In the world of brands, this soul is cultivated through intuition, something that comes from living, breathing and immersing yourself in the culture and philosophy of the brand. Nike’s success is not based solely on data, but on the instincts of visionary designers and marketers who had a sense of the streets and the athletic fields. People who made Nike resonate culturally, like Sergio Lozano, designer of the Air Max 95; Nate Jobe, who oversaw The Ten’s hugely successful collaboration with Virgil Abloh’s Off-White; and Tom Rushbrook, senior global design director, embodied this intuition. Yet, unsurprisingly, all of these key figures were part of the mass exodus of talent that occurred under Donahoe’s watch.
It all started when Donahoe took over as CEO and made the controversial decision to restructure Nike’s product and marketing departments, eliminating long-established categories such as running, soccer, basketball, fitness and training in favor of simplified, gender-focused labels such as “men,” “women,” and “kids.” This shift not only alienated a core group of designers and marketers, many of whom left in droves, but also blurred Nike’s ability to authentically speak to specific sports communities, diluting its competitive advantage by innovation and niche marketing.
Under Donahoe’s leadership, Nike centralized its marketing efforts and pushed for a digital-first strategy. This resulted in a move away from the bold, emotionally charged campaigns that once defined the brand, such as the iconic 1997 “Failure” ad, featuring Michael Jordan reflecting on his missed shots and defeats, and the “Find Your Greatness” from 2012. which celebrated ordinary athletes pushing their limits. These campaigns struck a chord with audiences because they addressed the universal themes of humanity’s struggle and triumph.
Instead, Nike opted for a more clinical algorithmic approach, which Giunco called an “infamous editorial strategy.” The goal was to produce micro-targeted content optimized for digital platforms, but this approach backfired.
Rather than creating compelling narratives, Nike flooded its social media channels with a deluge of content that was both costly and ineffective. These posts, designed to drive traffic to Nike’s e-commerce platforms, did little to convert visitors into customers. Worse yet, they eroded Nike’s once-powerful storytelling ability, leaving a void in the emotional connection with its audience.
Can Nike regain its cultural advantage?
Despite all this, Nike remains one of the most well-known and popular brands in the world. It is still the market leader in its sector and still makes $5 billion in earnings before interest and taxes each year ($5.7 billion in fiscal 2024) without a dollar of debt.
Nicoline Van Enter suggests that Nike could benefit from focusing on local manufacturing and innovation hubs, in the same way that On Running has benefited from its proximity to advanced manufacturing equipment in Europe.
