PR Gaffe Gives Nike Black Eye

When is the winner of a race not the winner of a race? Simple: When other racers don’t know what’s happening with all of the other racers or teams during a race.

Clear as mud? Let’s be more specific.

As I wrote yesterday on the SOAR Communications blog (see “Fastest Runner Finally ‘Wins’ Nike Women’s Marathon“), Arien O’Connell (photo above) posted the fastest time in this past Sunday’s race in San Francisco. However, because O’Connell didn’t start the race with the elite runners some 20 minutes before the 20,000 other runners, O’Connell’s time of 2:55:11 didn’t put her on the winner’s podium or give her the winner’s prizes.

Not fair. Maybe. But them’s the rules, both Nike’s and those of USA Track and Field. And for good reasons.

You always have at least two competitors in a race - other racers and yourself. Truth be told, the strategies and tactics that go into running a race don’t always mean running flat out from start to finish. In fact, sometimes the person who wins is she who has the best plan going into the race or he to adapts the best to the unfolding drama on the course.

Unfortunately, for Nike, few people outside of competitive/professional runners realize such strategies and/or rules exist.

Nevertheless, Nike could have had all of the runners start at the same time - apparently that’s their plan for next year’s Nike Women’s Marathon.

But this year, after word got out that O’Connell’s fastest time didn’t win the Nike Women’s Marathon all heck broke loose. Hundreds of comments, most negative toward Nike, were attached to online stories and blog posts.

Brian Solis of FutureWorks fame wrote an impressive blog post providing good background on the race (his wife and mom ran in the marathon), and then he appropriately lambasted Nike for dropping the PR ball in this instance.

Remember: Companies like Nike sponsor and/or produce events like marathons for very specific corporate goals. In the case of this marathon, I believe the three main purposes of the race were to A) raise money for cancer research, B) celebrate female athletes and “average” runners, and C) promote Nike.

Several days after the race, Nike backtracked (kind of) and named O’Connell “a” winner in the race. Not THE winner - A winner. She also got the same prize package as THE winner.

And as mentioned above, Nike also announced it will NOT have separate start times for elite runners and the rest of the pack in next year’s contest.

At the end of the day, these were the correct steps for Nike to take. But my heck, what a mistake by Nike and its marketing & PR teams to not honor O’Connell on race day.

If such an event had NEVER occurred before (a non-elite runner’s results surpassing those of a top elite finisher), that would be one thing.

But literally days before the running of the Nike Women’s Marathon a similar result had occurred with the Chicago Marathon when the fourth best time was posted by a non-elite runner. Except in this instance, Wesley Korir did NOT receive the $15,000 in prize money awarded to the 4th place finisher.

How did Nike not know this? And even if they didn’t know this had happened, how is it that a company dedicated to sport and celebrating the competitive nature of the human spirit didn’t immediately step forward and declare to the world,

“Wow! Look what happened. We’re so excited by Arien’s best time finish, we’re going to award her a prize package identical to the ‘official’ 1st Place finisher!”

Then everyone would have joined in celebrating with O’Connell and Nike, instead of decrying the company’s lack of fair play and its corporate callousness.

Nike gets a “Sad Betty” Award in my book, even if they did the right thing eventually.

They just didn’t “Do It” from the get-go, and that’s the problem.

The Role of Social Media in Branding Efforts »« 7-Election ‘08