This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Boje, D. M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Sexual Politics of Sneakers

"Common Ground" and Absent-Referent Stories in the Nike Debate

New Mexico State University

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.

Organization & Environment, Vol. 14, No. 3, 356-363 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/1086026601143007


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. E. Wokutch The Nike/IABS Debate: A Reply to David Boje Organization Environment, September 1, 2001; 14(3): 364 - 368. [PDF]