Phil Knight's Oppression Of Nike In The Workplace

The sneaker manufacturer began in 1972 by owners Phil Knight and Bill Bowerman. After their initial meeting at the University of Oregon in 1957, the two formed a lesser known shoe company that eventually evolve to Nike. The company was able to go public in 1980 after one short year of acquiring “50 percent of the U.S. running shoe market” (Parnell, 2008 p. 334). Although Nike has surpassed many of their competitors, such as Adidas, it did not come without controversy. Consequently, their strategic plan of utilizing cheap labor has cost them the reputation of being child labors in violation of human rights for their financial gains.

NIKE Inc. has been the worldwide leader of athletic shoe sales for many years now. The company’s successful brand image combined competition and enablement for the competitive, athletic user. Nike has to modify their brand to a focus of excitement and freedom and not just competitiveness. By collecting and studying an assortment of material we could be able to understand where NIKE is currently placed in the athletic shoe industry compared to their competition, and how they will be able to adjust their brand focus so it can be more effective in the future. These adjustments can help NIKE reach the more casual group of urban runners and ultimately increase the sales forecasts, while still controlling a percentage of the market for athletic shoes.

Nike’s employment of the cultural relativism philosophical approach, used to justify ‘sweatshop’ labor practices in developing countries, had a detrimental effect on the reputation of the company. In 1998, Nike had to lay off staff amid lagging sales resulting from the backlash against the company. Today, Nike is recognized as the leader in athletic apparel, and one of the favorite brands among millennials and teens. A significant part of that success is attributed to the company’s dramatic change in social responsibility, initiated by its then CEO, Phil Knight, in 1998 (Lutz,

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.

When people think about shoes most of them have one superior shoe company come to mind, Nike. This dominant company was founded by Phil Knight and Bill Bowerman in 1964. Little do some know this company hasn’t always been on the top of shoe companies. When it first started off it was called Blue Ribbon Sports, but it was later changed to its iconic name Nike in 1973. Matter in fact it was started in the back of a car, and now it’s worth roughly around $15 million dollars. This change didn’t happen overnight. It took a lot of grit from Knight and Bowerman to achieve this elite status, which was obtained through two individuals with great ideas on how to reach it, and the grit to back their ideas up.

As a company, Nike is extremely profitable; it is the biggest shoe company and has become the fourth biggest industry leader. Nike can easily afford to increase wages of people that do labor work for the company without even the slightest loss but unfortunately chooses not to. According to the SEC, “In 2007, Nike’s advertising budget was $678 million. Realistically, Nike could pay all its individual workers enough to feed and clothe themselves and their families if it would just devote 1% of its advertising budget to workers' salaries each year!” (A background on…) In Nike’s Code of conduct, they state that in the area of human rights and in the communities in which they do their business, they want to do everything required of them as well as what is generally expected of a leader and thus by magnifying on the wrongs an industry leader commits, changes in the entire industry is expected.

1964 marked the creation of “Nike” which at first was called “Blue Ribbon sports”. Nike was created by Phil Knight and Bill Bowerman. At first

My colleagues and I agree that in certain circumstances that freedom of expression could be limited, for example it is illegal for people to say “bomb” in an airport or “fire” in a crowded movie theater. An example, in the case of Nike v. Kasky a confidential audit by Ernst & Young about Nike’s labor practices in southeast Asia. The audit stated that “workers in the Nike factory were exposed to harmful and toxic chemicals without protection, subjected to physical, verbal, sexual abuse, forced to work excess amount of overtime without proper pay, and suffered from poor ventilation, and drinking water.” In this case I believe that the worker has the right to say what the company was doing , but i feel like disclosing information about the your

Conclusively Nike should be held responsible for its subcontractors. They are not completely responsible for this but they should be aware of it and as a influencial company they should impose what they call basic rights to their subcontractors and make sure that their rules are followed.

Phil Knight and his track-and-field coach Bill Bowerman found one of the world’s well-known sports brand, Nike in 1964. With the beginning of Nike first “office” being the laundry room of Knight’s family home it has now become the biggest sports and fitness company in the world with international recognition. The vision statement of Nike as an organization was to think ahead in the long term and not to simply focus and be content with the present as described by Tom Clarke, chief executive of Nike.

Although Nike may be technically removed from responsibility in some areas, it clearly has the obligation to be certain that exploitation by subcontractors do not occur. Certainly the pay and working conditions that the workers of subcontractors receive is due in large part to the contract that has been negotiated by Nike. If Nike had chosen to make improved working conditions a part of the arrangement, them those benefits may have been passed on to the workers. Still, Nike is a publicly owned firm whose goal is to improve the wealth of its shareholders. The workers in these Asian countries were happy, even eager, to accept the conditions that were provided as a manufacturer of Nike. The reason is that those wages were probably equal or superior to wages available from other sources. If Nike were to leave the country because of the pressures placed upon it, the workers would undoubtedly suffer greatly.

Conditions for these workers have allegedly been made by campaigns of poor conditions, with commonplace harassment and abuse. Nike has sought to respond to these allegations by putting into place a code of conduct for all of its suppliers, and working with the Global Alliance to review around 21 of these factories, and to pick up and respond to issues.

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 began as Phil Knight’s semester-long project to develop a small business, which included a marketing plan. This project was part of Phil Knight’s MBA course at Stanford University in the early 1960s. Phil Knight had been a runner at the University of Oregon in the late 1950s. His idea for his project was to develop high quality running shoes. He thought that high quality/low cost products could be produced in Japan and then shipped to the United States to be sold at a profit. His professor thought that Knight’s idea was interesting, but not much more than a project.