Essay On Nike And Social Responsibility

Within the past few decades, there has a growing focus by firms on examining their social responsibilities. But what the term “social responsibility” means is the subject of wide debate. What are they responsible for, to whom are they being held accountable, and who is calling for them to be responsible? Discussion in various academic studies and literature has centered on the call for companies to carry out actions that might be regarded as socially responsible, all of which have attempted to set some sort of a definition and boundaries to the extent of corporate social responsibility. Because of the nature of business and society, they have become interwoven entities, and with this comes the call for business to make a positive impact on

Nike’s suppliers were caught in the act of questionable labor practices abroad, and Nike as a whole was met with large public outcry domestically. Social activists challenged and scrutinized Nike’s practices across the board, taking a closer look at all aspects of their supply chain (Zadek, 2004). This caused them to make major structural changes within their company and to permanently rethink the way that they approach corporate social responsibility. Following the law was no longer enough—in order to maintain their hold on the market they had to go above and beyond the law, following and anticipating public opinion on social issues (Zadek, 2004). According to meaning of corporate social responsibility Nike’s obligation is to work towards the benefit of all stakeholders of their company. This means that while it should be looking to maximize profits to benefit investors and senior leadership, it also must be aware of the entire supply chain, ensuring that labor policies are being followed and lowest-level workers are not being abused, so that they act as an integral part of investing in the growth and development of the community that its products are sourced

Unions that have been able to amalgamate a vast amount of power have the ability to raise employee issues into focus and force firms to respond. Reputation can certainly drive a consumer based firm to respond to a claim that has amassed some sort of urgency with the public. Environmental issues that were previously without legitimacy (ie: strong scientific backing) can gain attention quickly when research by NGO’s begin to show that a business practice is contributing to a negative effect. By looking at CSR as something that contributes to sustainable growth and economic development, firms have the ability to look deeply at the issues that are being presented with legitimacy, urgency and power in order to order to establish which norms they need to continue practicing or implement, so that they can remain in high esteem and