“As a company thrives in its home country it is only normal to think about either reaching to outside boundaries or outsourcing. It has become a norm in today’s business that once they have reached a certain success that they must try elsewhere. This does come with many different issues such as a financial risk, different culture issues, and taking jobs away from our country. Controversy will arise either way it is looked at so it makes it almost unfair” Nike, Inc. is highly recognized name and logo not only in the U.S, but also around the entire world. This is because Nike is an American multinational corporation that is highly engaged in the design, development, and manufacturing. They are also responsible for being the world's largest suppliers of athletic shoes and apparel and a major manufacturer of sports equipment because of the proper worldwide marketing and selling of footwear, apparel, equipment, accessories and services. The company was founded on January 25, 1964, as Blue Ribbon Sports, by Bill Bowerman and Phil Knight and officially became Nike, Inc. on May 30, 1971. The company takes its name from Nike the Greek goddess of victory. Now that we have a brief history lesson of Nike let’s get into some of the culture issues they have faced and face since they have globalized. When a contract factory wishes to do business with Nike or one its many subsidiaries, it is critical that the owners and/or managers in the supply chain understand the cultural differences across the globe. Failure to understand the cultural norms can result in communication failure, lack of respect, negotiation breakdowns, and a loss of current and future business opportunities. On the contrary, it is critical for Nike managers to understand the culture differences of their international supply chain as well. Failure to grasp the customs of the different supplier communities can result in steep business losses, which hurt every part of the supply chain. For instance, under is a general analysis of Asia’s common cultural dimensions one can expect to encounter when doing business with them and can be different for any other country.
• Time Sensitivity: Nations located in Asia and the Pacific Rim tend to have longer, more drawn-out negotiations due to the high value placed upon long-term relationships and the amount of time it takes to create them.
• Space Orientation: As a result of the abundance of people in such small spaces, personal space in Asia and Pacific Rim cultures is closer than in North America. Managers engaged in negotiations should expect brief handshakes or bows with minimal physical touching. Eye contact is brief and physical gestures are reserved as signs of respect.

• Power Distance: Most Asian nations have a high power distance, meaning that authority is respected. These nations accept the fact that inequality in power is considered the norm.

• Uncertainty Avoidance: Avoiding uncertainty is paramount to most of the Asian cultures, as respecting authority and saving face are critical facets to business processes.

• Individualism-Collectivism: Asia and Pacific Rim cultures emphasize collectivism, choosing to focus on group needs in lieu of those of the individual. As a result, the negotiation process can be slower since decisions are made by the entire group instead of one key player.

• Masculinity-Femininity: The male gender is typically favored over the female, and heavy emphasis is placed on education and career-goals as a way to bring honor to the family.
(NikeSupplyChain)
Nike's explosive increase did not come without any consequence though; as it has been singled out as one of those global companies targeted by a broad range of campaigning NGOs and journalists as a symbolic representation of the business in society. Since faced with the increased labor and manufacturing costs in the 90s, Nike began to outsource its supply chain operations to contract-factories operating in different countries such as Bangladesh, Taiwan, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Moldova, Argentina, Nicaragua, Mexico, Sri Lanka, Turkey, China, India, and many more. Many of these contract-factories were accused of second-rate working conditions and wages, but had little to no leverage until recent public protest uncovered what many believe where unfair labor practices. As a result, Nike was admonished by many human labor watchdog groups, sued in Kasky v. Nike, INC., and boycotted by many university students and faculty. (NikeSupplyChain)
Nike was extremely criticized for treating workers poorly in Asia, but they were also attacked for taking jobs away from the United States. This attack was a damage to the reputation but the Nike’s reps responded with. "Knight . . . and other Nike officials argued that most of the 6,200 American employees of the company have the kinds of white-collar marketing, design, computer, and other jobs that are valued and desired in an advanced economy." (Just Do It, pg. 167) The Nike officials were right that most the jobs the workers in China and Vietnam were filling would not suffice for the more skilled American counterparts. A highly advanced economy such as the United States would want more skilled labor, but that was a forgotten point during a lull in the economy at the start of the 1990s. The stage had now been set for what was rapidly becoming a business war of profit and welfare. (NikeSupplychain)
Nike has managed to turn its image around in a short time. Although they have yet been completely successful in bringing factories into line, but there's no denying that the company has executed one of the greatest image turnarounds in recent decades. It all started with these small actions after facing public unveiling of their unethical practices.
• 1999: Nike begins creating the Fair Labor Association, a non-profit group that combines companies, and human rights and labor representatives to establish independent monitoring and a code of conduct, including a minimum age and a 60-hour work week, and pushes other brands to join.
• 2002-2004: The Company performs some 600 factory audits between 2002 and 2004,
• other companies who outsource could stand to learn a few things from Nike's turnaround including repeat visits to problematic factories.
• 2004: Human rights activists acknowledge that increased monitoring efforts at least deal with some of the worst problems, like locked factory doors and unsafe chemicals, but issues still remain.
• 2005: Nike becomes the first in its industry to publish a complete list of the factories it contracts with.
• 2005: Nike publishes a detailed 108-page report revealing conditions and pay in its factories and acknowledging widespread issues, particularly in its south Asian factories.
• 2005-Present: The company continues to post its commitments, standards, and audit data as part of its corporate social responsibility reports
(hownikesolveditsSweatshops)
Nike wasn't the only or even the worst company to use sweatshops to their advantage, but it was the poster child for everyone to see. Transparency to the public doesn't always come with a complete change because ongoing reports of abuses and still-low wages continue, but by becoming a leader instead of denying every allegation, Nike has managed to put the most difficult chapter of its history behind it and move forward in continuing to be the world's largest suppliers of athletic shoes and apparel and a major manufacturer of sports equipment.

(Reference) http://nikesupplychainmbaproject.weebly.com/introduction.html http://nikesupplychainmbaproject.weebly.com/nike-inc-cross-cultural-challenges.html http://www.businessinsider.com/how-nike-solved-its-sweatshop-problem-2013-5#ixzz3AohcNIOl