In August 2014, SSC completed a peer benchmarking analysis of the athletic wear industry that examined the sustainability performance of five prominent brands: Adidas, Lululemon, Nike, Puma, and Under Armour. During this process, we focused on six different dimensions of sustainability with four categories as a part of each dimension: -Governance - Materiality, Ethics, Risk, Communications -Environment - Energy & Climate, Waste & Recycling, Water, Land Use & Biodiversity -Workplace - Diversity, Health & Safety, Training & Education, Working Conditions -Community - Philanthropy, Volunteering, Community Investment, Engagement -Product - Life Cycle Management, Product Quality, Product Safety, Packaging -Supply Chain - Materials Stewardship, Green Purchasing, Social Standards, Engagement Not only did we assign four categories to each dimension, but for thoroughness we applied a three prong analysis to each dimension reviewing policies, programs, and performance to each category. It is also important to note that SSC relies only on publically available data when conducting a peer benchmarking assessment.

1. PEER BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS
ATHLETIC WEAR BRANDS
AUGUST 2014

2. PEER BENCHMARKING – ATHLETIC BRANDS
In August 2014, SSC completed a peer
benchmarking analysis that examined the
sustainability performance of five different athletic
wear brands:
 Adidas
 Lululemon
 Nike
 Puma
 Under Armour
These five companies generate over $50 billion in
revenue each year with Nike pulling in the most at
$25 billion.
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Summary of Peer Performance
Overall by Dimension
Maximum Total Score = 144
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Governance Environment Workplace Community Product Supply Chain

3. OVERVIEW: ATHLETIC WEAR PEER BENCHMARKING
PROCESS
SSC's peer benchmarking focuses on six different dimensions of sustainability with four
categories as a part of each dimension:
Governance
• Materiality
• Ethics
• Risk
• Communications
Environment
• Energy &
Climate
• Waste &
Recycling
• Water
• Land Use &
Biodiversity
Workplace
• Diversity
• Health & Safety
• Training &
Education
• Working
Conditions
Community
• Philanthropy
• Volunteering
• Community
Investment
• Engagement
Product
• Life Cycle
Management
• Product Quality
• Product Safety
• Packaging
Supply Chain
• Materials
Stewardship
• Green
Purchasing
• Social Standards
• Engagement
Not only did we assign four categories to each dimension, but for thoroughness we applied a
three prong analysis to each dimension reviewing policies, programs, and performance.

4. THE 3 PRONG ANALYSIS
1) Policies: Companies with strong policies
have clear expectations for their corporation,
their leaders, their employees, and their
suppliers.
2) Programs: Companies with robust
programs have sustainability activities
integrated across the entire corporate
structure and embedded into key functions
(like product development).
3) Performance: Companies with high
performance marks have data and metrics to
back up their claims and measure progress
over time—as well as quantitative goals for
the future.
In the athletic wear industry, companies are
generally solid on sustainability policies, but
programs and performance vary dramatically.
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Summary of Peer Performance
Overall by Aspect
Maximum Total Score = 144
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Policy Programs Performance

5. DIMENSION #1: GOVERNANCE
The highest governance scores went to the
large companies, who generally face higher
pressure to disclose issues like sustainability
risk and corporate ethics.
Sustainability-related communications
proved to be a strong point among all
companies, with everyone at least having a
page on their website dedicated to
sustainability.
Materiality is still an emerging issue, with
two companies receiving no points in this
area.
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dimension - Governance
Maximum Total Score = 24
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Communications
Risk
Ethics
Materiality

6. DIMENSION #2: ENVIRONMENT
In the environment dimension, energy & climate
change and water are the leading categories
with all five companies receiving points in each.
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
dimension, with only two companies (briefly)
addressing the issue.
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dimension - Environment
Maximum Total Score = 24
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Energy &
Climate
Change
Waste &
Recycling
Water
Land Use &
Biodiversity

7. DIMENSION #3: WORKPLACE
The workplace dimension is split into two
groups: the top dogs and 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 demonstrating 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.
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dimension - Workplace
Maximum Total Score = 24
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Diversity
Health & Safety
Training &
Education
Working
Conditions

8. DIMENSION #4: COMMUNITY
Dimension - Community
It’s unanimous: philanthropy carries
importance in all five companies. Each
company has at least a program in place, with
many companies having a set policy.
Community investment and volunteering
are more of a wildcard. Only Nike and Adidas
mention 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
and just briefly, too. 0
25
20
15
10
5
Maximum Total Score = 24
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Philanthropy
Volunteering
Community
Investment
Engagement

9. DIMENSION #5: PRODUCT
The product dimension is the weakest
dimension overall. The only category to be
address by all four companies was life cycle
management.
Product safety was either a big hitter
(Adidas, Puma) or it was hardly mentioned or
not mentioned at all.
Only two companies – Nike and Adidas –
received four points in all categories. They
were also the only companies to report on
packaging and product quality.
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dimension - Product
Maximum Total Score = 24
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Life Cycle
Management
Product Quality
Product Safety
Packaging

10. DIMENSION #6: SUPPLY CHAIN
The supply chain dimension was strong
overall, with each company recording points in
the three categories: social standards,
engagement, and materials stewardship.
While green purchasing is a major theme for
many companies, it is not highlighted as it
should be and requires a lot of digging through
websites to try and find a policy.
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dimension - Supply Chain
Maximum Total Score = 24
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Materials
Stewardship
Green Purchasing
Social Standards
Engagement

11. SUMMARY OF PEER PERFORMANCE
25
20
15
10
5
0
Summary of Peer Performance
By Dimension
Maximum Total Score = 24
Nike Adidas Puma Lululemon Under Armour
Governance Environment Workplace Community Product Supply Chain

12. TREND ANALYSIS
1. The supply chain and environment dimensions
are two of the strongest dimensions across all
companies
2. While the workplace dimension is one of the
higher-scoring dimensions for the top
companies, it is one of the lowest-scoring
dimension for the bottom companies
3. There is a significant drop off in points from
the top three companies to the bottom two –
there is no gradual decline, but rather an
obvious decrease in sustainability
performance

13. NOTES AND CAVEATS
Makes our lawyers happy!
 SSC relies on publically available data for our peer benchmarking process. Even though a company
might be doing more with sustainability than meets the eye, if it was not publically available, we did not
include that information in our analysis.
 This analysis has been prepared in good faith on the basis of information available at the date of
publication without any independent verification. Strategic Sustainability Consulting does not guarantee
or warrant the accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency of the information in this publication nor its
usefulness in achieving any purpose. Readers are responsible for assessing the relevance and
accuracy of the content of this publication. SSC will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost or expense
incurred or arising by reason of any person using or relying on information in this publication.
 Products may be identified by proprietary or trade names to help readers identify particular types of
products but this is not, and is not intended to be, an endorsement or recommendation of any product or
manufacturer referred to. Other products may perform as well or better than those specifically referred
to.

14. THANK YOU
WWW.SUSTAINABILITYCONSULTING.COM
INFO@SUSTAINABILITYCONSULTING.COM
1-202-470-3246
Want to see how your company
stacks up against its industry
peers? Contact us for more
information!