Week 10 Activity From YouTube

Week 10e Activityhttpswwwyoutubecomwatchvjhkp7bch2bafrom The

Week 10 e-Activity: From the e-Activity, evaluate the success of Nike’s global network structure in terms of centralization of authority and horizontal differentiation. Next, analyze the fundamental manner in which the company’s outsourcing strategy facilitates both resource sharing and the leveraging of its competencies around the world. Provide a rationale to support your response. From the e-Activity, evaluate the appropriateness of the type or types of basic strategies that Nike implements in order to expand globally. Next, analyze the most important manner in which Nike’s organizational structure, control systems, and culture influence its international strategy. Provide a rationale to support your response.

Paper For Above instruction

Nike is a prominent example of a multinational corporation that has successfully established a dominant presence in the global sportswear and apparel industry. Its expansive operational framework relies heavily on a well-structured global network, strategic outsourcing, and a cohesive organizational culture that aligns with its international ambitions. Analyzing Nike’s global network structure, outsourcing strategies, and organizational tactics provides insight into how these elements collaboratively facilitate its worldwide success.

Firstly, Nike’s global network structure demonstrates a strategic balance between centralization and differentiation across its international operations. The company's authority structure exhibits a degree of centralized control, especially in brand management, product development, and marketing strategies. This centralization ensures brand consistency and strategic alignment across all markets, which is crucial for maintaining Nike’s global brand identity. However, Nike also employs a horizontal differentiation approach, empowering regional offices to adapt marketing campaigns, product lines, and distribution methods to local preferences and cultural nuances. This decentralized aspect enables Nike to respond swiftly to local market demands and foster consumer loyalty. The success of this network structure lies in its ability to maintain brand integrity while allowing flexibility, creating a dynamic synergy between centralized authority and decentralized market responsiveness.

Secondly, Nike’s outsourcing strategy fundamentally facilitates resource sharing and the leveraging of competencies worldwide. The company predominantly relies on contract manufacturing, outsourcing production to suppliers primarily in Asia, including China, Vietnam, and Indonesia. This approach reduces costs significantly while affording Nike the flexibility to scale production in response to global demand fluctuations. Outsourcing also enables Nike to tap into specialized manufacturing expertise present in different regions, enhancing product quality and innovation. Moreover, Nike’s outsourcing allows for the global sharing of resources by establishing global supply chain networks, which enhances operational efficiency and reduces lead times. The rationale behind this strategy is rooted in leveraging comparative advantage; by focusing on design, marketing, and distribution, Nike can optimize its core competencies and delegate production to regions with cost advantages and specialized skills.

Thirdly, Nike employs a combination of global and transnational strategies to expand its presence internationally. Its core approach revolves around a globalization strategy, standardizing branding and product lines to create a unified global image. Simultaneously, Nike adopts localization tactics, customizing products and marketing campaigns to suit regional tastes and preferences. This dual strategy allows Nike to capitalize on economies of scale while appealing to local consumer bases. The appropriateness of this approach is evident in its successful market penetration and brand recognition worldwide, offering a competitive edge over rivals that either over-standardize or over-localize.

Furthermore, Nike’s organizational structure, control systems, and corporate culture significantly influence its international strategy. The company’s matrix organizational structure combines geographic and functional divisions, fostering collaboration across markets while maintaining clear accountability. This structure supports knowledge sharing and innovation, vital for staying competitive globally. Nike’s control systems, including performance metrics, quality controls, and supply chain management practices, ensure consistency across geographies and uphold the company’s standards. Additionally, Nike’s organizational culture emphasizes innovation, athletic excellence, and consumer engagement, which permeate its global operations. This culture supports a global strategic outlook but is adaptable enough to incorporate local insights, ensuring relevance and resonance in diverse markets.

In conclusion, Nike’s success in the global arena is largely attributable to its well-designed network structure, strategic outsourcing, and organizational culture aligned with its international ambitions. Its balance of centralization and decentralization allows flexibility and control, while its outsourcing strategies optimize resource utilization and core competencies. The integration of global and local strategies, supported by a robust organizational framework, positions Nike as a leading player in the competitive global sportswear market.

References

• Ghemawat, P. (2007). Redefining Global Strategy: Crossing Borders in a Boundaryless World. Harvard Business School Publishing.
• Hill, C. W. L., & Hult, G. T. M. (2019). International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Kozlowski, L. (2019). Managing global supply chains: Corporate strategies at Nike. Supply Chain Management Review, 23(4), 18-25.
• Kotabe, M., & Helsen, K. (2018). Global Marketing Management. John Wiley & Sons.
• Ghemawat, P. (2010). Strategy and the Business Landscape. Pearson.
• Porter, M. E. (1986). Competition in Global Industries. Harvard Business Review, 64(2), 47–60.
• Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2008). Global corporate strategy and trade: Economies of scope and the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(3), 431-448.
• Yip, G. S. (2003). Total global strategy. Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
• Vernon, R. (1966). International investment and international trade in the product cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(2), 190-207.
• Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.