That's what is ki-ling the brand. We used to be the biggest innovators in the industry but then the focus shifted and now we're stuck where we're stuck. Now it's playing office politics and making new versions and variations of our old products. No wonder sales are down.
31 replies (most recent on top)
this is what phil knight and the board wanted nike to become. they could've done different but no. turned a great culture into one where political backstabbing is the norm
@apw+1qjDqrA0 the primary reason I left a few years ago is that I got tired of doing useless forecasts, reports and PowerPoint decks.
The focus you mention was a shift to AP in 2009 when JJ brought her fear and intimidation brand of leadership to the org. This did not happen overnight. HON and her group of AP “leaders” destroyed the FW offense my dismantling it piece by piece so they could rise through the org, get rid of all key FW stakeholders across the org and deliver a direct AP offense that has only taken this company backwards year after year. Focus on icons cause that’s what the consumer wants right. “We’re a premium brand who doesn’t need partners…just direct.” Nothing creates a bigger blind spot than an offense that eliminates key partners who carry all brands. You can’t assess the market place accurately. Just give us more of what’s selling works until the market is saturated and we have nothing in the pipeline. Get rid of HON and her AP leads that are all in key leadership positions in the company. Nike is nothing if it’s not leading the mkt in FW first. Just a b-league AP brand at best thanks to that crew.
@2otx You my dear mansplained MY point. Forecasting is never accurate (unless you put in bookings as your forecast after the deadline lol). You have spent your entire career in DSM haha I helped create DSM. Anyway, your point about forecast accuracy “that will not happen to perfect accuracy given then (sic) current business model” just underscores my point: you’re NEVER going to have perfect forecast accuracy under any business model! You strive for continuous improvements through x-functional collaboration.
You call me arrogant; however, there is no way to sound humble when pointing out such glaring and basic issues.
@2tjr+1qjDqrA0 No need to be as a--hole. I have worked in DSM and my entire career and know how forecasting works. My comment was in response to @oqc+1qjDqrA0 Who said the problem was everyone needing to forecast the right amount at the right time. My point is, that will not happen to perfect accuracy given then current business model.
Your arrogance and lack of EQ is very telling.
@1jpq I did not misunderstand you. You don’t understand forecasting. No one will ever achieve forecast accuracy- you strive for improved collaborated accuracy. The problem is that too many people are wired to wait until bookings come in and then copy paste so they have the “best” forecast. Lol!
@1hkg think you misunderstood my comment. IBP processes which you are describing are not new, and while they do improve forecasting on a macro level, they are tied to an overall financial drumbeat. On a style by style level it doesn’t prove to be as accurate and with a wholesale model there are uncontrollable variables and it will never be 100% accurate or completely eliminate excess inventory with the current make to forecast model.
@1hkg you are short-sighted. Long range financial forecasting, done in partnership with long-range demand sensing will lead to improved forecasting accuracy. Which will lead to optimization of the supply chain which will lead to less of a mess such as you currently find yourself. There is no strategy; just a lot of word salad, tactical tail chasing and kicking the can down the road.
How about we stop "collaborating" with everyone you calls themselves a rapper...and maybe get back to sports?
Let’s just put it out there that Venky has taken control of forecasting years ago and Amy is a figure head. Venky works 100 hours a week, has kids who hate him and are not athletic, and has no connection to the consumer. He is storing undesirable inventory all over the place to be closer to the consumer who doesn’t want it. Go back to where you are from and give us back our company you short, annoying bot!
@1wmu+1qjDqrA Forecasting on time is arbitrarily related to internal Nike processes and has zero impact on stock, margins or profitability.
Forecast ACCURACY, based on an IDP process (which Nike follows) is another story.
Again, forecast accuracy, based on an IDP process (which is a monthly financial projection that nike uses) is focused on wholistic projected performance to shareholder and does matter for company performance.
That said, getting it right on a macro vs micro level to mitigate inventory, improve margins and reduce layoff risk is nothing we can solve with current technology and business models. It also has zero to do with current layoffs.
When I first started at Nike I was told “this isn’t a product company, it’s a marketing company”.
I was hired into innovation and Nike was absolutely ki-ling it. These days, we have the fastest marathon shoe in the world, the fastest track and field shoes, we have the most desirable basketball shoes in the world.
I look at the brands we are told are our biggest competition: hokah, ON, brooks. They aren’t more innovative than us.
They make good shoes with the same or less technology but have managed their brand to be identified as something better.
Nike was a product company.
Nike was a marketing company.
Nike is now a company that exists to sell an annual offering or snake oil promises to a round table of ultra wealthy people.
@drh Forecasting on time is achieved by knowing what a forecast is and then locating the forecast deadline calendar and throwing that on time.
Here is the definition for you: (verb) to predict or estimate (a future event or trend)
I am glad I sold all my stock. Yeesh!
@vgc+1qjDqrA0 This had been by far the most useful and relevant info I have got on this website!
“I would propose that one mistake (there have been many) has been building up a company that has assumed forever high percentage growth that was unsustainable to begin with.”
Welcome to capitalism. First time?
This first round of layoffs is just the beginning of a series of larger cuts in the works.
The problem is the culture of fear at nike… that’s what ki-ls innovation. Perpetual layoffs add to this as well as rewarding the wrong people
The problem isn’t lack of innovation, it’s that leadership is so desperate for their next win they are making all the wrong decisions and ignoring developing the talent and ideas on their teams. They care more about a-s kissers than delivering results. They made the wrong investments and aren’t being held accountable.
@oqc There is literally no way to forecast on time.
You can’t predict the future based on historical data data alone and while you can get it right sometimes, there are too many variables outside of our control- especially since we have wholesale distribution.
People in this industry have been trying to solve that problem for more than decades and unless we shift the business model, it isn’t changing anytime soon.
I really have to add that this really comes down to forecasting. If everyone forecasted the right amount (sense the demand up or down, not trying to back into a revenue target!) at the right time (when factory capacity is open and being set) then the right product would deliver to the right people ON TIME (key because accounts use this as an excuse to cancel product).
I question how much any of what is going on with Nike the last 5 years can really be course corrected with product, brand OR org strategy. I would propose that one mistake (there have been many) has been building up a company that has assumed forever high percentage growth that was unsustainable to begin with.
There's only so many markets and so many people who are going to buy very expensive Nike shoes and apparel. At some point Nike was going to hit a consumer saturation wall and this may be that time. That doesn't mean the company will go under....but it does mean the company will have to figure out how to be a much smaller company that survives on very low growth or no growth as the norm.
Nike doesn't have the flexibility to find totally different product verticals to pivot into (we're not going to start selling autonomous electric vehicles or VR headsets) so the focus becomes increasing margins and lowering operating costs.
It may be that we're entering a very nasty period of perpetual downsizing year after year until the company is small enough to support the actual market rather than the pie in the sky capitalist dream market. The big question in that scenario is whether Nike can operate as a viable company at that smaller size or if the fundamental structures that have been built into the way it's grown the last ten years are just too rigid and too cumbersome to right size without falling apart. Also the impact of downsizing Nike year after year could potentially be so toxic for the workforce that it causes a negative reinforcing feedback loop that can't be recovered from.
BTW I have ZERO faith in our current leaders to navigate this potential reality.
@loa gets it
Innovation should be made to how the company is run, how teams work together and communicate as well as ensure everyone has a base knowledgeable for how the supply chain works. I’ve seen Director level leaders in Demand Planning (who worked their way up from being an individual, contributor demand planner) insist that a forecast be submitted from sales after the order deadline (how stupid is that - this person apparently didn’t take actual orders into account as part of their demand plan!!!)
I can recall conversations being shut down around supply chain and anytime someone in sales used a supply-chainy word, how everyone would get super worried about it. (OMG a sales rep used the word “cycle count” or worse the phrase “phased availability” we should be worried about that!) WTF!?!
It’s not just supply chain either, so much redundancy in sales and merchandising, “Don’t share account plans with the category - they won’t know how to use that information.”
In fact, there was a huge investment made towards innovating the supply chain years ago and I am fairly confident that not many outside of supply chain remember, understand or partner with anyone then or now to utilize it as a competitive advantage.
Somehow it ends up boiling down to binary thinking: you know, us against them. Plans of attack. Driven by ego.
Innovation has been dead since someone made the decision to install a worthless finance guy as innovation lead. Now he’s gone but the damage is done. What do you expect when that’s followed by keeping ridiculously untalented design leadership and risk averse uneducated mo--ns in director positions -since 2015. What about the stale leadership in the NSRL?
Nike- you got rid of the wrong people…now they’re at your competitors with an axe to grind.
From Linkedin: I found it interesting
Nokia CEO ended his speech saying this “we didn’t do anything wrong, but somehow, we lost”.
During the press conference to announce NOKIA being acquired by Microsoft, Nokia CEO ended his speech saying this “we didn’t do anything wrong, but somehow, we lost”. Upon saying that, all his management team, himself included, teared sadly.
Nokia has been a respectable company. They didn’t do anything wrong in their business, however, the world changed too fast. Their opponents were too powerful.
They missed out on learning, they missed out on changing, and thus they lost the opportunity at hand to make it big. Not only did they miss the opportunity to earn big money, they lost their chance of survival.
The message of this story is, if you don’t change, you shall be removed from the competition.
It’s not wrong if you don’t want to learn new things. However, if your thoughts and mindset cannot catch up with time, you will be eliminated.
Conclusion:
The advantage you have yesterday, will be replaced by the trends of tomorrow. You don’t have to do anything wrong, as long as your competitors catch the wave and do it RIGHT, you can lose out and fail.
To change and improve yourself is giving yourself a second chance. To be forced by others to change, is like being discarded.
Those who refuse to learn & improve, will definitely one day become redundant & not relevant to the industry. They will learn the lesson in a hard & expensive way.
@uxt+1qjDqrA0 A few of the innovation people let go were making the biggest impact and delivered innovations that made it to the earnings calls, so not sure what your point is. It goes to show we are focused on defending empires and egos before embracing anything or anyone who moves the needle.
@uxt+1qjDqrA0 Seeing as the majority of NXT and their leaders have been in their roles for 7+ years with negligible innovations succeeding to the masses, I’m pretty sure it’s not the new people that are the problem.
This “it’s the new people” talk sounds like a classic case of fixed mindset being unable to adapt to change. Those youngsters and their crazy ideas! 😂
There are literal innovations out now that were in Time magazine as best innovations of 2023. GEOs didn’t buy it, storytelling was only for a moment. Please explain your perspective on lack of innovation.
@uxt This isn’t about new vs not new or talking points being diverse but open conversation from different points of view and backgrounds is proven to make a difference in innovation. Currently innovators are emasculated by their leaders who spend in the wrong area and don’t empower their teams. This has nothing to do with your peer being a Nike lifer or from other brands.
I haven’t seen innovation as a main priority on a deck since 2019. I know what the focus has been on in my area but will get hate for saying it.
Many things are important but balance is also important. When you start compensating executives for certain goals met, those goals become the priority, no matter what was presented. Just being real. Need to focus on the business and not try to solve world or U.S. problems.
I understand that issues the past few years have consumed our minds, but many companies shifted focus in areas that they should have stayed out of and getting the business back on track is going to take years.
Can we just get back to the athletes?
All the innovators have been fired or emasculated.. The new people are more diverse for sure though and the idea is that their diverse points of view are innovative. How that going?