Nike Case analysis

QUESTION 1- Prior to the “Game Changing” proposal for global woman's fitness where would you put Nike on the CSI chart? Why
Prior to “Game Changing” initiative, I would categorize Nike as a scope-driven organization on the Complex Strategic Integration Chart. Generally, in a scope-driven strategy, resources are mobilized across business units to pursue major opportunities. Nike business strategy is centered on big events. Nike scope dimension indicates the magnitude to which pursuing a new business opportunity requires the collaboration of the existing business units with the corporate strategy.
Prior to the “Game Change” proposal, Nike was an initiative-driven organization, product group and business units work together on major marketing events but then go back to their silos as soon as the common goal is accomplished. Nike focus on product improvement, it has organized its core business around a product orientation, with primary business units focused on their main competencies. In other words, Nike’s strategic integration contributes to the support of the strategic push of the company’s core business. Furthermore, Nike’s business units represented the lead dimension of the matrixed organization structure. Within Nike’s matrixed structure, the business units dominated decision-making and priority setting. Members of different business unit teams only collaborated across business unit boundaries commonly to support short-term projects as such World Cup and Olympics. The cross-communication, sharing, and transferring of resources among business units is conducted in order to meet Nike strategic desire to optimize innovation and execution around its primary products.
As an example, prior Game changing, Nike ‘strategic integration did not support redirection; Nike’s marketing strategy was focus on products and product innovation. According to Nike managers, it was difficult to gain the support of all the business units in ongoing strategy preceding the Game