Why Nike Should Be All

In

13
Consulting
Company

Why Nike Should Be All In

Prepared for
Mark Parker
President and Chief Executive Officer

Prepared by
13 Consulting Company
Giovanni Sisneros, Dane Salinas, Austin Hart, Eric Reinke, Matt Glassmeyer

April 02, 2015

Memo of Transmittal
To: Mark Parker CEO and Nike Board of Directors
From: 13 Consulting Group 13 Consulting Group
Date: April 13, 2014
Subject: Insourcing Nikes Operations
This is the report you requested in regards to issue of insourcing Nikes production. If insourcing
is accomplished, Nike will be seen as more respectable in Americans eyes, leading to greater
profits.
The following report includes detailed facts and figures pertaining to outcomes of insourcing. We
compared the major companies who have successfully transitioned into insourcing and listed
their achievements. Much of this information was gathered from scholarly articles found using
the Colorado State University Library database. Other data we obtained came from online
articles with proper publications.
Using the information we found concerning insourcing, we came up with 2 main supporting
arguments with additional subheadings for additional evidence:

Problems with Outsourcing

o Public Image (brand & value)
o Supply Chain Stability

Benefits from Insourcing: Boost American Economy

o Companies have Insourced Successfully

o Customers will Support Insourcing
On behalf of our team (13 Consulting Company), we would like to thank you for giving us this
opportunity to share our findings. Ending all production outside of the U.S. will eliminate all
costs that come with outsourcing, such as shipping, and allow for Nikes supply chain to be
better connected giving management full control of operations. We hope that you will carefully
consider our position and move forward in a way that will benefit Nike

Table of Contents
Page
List of Illustrations..

iv.

Executive Summary.

v.

Introduction..

1.

Problems With Outsourcing....

1.

Public Image (Brand & Value)

3.

Supply Chain Stability.....

4.

Benefits of Insourcing: Boost American Economy....

5.

Companies Have Insourced Successfully

6.

Customers Will Support Insourcing...

7.

Recommendation & Conclusion..

7.

References..

10.

List of Illustrations

Figures

Page

1. Nike Revenues worldwide from 2009 to 2014,

by region (in million U.S. dollars)....11.

2. Nikes World
Nearly one million workers labor in 744 factories world-wide.....13.

Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to introduce to Mark Parker and the Nike Board of Directors that the
transition to insourcing will create a more efficient, respectable, and manageable organization.
Problems with Outsourcing
Workers overseas experience harsh working conditions with long hours. These working
conditions are affecting both Nike and the third world countries involved. There have been
numerous cases involving Nike and their treatment of workers leading to negative publicity. The
negative publicity from sweatshops scandals has hurt Nikes brand value.
Public Image (Brand & Value)
Multiple issues have occurred regarding Nikes foreign operations that have shown Nike in a
negative light. Like in 1992 when Jeff Ballinger wrote a report resulting in headline news about
Nikes low wages and poor working conditions in their foreign factories. This caused Nike stock
to fall by almost 15%.
Supply Chain Stability
Management of corporations strive to have full control over their supply chain. When companies
outsource their operations to third party factories, much control is lost. Insourcing Nikes
production will give management more control, allowing operations to be more timely and
efficient.
Benefits of Insourcing: Boost American Economy
Of $27.8 billion in revenue, the U.S. accounted for $12.3 billion (45%) of Nikes sale revenue.
Despite little production of Nike goods occurring in the United States, America is the largest
single consumer. This means Nike is paying unnecessary shipping cost related to outsourcing
when their largest consumer is in same country as Nikes headquarters.
Companies have Insourced Successfully
Many Multination Corporations have noticed a drop in the economic success of outsourcing. For
example Starbucks, another multi-billion dollar company, cut ties with overseas production and
changed to insourcing. After shifting the manufacturing of 20,000 coffee mugs to a pottery
manufacturer in Ohio, Starbucks stated, this is what we need to do (Schepp, para. 2). The
opportunity to insource successfully is there, however its up to these Multinational Corporations
to take advantage of them.
Customers will Support Insourcing

Insourcing Nikes production will create a large amount of jobs for the American public. By
putting the unemployed back to work, Nike will be seen in a better light, eventually boosting
sales.
Introduction
With more than 40,000 workers globally, 750 plus retail stores, and an estimated net worth of
more than 20 billion U.S. dollars, Nike has become a household name (Nike Inc., 2014, p. 3-7).
Though Nike is known worldwide as the premier brand for athletic shoes and sportswear, they
are a company which has endured many political controversies. Even Nike, having a huge
presence in the global market contributing to sponsorships, subsidiaries (such as Converse and
Hurley), and various charitable contribution groups, they are still a company which is far from
being a diamond in the rough. Since the start of the company, Nike has been challenged with
making profits while also maintaining to customer satisfaction. Being a top-class consulting
group, we understand that a profitable and successful company is driven from sales being greater
than the cost of production. So, Nike decided in the late 1970s to keep their production prices at
a bare minimum with overseas labor. This projected far greater profitability than production
within the United States at the time. From an economic standpoint, this is known as
specialization because other countries such as Indonesia, have an absolute advantage with cheap
laborers and less strict regulations on factory conditions. Producing goods outside of a
companys home country is known as outsourcing. Though outsourcing Nike in the past has had
a positive impact on overall net profit, it has also caused horrible working conditions, loss of
American jobs, and an overall loss of support from many Americans. Throughout this paper we
will be discussing some key facts regarding the outsourcing and insourcing controversy, while
illustrating how insourcing production in the United States is currently projecting numerous
benefits for companies. To do so, we will be talking about problems with outsourcing (including
public image and supply chain stability) and the benefits of insourcing (including how various
companies and competitors have insourced successfully, and illustrating how customers support
insourcing).
Problems with Outsourcing
Coming to the turn of the 21st Century, morals and treating people ethically is at the forefront of
human relations, especially in the American culture. Today, a huge problem with outsourcing

(particularly coming from Nike) lies in the abuse and mistreatment of overseas workers. In their
article titled The Nike Controversy, Wilsey and Lichtig (2012) note that no action is taken toward
fixing poor working conditions unless a catastrophic tragedy occurs to persuade the public to
rally for worker rights. (para. 1). Moving overseas for Nike presented an opportunity for greater
profits at the time because third world countries (much less affluent than the United States) offer
cheaper labor with less worker rights. Today, outsourcing is causing major problems for both the
corporation and the foreign countries the jobs were outsourced to. Another article from
Huffington Post (2011) titled Nike Faces New Worker Abuse Claims In Indonesia mentions
workers who complained about shoes being thrown at them, being slapped in the face, and even
being called derogatory terms such as pigs and dogs (para. 1). Overall, problems such as these
affect the livelihood and perceptions of Nikes company to not only overseas workers, but also to
many Americans. In this same article, a representative of Nike goes on to mention that there was
little they could do to stop this abuse (Ibid). This issue, referring to supply chain stability is
another huge problem with Nikes outsourcing, which will be covered more in depth further in
this paper. The fact that Nike has a lack of presence and control in overseas relations is definitely
a problem the company should work on.
Not only are overseas workers directly victimized while working for various third party
manufacturers who produce for big organizations, but the working environment these workers
face is hazardous. In the article by Shelly Banjo (2014) Inside Nikes Struggle to Balance Cost
and Worker Safety in Bangladesh, she notes how a group of five Nike executives visited a
Bangladesh manufacturing company of Nike to get a feel for the environment (para. 2). One of
the executives, Ms. Jones, described how at first sight she saw rolls of fabric strewn across the
production floor and various windows bolted shut which presented an obvious hazard in the
instance of a fire (para 3). The trip inspired Jones to cut ties with the third part manufacturer the
very next day. However, this is not the only case where third party Nike outsourcing factories
have shown hazards and unethical treatment of workers relations and unmaintained factories.
Nikes outsourcing has also lead to claims of factories overworking employees for little pay.
Banjo further mentions that in 2006 a non-profit group emailed Nike asking why they refused to
raise wages for 10,000 employees in Bangalore, India, even though it was a government
mandated increase (para. 10). Phil Knight of Nike responded to these issues by denying Nikes

responsibility for worker safety or labor conditions because they did not directly own the
factories these employees were working in (para. 16). Though Nike would like to stray away
from fault, the problem again lays in Nikes lack of interconnectedness and inability to control
factory and worker conditions far outside its own headquarters. If outsourcing Nike production
did not already present enough issues, Nike has also been targeted for child labor. Banjo
describes a 1996 Life Magazine article titled Six Cents an Hour which featured a Pakistani boy
stitching Nike soccer balls (para. 12). Considering the numerous workers rights violated due to
Nikes outsourcing, it is clear that Nike needs to change they way it produces their merchandise.
Public Image (Brand & Value)
Max Nisen (2013) notes in his article How Nike Solved Its Sweatshop Problem in 1991 Nike
became the target of an investigation of labor practices by Jeff Ballinger (para. 5). A year later
Ballinger published his report, making the low wages and poor working conditions in Nikes
factories headline news. Nike faced about a decade of strict public scrutiny following the release
of the report. Nike clothing and gear was protested at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics, a major
revenue source for the brand (Ibid).The public image of Nike only worsened in the following
years. In an effort to increase sales, more retail stores were opened in the U.S., leading to more
protests by the public (Ibid). Starting in 1997, Nikes athletes began to be questioned about
Nikes outsourcing practices in post-game interviews. Nikes flagship athlete, Michael Jordan,
was often asked about his views on Nikes labor practices, proving that the Nike Sweatshop
Controversy was capturing the nations attention (Ibid).Nikes controversy quickly became more
than just a political topic, it began to cross the border into the sporting events that made Nike
popular. College students, enraged by the abuse of Nikes employees even began protesting Nike
across the nation's college campuses, putting even more pressure on Nike to improve working
conditions (Ibid).
Only a few years after the release of Ballingers investigation, Nike went from being the worlds
favorite athletic brand to one of the most hated corporations in the world. All the negative press
led to a sharp decline in sales, just over 8% in 1998(Wazir, 2001, para.18)To make matters worse
Nikes stock fell by about 15% in 1999, proving Phil Knights (current CEO at the time) quote
that, the American consumer doesnt want to buy products made under abusive
conditions(Nisen, 2013, para.5). During this time, rival athletic clothing and shoe companies

enjoyed increased success. Reebok, a rival shoemaker saw its stock rise from $8 a share to over
$30 (Ibid). Customers were clearly upset enough about Nikes labor practices to stop buying
Nike products and switch to competitors goods. The losses in revenue and customer support can
be mended with a more reliable supply chain.
Supply Chain Stability
When a company decides to outsource their production, management of the supply chain
becomes disconnected and harder to control. Communication becomes a struggle due to
language barriers between Nike executives and third party factory owners in countries such as
Vietnam. These problems with communication can and do create larger problems for the
company. Communicating with third party manufacturers on the other side of the world, (who do
not speak the same language) is no easy task. In order for Nikes headquarters in Oregon to speak
with factory owners in Asia, lines of communication must be set up. This is usually done by
setting up various telecommunication lines (i.e., video chats, virtual conference rooms etc.),
which are generally expensive and time consuming. Reliability of the network is also an issue,
especially in third world countries who are lacking up-to-date technology and infrastructure. If a
factory is unable to be contacted because of a lack of communication lines, further problems will
occur. For example, enough goods may not be produced creating an unfilled order or completed
goods may miss their designated shipment times back to U.S. retail stores. Nike production
shipments leaving Asia are transported on cargo ships that use the Panama Canal. According to
Bloomberg (2013), in order for Nike to ship 10 containers of gear through the Panama Canal,
they will be charged around $1,000 per container from just the shipping company alone (para.5).
This cost does not include the cost of transportation from the factory to the shipping yard or any
other loading fees that will occur. Considering Nike makes thousands of shipments daily from
multiple Asian countries, these shipping costs add up quickly. During the process of shipping
products from Asia to the U.S. the merchandise is susceptible to damage. The packaging that
Nike gear is shipped in is often tampered or even destroyed, both by other goods in transit and by
the heavy machinery used to load and unload the shipment. In 1990 a cargo ship leaving from
Korea in route to the United States was caught in a storm. A large wave rocked the ship causing
21 cargo containers to go overboard. A total of about 80,000 Nike shoes were in the containers
that went overboard (Posada, 2010, para.1). At an average of $80 of revenue per pair of shoes,

Nike approximately $6.4 million in sales revenue, not to mention further harming their public
image by contributing to the pollution of the oceans.
At the end of the day, the money Nike saves through less expensive labor overseas is eventually
spent on costs related to outsourcing. Companies who choose to keep production in the U.S.
enjoy a more stable infrastructure and a more manageable supply chain. A simplified supply
chain makes a corporation more efficient, leading to a larger profit margin. This reduces the
stress of relying on other countries to ensure the stability of the company. In fact, there are
numerous benefits to insourcing, all of which helps a company's success and image.
Benefits of Insourcing: Boost American Economy
Many corporations choose to outsource jobs overseas because they believe it saves them
production costs. However, these United States based corporations are not seeing the entire
picture. Outsourcing at first sight seems like the perfect short term answer to any large
corporations problems, but outsourcing actually hinders corporations from expanding in the long
run. Overall, in order to sustainably grow a corporation to a certain level of control, business
operations must be maintained. Insourcing all business operations allows corporations to
maintain complete, or at least a larger amount of control. When corporations such as Nike
contract out their manufacturing operations, they lose abilities to maintain control over their
production costs. The less amount of control a corporation has, the less efficiently the resources
are used. There is also issues with transporting goods back to the United States, such as product
shipments being delayed or products getting lost or damaged during shipment.
As shown in the figure 1 below, the United States contrived roughly $12.3 billion, which is about
45% of Nikes $27.8 billion revenue in 2014 (Nikes Revenue, 2015; Nike Inc., 2015). Not only
is a low percentage of Nikes production coming from the United States, but the U.S. makes up
the majority of Nikes sales. So, Nike is paying to ship inventory thousands of miles to their
largest customer. The profit margin is diminished heavily when you look at the price to produce,
store, ship, and manage all of the products that are manufactured overseas.

Figure 1.

As figure 1 depicts, the emerging markets where Nike products are produced account for little of
Nikes revenue. In fact, these markets only make up less than one third of U.S. revenues for Nike
products. All of these risks just to turn around and sell products to someone that is at your
doorstep, are risks that are unnecessary and can be damaging to much more than just a
corporations profit.
Insourcing would cost corporations more money in the short run, but the costs pale in
comparison to the long run opportunity cost of outsourcing. Not only would insourcing create
thousands of American jobs, but it would also allow corporations to develop more efficient and
technological methods of manufacturing products. Rather than outsourcing them to obsolete and
inefficient factories overseas. This would allow corporations to focus financial resources towards
marketing and other important business operations that would increase sales. There has been
numerous companies which have successfully transitioned from outsourcing to insourcing,
proving it viable.
Companies have Insourced Successfully

With outsourcing being a reliable business operation in the past, todays complex world economy
is diminishing the benefits of outsourcing. While overseas production generally yields high
profits, the question of ethical and moral dilemmas persists. Companies also face the issue of
how to insource successfully. As Americans know, current President Barack Obama made way
with his infamous slogan change, which he has advocated quite regularly. President Obama has
pushed for change in many realms of American society and politics including the debate for
insourcing. David Schepp (2012) explains how insourcing is becoming a new trend for American
companies in an article titled 8 Employers Buck Outsourcing Trend, Bring Jobs Back to America.
Schepp notes how Starbucks Coffee Company is one of the latest examples of this trend by
cutting ties with Chinese factories and returning manufacturing of 20,000 coffee mugs to an Ohio
pottery maker (para. 2). CEO of Starbucks Howard Schurtz told NPR even though its more
expensive to manufacture this mug in the U.S. than it would be in Korea or Mexico, this is what
we need to do (para. 3). With outsourcing making economic sense in the past, overseas
production is having less economic success today with rising production and shipping costs.
Referencing from the same article, the Boston Consulting Group said U.S. employers decisions
to bring jobs back to the U.S. is still in the early stages, but we believe it will accelerate in the
years ahead (para. 6). Starbucks is not the only company to prove this trend will accelerate in
years to come. Ford Motor Company has returned 2,000 plus jobs to Fords factories in the U.S.
from outside suppliers, in accordance with the United Auto Workers agreement (para. 9). Seeing
as this article was written in 2013, the company today is leading the way with an even bigger
pool of American applicants and jobs. It is not just large corporations either, smaller companies
are seeking the transition from outsourcing to insourcing, finding insourcing to be a more
manageable and fluid technique for running a business. Peerless Industries Incorporated, a
producer of mounting systems for flat-screen televisions, recently relocated all of its
manufacturing from China to a new facility in Chicago, which has created 85 U.S. jobs (para 10).
Every act of supporting U.S. culture and economy is important and even though 85 jobs may not
seem like a huge impact, every business, organization, or corporation has the responsibility to
operate as ethically as possible. Increasingly, the American public is showing support for
insourcing movements.

Customers will Support Insourcing

Throughout this paper we have highlighted some important issues regarding insourcing and
outsourcing controversies for U.S. companies. All of which plays background to the fact that
American customers want and support insourcing movements. The obvious support system and
motive behind American customers pushing for companies to insource is the creation of jobs. In
fact, figure 2 below presented by Shelly Banjo shows the influx of jobs that Nike is producing
overseas.
Figure 2.

As figure 2 illustrates, American workers are out nearly one million job opportunities to
outsourced Nike production. Americans who are currently unemployed desperately need these
jobs. Additionally, employed Americans would push for this movement because the creation of
jobs will open a whole new circulation of revenue, creating more money and healthier American
economy. With more Americans gaining jobs from companies who insource, they will be more
supportive of these companies, who are in-turn supporting the people in their home country.
Recommendation and Conclusion

After analyzing the effects of outsourcing on a corporation, 13 Consulting Company

recommends Nike ceases all production in factories outside of the U.S. Considering the time and
resources required to move production to the United States, we believe by the year 2025, Nike
should be able to move all operations to the U.S.
Throughout our research we have discovered many benefits to insourcing merchandise
production. The best way for Nike to fully repair its public image from the sweatshop
controversy that was exposed in the 1990s is to end all operations in countries outside of the U.S.
As presented in our research above of companies such as Starbucks and Ford Motor Company,
the American public thinks highly of companies who produce their goods in the U.S. If all
production jobs are brought to the U.S. Nike will create roughly 550,000 new jobs in America,
putting the nations unemployed back to work (Beder, 2002, p. 9).
The creation of 550,000 new jobs will be great for the American economy. With our economy
becoming increasingly unstable and still attempting to recover from the market crash in 2008,
America is in need of jobs to support the growing population. If Nike puts over half a million
people to work, there is no doubt the economy will be boosted.
Along with a major boost to Nikes reputation, insourcing will drastically simplify the supply
chain. Nike will no longer have to spend large quantities of time and money on shipping finished
goods from Asia to the U.S. The supply chain will become more integrated and connected,
allowing executives and factory owners to communicate easier. Also Nike representatives will be
able to audit third party factories much easier because they will no longer be located on the other
side of the world. Nike will then be able to manage relations closer to home, eliminating the
chance of further controversies with third party Nike manufacturing companies overseas. Not
only will Nike be able to better manage the treatment of workers, but quality of production will
also be easier to monitor. If factories are located in the U.S. workers will have greater access to
the latest technology, improving the quality and durability of goods sold by Nike. This will cut
down on profit Nike loses on product returns and all the related shipping and replacement costs.
Brand loyalty will also increase due to the increased reliability and lifespan of Nike products
made in the United States.

The only downfall of insourcing production that 13 Consulting Company found was the
increased labor costs. Due to higher minimum wage laws in the United States compared to Asia,
Nike will need to pay each American laborer more. Per month, U.S. workers will be paid more
than 100 times the amount Vietnamese laborers would. Although Nike will spend significantly
more on labor, costs related to outsourcing such as shipping, will be virtually eliminated.
AlixPartners (2013), a global consulting firm, predicts that by the end of 2015 producing in
China will be just as expensive as it is in the United States (para. 8). Steve Maurer, a managing
director at AlixPartners, cites rising shipping costs as the reason outsourcing is becoming less
and less profitable.
If outsourcing is no longer as profitable as it was 20 years ago, there is no reason for Nike to
continue to manufacture their goods overseas. Through hours of comprehensive research, 13
Consulting Company has identified the benefits Nike will experience if all production is
insourced by the year 2025. If Nike wants to fully repair its public image, becoming one of the
first American apparel companies to produce all goods in the U.S, will to just that and more.

Based on the findings provided, we believe that insourcing Nikes production will increase
customer satisfaction and will yield a stronger community of people for future business relations

References
(1996, September 19). The global sweatshop. Far Eastern Economic Review. p. 5.
Banjo, S. (2014, April 21). Inside Nike's Struggle to Balance Cost and Worker Safety in
Bangladesh. In Wall Street Journal. Retrieved April 11, 2015, from
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303873604579493502231397942
Beder, S. (2002, March). Environmentalists Help Manage Corporate Reputation: Changing
Perceptions not Behaviour. In University of Wollongong Research Online. Retrieved
from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1036&context=artspapers
Bloomberg. (2013, March 11). Maersk Line Ships Will No Longer Transit Panama Canal.
In G-Captain. Retrieved April 16, 2015, from http://gcaptain.com/maersk-line-shipslonger-transit/
Chung, K. C., Derdenger, T. P., & Srinivasan, K. (2013). Economic Value of Celebrity
Endorsements: Tiger Woods' Impact on Sales of Nike Golf Balls. Marketing Science,
32(2), 271-293. doi:10.1287/mksc.1120.0760
Joseph, S. (2013). Nike cuts agencies out of social media management. Marketing Week, 5.
Locke, R., Kochan, T., Romis, M., & Fei, Q. (2007). Beyond corporate codes of conduct: Work
organization and labour standards at Nike's suppliers. International Labour Review,
146 (1/2), 21-37.
Lund-Thomsen, P., & Coe, N. M. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and labour agency: the
case of Nike in Pakistan. Journal Of Economic Geography, 15(2), 275-29
NIKE AND GAP SCRAMBLE IN VIETNAM. (2003). Far Eastern Economic Review, 166(31),

8.6.
Nike Faces New Worker Abuse Claims In Indonesia (2011, September 12). In Huffington Post
Business. Retrieved April 14, 2015, from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/13/nike-faces-new-worker-abuseindonesia_n_896816.html
Nike, Inc. reports fiscal 2014 fourth quarter and full year results (2014, July 26). In Nike.
Retrieved April 7, 2015, from http://news.nike.com/news/nike-inc-reports-fiscal-2014
fourth-quarter-and-full-year-results-fiscal-2014-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-results
Nike's revenue worldwide from 2009 to 2014, by region (in million U.S. dollars). (2015).
In Statista. Retrieved April 12, 2015, from
http://www.statista.com/statistics/241692/nikes-sales-by-region-since-2007/
Nisen, M. (n.d.). How Nike solved its sweatshop problem. In Business Insider. Retrieved May 9,
2013, from http://www.businessinsider.com/how-nike-solved-its-sweatshop-problem
2013-5
Podsada, J. (2001, June 19). Lost Sea Cargo: Beach Bounty or Junk?. In National Geographic.
Retrieved April 16, 2015, from
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/06/0619_seacargo.html
Quinn, J. B., & Hilmer, F. G. (1994). Strategic Outsourcing. Sloan Management Review, 35(4),
43-55.
Schepp, D. (2012, June 13). 8 Employers Buck Outsourcing Trend, Bring Jobs Back To
America. In Aol. Retrieved April 9, 2015, from http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/06/13/8employers-that-are-bringing-jobs-back-to-america/
Tsay, A. A. (2013). Chapter 2: Motivating Case Studies: Boeing's 787 Dreamliner: Toysrus.com

and Amazon: Factory labor headaches for Apple and Foxconn: The original "Nike
moment". Foundations & Trends In Technology, Information & Operations Management,
7(1/2), 20-23. doi:10.1561/0200000030
Wilsey, M., & Lichtig, S. (n.d.). The Nike Controversy. In University of Stanford. Retrieved
April 9, 2015, from
https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297c/trade_environment/wheeling/hnike.html
Zhang, H., Ko, E., & Lee, E. (2013). Moderating Effects of Nationality and Product Category on
the Relationship between Innovation and Customer Equity in Korea and China. Journal
Of Product Innovation Management, 30(1), 110-122. doi:10.1111/j.15405885.2012.00990.x

2013 Manufacturing-Sourcing Outlook. (2013, April 1). Retrieved April 24, 2015, from
http://www.alixpartners.com/en/Publications/AllArticles/tabid/635/articleType/ArticleView/articl
eId/602/2013-Manufacturing-Sourcing-Outlook.aspx#sthash.fqv4Sdx6.ctX5VcLZ.dpbs