The only way globalization pays
By Brian on Oct 24, 2003
The only way globalization pays off at all for America is if the nations that are the current recipients of outsourcing by American companies then become serious consumers of other American goods and services. This article about Reebok’s push into Asia as a serious growth-oriented consumer market is promising in that regard. Without globalization and the open economy and substantial foreign investment that accompanies it, Chinese citizens wouldn’t have enough disposable income to make them an attractive market for a relatively frivolous item like basketball shoes.
So it looks like we have a US-based company (Reebok) whose white-collar jobs (administration, finance, design, marketing, etc.) are still located in the US and whose manufacturing takes place in Asia (that’s an assumption, but I think a safe one) and who is now banking on significant sales coming from the same region where their product is produced. That seems like a win-win situation for both the US and China.
The next wave of outsourcing, though, is white collar service jobs in information technology, finance, marketing, etc. It’s already begun, and it shows few signs of slowing down. So will Reebok eventually be a US company with no significant US operations? If that’s the case, will the US still be an attractive market for Reebok to sell in?
That’s the pessimistic view, of course. What has to happen to avoid that pessimistic view from becoming reality? US workers in white collar service jobs must prove that they provide value to the company, even at a significantly higher cost than outsourced labor. How do US workers do that? Education, innovation, and speed.
Will we meet the challenge?
Reebok, the sportswear brand recently acquired by Adidas-Solomon AG, is causing something of a stir with its “shockers”. And by “shockers” we’re not referring to a new innovative bio-mechanical and ergonomic footwear revelation - God forbid! No, we’re referring to controversial advertising which includes depictions of Satan - indeed, God forbid!
Only last year Reebok ran a controversial television advertisement which depicted 50 Cent, the renowned uber-rapper and former drug dealer who lives in Connecticut, counting the number of bullets that have been shot at him. The famous rapper laughs and then looks into the camera as a voiceover asks, “Who do you plan to massacre next?” The advertisement was pulled in the United Kingdom. This type of tired and frankly puerile advertising is a long way from Reebok’s roots which where planted in the soil of step-aerobics and Richard Simmons’ anti-inertia classes. Indeed, the brand appears to be at the antithesis of its roots with its direct association with the negative side of hip-hop culture.
Given the negative connotations associated with Reebok’s patently obvious attempt to woo the dark side, many knowledgeable commentators are asking could this negatively impact their new parent company, Adidas. Adidas still has a strong customer base in Middle America and mainstream Europe and surely the last thing they would want to do is alienate their main customer base by supporting advertisements glamorising Satan and murder.
The Congress of Racial Equality is outraged by Reebok’s negative message about black men. “50 Cent was a drug dealer and proud of it,” says Niger Innis their spokesperson. “The fact that corporations are going to reward that kind of behavior is an outrage.” Let’s hope Reebok and now, more importantly, Adidas take note of this valuable advice and they start to glamorise wholesome and decent role-models and ideologies.
Kitmeout | Feb 16, 2006 | Reply