Cross Cultural Perspectives-Eth 316 Essay Example
Cross Cultural Perspectives
ETH-316
April 1, 2013
Cross Cultural Perspectives
A money-spinning product fed by an incongruous campaign Just Do It, Nike a global company who increased its share from $ 877 million worldwide to $ 9.2 billion within 10 years (Nike’s “Just Do It” Advertising Campaign, 2011). A brilliant profit boosting marketing campaign, in which many evoked possibilities, audacity whereas others evoked indifference for human rights standards, and the ecological system. This paper will provide an analysis of Nike’s social responsibilities, and ethical issues on global production. Concerns as child labor laws, wages violations, lack of health and safety on workplace, and ecological insolence (A Cultural Study of Nike, 2011). Additionally, this document will assess the ethical perspectives across cultures implicated by Nike global organization.
Social Responsibilities and Ethical Issues
Nike as innovating business, it grew rapidly, manufacturing cost, and resale goods became challenging, leading the organization to change the market conditions. Nike an Oregon-based company moved a large portion of the operations overseas. Nike established plants on third world country as Pakistan, South Korea, Vietnam, China, and Indonesia, providing access of a cheap labor and iniquitous labor laws. Thus Nike’s social responsibilities and ethical issues became a criticism on public eyes. Indeed Nike labor practices failed to comply with such. The press reported Nike Pakistan plant employed children as young as seven stitching soccer balls. As implied Nike waged workers in Asian countries $ 1.60 per day, less than daily necessary meals. Nike forced workers to put outrageous hours of overtime to meet quota productions. As stated Nike exposed pregnant working women to hazardous fumes. Sam Young, Vietnam a Nike plant 15 women were reportedly beaten with the Nike sole by a supervisor for poor performance (Michael Clancy, 2000). Nike ditched synthetic shoes parts
ETH-316
April 1, 2013
Cross Cultural Perspectives
A money-spinning product fed by an incongruous campaign Just Do It, Nike a global company who increased its share from $ 877 million worldwide to $ 9.2 billion within 10 years (Nike’s “Just Do It” Advertising Campaign, 2011). A brilliant profit boosting marketing campaign, in which many evoked possibilities, audacity whereas others evoked indifference for human rights standards, and the ecological system. This paper will provide an analysis of Nike’s social responsibilities, and ethical issues on global production. Concerns as child labor laws, wages violations, lack of health and safety on workplace, and ecological insolence (A Cultural Study of Nike, 2011). Additionally, this document will assess the ethical perspectives across cultures implicated by Nike global organization.
Social Responsibilities and Ethical Issues
Nike as innovating business, it grew rapidly, manufacturing cost, and resale goods became challenging, leading the organization to change the market conditions. Nike an Oregon-based company moved a large portion of the operations overseas. Nike established plants on third world country as Pakistan, South Korea, Vietnam, China, and Indonesia, providing access of a cheap labor and iniquitous labor laws. Thus Nike’s social responsibilities and ethical issues became a criticism on public eyes. Indeed Nike labor practices failed to comply with such. The press reported Nike Pakistan plant employed children as young as seven stitching soccer balls. As implied Nike waged workers in Asian countries $ 1.60 per day, less than daily necessary meals. Nike forced workers to put outrageous hours of overtime to meet quota productions. As stated Nike exposed pregnant working women to hazardous fumes. Sam Young, Vietnam a Nike plant 15 women were reportedly beaten with the Nike sole by a supervisor for poor performance (Michael Clancy, 2000). Nike ditched synthetic shoes parts