Cross Cultural Perspectives: Nike Inc.
Order Instructions:
Identify a global organization with a multinational presence.
Identify and research a cultural issue that affects this organization’s interactions outside the United States.
Define the issue and provide an overview of how became an issue in the organization.
Prepare an analysis of the ethical and social responsibility issues your organization must deal with as a result of being global.
Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper summarizing the results of the analysis. Include the following:
•Identify ethical perspectives in the global organization.
•Compare these perspectives across cultures involved in the organization.
•Describe a viable solution for this issue that could be acceptable by all stakeholders.
Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines.
SAMPLE ANSWER
Cross Cultural Perspectives: Nike Inc.
Today’s speedily developing globalized economies and contest have forced organizations to spread out their business internationally for sustenance in their respective industries, which has introduced numerous cultural barriers within nations. These cultural barriers generate ethical disquiet when the firm expands its operations outside the its mother country. This document will focus on an international firm, specifically Nike Inc., and a cultural concern that affects its interactions outside the U.S, stressing on ethical perspective.
The Nike Inc. is a renowned global business entity. From the start, the firm has turned to other nations as a means of inexpensive labor. Nike first surfaced as Blue Ribbon Sports founded by Philip Knight along with Bill Bowerman. The firm decided to shift to Asian countries, for instance, Japan, in order to save money through a reduced cost of labor and manufacturing (Azam, 1999).
As the corporation continued to enlarge its line of merchandise, it also extended its outsourcing to additional countries such as Pakistan, China, and Vietnam among others. In Pakistan, the firm faced severe allegations of poor operating conditions and the usage of infant labor. The accusations were that there existed young kids edging the soccer balls produced by the firm. Many states that soccer balls have been produced largely for years include Sialkot, Pakistan in companies such as Nike, and it has been approximated that thousands of kids have been employed for soccer balls’ stitching. Dissimilar cultures have diverse analysis on how much duties children could have. The way infancy is perceived not only diverges among countries but additionally from one civilization to another. Childhood practices do not simply diverge across nations but also inside a single culture and throughout dissimilar ethnic groups (Khan 2010). For instance, even in some poor nations, policies developed to safeguard the nations against severe poverty levels are created towards empowering kids through education. Subjecting kids into working situations deprives them of their childhood rights of education and socializing and also introduces them into slavery. Numerous cultures in the world protect the children since they are their future. I find Nike’s preference to child labor very inhumane in the eyes of every individual and global culture.
Nike, as a result going global, must obey and accomplish its cultural and ethical responsibilities in order to remain globally competitive. The company must rise beyond the allegations it has previously underwent. Nike faced a lot of ethical and social responsibility challenges in their expansion to other countries. Firstly as analyzed, the issue of child labor along with the sweat shop crisis has introduced the company into numerous legal challenges. This is an ethical issue that Nike has to obey in order to remain in the international business. Additionally, Nike has been faced with another obstacle of awarding the workers an extremely low wage forcing them to do unpaid overtime in nations like Vietnam and Indonesia through a subcontractor. Nike will have to conform with locally and internationally set wage limits for its workers, which is the price of going global and which must be accomplished. An added difficulty faced by Nike is deprived operating conditions, filthy working conditions, along with compulsory labor in many of the factories that produce their products. Nike has been accused of damaging the environment that is attained through air and water pollution, noises and adjunct in the typical weather as a result of pollution. Nike must ensure that it maintains the environmental standards of the areas they operate in, if not making them better. Production measures must be put in place to avert air pollution including other forms of damaging the environment (Burns, Spar, & Harvard Business School, 2000).
Ethical Perspectives
Duty perspective
This perspective is concerned with people’s obligations to others. Duties are usually seen as natural, collective, balanced, and self-evident. In our case duty ethics like moral law a company actions have a responsibility to observe a set of rules. According to this perspective, Nike has a duty to comply with moral guidelines and, consequently, it is frequently considered a type of basic ethics. Nike has shown absolute failure in the duty perspective, it has subjected kids to illegal labor, it has persistently paid unimaginable wages to its workers along with many other failures.
Rights Perspectives
This perspective stresses on the responsibility among self and others, grounded on the task that the collective owes the individual. Thus, the collective’s duty is owed to the person in the appearance of rights (e.g., equality). In our case the rights perspective universalizes ethics, consequently, rights should be considered inalienable. This means that Nike must respect workers’ rights in whichever country they operate. Nike has denied the right to a fair wage, the right to education for kids, and the right to join unions.
Virtue perspective
Virtue ethics symbolizes a middle ground among duty and rights. Individuals have the responsibility to self-actualize and, thus, they should be given the space to complete that self-actualization. This viewpoint suggests that every human is born with intrinsic potential and, consequently, human growth is through the effort for self-actualization. A deed is judged grounded on whether it permits for expression of complete potential, thus, generating benefits for both a person and the community. Nike has evidently failed in this particular perspective since workers are subjected to forceful labor and are not allowed to express themselves in any way. Previously, workers were disallowed to join unions; this was done to cripple their voices (DiFazio & Aronowitz, 2006). When a firm wants to strengthen steady ethical patterns of behavior, effectual communications amongst members of that firm can create the difference linking success and failure. For a firm to act ethically, it should live and respire its policy of conduct, teach its workers and communicate its policy via its visioning statements.
The corporation has to ensure that it obeys the set international and local labor guidelines to recover its tarnished image and in order to support any future expansion to other countries. Additionally, the administration of Nike should view its hiring practices to make sure that the corporation is observing the regulations on recruitment, training, fitness, protection, and welfare. The administration should also supervise that the ecological practices are observed. This is to guarantee that the company follows measures that are responsible regarding waste disposal along with pollution prevention (Businessethics, 2010).
The firm should conduct and devise a training plan for the workers. Training and development endeavors enable employees to assume extended duties and larger responsibilities. The executive must also keep in mind that training and development plans are not complete solutions to all needs of the company. Effectual job designs, selection, placement, along with other activities of the HR unit are also very central.
References
Azam, F. (1999). NIKE and Child Labor. Retrieved August 5, from http://www1.american.edu/ted/nike.htm
Burns, J. L., Spar, D. L., & Harvard Business School. (2000). Hitting the wall: Nike and international labor practices. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Pub.
Businessethics. (2010). Nike: Corporate Responsibility at a “Tipping Point” | Business Ethics. Retrieved August 5, from http://business-ethics.com/2010/01/24/2154-nike-corporate-responsibility-at-a-tipping-point/
DiFazio, W., & Aronowitz, S. (2006). Ethical Perspectives and Practices. Retrieved August 5, from http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/10924_Chapter2.pdf
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
