Shoe Dog

Shoe Dog is broken up into 20 chapters, each roughly corresponding to one year of Knight’s life. Why does Knight tell the story this way? What narrative advantages does such a format offer, and what challenges might it pose?

Knight compresses more than 25 years of Nike’s history (spanning 1980 to 2006) into the Epilogue. Why does Shoe Dog focus primarily on the company’s early years while compressing the latter years into the final 30 pages?

Knight confesses that he wishes he was more present in his sons’ lives as they grew up. How does Knight’s frequent absence from his family lend nuance to his emphasis on success at any cost?

Knight expresses regret at sending out a memo to his company claiming to have a spy inside Onitsuka. Under what circumstances is Knight willing to engage in deception? How does this complicate his commitment to Telling the Truth as a Successful Business Strategy?

One of the book’s recurring motifs is victory and the drive to “never stop,” no matter what. How does this mantra affect Nike’s early history? How is it evident in Knight, both as an individual and as a leader?

Kitami believes Blue Ribbon broke its contract when it began producing Nike shoes, while Knight believes Kitami was being deceitful by looking for new distributors while still under contract with Blue Ribbon. If you were a jury member presiding over their court case, who would you side with, and why?

Knight’s early bankers find Blue Ribbon’s rapid growth dangerous, while Knight believes such growth signals a healthy business. What is Shoe Dog’s overall message about risk in business, and why might different people/entities see risk differently?

Knight says he felt a sense of betrayal when Nike came under attack for poor conditions in many of its factories worldwide. How does Knight respond to this crisis in the Epilogue? Does that response strike you as authentic or sufficient? Why or why not?