Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Responsibility of Nike
2014
Table of Contents
Introduction: Nike.................................................................................................. 3
What is Corporate Social Responsibility?...............................................................3
Corporate Social Responsibility Theories for Nike..................................................4
Management Audit Verification Tool for Nike......................................................5
Role of CEO in Nikes Development.......................................................................5
Process Activity Mapping:................................................................................... 5
Supply chain response matrix:...........................................................................6
Product Variety Funnel:....................................................................................... 6
Quality Filter Mapping:........................................................................................ 6
Demand amplification mapping:.........................................................................7
Decision Point analysis:...................................................................................... 7
Physical structure:.............................................................................................. 7
Stakeholders of Nike.............................................................................................. 7
Conclusion............................................................................................................. 9
References........................................................................................................... 10
Environment audit was conducted during 2007 for fulfilling the self evaluation
criteria for focusing upon the ways for employees to fulfil the requirements of
corporate social responsibility. The ESH management standards were introduced
through conducting this audit for improving the capacity of people and factories
for managing critical issues efficiently.
parameters for covering the service levels with lowest investments. These
parameters include order capacity, safety of stock and cycles involved in product
development. The mapping consists of horizontal and vertical axis through which
inventory amounts can easily be detected for improving the further steps that
should be taken for managing the logistical support.
Physical structure:
The tool focuses upon the examination of the whole structure of the industry
through production chain. Every inch of detail is examined including the raw
materials, assemblers and the affect of product in the market. Hence the whole
chain of production can be determined and weak points can be extracted for
obtaining better results. Cost for each step is also determined through observing
the physical structure.
Stakeholders of Nike
Stakeholders include the groups of people who are interested in the business for
expanding its operations (Harrison and Freeman, 1999). The main stakeholders
for Nike include consumers, shareholders, financial agencies, local communities,
labourers, governmental agencies, suppliers and pressure groups. They share
common interests for Nike and are brought on a single policy, for instance
including the customer question time, surveys for staff members and staff
forums. However the management of Nike emphasise upon three major
stakeholders including consumers, suppliers and employees. The consumers are
asked for their feedback through which their views are heard and according to
which better services are provided for making the managements role stronger.
The suppliers are also treated well and due to which Tesco has the best supply
chain management and employees who are encouraged to give their feedback
through Viewpoint Staff Survey in which responses to Staff Questions, Time
sessions and staff forums are observed. The stakeholder mapping can be done
as follows (Woods, 2007):
Recognition of relevant groups analysis of stakeholders interests mapping
of related objectives of stakeholders ranking of stakeholders
Stakeholder mapping holds vital importance for Nike as the needs of the firm
makes the job for objective meeting easier. The problems prevailing in the
business can be determined which can further help to devise a solution for the
management of Nike. However the mapping procedure requires revising on a
regular basis for evaluating that how well the meeting with the parties of interest
go and the steps to be taken to change the strategic steps (Walsh, 2008).
The corporate social responsibility refers to the relationship between global
corporations, government institutions and individuals. However the term majorly
emphasise upon the connection between a corporation and local society
(Lindgreen, 2010). For Nike this also includes the association of stakeholders with
the company for its development. The self regulation is highly governed with the
business model in which the firms perform. The business monitors for Nike can
ensure the ethical standards and laws are well observed. CSR can be taken as a
process through which Nikes accomplishments can be persuaded to achieve a
positive impact through regulating the environment, employees, stakeholders,
communities and consumers (Jones et al., 2005). For Nike the social contract
includes the application of unselfish and humane behaviour which further
promotes the self interest and self-centeredness. This can put forward some
influential ideas for collaborative control of the company. The focal point for Nike
is however to maintain the social contract among the stakeholders and people of
the society. This in return increases the value of civil society. The key area for
CSR in Nike expands the presence beyond the present members of the society
keeping in mind the future scenario. On the other hand the actions are highly
affected by the external environment in which the company operates. This
environment for Tesco includes the local societal and wider global environments
(Andersen, 2009). There are numerous factors which influence this environment
including the usability of natural resources within the production cycle, effects of
competition among itself and other firms, fortification of a local community
through the development of employment opportunities, conversion of raw
materials, distribution of wealth created contained by the owners of Tesco and
climatic change of corporate sector.
The stakeholders lend a hand in prioritizing key problems and widen the
corporate responsibility policies. Through a great deal from the interactions it
was concluded that productive engagement with stakeholders is most frequent
approach that enhance the best approach to the challenges Nike have in
addressing (Doane, 2004).
Nike connects with a wide range of stakeholders on a continuing base together
with civil society, industry, government, consumers and shareholders. Nike
performs this unceremoniously, through set of connections and organizations
that it contributes in or is affiliate of and as a prearranged part of its policies on
issues and challenges. Nike in addition accomplishes this through our official
enterprise work. Each of Nikes key enterprise is presided over by agreements,
union and operating principles, encouraging the responsibility and governance of
each partnership. Nike have also worked to appreciate how multi-sector
corporation are finest brokers and how to make them accomplish something.
Nike considers that increasing and cleansing skills of paying attention and sense
are serious to a company's success. This has been factual for Nike's record of
taking notice to and innovating for athletes to deliver performance product and
the approach of Nikes corporate responsibility efforts. Lately Nike has
10
commenced to take appointment with the external world to a new level. Nike has
developed a register of stakeholders for harmonizing the requirement to meet up
the following different criteria: Understanding and aptitude to remark on the
company through previous interactions, aptitude to make available new and
different perspectives, proficiency and standing in corporate responsibility
strategy and specific contented areas, Geographic, gender and subject variety.
Conclusion
Numerous methods are present for managers of Nike to take decisions. However
corresponding to a method for a problem is one of the expertises. The present
day manager needs to act as a partner, investor, customer and coach to take
decisive decisions. For achieving the upper level of innovation managers need to
be completely occupied for making strategic planning and decisions. However
they also need to consider the employees way of thinking. Through balancing
the knowledge of science and philosophy, the complexities of Nikes CSR
management can be resolved in the present competitive market. With the
passage of time the concept and theory of CSR is becoming the top most
significant theories among the management theories. It explains the internal
sources with respect to Sustained Competitive Advantage or SCA. It proposes
that if an organisation is aimed at achieving the state of SCA it must manage the
controlling Valuables, Rare, Inimitable and Non-substitutable resources. It must
also have the capabilities to apply the resources which are obtained through
dynamic decision making, competence and Knowledge Based View (KBV). RBV is
famous for its simplicity due to its core message. However it has been criticised
for negative aspects for dynamic market contexts. However following are some
outcomes that CSR strategies can fac
11
References
Andersen, M., & Skjoett-Larsen, T. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in global
supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 14(2), 75-86.
Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of
sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122-136.
Belal, A. R. (2002). Stakeholder accountability or stakeholder management: a
review of UK firms' social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting (SEAAR)
practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9(1),
8-25.
Brunk, K. H. (2010). Exploring origins of ethical company/brand perceptionsA
consumer perspective of corporate ethics. Journal of Business Research, 63(3),
255-262.
Buchholtz A and Carroll A (2012) Business and society, Ethics
StakeholderManagement, 8th edition, South Western, Cengage Learning
and
Burgess, K., Singh, P. J., & Koroglu, R. (2006). Supply chain management: a
structured literature review and implications for future research.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26(7), pp
703-729.
Castello, I., & Lozano, J. (2009). From risk management to citizenship corporate
social responsibility: analysis of strategic drivers of change. Corporate
Governance, 9(4), 373-385.
Crowther, D., & Aras, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility. BookBoon.
DeTienne, K. B., & Lewis, L. W. (2005). The pragmatic and ethical barriers to
corporate social responsibility disclosure: The Nike case. Journal of Business
Ethics, 60(4), 359-376.
Doane, D., & Abasta-Vilaplana, N. (2005). The myth of CSR. Stanford Social
Innovation Review, 3(3), 22-29.
Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility, Public Policy, and
NGO Activism in Europe and the United States: An InstitutionalStakeholder
Perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 47-73.
George, J. M., Jones, G. R., & Sharbrough, W. C. (1996). Understanding and
managing organizational behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hess, D. (2001). Regulating corporate social performance: A new look at social
accounting, auditing, and reporting. Business Ethics Quarterly, 307-330.
Holme, R., & Watts, P. (1999). Corporate social responsibility. Geneva: World
Business Council for Sustainable Development.
12
Kahle, L. R., Boush, D. M., & Phelps, M. (2000). Good Morning, Vietnam: An
Ethical Analysis of Nike Activities in Southeast Asia. Sport Marketing Quarterly,
9(1).
Leonard, D., & McAdam, R. (2003). Corporate social responsibility. Quality
progress, 36(10), 27-33.
Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2010). Corporate social responsibility. International
Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 1-7.
Maignan, I., & Ralston, D. A. (2002). Corporate social responsibility in Europe and
the US: Insights from businesses self-presentations. Journal of International
Business Studies, 33(3), 497-514.
McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social
responsibility: Strategic implications*. Journal of management studies, 43(1), 118.
Morsing, M., & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication:
stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A
European Review, 15(4), 323-338.
Nike
Financial
Report,
2012
[online]
Available
at:
http://investors.nikeinc.com/files/doc_financials/AnnualReports/2012/docs/nike2012-form-10K.pdf
Portney, P. R. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility. Environmental Protection
and the Social Responsibility of FirmsPerspectives from Law, Economics, and
Business.
13
14