Search

Two members of Nike's executive team must decide what sustainability targets to propose to Nike's CEO and to the corporate responsibility committee of Nike's board of directors. Set in 2012, the case traces the evolution of Nike's approach to environmental and social concerns from its origins in student protests against labor conditions in the supply chain in the 1990s through the development of a board-level corporate responsibility (CR) committee in 2001 to the creation of the Sustainable Business & Innovation (SB&I) strategy in 2009. In this context, Hannah Jones, Nike's VP of SB&I, and Eric Sprunk, VP of Merchandising & Product, are working to finalize the company's next round of sustainability targets for presentation to the CR committee. When Nike signs on to the Roadmap to Zero, a Greenpeace-inspired initiative to eliminate the discharge of toxic chemicals into the water supply by 2020, the company's target-setting process becomes more complex. Jones and Sprunk must decide whether to recommend that Nike dial back other sustainability goals to meet the zero toxics challenge, modify its commitment to zero toxics, or find another solution.

Two members of Nike's executive team must decide what sustainability targets to propose to Nike's CEO and to the corporate responsibility committee of Nike's board of directors. Set in 2012, the case traces the evolution of Nike's approach to environmental and social concerns from its origins in student protests against labor conditions in the supply chain in the 1990s through the development of a board-level corporate responsibility (CR) committee in 2001 to the creation of the Sustainable Business & Innovation (SB&I) strategy in 2009. In this context, Hannah Jones, Nike's VP of SB&I, and Eric Sprunk, VP of Merchandising & Product, are working to finalize the company's next round of sustainability targets for presentation to the CR committee. When Nike signs on to the Roadmap to Zero, a Greenpeace-inspired initiative to eliminate the discharge of toxic chemicals into the water supply by 2020, the company's target-setting process becomes more complex. Jones and Sprunk must decide whether to recommend that Nike dial back other sustainability goals to meet the zero toxics challenge, modify its commitment to zero toxics, or find another solution.

Two members of Nike's executive team must decide what sustainability targets to propose to Nike's CEO and to the corporate responsibility committee of Nike's board of directors. Set in 2012, the case traces the evolution of Nike's approach to environmental and social concerns from its origins in student protests against labor conditions in the supply chain in the 1990s through the development of a board-level corporate responsibility (CR) committee in 2001 to the creation of the Sustainable Business & Innovation (SB&I) strategy in 2009. In this context, Hannah Jones, Nike's VP of SB&I, and Eric Sprunk, VP of Merchandising & Product, are working to finalize the company's next round of sustainability targets for presentation to the CR committee. When Nike signs on to the Roadmap to Zero, a Greenpeace-inspired initiative to eliminate the discharge of toxic chemicals into the water supply by 2020, the company's target-setting process becomes more complex. Jones and Sprunk must decide whether to recommend that Nike dial back other sustainability goals to meet the zero toxics challenge, modify its commitment to zero toxics, or find another solution.

Two members of Nike's executive team must decide what sustainability targets to propose to Nike's CEO and to the corporate responsibility committee of Nike's board of directors. Set in 2012, the case traces the evolution of Nike's approach to environmental and social concerns from its origins in student protests against labor conditions in the supply chain in the 1990s through the development of a board-level corporate responsibility (CR) committee in 2001 to the creation of the Sustainable Business & Innovation (SB&I) strategy in 2009. In this context, Hannah Jones, Nike's VP of SB&I, and Eric Sprunk, VP of Merchandising & Product, are working to finalize the company's next round of sustainability targets for presentation to the CR committee. When Nike signs on to the Roadmap to Zero, a Greenpeace-inspired initiative to eliminate the discharge of toxic chemicals into the water supply by 2020, the company's target-setting process becomes more complex. Jones and Sprunk must decide whether to recommend that Nike dial back other sustainability goals to meet the zero toxics challenge, modify its commitment to zero toxics, or find another solution.

Describes the basic elements of a typical corporate compliance or ethics program, focusing on the components of an'effective'program set forth in the U.S. Organizational Sentencing Guidelines as revised in 2010. Outlines key issues in program design and implementation and provides an overview of relevant research.

Richard Wingfield considers whether to continue a cooperative agreement with industry peers in the deep-sea parcel tanker shipping industry. What are the economic and strategic implications of ending the agreement? What are the legal implications of continuing? Where is the line between cooperation and conspiracy, and what should a company do if the legality of a long-standing business practice comes into question?

When do antitrust laws come into play in a bidding situation? What should a company do if an antitrust violation is uncovered? This memo discusses'hard-core'antitrust violations, focusing on bid rigging and market allocation, under the laws of the U.S. and other leading antitrust regimes.

On the eve of trial, and after nearly 14 years of pre-trial litigation, the parties in Wiwa v. Royal Dutch/Shell jointly announced that the four U.S. lawsuits stemming from the execution of the Ogoni Nine in 1995 had been settled.

This note addresses some of the most frequently asked questions about the relation between human rights and business. Topics include the definition of human rights, the business leader's role regarding human rights, and legal liability of companies and executives for violating human rights.

Many of us will at some point in our professional lives encounter situations involving what we believe to be wrongful or injurious activities that may cause harm to innocent parties, our company, or the public. It may be necessary to bring the matter to the attention of someone who can do something about it--to engage in what is sometimes called'whistleblowing.'This note outlines some factors that should be considered when that happens.

This note provides an introduction to the law of sexual harassment. It has three parts. Part One describes the laws on harassment in the United States. Part Two explores controversial and emerging aspects of the American legal framework. Part Three gives a brief overview of sexual harassment laws and policies in several regions of the world, including Europe, Asia, and Latin America.