Outline
This paper discusses the emerging opportunities with respect to Nike’s ethical behaviors in relationship with Straw men, justice theory, righteous moralism, Utilitarian, rights theory and cultural relativism. It also contains personal views on how one can benefit business-wise with the emerging opportunities with regard to the above.
Introduction
Ethical behavior can be defined with virtues such as honesty, fairness, interpersonal skills, professional, academic relationships and research; it also respects the rights of individuals and groups of people (Maidment, 2001). For any business to achieve its set goals and objectives effectively, it must put into practice ethical behaviors starting from the top management down to the employees. That means ethical behaviors among the top management, middle-level management, lower-level management, among employees, and between the management and the employees.
Righteous moralist
Nike is one of the leading sport products industries in the world which has excelled with a strong base of ethical behaviors, especially in enhancing the rights of the workers. Despite the continuous criticism of Nike’s business whereby its products were accused of being made in sweatshops with many of workers being underage children and receiving wages that are below the usual standards, as well its wealth is said to be gained out of the world’s poor backs. Nike is also seen as a symbol of evil whereby its rich industry uses the poor to design expensive products to be marketed to developed nations. Due to these repeated criticisms, the human rights organization meant to promote the environment, political and social justice have been targeting Nike.
It was also reported that workers with physical sensitivity were not transferred to chemical-free areas; others were exposed to chemicals that were beyond the set standards making a large part of the employees suffer from respiratory problems. Nike and its contractors had to revise the company’s policies after realizing that even though they were not breaking any laws their policies were seen as unethical. Nike’s new code of conduct stated that all the employees to be above 18 years, and no employee was to be exposed to toxic chemicals which are over the standards of the occupational safety and health administration for workers in the United States. This led to Nike’s conclusion that one has to go further than the law requirements so as to behave ethically. Many argued that it was very unethical for Nike to subcontract its work to factories with very poor working environments but all in all Nike had broken no rules.
Nike managers thought that it was the duty of the subcontractors to adhere to the local rules, and they naively believed that those local rules will as well favor the employees. Nike subcontracted work to factories in the developing nations whereby, in reality, the legalities in the developing nations are weak and mostly incomplete as compared to that of developed nations. Nike’s ethical behavior made it choose contractors from developing nations so as to help them to develop economically, and going to an extent of hiring independent auditors to ensure subcontractors followed the new set rules. Further, the ethical behaviors were to rebuild the tarnished reputation of the company which is a very costly intangible asset.
Rights theory
According to Dowling (2009), Nike ensures labor rights in all its firms, whereby, the workers have the right to form or join trade unions without withholding any influence from the employer or the ruling government. Its workers are always at liberty to negotiate all matters relating to their roles with their employers freely. Moreover, its workers are secured from prison labor and slavery, are not forced to work under duress, and there is the implementation of the right working condition for the children in its firms. With this kind of labor rights, Nike’s industry is in a position to maximize the emerging opportunities of the best human labor in the workforce.
Theory of justice
For an individual or an organization to excel and benefit from the current emerging opportunities, it’s wise and necessary to practice justice in every undertaking and to every individual. For instance, Nike’s behavior of justice has done him good since the beginning up to the current situations. According to Malachowski (2001), the employees in Nike industries are seen to receive the duties and responsibilities according to their abilities and are being rewarded depending on the quantity and quality of their performances. The behavior of making the life of those who are disadvantaged better than concentrating on those who are already well off is also observed. More so, there are standardized rules and regulations which guide every employee despite their levels, races, gender, powers, religion among others, and set penalties that are exercised to each individual.
Utilitarianism
Nike industry is one of the leading industries in the world which are utilizing the emerging opportunities of specializing in profit maximization and minimization of expenses. Friedman believes that there is only one social responsibility of a business which is utilizing its resources to increase its profit and getting engaged in other relevant activities as long as it sticks to the rules governing it. This industry has fought a battle of extending its hand to the activities in the surrounding communities and as well as managed to emerge with excellent profits. Utilitarianism states that the final result of any action is the major determinant of its ethical worthiness. The excellent growth, increased profits, widespread and reputation of Nike industry is as a result of Nike’s ethical behavior which shows that for any business to excel, a wide range of ethical behaviors should be invested and put into practice in the day to day running of the business, so as to be in a position to welcome all the upcoming opportunities to success (Wall and Rees, 2004).
Cultural relativism
According to Griffin & Pustay (2009), for any focused business to excel, the issue of cultural relativism is also considered as a determinant such that one has to respect and adhere to different cultures. This comes as a result of the expansion of the business into different countries and regions whereby, people practice various cultural activities. For instance, Nike industries are extended into different nations which add up to 140 despite their culture such as, Canada, Australia, France, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, New Zealand, and Italy among other countries. Most of Nike’s sports products which are meant to be distributed to different nations are made in such a way that they match the targeted customers’ tastes and preferences, bringing the issue of cultural relativism into practice. In the modern world, cultural relativism has become so popular and sensitive as there are no standards of morality, and whatever is considered good in one community may be termed as bad in another community (Rawls, 2005). Thus, no one has the authority to judge another community’s customs. For whatever good or bad, it’s a choice of an individual or society. Most of the issues involved in international business arise due to differences in politics, cultural practices, and legal systems but the rights and wrongs of the business are well governed by business ethics (Maidment, 2001).
Reference
Dowling, P. (2009). International Business. McGraw – Hill.
Griffin, R.W. & Pustay, M.W. (2009). International Business. Prentice Hall.
Maidment, F. (2001). International Business. McGraw – Hill Education.
Malachowski, A. (2001). Business Ethics. Taylor & Francis.
Ethics in International Business. 2009. Web.
Rawls, J. (2005). A Theory of Justice. McGraw – Hill.
Wall, S. & Rees, B. (2004). International Business. Prentice Hall.