Nike's New Supply Chain Project

Nike products is one of the most selling products all over the world, Nike products are as innovative as it meets the customer needs. So our products is Nike HyperAdapt1.0 where it is simply self-tying shoes so the main idea of this shoes is to put all technical components into this shoes as it allows the athlete to hit a sensor while running and the system will be tighten automatically. Moreover, In order to monitor customer satisfaction , there are four ways, the first one is to analyze customer interactions through answering their questions in emails and tracking to their feedbacks so mapping high quality with customer expectations is highly effective, the second one is the conceptual model of customer satisfaction which says that Nike

The forces of Nike’s customer-supplier relationship is based on joint efforts of improved quality, mutually beneficial partnerships, reduced costs, and increased market share for both parties. According to Nike building customer-supplier relationship is one of the most important goals because it is the analysis of the value chain which is defined as the collection of all activities involved in designing, marketing, manufacturing, delivering and supporting Nike’s products. Having strong relationship with both parties helps Nike to predict and notice any problem at might rise in the supply chain; as a result Nike will be able to develop better solutions to avoid it (Wankel, 2009). The first tier supplier of Nike is located mainly in Taiwan and South Korea, which work closely with R&D personnel in Oreon making the most expensive footwear. Strategies have shown that Nike implements include the vertical integration strategy. In general, the vertical integration strategy allows a firm to gain control over distributors, suppliers and competitors (Nike report, 2015). Nike has implemented forward integration by having its own retail locations throughout the United States, foreign countries & online stores. Every partner has a hugely significant

With Nike rapidly growing, in the 1990s reports began to surface of Nike sweatshops. In 1996; in a United States (U.S.) magazine, an image appeared of a young Pakistani boy sewing together a Nike football that shunned Nike (Wazir). Likewise, the next year another report surfaced that reported that workers in Nike factories in Vietnam were exposed to fumes 177 times over the legal limit allowed in Vietnam (Wazir). Feeling the pressure to act due to low demands (Nisen), Nike’s co-founder and chairman Phil Knight pledged to overhaul these conditions; nevertheless, three years later Nike came under scrutiny again for their abuse and exploitation of employees (Wazir). Even with the unrelenting criticism towards Nike (Nisen), the impact of these reports upon Nike’s success has been little, as Nike has continued their dominance over its competition (Lutz).

Nike started as a small company named “Blue Ribbon sports” by two guys named Phil Knight and Bill Bowerman. They had noticed that even though the trend of Japanese products was common in several consumer sectors, the shoe market was still relying on European and American produced goods. As they started to import shoes from Japan, within 6 years the came to an annual 2,000,000$ in sales.

If Nike Inc. had responded with the above suggestions, the consequences would have been different. First, organizations like consumers’ union, student group and labor group that boycotted Nike’s products would not have gone that far. Secondly, they would have gained the confidence of the market, locally and internationally with the strong brand the company has built for itself over a long period. Third and finally, the negative publicity Nike Inc. received from the media and the consequent tarnished reputation would not have occurred.

Further on the subject of customization, Nike had great difficulties balancing customization with speed-to-market. I believe the external factors of significant competition, changing market place and resulting disappointing financial performance in growth markets lead Nike to rush the implementation and interfered with normal OBB. The rushing meant that a guideline, templates and implementation methodology was discarded by Nike with the argument that the i2 provided material was too rigid. In general I would argue that Nike required technology that was not sufficiently available at the time. This pushed i2 to enter unknown software-territory and program-to-order disabling sufficient time for vendor/developer testing. The criticality of this was further boosted due to lack of testing from Nike, which clearly illustrates faults in phase 4 of the implementation as well. (Appendix 3)

Nike is one of the world’s largest athletic shoes and Apparel Company based on USA, including footwear, apparel, equipment, accessories, and services. The company was found at January 25, 1964 and they change its name to NIKE on May 30, 1971. Nike has brand basket and market them, such as NIKE+, Air Jordan, Hurley International, Converse and etc. Nike’s supply chain is plenary because they control the add-value part by itself and outsourced those labor-intensive part to China and Vietnam same as most multinational company do. But this is not a simple process.

Nike is a company that provides clothing and sports equipment trade large public and is headquartered in the United States. This company faces a number of trends which significant impact its supply chain management.

NIKE has dominated and been the long standing leader of athletic shoes. NIKE Inc. is a company made famous for selling athletic products, for both men and women covering a range of products not limited to but including action sports, athletic training, basketball, football, soccer, running and tennis. NIKE’s current goals include becoming more connected with non-competitive and or casual runners, the brand has recently lost grips with its runners. These runners are non-competitive and enjoy running for exercise and or shear enjoyment. In 2012 sales of running and jogging shoes accounted for over 3 billion U.S. dollars, becoming leading factor for NIKE to focus the brands attention towards the fun and enjoyment behind non-competitive runners. “From 2002 to 2007 there has been a steady growth of about 2.8% per year.” SWOT analysis, current environment, current marketing

In 1964, college track athlete Phil Knight and his coach Bill Bowerman started Blue Ribbon Sports, a distribution company for what are known today as Asics shoes. In 1971, Blue Ribbon Sports began designing and selling their own shoes and changed their name to Nike. Nike is no stranger to bad press and highlighted in a 2014 Business Insider article written by Lara O'Reilly, she mentions a few of the bold moves they made over the years that have garnered attention, starting with the change of their name. Another controversial move they made was with their slogan, “Just Do It”, which was admittedly inspired by the last words of a serial killer right before his execution. Furthermore, they also endorsed their first professional athlete who was nicknamed the “Bucharest Buffoon” because of his scandalous reputation. Phil Knight has been quoted as saying, “It doesn't matter how many people you offend, as long as you're getting your message to your consumers...” In this submission, I will explain how Nike came to its sweatshop scandal situation through its expansion strategy, the positive and negative impacts of this strategy, how Nike responded to this situation, how the company could have responded differently, and what would the consequences have been as a result.

They were only interested in making the largest financial gain so their investors would remain happy. Their only concern was finding the cheapest factories that were run by people not concerned by cutting corners. When responding to the accusation of their unethical practices, they did not quickly respond to remedying the situation; a half fast response was sent out to the public to try and keep the public happy and reporters off their backs. What should have happened is the Nike managers should have had more concern for the people they were employing and not treat them as cheap disposable labor. They should have set up from the first instance a detailed code of factory conduct as well as upheld and enforced their code of ethics. “Take care of your employees and they’ll take care of your business.” (Branson,

There are many relevant market stakeholders identified in the situation the first on would be the owners of Nike and their employees. Nike is owned by the shareholders, this is why Nike kept open commutations between the company and shareholders during the 14-year period it took to develop its new technology. Some stakeholders may have economic or financial concerns in the time it took to develop the new technology. The workforce encompasses Nike social responsibility unit, designers, scientist, researchers, Tom Hartge, Nikes Creative Director of advance research and Hanna Jones, Nikes Vice President for social responsibility. Nike employees’ interests is having a stable rapport with competitive salaries and a safe working atmosphere. The Nike workforce involved in carrying out the effort can be drastically changed by the necessity to invent a new technology and learn new methods of manufacturing the new product. Employees could pose a risk factor to the company, for example, someone could leak to the press inside information about the issue of replacing SF6. Another group of relevant market stakeholders is the consumers. This includes basketball players, athletes, runners, and retail wholesalers. The consumer’s concerns involve the shoes performance. Nike did not want the new technology comprise the high performance and the lightweight of the shoe. There was a risk of the shoe not performing as well, that would lead to a drop in sales. Fortunately, Nike designed

"Nike is a manufacturer, but really it's just a marketing company." - John Shanley, Securities analyst at Wells Fargo's Shanley in 2003

Nike is a major publicly traded sportswear and equipment supplier based in the United States. It is the world's leading supplier of athletic shoes and apparel, and a major manufacturer of sports equipment. (Partlow, 2003) The company of Nike is especially famous for the higher quality of athletic shoes. In today’s sports market, Nike occupies a comparatively large share in the whole world, with revenues in excess of about $19 billion USD in year 2008 and at the end of fiscal year 2009, it employed 34,300 people, working on 6 different continents. All these figures show that Nike is among the one of the world’s leading sports equipment manufacturers (Peters, 2009). Like any other business organization surviving and

Nike has also shown a balanced attitude towards the customers. Not only are their operations transparent and reliable but at the same time, they are reliable as well. They have specifically succeeded in maintaining a large customer base over the years, and all this is because of the attitude they