Search results

This case traces Under Armour from its founding in 1996 through 2008 when the company entered the hyper-competitive non-cleated athletic footwear market. In 1996, with an innovative product and locker room access to college and pro players, Kevin Plank started Under Armour. He turned a struggling t-shirt company into a dominant player capturing 75% of the performance apparel market. In 2006, Under Armour successfully entered the athletic footwear market with a line of football cleats. Under Armour was the first company to disrupt Nike's dominance of the football cleat market by gaining 25% of the market within a year of introduction. In 2008, Under Armour entered the non-cleated athletic footwear market with a cross-trainer sneaker line and a $4.4 million Super Bowl ad. Unlike prior introductions, Nike responded aggressively to Under Armour's move into sneakers. Despite increased sales, Under Armour's costs increased, and profits and stock price decreased. The case concludes by asking students to evaluate Under Armour's next move. An extensive exhibit provides an overview of the athletic footwear industry in 2008.

Grounded in the Uppsala model, the purpose of this paper is to investigate specific firm factors of fashion service retailers, which include: product category offering, firm experience (limited vs extensive) and firm size (small vs large) and examines how variations in these firm characteristics produce significant differences on three aspects of internationalisation activities; scale and scope of internationalisation, market choice (geographic and cultural distance), and financial performance (international sales and profit), and whether market choice produces differences on financial performance.

Secondary sources were utilised to empirically investigate retailers (n=118). Information regarding product category offering, year of establishment, number of employees, countries entered, international sales, and profit were collected from retailer web sites, press releases, and annual reports.

There were significant differences between product category offering and firm size in retailers’ internationalisation behaviours, and there were significant differences between product category offering and market choice in their financial performance. Variations in firm experience did not produce any significant differences.

This study extends limited literature on the internationalisation of fashion service retailers and contributes knowledge of how variations in specific firm factors produce different outcomes in terms of internationalisation, market choice, and financial performance.

Retailers offering functional products may be more flexible in their internationalisation. Firms regardless of experience or size may consider being active in international markets because variations in these factors does not impact performance.

This study addresses multiple gaps in retailer internationalisation literature and findings point that product category should be considered when studying internationalisation of service firms.

Looking beyond and “beneath” the short‐term effects of the 1990‐1991 recession, the general trends taking place in American retailing as it enters the third year of the 1990s are reviewed. These include: the effects of demographic changes, the significance of retailing in the economy, specialisation, “value” retailing, merchandise “scrambling”, the increasing segmentation of retail “offers”, the decline of the American department store, the “hangover” from the 1980s “space race”, the continued decentralisation of retail floorspace, the impacts of LBO debt problems, a return to “basics”, store “localising”, the “internationalisation” of American retailing, and the contributions of information technology. In conclusion, a brief prognosis is given for the remainder of the 1990s.

This paper aims to explore new forms of control that can address the legitimacy problems of globally‐integrated enterprises.

In a conceptual analysis the characteristics of the globally‐integrated enterprise are used to put forward apt strategies of control. These proposals are examined and illustrated in a case study of the strategies in use in the athletic footwear industry.

This paper argues that command‐and‐control strategies will be ineffective for globally‐integrated enterprises. In order to behave like a global corporate citizen companies need to stress controls based on belief systems and interactive systems. Certain features of this shift in control are visible within the athletic footwear industry although many strategies in use are still based on thinking like a multinational.

This paper is explorative in nature. More empirical research is needed to test the proposals this paper puts forward.

The results of this paper can be used as a framework to develop control strategies for companies working from a transnational perspective.

The functioning of globally‐integrated enterprises creates both tremendous economic possibilities as well as new problems of legitimacy. This paper is one of the first systematic attempts to provide a framework for dealing with these legitimacy problems and also serves as an illustration of this framework in the athletic footwear sector.

This contribution conceptualizes the politicization of MNCs from outside – the processes by which MNCs become confronted with demands for regulation and engage in political contestation with other non-state actors. It compares two global industries, athletic footwear and toys, to show that the dynamics of politicization follow different trajectories, which are only partially to explain with structural differences across industry fields. If politicization leads to increasing political functioning of business or to a depoliticization of criticism depends to a great extend on the agency of business and their capacity to strategically counter mobilization, but also on the difficulties for activist to construct continuing collective action across a diverse range of cultural-institutional settings.

Over the last two decades, Under Armour (UA) has emerged from being the “underdog” in the sports apparel and footwear industry to being a leader in the industry, with a fierce attention to performance and great skill at picking up-and-coming athletes who emerge as superstars. This case underscores its administrative heritage, competitive strategy, and growth potential as a global player in a highly competitive industry. It addresses the tension between being a performance brand while launching lines for women vs technology applications and conflicts between its growth strategy and macro-economic forces. It highlights areas in which it has succeeded against macro-economic forces and where it has not.

The research relies primarily on secondary sources and countless studies of UA and its major competitors. Primary research is based on databases, videos of UA’s Chief Executive Officer, Kevin Plank, and articles from Bloomberg to The Baltimore Sun (UA’s headquarters) on the history, growth and future of UA. It also includes observations and site visits to one of its signature brand house stores as well as intensive research and directed studies with students in the USA and China.

The case can be applied to undergraduate, graduate or executive business classes in: business policy and strategy; general management; (sports) marketing; leadership or organisational behaviour classes.

The present study aims to explore the efforts of a core action sports company (Board Sports Company (BSC)) to employ a multi‐brand strategy and to focus on the identity and reach of the seven distinct brands operated under the parent company. The study seeks to identify benefits and limitations of the multi‐brand strategy, as seen by company employees.

In a single‐case design study approach, a global, private action sports company, recognized as a leader in authentic action sports footwear and apparel, was selected for study. Data were collected via in‐depth interviews with key company employees and an extensive review of secondary sources.

The adoption of a multi‐brand strategy with the operation of seven distinct brands has allowed BSC to expand to mainstream audiences, while strengthening its core target markets. Through aggressive consumer segmentation practices and the strategic utilization of a variety of distribution outlets, BSC remains competitive in a highly antagonistic business environment.

Possibly the greatest benefit of a multi‐brand strategy is a company's ability to diversify, while minimizing the risk of transferring potentially harmful associations among its brands. Thus, BSC has expanded its reach into the mainstream through new sports, product lines, distribution channels, and target audiences. Simultaneously, the organization has guarded the perception of authenticity of its core brands.

The study extends the understanding of the management of sport brands by moving beyond collegiate and professional sport organizations to focus on an athletic wear and equipment brand. It also offers insight to sport organizations that might consider expansion via the adoption of a multi‐brand strategy.

Provides an overview of the present state of the footwear manufacturing industry and the consumer footwear market. Describes how many manufacturers have recognized the need for advanced manufacturing techniques and automation technologies, turning to robotics and automation for more reliable manufacturing system solutions. Reports on the robotics integration and system‐level products specifically targeted for footwear manufacturing operations provided by three specialist companies; ACTIS Engineering, DESMA and Intelligent Machines Corporation.

The case traces the development of the Under Armour (UA) brand, product, and market growth under CEO and founder Kevin Plank from its inception in 1996 through 2016. UA provides a cohesive case study of how to launch and sustain a consumer brand even in the face of its third-party manufacturing approach, which gives its apparel no patentable design or fabric technologies. The case uses UA's brand and advertising development as a backdrop for the current pivotal issue of how to target women to sustain growth. UA's stated goal is to build a $1.9 billion women's business by 2019.

In laying out UA's growth and competitive moves, the case lets students analyze broadcast, social media, and other digital advertising campaigns in view of the company's brand development and strategic targeting. The case also highlights the importance of leveraging brand heritage and historical differentiation while respecting key nuances when extending into new markets (i.e., moving from a predominantly male-driven audience to female). It also allows an exploration of how to use consumer insight and broader cultural attitudes and trends to support extending a position into new markets.