Nike Inc. is an American MNE which is involved in the design and the manufacturing of footwear, equipment, and accessories. Nike was established in 1964 and headquartered at Oregon. Nike has grown to be the world’s largest marketer of footwear and having a market share of 37% globally. It is the mission of the company to bring motivation and innovation to all the athletes worldwide. The company focuses on national differences as a basis of competitive advantage. The business of MNEs is much more complicated than the domestic business as countries differ in many ways. The countries have diverse national values, political, economic and legal systems which contribute to competitive success (Allen, Lee & Reiche, 2015). The export strategies, innovation and use of technology help the company to move forward. The national differences contribute to 4 major economic attributes, factor conditions, demand conditions, supportive industries and firm strategy. The factor conditions as per Nike are classified into two forms, home grew resources and highly specialized resources. In the homegrown resources, Nike exports sports products to the countries worldwide. In the form of highly specialized resources, Nike makes use of skilled resources and technological base in the country where it is dealing. The sufficiency of countries in factors of production leads to innovation. The demand conditions in the domestic market drive growth, innovation, and quality improvement. The domestic markets helped the company to expand. Nike has conquered the market when it comes to high-performance sector of the world’s sportswear industry (Koster, Vos & Schroeder, 2017). The third determinant is the presence of related and supporting industries. Nike enjoys cost-effective and innovative inputs due to the competitiveness of the local supporting industries. The domestic competition gives an advantage to the Nike in terms of innovation and efficiency. When the local industries are modest, the company appreciates more cost-effective and innovative efforts. The fourth determinant which is strategies and structure of the firms play an important role in influencing national performance. The competition in the local market has caused Nike to drive innovation. The government also provides a basic environment to the company for the development of the industry (Beamond, Farndale & Härtel, 2016). It provides the capital channels for the infrastructure development. The government provides opportunities to enlarge product development.
The innovations made by the company can be evaluated for it’s intensive growth strategy. The innovations are the strategic objective of Nike. The generic strategy helps the company to achieve and maintain it’s competitiveness. It focuses on the innovations to develop it’s business. Nike is one of the biggest sports players in the world. The company ensures generic strategy and intensive are in a position to focus on innovation. The generic strategies are appropriate for the diverse product line of the company ensuring competitive advantage (Tarique & Schuler, 2018). For instance, Nike innovates shoes on the basis of different classes such as athletes, runners, gymming and more. The company also keep on making changes to provide more comfort and reliability. The countries also welcome the brands leading innovative things. The generic strategy of Nike undertakes cost leadership and differentiation strategy. The cost leadership generic strategy of the company endures a competitive advantage based on the costs. The company makes efforts to minimize production costs in order to maximize it’s profits. The company can also enhance it’s sales by decreasing costs. It helped the company to gain it’s competitiveness against other sports companies such as Adidas and Puma. The differentiation generic strategy helped the company to produce unique products. For instance, Nike introduced cutting-edge designs for shoes (Tatoglu, Glaister, & Demirbag, 2016). Both cost leadership and differentiation generic strategies helped Nike to boost it’s performance in the international market. The strategic objective of the company is to form a competitive advantage through new technologies to minimize production costs. It also maximizes the profit margins of the company. The intensive strategy of Nike includes product development, diversification, market penetration, and development. Nike introduces new products in order to grow sales revenues. The company innovated new designs for shoes and the accessories. The new technologies differentiate the products and help to gain a competitive advantage. The differentiation strategy of the company is possible through innovations only. The innovations enhance the products and keep away from the competition (Strange & Kawai, 2015). The products of the company always remain attractive despite the changing preferences of the consumers.
Allen, D., Lee, Y. T., & Reiche, S. (2015). Global work in the multinational enterprise: New avenues and challenges for strategically managing human capital across borders. Journal of Management, 41(7), 2032-2035.
Tatoglu, E., Glaister, A. J., & Demirbag, M. (2016). Talent management motives and practices in an emerging market: A comparison between MNEs and local firms. Journal of World Business, 51(2), 278-293.
Strange, R., & Kawai, N. (2015). The past, present and future of the hybrid factory: Lessons from the study of the management of Japanese MNEs overseas. Asian Business & Management, 14(1), 43-51.
Tarique, I., & Schuler, R. (2018). A multi-level framework for understanding global talent management systems for high talent expatriates within and across subsidiaries of MNEs: Propositions for further research. Journal of Global Mobility, 6(1), 79-101.
Koster, M., Vos, B., & Schroeder, R. (2017). Management innovation driving sustainable supply management: Process studies in exemplar MNEs. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 20(4), 240-257.
Beamond, M. T., Farndale, E., & Härtel, C. E. (2016). MNE translation of corporate talent management strategies to subsidiaries in emerging economies. Journal of World Business, 51(4), 499-510