In this day of how business is conducted it becomes hard to come across a company or any manufacturing business that makes their product from the ground up, without outsourcing for all or part of its product. Nike is no exception this American business trait of conducting business. Nike has multiple manufacturing facilities throughout the world (primarily Asian countries). Nike was one of the first major global foreign companies who was widely scrutinize not only for outsourcing jobs to lower economic countries, but much of the controversy was brought over wages and working conditions of its employees; of which much of the judicial systems placed in these countries have no system enforced for such employment rights.
Since the beginning of the Nike Corporation which was founded in 1972; the origin of business was strategically contracted with outsourcing to factories in Taiwan and South Korea; at which that point in time did not have strict bylaws on workers’ wages or conditions. Following the next two decades of conducting business workers in these countries lobbied to have their government establish such laws; at which Nike decided to venture into other less established countries. The convenient irony is that the countries they decided to open shop are known countries such as China, Indonesia and Vietnam where it is illegal to organize, plus these strategically hit countries are among one of the lowest paying wage countries in the world. (Charles Hill, 2009).
Roles of the Government
After much negative press Nike was bombarded with many allegations of un-ethical child labor, forced overtime and paying below poverty level wages. Much of this media attention brought pressure from U.S civil right organizations such as Education for Justice, Global Exchange, and Students Against Sweatshop Labor (Charles Hill, 2009). Not only was the pressure from these groups and public securitizing growing, but also the native citizens of these countries were also becoming restless; of which they started to protest for worker rights of which such acts are illegal and strongly prosecuted in their countries.
With all this negative publicity mounting Nike decided to makes changes which drew and gave the right for the global community to inspect the company on foreign grounds. The operational challenges that faced Nike manager in this open global front agreeing to allow random factory inspections from the Fair Labor Association and independent monitoring of international organizations; not to mention Nike added its own specialized staff team to stay in compliance of the regulations set.
In conclusion business or global business it will always come down to the bottom dollar. It becomes no wonder that natives of this country are no longer value struck or driven to keep the U.S economy growing but are more harvested on their own personal growth. Nike being a product of the U.S should hold as no surprise that its natural trait to make money; the only reason Nike is projected more negatively because they are on a larger scale and stage. Also as a native to these country traits it also becomes Nike obligation to lead by example in leading by example and playing police and rule keeper to the world by holding ourselves to greater statue. Nike showed this by issuing a company Code of Conduct for all its factories to regulate safety conditions, health and labor standards in nations were this is simply not required. Even if with all its changes the company to this day still faces much scrutiny over working hours of employers’ and wages.
Charles W. L. Hill. (2009). International Business. Competing in the Global Marketplace. Retrieved from Charles W. L. Hill, Mgmt 448 website