Environment Marketing

Environment Includes the marketing team within an

organization and includes all of the outside factors of
marketing the affect the team's ability to develop and
maintain successful customer relationships with their
.targeted customer group

The marketing environment Consisting of three

: sections

MACRO_ENVIROMENT
MICRO_ ENVIROMENT
INTERNAL_ ENVIROMENT
MACRO_ENVIROMENT :

The major external and uncontrollable factors that

influence an organization's decision making, and
affect its performance and strategies. These factors
include the economic factors; demographics; legal,
political, and social conditions; technological
changes; and natural forces.
Specific examples of macro environment influences
include competitors, changes in interest rates,
changes in cultural tastes, disastrous weather, or
government regulations.
MICRO_ENVIROMENT :

Factors or elements in an organization's immediate area of

operations that affect its performance and decision-
making freedom. These factors include competitors,
customers, distribution channels, suppliers, and the
general public.

INTERNAL_ENVIRONMENT :

The internal environment is comprises of the activities

inside of your marketing organization. In your internal
environment, you have

some variables to make decisions and influence your

marketing efforts, such variables of marketing e.g.
product, promotion, price, place, process, physical
environment.
Nike is a global brand specializing in the design and
manufacture of athletic apparel, footwear, accessories and
equipment; it is headquartered in the United States,
Europe, and the Asia Pacific Region (Whitehead, 2012). Its
products are available through over 20,000 retail outlets,
including those in its own footfall outlets, e.g. Nike Factory
stores (Whitehead, 2012). This study considers the
contemporary business environment of Nike using a
PESTLE approach, paying particular attention to any
human resources management (HRM) issues that may
arise under each heading. Overall, it is argued here that
Nike has attempted to address various business and social
challenges by harmonizing its value proposition to
Consumers, shareholders, business partners, employees,
.and the community

Nikes mission is "To bring inspiration and innovation to

every athlete in the world

Nike's vision is " to help Nike, Incorporated and our

consumers thrive in a sustainable economy where people,
.profit, and planet are in balance
 : Macro environment

Economic :

In common with all consumer-facing

organizations, Nike faced challenging trading conditions
since the financial crises of 2008-9 and contingent
economic slowdown; this has applied in both Western
markets (such as the US) and the Asia-Pacific region
(Whitehead, 2012). Conversely, Nike has used its
established brand equity to take advantage of growing
consumer demand in emerging economies (Whitehead,
2012). The corollary to this has been an expansion
of Nikes value chain in which it has also taken advantage
of the lower wage rates paid in those economies
(Whitehead, 2012). Nike has defended the contingent CSR
critiques by arguing that it has provided employment in
otherwise underdeveloped economies, and paid the
established local rate for labor (Whitehead, 2012). In HRM
terms, this implies a considerable divide between the
higher-value strategic and design function retained in the
US, and those in outsourced manufacturing (Davies,
.2006)

Political :

In the estimation of some observers, Nike has benefited

considerably from the growth-orientated policies of the US
government, which has maintained low interest rates,
currency exchange stability, and internationally
competitive tax arrangements (Whitehead,
2012). Nike has also benefited from cooperation with
government initiatives in terms of transparency in the
global value chain; one example of this lies in membership
of the Clinton administrations 1997 Apparel Industry
Partnership (Wagner, 2009). As will be discussed further
below, political pressures have featured more negatively
in concerns over Nikes employment practices (Whitehead,
.2012)

: Micro environment

Customers
Since the London Olympics there has been a strong
customer demand for Nike products, which helped them
charge past their competitors. Just like any other
consumer products maker, Nike faces rising costs for
packaging, fuel and other raw materials. In addition, the
weak economy in Europe and softening in China is likely to
weigh on results to a degree (Bloomberg, 2012). Laws of
Supply and Demand come into play especially with this
surge of interest with Nike products from this point
onward. The Laws of Supply state that as the price of a
good or service increases, the quantity of goods or
services offered by suppliers increases and vice versa.
Whereas the Law of Demand states that, all other factors
being equal, as the price of a good or service increases,
consumer demand for the good or service will decrease
.and vice versa
Competitors
For the most part, Nike is in a free market industry which
oligopoly behavior. The reason for most part is that the
barriers of entry, factors that prohibit firms from entering
an industry, primarily lie with the economies of scale and
how the current companies in the market have sufficient
sales to achieve these scales (McConnell, Brue & Flynn,
2012). Nike is such a large company that they and their
competitors have been reaping the benefits of the
economies of scale. Prime example would be that of an
oligopoly behavior called game-theory done with Nike and
Adidas (McConnell, Brue & Flynn, 2012). Game theory
assumes consumers would make rational decisions, but as
we all know, feelings often disrupt our rational decision-
making processes, often resulting in irrational choices that
we perceive as satisfying (McConnell, Brue & Flynn, 2012).
In essence, game-theory will elude to a concept called
reciprocity strategy, which is when the same oligopolistic
repeats strategic situations over and over again where
Nike and Adidas are mutually interdependent on pricing,
advertising and product development year after year
(McConnell, Brue & Flynn, 2012). The more complex the
company is the more manageable the scale can be. Given
market demand, only a few large firms or, in the extreme,
only a single large firm can achieve low average total
.costs