I need answer each of the given question. Required the reference at the end of response. Response each of question must be 200 words.

1. This leader believes this problem to be the same as the Ford Motor Company Pinto problem. Nike and Lebron James value money more than the quality of human life and more explicitly, more than human life specifically. This leader is baffled by the notion of people in some cases fighting and dying for sneakers. If this leader may speak plainly, fighting and dying for sneakers insults and dishonors the ancestry, heritage and legacy of African-Americans and others who "fought" and "died" so this leader can have the opportunity to even write a response the question posed. This leader acknowledges his own fear in which he saw the lines in his own neighborhood and failed to ask the question of those in line, what are you doing? He knew something had to be on sale as the line was in front of an athletic gear store. However, he did muster the courage to ask one young lady as she scurried away with her house shoes on, her satin night cap on and her three bags, "what's going on" and she replied, "the new Nikes is out!" This failed and fearful leader wanted to say, "are you a registered voter and did you vote in the recent presidential election?" He wanted to go back and ask the line, "how many of y'all stood in line to vote last Tuesday?"Instead, he took a picture of the line, posted it on Facebook and raised hell safely in the confines of his home.

The subjugation of African-Americans and other minorities will continue until those of us in these groups are no longer afraid to say something in our communities and when we are not afraid not sell out our own people for a buck. When life is valued more than personal gain, the suppression will stop! Schwepker (2015) suggests, "Ethical leadership is the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement and decision-making." (p. 292). In this case study, none of this occurred. In my neighborhood, none of this occurred and shame on this leader.
This leader's personal ethics should have challenged him to say something! Would the outcome have changed... Maybe or maybe not? This leader should have said something!

Reference

Schwepker, C. H. (2015). Influencing the salesforce through perceived ethical leadership: The role of salesforce socialization and person-organization fit on salesperson ethics and performance. Journal of Personal Selling, 35(4) 292 - 313.

2. Review the Nike case information presented in the textbook. If you were a high-level leader in this corporation, how might applying your personal ethics have changed the outcome?

This question makes a large assumption that the author of this paper agrees that there is an ethical issue in what Nike did with the cost of the Lebron X Plus shoes. The article assumes that the marketing population targeted low-income teenagers and sneaker junkies, but did Nike do that? That would be based on perception. What studies did Nike conduct before the release of the shoes? These shoes, in the author's opinion, were geared toward serious athletics that would pay more for the advanced technology that the shoe contained. In applying my own ethics to the situation, I would have marketed the shoe exactly in that way; a shoe for serious athletes looking to improve their game through technological advancements. However, are there ethical issues on the other side of the shoe?

Purchasing high-priced shoes in place of paying other commitments raises ethical issues on the other side where the consumer also has a responsibility to say no, I will not purchase those high-priced shoes. To be sure, consumers must take responsibility for their own actions also. For example, is McDonalds responsible for this nation's obesity? There are some who believe so. Robinson and Bloom (2005) point out that plaintiffs against McDonalds would have to prove that the corporation acted deceptively, along with evidence that the products cause significant health issues, and that McDonald's has a duty to warn the public about unhealthy products. One may compare McDonalds to Nike in that they also cater to low-income families with inexpensive selections, yet can help people with a path to obesity. The point is that while consumers like to point fingers at corporations believed to exhibit unethical behaviors do not exhibit restraint in their purchases. Imagine the message that people can send to corporations by buying less expensive Nike competitor options.

References:

Robinson, M. G., Bloom, P. N., & Lurie, N. H. (2005). Combating Obesity in the Courts: Will Lawsuits Against McDonald's Work?. Journal Of Public Policy & Marketing, 24(2), 299-306. doi:10.1509/jppm.2005.24.2.299

3. In an article authored by Shain and Newport (2014) ethics are described as a code that determines how humans should act and morals guide how humans do act which creates mutual exclusiveness amongst the two concepts. In the case of Nike, it is my assertion that the ethical operation statements which are publicized for the corporation do not align with the moral beliefs of the corporation. Taking into consideration the desire for Nike to increase profit and produce a unique product that includes sensors to provide data for budding basketball players, it is irresponsible to have marketed the Lebron X shoes with a retail value of $180.00 when taking into consideration the target clientele.

Although I applaud Nike for taking into consideration the municipal support that is warranted when releasing a high-interest item for purchase, f given the opportunity to apply my personal ethics to the release of the Lebron X shoe several components would differ. I would allow for the Lebron XL to be available only in the on-line store and identify a reasonably affordable price for the Lebron X to allow for the shoe to be purchased by a greater number of individuals identified in the target clientele. By enacting the proposed actions, Nike would reap a smaller dollar per shoe profit but increase the number of shoes purchased creating less interest for social concern to be raised by the product and for Nike to better align with their stated ethical beliefs of the corporation.

Shain, R. B., & Newport, S. (2014). Finding a personal fit in law, morality, and ethics. Journal of Legal, Ethical & Regulatory Issues, 17(1), 91-95.