Workplace Conflict Mediation: The Nike Sexual Harassment Case

Introduction: The #MeToo Era and Nike's Workplace Crisis

It is difficult to discuss an employee dispute of recent times without thinking of the #TimesUp and #MeToo movements. While these movements have been most visible in Hollywood, they definitively impact women in every industry and workplace. More and more women are refusing to be silent when it comes to dealing with sexual harassment and related toxic behaviors in the workplace—and they should not have to be. This paper examines an instance of employee conflict that occurred not within the entertainment world, but within an adjacent industry—the lifestyle and sports apparel industry—concerning one of the giants in the field: Nike.

What Happened at Nike: Harassment, Marginalization, and the Anonymous Survey

The problems at Nike involved inappropriate behavior in the workplace, sexual harassment, and even sexual assault. Women within the company detailed workplace violations such as the following: "There were the staff outings that started at restaurants and ended at strip clubs. A supervisor who bragged about the condoms he carried in his backpack. A boss who tried to forcibly kiss a female subordinate, and another who referenced a staff member's breasts in an email to her. Then there were blunted career paths. Women were made to feel marginalized in meetings and were passed over for promotions" (Creswell et al., 2018). To make matters worse, in some divisions within Nike, women were not represented at all, and when they made complaints to human resources, no changes were implemented (Creswell et al., 2018).

The female members of staff at Nike engaged in an organized revolt via anonymous survey, inquiring whether each respondent had ever been victimized by sexual harassment or gender discrimination. The results of this anonymous survey ended up creating an overall coup within the executive ranks of the world's biggest sportswear and apparel firm. In the first week of March 2018, the packet of anonymous surveys ended up on the desk of Mark Parker, Nike's chief executive. The outcome was significant: many of the men in positions of power who had engaged in this toxic behavior ended up leaving the company or announcing their resignations (Creswell et al., 2018). This group included Trevor Edwards, the head of the Nike brand who was widely viewed as the most likely successor to Mark Parker upon his retirement, and Jayme Martin, Edwards's chief deputy (Creswell et al., 2018).

In the case of Nike, it is commendable that so many of the men who abused their power ultimately left their positions. However, upon reflection, one wonders whether there could have been another approach through which the female employees might have reaped a greater benefit, given the extent and duration of the abuse they suffered. While the anonymous surveys were beneficial and protected women from retaliation, it would have been more effective if this packet of surveys had been delivered by an attorney or mediator formally representing the women.

The Case for Professional Mediation

The representative in such a process needs to be someone outside the company—someone who can engage in a direct, one-on-one approach with Mark Parker and ultimately negotiate on behalf of all the affected women collectively. The ultimate objective of workplace mediation is for all parties to resolve the issue themselves, without anyone filing a lawsuit, and to reach a nuanced decision that all parties find fair and just (Dickinson, 2016). In the rare case that mediation does not end in a resolution, the parties should at least arrive at a more in-depth understanding of the concerns and perspectives of the other side, as well as the origins of the conflict (Dickinson, 2016).

In the Nike case, because workplace abuse occurred repeatedly and was allowed to persist in this environment, the issue is somewhat one-sided. The women represented by the mediator need to make clear that a toxic work environment was created and sustained within the company, and that it is the responsibility of leadership to fix it immediately and provide appropriate redress to the women in the most just manner possible.

Benefits of Mediation for Affected Employees

The advantages of this one-on-one mediation approach are clear. First, it is far more practical than attempting to have the hundred or more women who suffered abuses at Nike each individually discuss their experiences with Parker. The mediator or attorney can act as their collective representative and succinctly outline the many ways in which women were harassed or marginalized in this harmful work environment. While mediation works best when issues are addressed early, it also allows for a clear exchange of communication so that female employees can begin to heal. Additional benefits of mediation include the following: "it's confidential and private and can be done within a relatively short timeframe; participants [in this case via the mediator or attorney] have a voice and a safe forum to vent, clear the air, and express their perspectives" (Dickinson, 2018).

Rather than simply dropping a set of anonymous surveys on the desk of the company president, the women involved might have pursued a more empowering process—one in which they negotiated for new terms at the company that could have made up for past transgressions. Many women had their careers blunted by the repressive environment that was allowed to fester within this corporate culture. There needs to be meaningful redress, and mediation can help ensure that this occurs. Another major benefit of mediation is that "past actions are explored and participants have the opportunity to understand the source of the conflict that has arisen, but it is also future-focused, insofar as any agreement reached can provide a framework for an ongoing relationship—how we communicate with each other, how we resolve future conflict, etc." (Dickinson, 2016). This future-focused dimension is especially important because mediation gives voice to smaller grievances and microaggressions that were allowed to dominate the firm, and it demonstrates to leadership that a complete overhaul of corporate culture is necessary.

Another major benefit of mediation or attorney negotiation is that the representative for these women can enter the process with demands and solutions already prepared. The mediator can begin with a list of individuals who need to be dismissed, with the clear understanding that failure to act will result in litigation. The mediator can also present a further list of demands: identifying women who are overdue for promotions, specifying departments that need to be restructured to reflect greater inclusiveness, and requiring that the company hire a corporate culture specialist to implement changes, conduct training, and establish new behavioral standards. Agreeing to such demands would send a clear message that Nike takes the matter seriously and is committed to helping the women who were victimized, while working to restore trust and repair damaged relationships.

References

Benton, T. (2015, October 15). The advantages and disadvantages of mediation. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/advantages-disadvantages-mediation-terri-benton

Creswell, J., Draper, K., & Abrams, R. (2018, April 28). At Nike, revolt led by women leads to exodus of male executives. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/28/business/nike-women.html

Dickinson, L. (2017, February 1). When mediation is the right approach to resolving workplace conflict. Worklogic. Retrieved from http://www.worklogic.com.au/workplace-mediations/mediation-right-approach-resolving-workplace-conflict/

Heathfield, S. M. (2004, July 10). Steps in mediating workplace conflict resolution. Retrieved from https://www.thebalancecareers.com/workplace-conflict-resolution-1918675