Nike and its Approach to Corporate Responsibility Essay

Nike and its Approach to Corporate Responsibility - Essay Example Nevertheless, large and multinational enterprises face major distrust by the broad public perhaps due to that the expectations of society regarding business has tremendously changed in recent years. The business of business shouldn’t be just ‘business’, but it has to extend its contribution to social justice, community welfare, economic development and quality of social life as well. This piece of paper discusses the corporate social responsibility of Nike and provides an in-depth analysis of Nike’s social responsibility initiatives in recent years by using strategic analysis tools. 1.1- Nike’s Corporate Social Responsibility Nike Inc, world’s number-one shoe and apparel company, designs and develops athletic footwear, apparel, equipments and accessories to market them worldwide. It sells its athletics products to its customers through its own retails stores and internet apart from independent distributors and retailers (Reuters.com, 2013). Ni ke Inc. headquartered in Beaverton, USA, has been ranked #126 by Fortune 500 Companies (Hoovers.com, 2013). Amid some issues related to employees poor working conditions in Nike’s manufacturing centers including Indonesia and that media as well as NGOs have recently given greater importance about Nike’s issues of responsibility towards its stakeholders, the company took a very positive strategic way to its corporate social responsibility. It explored new sustainable business model to prepare the company a different operating environment. In recent years, Nike has changed the way it operated and it developed focus for its social responsibility on improving employees’ working conditions in its contracted factories aiming for carbon neutrality with a view to maintain sustainable business by making sports available to youngsters across the world (mallenbaker.net, 2013). 1.2- Corporate Social Responsibility The significance of CSR has been continuously increasing in the business contexts for the last few years and this can be very evident from the fact that more than 90 percent of the Fortune-500 companies do have explicit social responsibility initiatives (Bueble, 2009, p. 1). As this term is discerned from Corporate, Social and Responsibility, it is very clear that it refers to the responsibilities that are inherent in the relationship between corporate and the society (Werther and Chandler, 2006, p. 6). Kotler and Lee (2005, p. 3) elucidate the concept of CSR that it is a commitment of an enterprise to improve community well-being through discretionary management activities. The social responsibility of an enterprise involves society’s economic, legal, ethical and other discretionary expectations from that enterprise (Sims, 2003, p. 43). The basic four elements of CSR are economical, legal, ethical and discretionary responsibilities a business is expected to fulfill (Pearson and Robinson, 2004, p. 50). Hence, it is expected that a bus iness need to protect human rights (Banerjee, 2009, p. 94), sustain natural environment (Banerjee, 2009,

Housing and Urban Regeneration Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Housing and Urban Regeneration - Essay Example Housing reforms were also constant in the market as there was little dissemination of information to the public as Isobel Anderson ( 2010, p9) insinuates. In this paper, the main focus is on housing inequality in relation to the black minority ethnic group and other related groups which Harrison Malcom( 2003, 128) largely explains. This has been largely contributed by factors such as socio-economic and institution groups that are in control in the market platform. Currently market dynamics have emerged providing diverse range of housing that has increased the consumption levels. In contrast there were few choices in the previous past which limited the people from accessing housing. Huang and Clark (2002, p322) state that some housing units in countries such as China were set aside as welfare benefit especially on basis of non-monetary factors such as job rank, job seniority, marital status and household size. However, this situation is changing as privatization is taking ground in th e market corridors. Public housing was previously meant for institution groups such as the political status and those working in government agencies. Individuals working in these sectors had an advantage over the migrants and farmers. They were allocated public houses that were subsidized. It did not matter if they received low incomes. On the other hand the governmental heads and the political elite accessed considerably large housing with the best facilities. This pattern is however changing as market forces are gradually gaining ground. Even though this scenario is taking effect the black minority ethnic groups and asylum seekers cannot still afford better housing (Finney & Peach, 2004, p302). Public housing was privatized through selling at subsidized prices. Privatization also led to new private housing where real estate developers were constructing a wide range of housing to create diverse preferences. Households living in public houses had an advantage over the migrants and f armers as they were able to purchase public houses sold off. They were able to obtain home ownership while the minority such as single women with children could only afford rental housing ( Harrison, 2004, p128). Those working in government and organization agencies earned low income and had retired; they were able to purchase good and large housing. This was made possible by the housing policy reforms that were in place. On the contrary the minority could only enjoy poor housing as they were excluded from accessing these benefits. Therefore they were still constrained to small and poor housing. The political status had considerably great advantages as they used their position to gain control by purchasing public housing and investing heavily in construction of rental housing. The educated and those who had occupations had access to good housing and better standards of living individuals. Housing inequality increased continually due to income inequality. Individuals at top levels su ch as managers and heads of governments enjoyed the top cream. They had huge incomes as compared to those at low levels. This gave them great access to a wide range of varied housing. They had an upper-hand as they could invest in rental housing and developing of real estates. Therefore, they continued to get richer as those at lower levels were subject to rental housing. This was