5 Athletic Wear Companies: Who Wins on Sustainability?

By: Alexandra Kueller

Two weeks ago we introduced SSC’s latest peer benchmarking analysis, and last week we introduced an in-depth look at three of the six dimensions - governance, environment, and workplace- we analyzed during our process. This week we will finish our analysis of the remaining three dimension starting with community:

Community relations is no longer an afterthought; it is now a serious, strategic aspect of business for all companies. For SSC’s peer benchmarking process we were looking to identify ways that a company is a good citizen of the community: philanthropic initiatives, employee volunteering, community investment activities, and engagement with local stakeholders.

Overview of the Community Dimension

Points:

  • Nike – 17
  • Adidas – 12
  • Puma – 7
  • Lululemon – 8
  • Under Armour – 4

Great news! During our analysis of the community dimension, we noticed that philanthropy carried a unanimous importance in all five companies. Community investment and volunteering are more of a wildcard. Only Nike and Adidas mentioned both categories, with the remaining three companies addressing at least one of those two categories. But overall, engagement is a category that is only mentioned by two different companies (Nike and Puma) and just briefly, too.

Philanthropy

As mentioned above, philanthropy is held in high regard to all five companies. Everyone analyzed had many examples of their philanthropic efforts listed on either their website and in their sustainability reports. Three companies – Nike, Lululemon, Puma – have their philanthropy policy stated as well, with Nike, Adidas, Puma providing performance data as well.

Volunteering

Volunteering is another category that proved to be important to all five companies. Nike and Adidas all provided strong policies, programs, and performance metrics throughout their sustainability report and their website. Under Armour listed a brief policy on their website, and Puma had many examples of volunteering opportunities in their report. Lululemon was the only company to not directly mention volunteering. 

Community Investment

Lululemon scored very well in the community investment category by having an excellent policy regarding community investment and a multitude of examples of programs they use to stay connected to the local community. Adidas briefly mentioned a community investment policy in their report, and Nike had at least a policy, program, and some sort of performance metric. Under Armour and Puma mentioned nothing of topic in either their report or website.

Engagement

Engagement was the one category in the community dimension that had no heavy hitters. Nike and Puma were the only companies to mention engagement, and even that was a brief amount of detail. While it is important for companies to give back around the world and encourage their employees to do the same, it is just as important for companies to give community members an opportunity to provide feedback to the company.

Click here to catch up on the governance dimension, environment dimension, and workplace dimension.

 

How Sustainable are the Workplaces of Athletic Wear Brands?

By: Alexandra Kueller

Last week we introduced SSC’s latest peer benchmarking analysis, and this week we will take an in-depth look at each dimension.

A sustainable company has a responsibility to ensure a safe, healthy, and equitable workplace for their employees and contractors. In SSC’s peer benchmarking analysis, we look for companies that go beyond the legal requirements mandated by workplace laws and regulations. Acceptable companies are able to tie their workplace practices back to the success of their companies.

Overview of the Workplace Dimension

Points

  • Nike – 19
  • Adidas – 21
  • Puma – 18
  • Lululemon – 2
  • Under Armour – 0

During our analysis of the workplace dimension, one common trend kept appearing among all of the companies: there were the top dogs, and there were the laggards. Nike, Adidas, and Puma are all leading the way in this dimension. With strong results in the diversity, health & safety, and training & education categories, along with points in working conditions as well, these companies have demonstrated workplace excellence. Under Armour and Lululemon are on the lower end of the spectrum, with the latter only briefly mentioning working conditions on their website.

Diversity

The diversity category was a very strong category for Nike, Adidas, and Puma (Nike and Puma received full points). All three of those companies had very strong programs and policies regarding diversity, and they also provided detailed performance metrics. Lululemon and Under Armour did not mention diversity in any of their website materials.

Health & Safety

Just like diversity, the health & safety category had Nike, Adidas, and Puma scoring the highest points and Lululemon and Under Armour receiving zero points. Adidas and Puma were the two companies that received full points and Nike was not far behind.

Training & Education

The trend continues with the training & education category: Nike, Adidas, and Puma were the top performers and Lululemon and Under Armour were the underachievers. This time around, Nike was the only company to receive full points.

Working Conditions

The working conditions category was the only category where more than three companies received points; Lululemon was the additional company in the category on top of Nike, Adidas, and Puma. While the previous categories were strong for any reporting companies, Adidas was the only company to supply solid policies, programs, and performance data. The other companies only briefly mentioned a policy or some supporting programs.

Missed our second dimension analysis earlier this week? Catch up right here!

Puma, Adidas, Under Armour – Who Has the Best Sustainability?

By: Alexandra Kueller

Last week we introduced SSC’s latest peer benchmarking analysis, and this week we will take an in-depth look at each dimension. For a better understanding of how we score and each dimension, please read:

A company that is environmentally responsible is the key to any sustainability plan. During SSC’s peer benchmarking process we look for companies that use the earth’s resources efficiently, seek out renewable materials and energy options, incorporate life-cycle-based thinking, and evaluate performance to allow for continuous improvement.

Overview of the Environment Dimension

Points

  • Nike – 20
  • Adidas – 14
  • Puma – 19
  • Lululemon – 10
  • Under Armour – 4

Between the five companies in the environment dimension, energy & climate change and water are the leading categories with all five companies receiving points in both. For the companies that addressed waste & recycling, they reported strong, well-rounded plans that focused on policies, programs, and performance. Land use & biodiversity was the weakest category, with only two companies briefly addressing the issue.

Energy & Climate Change

Energy & climate change was the strongest category in the Environment dimension, with three companies scoring maximum points (Nike, Adidas, and Puma). This indicates that these companies have very strong policies, programs that support the policies, and that they provide plenty of performance metrics. Lululemon and Under Armour briefly mention a policy regarding energy and climate change on their website, with Lululemon providing performance data and Under Armour supplying examples from their programs.

Waste & Recycling

Four out of the five companies mentioned waste and/or recycling on their website and in their reports at least once (Under Armour was the only company not to do so). Nike and Puma achieved maximum points for the Waste & Recycling category, while Adidas and Lululemon provided strong policies and supporting programs for waste and recycling.

Water

The water category is strong amongst all of the companies as all five provide at least one water policy. As with the previous categories, Nike and Puma received maximum points for having excellent policies, programs, and performance metrics, and Lululemon and Adidas were not far behind. However, Lululemon and Adidas did not provide as many metrics or programs as Nike or Puma. Under Armour has the weakest score with only a brief policy mentioned on their website.

Land Use & Biodiversity

The only companies to discuss either land use OR biodiversity were Nike and Puma. Nike only had a brief land use and biodiversity policy and respective programs mentioned in their report. Puma had one performance metric. The three other companies – Adidas, Lululemon, and  Under Armour – had no mention of either land use or biodiversity.

Miss our first dimension analysis earlier this week? Catch right up here!