Introduction
One of the significant reasons why a corporation is put in place is largely to attain profits. If a corporation is not profitable then there is no reason for its existence. Corporations go far and beyond to make sure that this profit-making motive is satisfied. In most cases to attain as much profits as possible means that the corporations need to ignore some of their responsibilities. The impact they have on the society, environment and culture has raised concerns over the years. This begs the question of whether these corporations have any responsibility at all except the responsibility to their shareholders, to make profits. As a result many theorists took it upon themselves to rethinking the roles and responsibilities of the …show more content…
Through globalisation and the aim to reduce cost, Nike has outsourced labour for most of its products in countries like China, Indonesia and Vietnam. The company has enjoyed much success but with much success came even more oppositions pertaining to the workforce labour practices. The workers in these countries complained of poor working condition, extremely low wages and physical and mental abuse.
Furthermore the workers at these plants do not have a voice at all. If they try to unionise and strike for better human treatment and higher wages, the management as well as the government deals with them strictly. This could even result in the workers losing their jobs. Nike has endured many criticism and these criticisms are not only limited to foreign companies.
Nike’s advert have motivated the athletic youths in the United States to invest in the brand. Talking about underprivileged youth that sees sports as the pathway out of poverty, Nike sells these youth sneakers for about $150 while it pays the Vietnam worker $1.60 a day. As a result, Nike has been criticised for not giving back to the community from whence its primary customers come from.
In conclusion, Nike responding to these critics argued that improvements need to be made but also insisted that their working conditions are better than most companies in the …show more content…
This paper presented the shift from Stockholder dominant theory to stakeholder theory that took place over the decades. Now corporations do not only have a responsibility towards their shareholders as Friedman argued, they also have a responsibility towards all of its stakeholders too. Furthermore all stakeholders should be treated as ends themselves. Applying this shift to Nike case study, it is clear that Nike does not only have to be accountable for its shareholders – to make profits for them but also have to take accountability for its suppliers and its clients. This is of utmost important because however the clients or the suppliers choose to go about doing business will always reflect on Nike as a brand in its
One of the significant reasons why a corporation is put in place is largely to attain profits. If a corporation is not profitable then there is no reason for its existence. Corporations go far and beyond to make sure that this profit-making motive is satisfied. In most cases to attain as much profits as possible means that the corporations need to ignore some of their responsibilities. The impact they have on the society, environment and culture has raised concerns over the years. This begs the question of whether these corporations have any responsibility at all except the responsibility to their shareholders, to make profits. As a result many theorists took it upon themselves to rethinking the roles and responsibilities of the …show more content…
Through globalisation and the aim to reduce cost, Nike has outsourced labour for most of its products in countries like China, Indonesia and Vietnam. The company has enjoyed much success but with much success came even more oppositions pertaining to the workforce labour practices. The workers in these countries complained of poor working condition, extremely low wages and physical and mental abuse.
Furthermore the workers at these plants do not have a voice at all. If they try to unionise and strike for better human treatment and higher wages, the management as well as the government deals with them strictly. This could even result in the workers losing their jobs. Nike has endured many criticism and these criticisms are not only limited to foreign companies.
Nike’s advert have motivated the athletic youths in the United States to invest in the brand. Talking about underprivileged youth that sees sports as the pathway out of poverty, Nike sells these youth sneakers for about $150 while it pays the Vietnam worker $1.60 a day. As a result, Nike has been criticised for not giving back to the community from whence its primary customers come from.
In conclusion, Nike responding to these critics argued that improvements need to be made but also insisted that their working conditions are better than most companies in the …show more content…
This paper presented the shift from Stockholder dominant theory to stakeholder theory that took place over the decades. Now corporations do not only have a responsibility towards their shareholders as Friedman argued, they also have a responsibility towards all of its stakeholders too. Furthermore all stakeholders should be treated as ends themselves. Applying this shift to Nike case study, it is clear that Nike does not only have to be accountable for its shareholders – to make profits for them but also have to take accountability for its suppliers and its clients. This is of utmost important because however the clients or the suppliers choose to go about doing business will always reflect on Nike as a brand in its