This case won the Ethics and Social Responsibility category at The Case Centre Awards and Competitions 2023. #CaseAwards2023
Who – the protagonist
Amanda Tucker, Vice President of Sourcing at Nike, the sportswear giant.
What?
This case explores the evolution of Nike’s efforts to improve working conditions at its suppliers’ factories. Amanda is considering three key supply chain challenges: monitoring suppliers, encouraging suppliers to improve capabilities to meet Nike’s quality and productivity standards, and deciding which country to add to its source base in order to source products closer to the North American market.
Why?
With over $36 billion in sales and 73,100 employees in 2018, Nike was the largest sportswear brand in the world. To support its operations, it had a global network of over 500 supplier factories in over 30 countries that produced the company’s footwear, apparel and sports equipment.
Nike was an early mover in sourcing its suppliers from outside the US but, by the early 1990s, it began to face mounting criticism regarding the treatment of factory workers. This case looks at Nike’s response - from denying responsibility, to monitoring suppliers, to encouraging them to self-regulate whilst providing education and training.
Where?
Nike is an American multinational corporation headquartered in Beaverton, Oregon but its supplier factories stretch across six continents and over 30 countries.
When?
The key events in the case take place in July 2018.
Key quote
What next?
Amanda must consider the various options facing Nike’s source base. How can they convince suppliers to take ownership of compliance issues? How can Tucker get them to see the long-term benefits of collaboration with Nike? How should the brand integrate its existing sourcing with a need to source closer to market?
This is the first win for all three authors and the second win for Harvard Business School in the Ethics and Social Responsibility category.
Winning the award
Nien-hê said: “It is encouraging to see continued interest in the topic of responsibilities for sustainability and working conditions in the supply chain. The topic is one that has received a great deal of treatment, and there are many compelling contemporary challenges regarding responsible business conduct - e.g. ethical AI, disinformation, algorithmic fairness. So, it is heartening that students continue to engage with this foundational issue for the global economy.”
Olivia continued: “I am pleased there is interest in this important topic. Labour rights issues are an integral but often overlooked aspect of manufacturing.”
Case popularity
Michael said: “Our case describes Nike’s decades-long journey to understand and respond to problematic working conditions in their supply chains. Nike’s initial response was that working conditions in factories they didn’t own was not their problem to solve. But over time, a growing number of stakeholders expected them - and other brands - to take some responsibility to avoid sweatshops and to foster improved working conditions at the factories they hired to produce their goods.
"The case showcases many innovations and pilot programmes Nike has pursued over the years, and several challenges they still face. I think many students care a lot about the working conditions and environmental impacts associated with the products they buy and can relate to the apparel and footwear products that the case focuses on. I’m sure that our case’s focus on a brand as well-known as Nike also heightens student engagement.”
Writing the case
Michael reflected: “I wasn’t sure that Nike would be willing to have a case written about their challenges managing working conditions in supply chains, but I was impressed that they did, and were quite open with us. We had a terrific relationship with Nike; they let us interview managers from a wide range of functions, which gave us deeper insights on how various parts of an organisation can see the same issue quite differently through their distinctive lens.”
Case writing advice
Michael explained: “First decide what you want students to learn as they read the case and discuss it in class, and only then seek out a company willing to let you learn and write about their managerial decisions and dilemmas.”
Olivia added: “I am a big fan of outlines. I also recommend mapping out the teaching plan before finalising the case.”
Teaching the case
Michael commented: “This case is unusually versatile, as we have led our colleagues to teach this case in two different core MBA courses (in different years): Leadership and Corporate Accountability where we emphasised companies responsibilities to workers and ethical decision making, and then most recently in Technology and Operations Management where we emphasised how companies need to think holistically in their supply chain management efforts, including how they initially choose suppliers and how they manage them.”
Final word
Nien-hê commented: “A hope is that students and instructors will extend the learnings from this case to other industries and even beyond questions about supply chains to more general questions about the repsonsibilities of business. Many of the learnings from the case - the change in Nike’s response, the piloting of novel programs, and the development of internal capabilities and reporting structures - have much wider applicability and are relevant for so many of the challenges facing business today.”
Olivia concluded: “Thank you for your work promoting the case method. Cases are complex teaching tools that produce memorable learning experiences, but students are not always aware of the time and commitment it takes to create them. It is a privilege to be part of this intellectual endeavour.”
The case
Who – the protagonist
Amanda Tucker, Vice President of Sourcing at Nike, the sportswear giant.
What?
This case explores the evolution of Nike’s efforts to improve working conditions at its suppliers’ factories. Amanda is considering three key supply chain challenges: monitoring suppliers, encouraging suppliers to improve capabilities to meet Nike’s quality and productivity standards, and deciding which country to add to its source base in order to source products closer to the North American market.
Why?
With over $36 billion in sales and 73,100 employees in 2018, Nike was the largest sportswear brand in the world. To support its operations, it had a global network of over 500 supplier factories in over 30 countries that produced the company’s footwear, apparel and sports equipment.
Nike was an early mover in sourcing its suppliers from outside the US but, by the early 1990s, it began to face mounting criticism regarding the treatment of factory workers. This case looks at Nike’s response - from denying responsibility, to monitoring suppliers, to encouraging them to self-regulate whilst providing education and training.
Where?
Nike is an American multinational corporation headquartered in Beaverton, Oregon but its supplier factories stretch across six continents and over 30 countries.
When?
The key events in the case take place in July 2018.
Key quote
What next?
Amanda must consider the various options facing Nike’s source base. How can they convince suppliers to take ownership of compliance issues? How can Tucker get them to see the long-term benefits of collaboration with Nike? How should the brand integrate its existing sourcing with a need to source closer to market?
Author perspective
This is the first win for all three authors and the second win for Harvard Business School in the Ethics and Social Responsibility category.
Winning the award
Nien-hê said: “It is encouraging to see continued interest in the topic of responsibilities for sustainability and working conditions in the supply chain. The topic is one that has received a great deal of treatment, and there are many compelling contemporary challenges regarding responsible business conduct - e.g. ethical AI, disinformation, algorithmic fairness. So, it is heartening that students continue to engage with this foundational issue for the global economy.”
Olivia continued: “I am pleased there is interest in this important topic. Labour rights issues are an integral but often overlooked aspect of manufacturing.”
Case popularity
Michael said: “Our case describes Nike’s decades-long journey to understand and respond to problematic working conditions in their supply chains. Nike’s initial response was that working conditions in factories they didn’t own was not their problem to solve. But over time, a growing number of stakeholders expected them - and other brands - to take some responsibility to avoid sweatshops and to foster improved working conditions at the factories they hired to produce their goods.
"The case showcases many innovations and pilot programmes Nike has pursued over the years, and several challenges they still face. I think many students care a lot about the working conditions and environmental impacts associated with the products they buy and can relate to the apparel and footwear products that the case focuses on. I’m sure that our case’s focus on a brand as well-known as Nike also heightens student engagement.”
Writing the case
Michael reflected: “I wasn’t sure that Nike would be willing to have a case written about their challenges managing working conditions in supply chains, but I was impressed that they did, and were quite open with us. We had a terrific relationship with Nike; they let us interview managers from a wide range of functions, which gave us deeper insights on how various parts of an organisation can see the same issue quite differently through their distinctive lens.”
Case writing advice
Michael explained: “First decide what you want students to learn as they read the case and discuss it in class, and only then seek out a company willing to let you learn and write about their managerial decisions and dilemmas.”
Olivia added: “I am a big fan of outlines. I also recommend mapping out the teaching plan before finalising the case.”
Teaching the case
Michael commented: “This case is unusually versatile, as we have led our colleagues to teach this case in two different core MBA courses (in different years): Leadership and Corporate Accountability where we emphasised companies responsibilities to workers and ethical decision making, and then most recently in Technology and Operations Management where we emphasised how companies need to think holistically in their supply chain management efforts, including how they initially choose suppliers and how they manage them.”
Final word
Nien-hê commented: “A hope is that students and instructors will extend the learnings from this case to other industries and even beyond questions about supply chains to more general questions about the repsonsibilities of business. Many of the learnings from the case - the change in Nike’s response, the piloting of novel programs, and the development of internal capabilities and reporting structures - have much wider applicability and are relevant for so many of the challenges facing business today.”
Olivia concluded: “Thank you for your work promoting the case method. Cases are complex teaching tools that produce memorable learning experiences, but students are not always aware of the time and commitment it takes to create them. It is a privilege to be part of this intellectual endeavour.”