Review of Nike Considered Index and Support Tools
1 Introduction Description of the Considered Index Approach
Nike has invited The Natural Step to provide external assessment and The Considered Index approach can be described as a set of strategic
advice on the Considered Index from a strategic sustainable design innovation tools providing:
development perspective. This review covers the overall Index 1) Insight into the environmental impacts of materials used in
approach, recognizing that there are variations of the Index (e.g. for product creation (material scores).
apparel and footwear). The assessment method is explained below. 2) Incentives for Nike to make more sustainable products, in line
We refer to different aspects of the Index in this review, so a with the company’s priorities and goals (product scores).
description of the approach and its parts is provided. We then give an 3) Communication of the performance results using Nike’s
overall assessment, followed by technical examination of different internal standards (Considered benchmarks e.g. Gold standard).
parts of the Index and commentary on its public release. 4) Company targets for continual improvement (stretch goals for
meeting company‐wide benchmarks of product performance by
Assessment Method – Backcasting from Success a given year e.g. all footwear to be Considered Bronze by 2011).
The assessment has been conducted using both the sustainability
principles and backcasting planning method of the unifying The two main tools that make up the approach are:
Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development, promoted by The 1. Material Assessment Tool (MAT). This tool scores and ranks the
Natural Step in collaboration with its international research and material types used to manufacture Nike products from least to
practitioner networks. Four science‐based sustainability principles most preferred. The scoring is based on:
from the framework describe success in terms of the conditions ‐ Major, known supply chain environmental issues within
needed for a sustainable society, providing an operational definition defined impact categories.
of sustainability that allows for a gap analysis between where we are ‐ A life cycle perspective, from ‘cradle to gate’.
today and where we need to arrive at in the future. ‐ Publicly available data that is compiled and aggregated for
general material types and typical supply chain scenarios.
From this ‘whole systems’ perspective, it needs to be clearly stated
‐ Third party input from specialists in materials
that there is no such thing as a sustainable or an unsustainable
environmental impact assessment methods.
material or product; there are only sustainable material and resource
‐ Weightings are assigned to impact categories, based on
management practices. Product and material sustainability claims
Nike priorities.
therefore need to be viewed carefully, and as part of a journey
toward sustainability – one that has many possible pathways. 2. The Considered Index. The Index rewards design innovation
choices related to product creation by assigning scores to
Understanding Purpose and Context for the Index products. It encourages the selection of environmentally
All tools serve a purpose. They need to be examined with their preferred materials (as scored in the Material Assessment Tool)
purpose in mind, and understood within the context in which they as well as other practices where the designer can improve the
are used. To judge if this Index is a good tool for supporting Nike’s environmental profile of the product, i.e. less waste generation,
movement toward sustainability, Nike’s overall approach to use of desired chemistry and an innovation bonus for
sustainability must be understood: breakthroughs that can be transferred across models.
• The Index has been developed to aid design and material choices
as part of Nike’s Considered design ethos, which is part of an Nike uses these tools in a number of ways ‐ for example, aiding
overall company sustainability agenda. procurement decisions, setting of internal standards and more
• Nike has long‐standing commitments to sustainability in place. broadly for defining sustainable design performance. Nike has
chosen to externally label Silver and Gold standard products, sending
• The tool is integrated into Nike’s innovation process.
a signal to the consumer about Nike’s Considered design ethos.
• Dedicated personnel support the tool’s development and
integration across the organization.
2 Overall Assessment
• The Index connects with, draws from and supports many other
aspects of Nike’s sustainable business and innovation agenda
Using Sustainability as a Driver of Innovation
(for example, procurement sustainability and audit programs,
Many traditional tools and approaches for measuring product or
restricted substances lists, company targets and policies etc).
material sustainability take a static perspective, attempting to
Just as an analysis of any single move or piece of sports gear used in a measure and assess the scale and severity of known issues and
football game cannot tell you who will win, one needs to look at the impacts today (primarily a risk avoidance approach). On their own
whole picture. Organizations wishing to use the Index and build from these life cycle assessment approaches have limitations in terms of
Nike’s experience should bear this in mind and ensure they build the guiding strategic decision‐making toward 1) sustainable resource
necessary competencies and structures in place to make the best use management and 2) related business opportunities.
of the results from the Index.
1
It is therefore refreshing to see the approach Nike has taken – • Overcame perception that sustainability costs extra by showing
combining quantitative material assessment with qualitatively‐ cost‐neutral improvement possibilities.
derived scores rewarding improvements in product creation. • Informed procurement decision‐making.
•
Challenged designers to compete between product lines.
This approach highlights an evolution in thinking on measuring
sustainability away from solely ‘impact minimization’ and movement Anecdotal reports from Nike affiliates who are beginning to use the
toward an ‘innovation enabling’ strategic perspective. We believe this Index also suggest that it is prompting new questions to be asked of
Index is a powerful demonstration of an overall ’backcasting’ suppliers. Further measurement of the impact attributed to the Index
approach for enabling sustainable design innovation, not simply a set is explained in Nike’s Corporate Responsibility Reports and studies
of tools for measuring movement away from environmental impacts. such as the MIT Sloan Management study “Nike Considered: Getting
Traction on Sustainability” (Henderson & Locke 2009). The impact on
Driving Progress toward a ‘North Star’ Vision the end consumer has not been evaluated, though much has been
For innovation tools to really drive progress toward sustainability, the publicly written about the evolution of Nike’s Considered approach
definition of sustainability itself must be clear – what are we trying to and the high profile athletes who wear Considered product.
achieve? Companies committed to sustainability must ultimately
assess and align their corporate business model and goals with the 3 Getting Technical: Index Structure
needs and principles of the sustainable society we are trying to Here we comment on certain aspects of the Index construction. As
create. Although the Considered Index tools were first created to the Index and Material Assessment Tool use different scoring
address a sub‐set of known environmental sustainability issues, Nike approaches we discuss the two tools separately. Assessment of the
has since defined its long term innovation goals using sustainability MAT is included in the next section.
principles that provide full awareness of the sustainability challenge
in both social and environmental dimensions. How Comprehensive is the Index?
The Index needs to be acknowledged as a sophisticated tool covering
This ’Considered North Star’ vision establishes an ambitious scope of
a significant scope of environmental issues relevant to Nike. Looking
action based on what science says is needed for sustainability and
through the lens of the four sustainability principles we can explore
what is relevant for Nike’s business. While the Index does not
the Index’s strengths and gaps in relation to the full scope of
currently address all of Nike’s aspirations, we have observed that the
sustainability:
goals themselves are now driving further evolution of the Index. This
• Key environmental sustainability impact categories (energy,
guarantees a living rather than static method of evaluation that can
chemistry, waste, and water) have been chosen in order to
continue to grow over time.
balance practicality with comprehensiveness. The impact
The lesson for other organizations is that the use of such tools can categories cover some issues related to the first three
only make sense when they are linked to a clear and comprehensive sustainability principles that cover problems associated with
definition of sustainability in combination with relevant company mined materials, man‐made substances and physical
commitments for helping society to achieve this desired state. degradation of nature. The approach identifies the least number
of variables that can be used to have fairly high confidence that
Evaluating the Impact of the Index Nike is moving in the right direction toward sustainability. It
Recognizing that Nike needs a pragmatic approach relevant to does not seek to cover everything.
designers, the utility of the Index is best assessed by looking at the • Social sustainability issues (related to the fourth sustainability
way designers use it and the outcomes of their work. Designers principle) are not directly included. Some implications are
interviewed in this review noted that the approach helps them: addressed indirectly (e.g. health effects on workers from
• Achieve a good overview of the environmental sustainability chemistry, sourcing from water‐scarce regions). Social issues and
profile of a product style. environmental sustainability issues are inherently connected
• Identify ‘low hanging fruit’; quick easy changes become obvious. issues so ideally they should not be addressed in isolation.
• Strategically develop a style with sustainability issues in mind.
This shows that while the tool addresses some aspects under each of
• Creatively explore design choices, analyzing pricing and testing
the four primary mechanisms of un‐sustainability, it does not cover
scenarios for improvements that are cost‐neutral.
them fully. As Nike has expressed the desire to expand the scope of
Nike staff also noted outcomes from the Considered Index as follows: the Index tools and develop new tools, we suggest that the
• Built commitment for Nike Considered’s approach to sustainable sustainability principles be used to inform these updates. This would
product innovation. capture issues not currently addressed, such as chemical persistence,
• Provided a broader perspective on what designers can do to release of scarce metals, and more on the social dimension.
make a difference.
• Raised enthusiasm and excitement about sustainability by
making it tangible.
2
Design Parameters within the Index Data Quality and Validity
The overall scoring scheme developed by Nike to reward design All organizations working on sustainability will recognize lack of
choices has been given considerable thought and sensitivity testing to supply chain transparency and access to meaningful data as key
ensure that differentiation between design options is possible. We challenges. The MAT employs a somewhat pragmatic approach,
expect that the scoring reflects a good range of options (best to worst working on available information and proxies. The assumptions and
options) for the designer from a sustainability perspective. data quality used to generate material and product scores need to be
understood so that results ‐ the basis for decision‐making ‐ are
Although we cannot comment in detail on the suitability of the design
interpreted correctly:
variables in the Index (points rewarded for material selection, waste
generation, chemistry and innovation) we believe they strike a good • Publicly‐available data has been used.
balance of what the designer has control over. There may, however, • Data is not consistently available and expert input has been used
be scope to expand the scoring to look at the fate of the product, e.g. to make educated decisions in order to generate scores from
is it designed for closed loop, durability, or for cold water washing? multiple sources.
Finally, it needs to be noted that the scoring has been developed • The scores are also base scenarios for generic material types
directly by Nike who does not claim this to be a third party eco‐label. with significant aggregation. This does not account for the
External input on the approach is now being sought. differences between supply chains and suppliers, which are
likely to be significant.
4 Getting Technical: Material Assessment Tool • Ensuring that data is accurate and stays current is a key
In this section we comment specifically on the materials assessment challenge. A clear mechanism for updating the assumptions in
approach in the Material Assessment Tool underpinning the Index. the Material Assessment Tool is not apparent but will be
essential moving forward.
MAT Impact Categories, Weightings and Aggregation
In the future, industries will need increasingly sophisticated tools to
We note the following:
understand the consequences of their activities and plan solutions.
• Nike has used external input and guidance from materials
Lack of data will need to be addressed. Given this, we would like to
environmental impact assessment experts to create a 100‐point
see Nike and the industry at large aiming for full transparency in the
scoring system from the materials assessment data (the details
supply chain on sustainability issues. If this ambitious long‐term goal
of the approach are not included in the scope of this review).
were agreed, rather than create only the generic material scorecards,
The impact categories included in the scoring reflect Nike’s
a further step would be to quantify the uncertainty range and
priorities. Weightings are applied to the impact categories so
incentivize suppliers to demonstrate where they lie within it. The use
that scores generated in each category can be aggregated into
of web‐based technologies may also be a means for building
overall material scores.
transparency by crowd‐sourcing of data.
• In our view, deciding on the importance or significance of
particular impact categories over one another (e.g. toxicity vs. Overall, the MAT illustrates the challenge of getting reliable
climate change) is an impossible task and should not be normalized data from manufacturers and suppliers and suggests a
attempted. They are simply different dimensions of un‐ requirement for a sea change in industrial practices. Nike’s effort to
sustainability to be tackled. The danger in this aggregation is the share its research findings on supply chain impacts needs to be
perception that the best scoring materials are viewed as the commended for raising this issue to industry attention.
‘most sustainable’ rather than ‘most preferred, based on current
priorities’. This needs to be more closely examined, as the 5 Public Release of the Index
potential (and cost) of a material to be managed sustainability It is a hallmark of leadership that Nike is sharing its lessons learned
can change over time, be region and scale‐specific or be heavily with the industry and opening up for public scrutiny a generic version
affected by only one parameter. Recognizing that Nike has of the approach – the Nike Environmental Design Tool. This should be
consulted external parties to develop its scoring approach we seen as a significant contribution to the industry dialogue on
simply wish to note the interpretation risk in scoring ‘apples’ and sustainability performance and it should support the development
‘oranges’ together. and convergence on approaches that can be universally applied
• With the above caution noted, other companies who wish to across the industry.
aggregate data from the different impact categories in the MAT
We suggest that metric tools alone are not enough for industry
and Index may choose to assign different priorities to them. In
alignment on sustainability. Capacity building tools should
order for the tools to retain their integrity, the company
accompany any Index to bring people on board with a shared story of
priorities must be included in a transparent way. The rationale
what sustainability means for the industry, using a robust definition.
for setting priorities should also be outlined e.g. perceived
In this way each actor can assess the inherent problems in their own
importance or urgency of sustainability issues, business
activities and work to generate and evaluate possible solutions.
priorities, ability to influence etc.
3
Knowing the ultimate aims that Nike and other industry leaders are The Framework as the Lens for this Review
seeking to achieve with their tools is helpful regardless of current What makes the framework unique is that it is proven on 3 arenas:
demands, the state of tools or available information. Such an • It is built on scientific consensus, with PhDs, peer‐reviewed
approach would help revise current tools by identifying gaps and articles, and international scientific recognition.
continually lift the bar as the industry makes progress. • It has been used by practitioners all over the world in
organizations of all fields and scales.
6 Conclusion • It can be used to analyze and relate all sustainability tools and
We really like this tool as it takes a pragmatic, strategic life cycle concepts to one another and to the goal of sustainability.
management approach where sustainability is viewed as a journey
rather than a static measurement of impacts. The use of product It is these attributes which make it suitable as a lens for reviewing
scores and labels such as Gold, Silver and Bronze for scoring and Nike’s Considered Index from a strategic sustainability perspective.
communication helps to simplify a complex task, making
sustainability concrete enough to bring designers on board, giving
Scope of Review
This assessment is made drawing on insights by advisors familiar with
them the information and incentives to make a real impact through
Nike’s business. It has been reviewed by Dr Karl‐Henrik Robèrt within
design choices. Digging deeper one can see the depth of analysis as
the scope of the international research program Real Change, in
well as the scope limitations and challenges with data availability and
which The Natural Step is a founding partner. The review was
aggregation methods.
conducted between December 2009 and July 2010 through
interviews with Nike’s Considered Team and Index users, training on
This Index is a very sophisticated tool and a powerful demonstration
Considered Index, document review and participation in an NGO
of an overall ’backcasting’ approach for enabling sustainable design
stakeholder session. It builds upon The Natural Step’s prior
innovation. What sets Nike apart is that it has used scientific
understanding and collaboration with Nike’s Considered innovation
principles of sustainability to set the scope for its vision of success for
team throughout 2008 to support the development of Nike’s North
product sustainability. Nike is now using its tools to make progress
Star Vision.
toward these goals.
Contributing Authors
It is a hallmark of leadership that Nike is sharing its lessons learned
This report has been compiled using input from a number of TNS staff
with the industry and opening it up for public scrutiny. We look
drawn from The Natural Step International, The Natural Step Network
forward to seeing how Nike continues to evolve its tools to make
USA and The Natural Step Canada.
progress toward sustainability.
7 About this Review
The Natural Step Regina Hauser Richard Blume
The Natural Step is an international not for profit organization Executive Director Senior Advisor
dedicated to sustainable development. The Natural Step acts as a The Natural Step Network USA The Natural Step International
catalyst for society, bringing about systemic change by giving
decision‐makers a common, science‐based understanding of
sustainability, and a framework to make decisions in a genuinely
sustainable way.
www.thenaturalstep.org
The Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development
The Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development ‐ commonly
called The Natural Step Framework after the organizations promoting
its development, application and dissemination ‐ has been
developed, tested and applied together with researchers, business
and political leaders and practitioners all around the world over the
last 20 years. It underpins and has inspired many of the world’s
pioneering sustainability initiatives and is openly published and freely
available for use by all.
Latest Revision 12/8/10
4
