Introduction
Globalization is more like a thing of the past, and the world is expecting the next big thing that comes after it. The world today is linked together by the channels of transport and communication to create the global village that aids integration for both businesses and culture (Kozlak, 2008). Companies are now outsourcing products from the less developed countries in the desire to have lower expenses that ensure profit maximization is achieved. This form of outsourcing has aensuredthat millions of individuals get jobs in the less developed countries because as production increases, so does the number of factories put in place to aid it. As a result, the per capita income rates of countries in the less developed grouphaves grown substantially due to this extension in the supply chain for big companies. However, the spread of these outsourcing activities has been associated with poor working conditions, environmental pollution, and industrial accidents. Most of the export-oriented industries are the ones that mostcontribute to these societal vices because of their total focus on production more than sustainability. Laws that govern the presence of such iniquities in business are not well implemented because of substantial traces of corruption as well as greed (D'Amato et al., 2009). Since the new millennium, there has been a concern that businesses are doing more harm than good because they do not use resources to foster sustainable production whatsoever. Newsrooms have been filled with reports on firms that do not have environmentally friendly policies that seek to curb their pollution of the environment. Additionally, humans have been transformed into machines that work 24 hours a day with meagre compensations. Numerous non-governmental organizations have ensured that companies are compelled to adopt more social and environmental guidelines that require suppliers to abide by these guidelines to the core (Guay et al., 2004). Theoretically, suppliers that comply with such guidelines are awarded more business, unlike those who do not abide by the guidelines.
Increased awareness of these sustainability guidelines by the suppliers allows the whole manufacturing process in any sort of industry. Corporate social responsibility in the supply chain is an imperative aspect of any firm because the entire wave of activities is gauged on set standards. Even though the CSR initiatives are to be commended, the number of firms that ensure their supply chain fulfills the requirements is not as much as would be expected (Maloni & Brown, 2006). Conducting social audits of all the firms in the supply chain can be a daunting task for any organization, hence the need to work hand in hand with local non-governmental organizations to effect the same.
Nike is a multinational corporation that is engaged in the development, manufacturing, and marketing of footwear, apparel, accessories, and services. It is awidelye known brand in the industry of sportswear, boasting a significant market share when it comes to footwear. Globally, Nike is considered the biggest supplier of athletic shoes and apparel, which helps the company amass billions of dollars in revenue. When it comes to contracting, Nike has contracted over 700 shops all over the world that are located in 45 countries outside the United States of America. In the past, the company was faced with a series of controversies that led activist organizations to ask for details of the contracted companies, something that Nike held private (NBC, 2005). One main reason for this is the total dependence on contractors for the creation of its products to the point that Nike was more of a conglomerate than a firm. CSR is something that I will talk about in detail in the subsequent section, clearly outlining the strategies that have been employed by the company.
Nike’s Supply chain management problem when it comes to sustainability
According to Marincas (2008), supply chain management is a critical issue in the production process, ess and firms ought to employ relevant expertise and knowledge to ensure that client needs are met and at the same time efficiency is upheld. With Nike’s over 700 contractors who form part of the supply chain, the customer is the primary concern and all effort done by these different playerssubjectected to them. When something in an organization touches on the very principle of its existence, it means that it is a must-do for the firm. When customers are subjected to these final products, there is a tendency to gauge the environmentally friendly practices involved in putting the product in their hands. Nike and Adidas, for years, have fought this battle of trying to assert which firm produces the environmentally friendly products and does not affect the utility enjoyed by their customers (Kell, 2016). In this form of business brawl, the point of focus is not on the marketing of the product but instead its production. Since the same production is outsourced to contractors who are given different tasks depending on their abilities, sustainability originates from there. In a corporate sustainability report of 2011, the then CEO Mark Parker stated that sustainability would be at the nexus of transformation in business, economies, and markets. He was not wrong because presently, firms are being gauged on the level of sustainability efforts they make because they are directly linked with reputation, which is quite significant in firm valuation (Lourenc et al., 2013).
Nike has a well-known rewire approach to the supply chain, where it seeks to induce changes in the company through transitioning to a more organized structure (Porteous & Rammohan, 2013). Additionally, the approach aims to propel innovation and improve efficiency in all the channels taken to ensure that Nike products reach their customers. The rewiring strategy is one that involves the company together with its contracted suppliers, who perform critical duties in the production process. Some of the leaps that were achieved in the strategy included the complete change of the organizational structure in the firm. Through the reshuffle process, the company was able to account for sustainability in the design process as opposed to the after-the-fact.
The major challenge in Nike’s supply chain management is the lack of proper measures to gauge sustainability. In measuring the level of good reached by firms, Nike uses different tools that seek to show human resource, health and safety, environmental compliance, energy management, and lean manufacturing impacts. The present tools that are used to measure sustainability include the traditional outlook on quality, cost, and delivery. The manufacturing index is another tool that has been used in the company for years to measure the levels of sustainability in the supply chain. This specific measure monitors the quality, delivery, cost, and sustainability performance (Porteous & Rammohan, 2013, p. 2). By being an integrated focus on sustainability, the measure ensures that the efforts done by the company on accounting for responsible operations are brought together with the rest of the steps to provide a more in-depth outlook. On the sustainability measure, the manufacturing index covers environmental, lean operations, health and safety issues, and social concerns. Even though the manufacturing index is an excellent measure of sustainability, it does not achievethe desired success when total responsibility is considered.
It is essential to understand that the race to sustainability for a company like Nike involves all its contractors who form part of the firm as a whole. Therefore, for Nike to be considered as performing responsibly, all its contractors need to conform to specific standards of conduct. However, the contractors are gauged with scores that indicate whether they are performing at levels that warrant them a responsible status. Such a gauge might seem perfect because it locks out the contractors who are not willing to do business at sustainable levels. Nevertheless, these contractors might be contracted by more than one company, meaning that if Nike does not demand their services, other companies are not necessarily compelled to do the same. The situation is in a manner that Nike is not involved, yet the sustainable practices are still present in the industry. Another approach for Nike as a company in such a situation with a contractor is to have it conform to sustainable operations gradually to the point that it discards those practices that are harmful to the workforce as well as nature. So the measure for gauging the contractors does not seem correct because they are not structured inae way of enacting change but rather mimic change.
Business Information Systems
It is prudent first to understand that data is an asset to any organization without even considering the industry in which it operates. Business information systems entail the analysis and coordination of information relating to the business through the use of technology (Nowduri, 2012). From the invention of the printing press to the development of the World Wide Web, the world has evolved to become one that is dependent on knowledge, as it gives a competitive edge to businesses. There is a difference between data and information when it comes to BIS, whereby data refers to raw facts and can take the form of numbers and statements. Information, on the other hand, is data that has been processed and bears meaning. Therefore, re business systems work together to make use of data to create information for management in business as a whole (Maritz, 2003). Nike can only be in control if it is meeting its needs of the environment and the social aspect. However, such measures are only made possible if data can be transformed into information using the BIS. There are different types of business information systems, and the two common ones are Operations Information Systems (OIS) and Management Information Systems (MIS) (Karim, 2011). The OIS is mainly concerned with process control, communication, and transaction processing. MIS, on the other hand, is concerned with providing help to managerial decision-making. Since in this case, the concern is on the supply chain management and the problems of measurement when it comes to sustainability, the OIS seems more applicable. One reason for this is its point of focus, which mainly revolves around the operative context.
BIS and the supply chain in sustainability
Understanding the link between the supply chain and information systems will go a long way in understanding how the problems of gauging sustainability can be resolved. First of all, businesses need to integrate internal activities with those that occur outside. These outside activities are done by the contractors, as I had earlier pointed out. To attain productivity for Nike as a company, there needs to be an improvement in decision making in within its supply chain that seeks to move to a more sustainable approach. An example is when the company wants to create a new line of footwear from environmentally friendly products. Contractors will have the task of ensuring that the elements required to produce the shoe are used totally. As a result, the final products that are taken to the customer are of high quality and apart from being eco-friendly. All these interactions are only found within the supply chain, in meaning that it serves as the ground where everything originates.
Information access in the supply chain goes two ways, whereby contracted parties can share visions of Nike as a company and vice versa. When the supply chain is transparent, the firms' foundational aspects that ensure mutual sustainability (Karkkainen et al., 2007). This form of sustainability is the one I had earlier pointed out as the ideal one that seeks to aid companies in becoming more socially responsible as opposed to marking them out from some draw.
There are different types of resources in play when external integration is concerned, such as electronic data integration that ensures suppliers are linked with the customers,s which provides information on the customer demand forecasts and reviews (Bhatt, 2001). These vast quantities of information ought to be handled using intelligent technologies like data warehouses. Nike is dependent on the supply chain because without it, no products would ever be available to the customers, and as a result, it can be able to engage in more advanced information ssystemssuch as cloud management, to streamline its operations.
Nike has had numerous scandals with the contractors, the most notable one being on the sweatshops, where it was criticized for contracting factories in China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Mexico. In these contracted facilities, the workers were subjected to poor working conditions because the company sought to exploit the fact that cheap labor was readily available (Harrison & Scorse, 2004). What resulted is that the reputation of the company was tainted, something that would be averted if smart information systems were in place. These systems record all the operations in the contracted families without looking at some aspects of sustainability and compare themton present benchmarks to review the areas where these factories are lacking. An additional point of this information system is the fact that they provide financial estimates that try to show the levels of investment required to turn the tables around. An example scenario is when a Nike supplier is faced with problems in procuring materials to create a particular Nike product, then Nike gets to know about this issue first. Apart from having access to raw information, Nike is also given a financial prescription that seeks to show the amount of money it can invest to ensure that the specific supplier takes sustainability measures. One other notable concept is the fact that the information system in place provides the information as it is without having to coat it because sometimes suppliers craft figures that lure firms such as Nike into their sustainability causes that are false. So integrity in actions is ensured using information systems because they are set on certain predefined objectives (Rogerson et al., 2017). Integrated information systems need to be connected with applications that ensure total management of the supply chain partners and provision of necessary information on the receipt and manufacturing of the products.
Conclusion
Nike is a well-known brand all over the world, meaning that its operations are under high scrutiny in the international sustainability focus. As a company that has been lauded for sits ustainability efforts in the 21st century, Nike still has a long way to go when it comes to the efforts made by its supply chain partners. It has been reported that the company discards different contractors from its structure because they scored low in the manufacturing index, which shows the level of sustainability effort done (NIKE, 2016). With such an approach, it might seem as if the company has reached the pinnacle of responsibility, but with a slight twist to the argument, it becomes the complete opposite. It is viewed as a company that does not really care about sustainability in its raw form, but instead, efforts that seek to better the image of the firm. When contractors are discarded, they are not taken out of business,s meaning that the practices they are used to having have not stopped, ed making it even more dangerous because no level of innovation has been observed. The best approach to such problems is to employ information systems that help to bettmonitor of sustainability efforts as well as provide frameworks that allow for financial modeling in the desire to achieve utmost sustainability in the supply chain. So that is where these business information systems come into play: analyzing, crafting, modeling, and suggesting plans of approach.
References
Bhatt, G. D., 2001. Business process improvement through electronic data interchange(EDI)systems: an empirical study. Supply chain management: An 566International Journal, 6(2), pp. 60-74.
D'Amato, A., Henderson, S., & Florence, S., 2009. Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Business Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Guay, T., Doh, J. P. & Sinclair, G., 2004. Non-governmental organizations, shareholder activism, and socially responsible investment: Ethical, strategic,gic and governance implications. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), pp. 125-139.
Harrison, A. & Scorse, J., 2004. The Nike effect: Anti-sweatshop activists and Labor market outcomes in Indonesia. Yale Economics Review, pp. 1-48.
Karim, A. J., 2011. The significance of management information systems for enhancing strategic and tactical management. Information systems of technology and management, 8(2).
Karkkainen, M., Laukkanen, S., Sarpola, S. & Kemppainen, K., 2007. Roles of interfirm information systems in supply chain management. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37(4), pp. 264-286.
Kell, J., 2016. Here's how Adidas plans to drastically cut down on waste.
Kozlak, A., 2008. Transport as a factor and subject of globalization. Zilinska University Journal, pp. 1-7.
Lourenco, I. C., Callen, J. L., Branco, M. C. & Curto, J. D., 2013. The value relevance of reputation for Sustainability leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(1), pp. 3-14.
Maloni, M. J. & Brown, M. E., 2006. Corporate Social Responsibility in the Supply Chain: An application in the food industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(1), pp. 35-52.
Marincas, D. A., 2008. Information System for the supply chain management. The logistics of merchandise, pp. 236-254.
Maritz, S. G., 2003. Data Management: Managing data as an organizational resource. Acta Commercial, 3(1), pp. 75-85.
NBC, 2005. Nike reveals overseas factory names, locations.
NIKE, 2016. Sustainability report 201 Beaverton Ave, Tonn: Oregon: Nike.
Nowduri, S., 2012. Management Information systems and business decision making: Review, analysis, and recommendation. Journal of Management and Marketing Research, pp. 1-8.
Porteous, A. & Rammohan, S., 2013. Integration, incentives, and Innovation Nike's strategy to improve social and environmental conditions in its global supply chain. Standford initiative for the study of supply chain responsibility, pp. 1-7.
Rogerson, S., Miller, K. W., Winter, J., S . & Larson, D., 2017. Information systems ethics-challenges anOpportunitieses. Journal of Information Communication and Ethics in Society, 41(7).
