Nike executives have been frequent targets at public events, especially at universities where students have pressed administrators and athletic directors to ban products that have been made under...

Nike executives have been frequent targets at public events, especially at universities where students have pressed administrators and athletic directors to ban products that have been made under “sweatshop” conditions. Indeed, at the University of Oregon, a major gift from Phil Knight, Nike’s CEO, was held up in part because of student criticism and activism against Nike on campus.1 In 2003 the company employed 86 compliance officers (up from just three in 1996) to monitor its plant operations and working conditions and ensure compliance with its published corporate code of conduct. Even so, the stigma of past practices—whether perceived or real—remains emblazoned on its image and brand name. Nike found itself constantly defending its activities, striving to shake this reputation and perception.