Manufacturing Practices of the Footwear Industry: Nike vs. the Competition

Nike NIKE (NI-KEY) is a winged goddess of victory according to Greek mythology. She is said to sit at the side of Zeus. The twentieth century Nike footwear lifts athletes to new achievements. The ‘swoosh’ resembles the winged goddess who was an inspiration to warriors since the beginning of time. Phil knight had two influential people that inspired him to create Nike.

As such, it applied cultural relativism to justify the use of child labor, unsafe labor practices, and near slave labor in its factories. Since then, Nike has been a driving force to ensure fair labor practices across the apparel industry. In 1999, Nike was a key contributor to the establishment of the Fair Labor Association, an organization that is “…dedicated to protecting workers’ rights around the world” (Fair Labor Association, 2016). Today, Nike continues efforts to ensure that contract factories comply with its Code of Conduct to improve labor standards in overseas factories (Nike, 2016). Because of Nike’s efforts to expand and enforce social responsibility at its factories and given the lessons learned from its sordid past, it is unlikely that Nike would resort to any of the straw men fallacies. However, given the pressure by investors to expect solid returns, one hopes the company continues its altruistic social responsibility efforts while veering away from the Friedman Doctrine and its assertion that “… the only social responsibility of business is to increase profits” (Hill, 2011).

Obviously, there is a big number of driving forces in the athletic footwear industry. Each of these driving forces has different impacts—some of them can have a more considerable effect than others on figuring out how much cross-company differences influence market shares and a number of units sold. The first line of most influential factors includes comparative prices, S/Q ratings, and a number of models offered among the footwear competitors. These three most important competitive forces affect customer decisions of which athletic footwear brand to choose. Furthermore, the decisions of customers whether to purchase one brand or another are also influenced by such forces as advertising, celebrity endorsements, the number of independent retail

Since the 1990s, Nike has been embroiled in controversy over its use of sweatshops. Including numerous media reports of workers earning very little an hour (14 cents per hour), and even workers abused by sub-contractor (Allarey, 2015). Incidents such as these are ingrained in Nike’s history and not quickly forgotten. However, as CEO I would like to attempt to correct wrongs.

Nike is the leading and yet renowned supplier of athletic apparel and shoes. The company controls close to 33% of the global athletic shoe market (Dogiamis & Vijayashanker,2009).Nike was founded by Bill Power and Phil Knight in 1962 as a Blue Ribbon Support and then was later on renamed to Nike in the year 1968 (Patrow,2003).The company supplies very high quality product in close to 100 countries with major markets being located in the U.S,U,K, Asia Pacific as well as in the Americas. The company has managed to attain its lead and legendary position via the application of innovative and yet attractive product design which is backed by quality production as well as well crafted marketing strategies.

As the brand name of Nike continue to soar, other companies in the industry; learning from the success Nike has experienced, start focusing more on brand development to keep up with the increasing levels of competition. These companies resort to brand maintenance, which has become the main target in this industry due to product differentiation made by Nike. Nike, being market-advantaged, produces an extensive range of products, through which it gains a balanced level of profits. This has influenced rival companies to initiate a new range of products in their businesses too. Previously these companies had high risks of failing in business, if their single products did not appeal to the market. Due to the impact of Nike’s business strategy, the other companies are also enlarging their product range,

Nike, one of many shoe companies produce their shoes in sweatshops or factories located in other foreign countries. The globalization of these nike shoes has dehumanized the workers in which they struggle with a destitute society. We as human have to preserve quality of life over anything and it is important to let people know the benefit does not outweigh the costs. Thousands of Nike workers, speak on issues regarding their wages and working conditions. Nike has brought these jobs to Southeast Asia but these workers are being physically abused and untreated.

Since its creation, Nike has proven itself as a popular brand and it has created niches by selling products such as footwear, apparels and various types of sports equipment. This paper will attempt to trace the product development of Nike shoes from its origins in conception and design to the manufacturing and production process located in contract factories in developing countries to advertising and marketing of Nike as a cultural commodity and finally, the retailing of the footwear around the world.

Currently, Nike stand as a leading figure in producing high quality sports and fitness equipment and apparels. Bearing just a simple start of selling Japanese imported shoes from a station wagon has transformed

Nike has seldom manufactured products own premises, except their air bladders. The shoes are manufactured through outsourcing and alliances with other companies. A successful company like Nike formed its organization on the customer values that have the MOST impact on the consumers mind – Design/R&D, Marketing and Distribution. Even though manufacturing is a vital function to perform, Nike realized that there were other ways to go about this function and thereby save both cost and maintain its focus on the critical customer value areas.

Apparel and shoe manufacturers continued to offload the more costly yet easily replicated part so their business models to concentrate on brand building, marketing, sales and attaining greater distribution channels globally. These are the pressures all apparel and shoe manufacturers face, and it is particularly challenging in the athletic show industry (Kynge, 2009). Adidas, Converse, Nike and Reebok have been outsourcing production of their shoes for in some cases nearly three decades. Nike was one of the leaders in this strategy, seeing to create a more efficient supply chain and also drop the labor and union costs of manufacturing in the U.S. (Boje, Khan, 2009). Adidas, Converse and Reebok have all followed Nike's lead, with Adidas benefitting from the fall-out generated when investigate reports showed Nike using child labor throughout Pakistan and Vietnam (Boje, Khan, 2009). All four of these companies share a common prioritization of manufacturing operations, yet none of them with the exception of Nike has a comprehensive Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) program in place to ensure ethical compliance to global standards of outsourcing in their industry (Nike Investor Relations, 2012). The intent of this analysis is to compare and contrast the four companies mentioned and their outsourcing practices. Their reasons for choosing to outsource are very much the same; the industry is shrinking

During the late 80s and early 90s Nike was faced with a series of labor strike back at home due to unethical labor practices by its independent countries in third world countries. It is well known for Nike to outsource almost all its production from third world countries at cheap prices and sell them in U.S. market at an abnormal profit. The company began outsourcing its products from Japan where labor was competent and wages were very low. The living standards were raised which prompted Nike to outsource its products from Thailand, Pakistan and Indonesia since wages in these countries were extremely low and labor for these products were competent due to rapid development of the Japanese economy. The outsourcing of footwear products from Asian countries enables Nike to earn high profits and enjoy a competitive advantage over its rivals in the footwear industry. The company invests the high profits realized in marketing its products through celebrities. For instance, Michael Jordan was used to advertise the positive image of Nike Company (Lipschutz and James, pp. 87-96).

Nike took responsibility and created stringent benchmarks for production associations - the Code of Conduct (CoC). While CoC became a need and necessity as it was evident that there still was more to be carried out to direct and deal with the inventory network. Nike constituted the CR Board. It also disclosed the locations of the source factories and manufacturing plants. Nike took measures to match the expectations and published its progress reports. This signalled Nike’s tough stand against these issues and that Nike takes is very seriously to strictly adhere to the best practices and find the solutions. This has resulted into transparency. It has empowered Nike to better fathom the issues and shape more fitting

The Pou Chen factory is located in a place where the minimum wage is far below the national average. It has 10,000 workers who make Converse sneakers. Most of the workers are women, and they earn only 50 cents an hour. The amount that they earn is not even enough to cover their food and very poor housing. In this factory, the women are both physically and verbally abused. Nike’s own investigations have proved these complaints to be true. The company made a statement saying that immediate actions would be taken to deal with the situation. It is interesting to note that, “an internal Nike report, released to the Associated Press after it inquired about the abuse, showed that nearly two-thirds of 168 factories making Converse products worldwide failed to meet Nike’s own standards for contract manufacturers. Twelve are in the most serious category, ranging from illegally long work hours to

With a slogan of “Just Do It,” Nike is known all over the world for its products ranging from apparel to shoes. Receiving recognition and sponsorship from various celebrities and athletes including Michael Jordan, Nike’s brand is generally associated in a positive light. However, the brand itself, variety of products, and numerous sponsors exist as only a few aspects of this continuously expanding brand. Another aspect to consider when addressing the overall existence of a product as well as the constant introduction of new products is the production process itself: how the product came to be, who is involved in creating the product, and where the product is produced.