Last week Nike injected itself into one of themost controversial, politically-charged showdowns in modern history when it unveiled Colin Kaepernick as the face of it’s 30th Anniversary“Just Do It” campaign.
Kaepernick, the famously underemployed NFL player, has become a symbol of social activism by way of his peaceful protest to kneel on the sideline during the NFL’s pre-game National Anthem.
In a clear attempt to embrace social activismand racial injustice, Nike has brazenly reminded the global market of one of its most defining characteristics as a
company—their remarkable ability toembrace discomfort.
****
In the early days, Nike’s stomach for discomfort emanated from the company’s battle to remain financially viable.
Phil Knight started his shoe business in 1962, long before venture capital was an industry and high-growth/high-risk companieswere the norm. As a result, he was in a constant battle with his banks to secure additional funding to fuel the company’s growth. For nearly two decades, Knight pushed the company balance sheet to the limit, surviving “on float” and barely being able to pay back creditors month after month. Despite exceptional sales year-after-year, Nike constantly faced financial insecurity to the point of overwhelming discomfort.
From the very beginning, the fabric of Nike was interlaced with threads of discomfort. It permeated their company culture, and became a core component of their overall belief system.
****
As the company evolved, so too did their strategy of employing discomfort. Rather than simply embracing discomfort, Nike began to consciously manufacture it within their marketing campaigns.
In 1993, Nike proactively engineered the most arguably "uncomfortable" commercial in history when they launched their Charles Barkley “I’m not a role model” campaign.
Their love for discomfort would soon be highlighted in their endorsement deals and sponsor relationships.
In 2003, NBA superstar Kobe Bryant held lucrative sponsorships with McDonalds, Sprite (Coca-Cola) and Nutella (FerreroSpA). When accusations of Bryant sexually assaulting a 19-year old woman began to surface, all three companies quickly dumped their endorsement deals. One company stood strong with Kobe. Nike.
In 2010, amidst the revelation of Tiger Woods’marital infidelities, some of the biggest global brands cut ties with the iconic golfer in the face of tumultuous scrutiny. Gatorade, Gillette, Buick, and AT&T all ran for the hills. To this day, Nike has stuck by his side.
Make no mistake about it—Nike is comfortable with discomfort.
****
When Nike makes a bet, they have an unprecedented track record of winning big.
They went all-in on Michael Jordan. All-in, mind you, in an era when African-American men were rarely even featured in marketing campaigns, let alone made the face of a brand.
They went all-in on Tiger Woods. They went all-in on Venus and Serena Williams. All-in, mind you, on black athletes looking to revolutionize traditionally white sports. And revolutionize they did.
Nike's latest bet on Colin Kaepernick is important on many levels.
It’s a message from Nike to its biggest representatives—most notably Lebron James and Serena Williams—that they’re willing to join the crusade and amplify a courageous voice of dissent.
Furthermore, it's a confirmation that Nike believes, in joining the crusade, it will benefit financially. There is no way Nike would make Kaepernick the face of their campaign if it didn't align with their economic interests.
Above all, Nike has made a bet that history will judge Kaepernick much more favorably than he is being judged now.
Only time will tell, but judging by their track record, I like their odds.
