Affiliation:
1. New Mexico State University
Abstract
A recent debate between Nike and its critics was published in Organization & Environment . The debate included an introduction in which it was claimed that the debaters reached four points of common ground. Agreement on the four points is imputed regarding human rights improvements at Nike’s subcontract facilities. The author suggests that this common-ground approach is problematic in several ways. First, some agreement stories are open to alternative interpretations. Second, the privileging of a few areas of agreement is accomplished at the expense of much larger areas of disagreement. Third, all the topic areas on both sides of the debate are in dire need of more research to verify the opinions of the debaters. Finally, the author concludes that there is an absent referent spoken about but missing from the debate—namely, the workers themselves.
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,General Environmental Science
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. The Accountability of NGOs in Civil Society and Its Public Spheres;Accountability and Transparency in the Modern Anthropocene;2022
2. Interpretation, Sustainability and Accountability Research;Accountability and Transparency in the Modern Anthropocene;2022
3. The accountability of NGOs in civil society and its public spheres;Critical Perspectives on Accounting;2007-09
4. Perspectives on a personal critique of international business;Critical perspectives on international business;2005-03-01
5. The Nike/IABS Debate;Organization & Environment;2001-09