Team Gophers: October 2009 Archives

One of the most important things Nike learned was the importance of their public image and also along with that they learned about the social responsibility that comes along with being a major world corporation. They may not think that these issues are a big deal, but when a person like the former St. John's coach makes a trip overseas to raise awareness about worker's poor conditions people pay attention. Negative publicity of any kind can drive down business which results in a potential loss of revenue.

Nike is in the compliance stage of learning. Essentially the fall into the category of organizations that do "just as much as they have to."They realized that they needed to implement some changes, such as improve working conditions and pay, but something was stopping them. When Nike looked at what it would actually cost to implement these changes they decided it really wasn't worth it. However, it seems a little ridiculous to the public that someone like Phil Knight, who makes roughly $8 billion a year, cannot raise the wages of the sweatshop workers even a little bit. With this being said, Nike has at least addressed that there are problems that need to be fixed. It just isn't enough in this day and age however to do only what is necessary, especially not for a global icon like the Nike brand.

Nike bought the Starter brand in 2004, which affected its strategy in terms of corporate strategy. Starter is sold at stores such as Wal-Mart and Target which are considered a value-channeled economy. By showing an interest and commitment to the value industry, whose manufacturers are found in countries in Latin America and Asia, Nike demonstrated that was committed to maintaining labor compliance with all of its products and markets. Along these lines of successful strategies Nike also developed a corporate responsibility department, furthering their initiative in this area. One of the ineffective strategies Nike implemented was the audits on the overseas factories' labor compliance issues.

-Parker Kruckenberg, Dan Pavlue, Alyssa Wiebusch, & Tony Des Marais

Power: 1. There needs to be one person that is appointed the leader of the entire organization to be the final factor in decision making. 2. Each group within the organization must appoint one person in their group to be the leader of their group to assist in decision making of the organization. Conflict of Interests: 1. The organization should start a committee in order for every level of the organization to be able to voice their interests of the organization. 2. The organization should create a handout or informational program to educate all employees, both paid and volunteer, about changes that will be made within the organization. Capacity: 1. The more powerful people in the organization need to be more open and accept suggestions from volunteers in order to make strides toward improvement and have a smooth change. 2. The organization needs to have a realistic vision and be able to act upon it. Each employee must understand this vision before execution of the plan begins.