Portland Hobby Jogger wrote:
Nike is paying the price for allowing a culture of frat boy / jock bro behavior to run rampant for 40+ years. I could tell you stories about workplace behavior at the Swoosh that would make you blush.
They are a huge publicly traded corporation and it is time to clean house. The world has changed. Civil rights are to be taken seriously and its better to right the ship before massive amounts of litigation force you too. Long term, this will be good for the company. It will attract more diverse leadership and be open to more ideas and creative thinking. People will be hired for their business acumen, not because they merely played ball at a certain college or are simply the spawn of a Nike executive, major shareholder, politician, or celebrity. Better business decisions will be made using market data rather than someone's man crush on a particular athlete. Business units will be led by people that better resemble their consumer base, not just an army of generic middle aged male hipsters.
Women and minority employees will get a fairer shake. There are some hugely talented folks that are kept down because they don't have the right look, pedigree, or party with the cool crowd. Worse, you shouldn't have your career stymied because you will not compromise your personal integrity or refuse to cross moral boundaries. Yes, this happens at most big companies but, Nike acts more like a college (gyms, clubs, intramural sports, on-site bars, organized off campus activities, etc.) than your typical corporate cubicle farm and offers more opportunities for such hijinks. I've heard a lot of married men laughingly chat about the "500 Mile Rule" on business and event travel. Know someone at Nike? Ask them about EKIN parties.
Change is needed. Change will be good.
So now it's time to take civil rights seriously. Are you saying we should pass a law or something? Kind of like the laws that were passed 50 years ago?
And you imply it's good that Nike has to change a business model that has worked really well for them, in order to avoid litigations. How exactly is that an improvement?
You say the diverse leadership will be good because of more creative thinking. Are people of color naturally more inclined to creative thought? Are you implying there's an inherent difference between races? Does your employer know you're racist?
As for the rest of your post, you seem to accuse Nike of being a culture where you have to sleep your way to the top. So where all the white male execs blowing each other to get the job? I'm confused.
Nike very well may have incidents of sexual harassment. The victims can follow appropriate legal means of remuneration.
Lastly, blind resume's sound like a good way of being a meritocracy. But how would a company do blind resumes AND actively promote more women and POC at the same time? Seems like a contradiction. But like I said in the other post, I didn't read the full article...pay wall.