feedback also led Apparel International to improve its managerswho had a reputation for being disrespectful and authoritarian. Explains Oscar Gonzlez French, the president of the supplier, "We had lots of people complaining their supervisors didn't have the right leadership stylethey were too strong, too blunt, they didn't treat them well."* An additional nonprofit was then brought in to design a 10-week training and team-building program tailored to Apparel International's needs. Supervisors are trained to learn employees' idiosyncratic circumstances, listen to their opinions, and foster open two-way communication. As Gonzlez French summarizes, "We're teaching them to be better leaders."* How important is having better leaders to Apparel International's employees? Well, it showed up as a need area more frequently than higher wages, despite the fact that Mexico's minimum wage for apparel workers is only $5 a day. Indeed, Gonzlez French believes bad managers is a key reason why the annual turnover rate in his plant tends to be in the 30-40 percent range.

In reflecting on the bottom-up structure of the Improving Worker Well-Being initiative, Kim Almedia notes, "We needed to step back and listen to vendors."* Offers Bergh, "If this is going to be sustainable over time, we have to prove to the factory owners that this is good for their business . . ."* Still, the question remains how to measure whether the initiative is helping, especially if it takes on different shapes and sizes across suppliers and regions. After all, Levi's is offering funding, even if the suppliers themselves are sharing the responsibility. How exactly will the company measure the success of the initiative? Much like it did with the design and execution of the Apparel International program, it found help. The company has asked the Harvard School of Public Health to design a rigorous scientific study to assess the impact of the Worker Well-Being initiative.