Case studies

Discusses the challenges that internal departments face as organizations grow and expand. The Field Museum in Chicago, Illinois, grew significantly over a short period of time, creating considerable problems in the finance department, as staff and systems failed to keep pace with the evolving demands placed by the museum departments. These problems resulted in outdated policies and procedures, unhappy users, and frustrated employees. The finance department needed big changes but had to make them while maintaining vital functions, improving morale, and instituting new policies and procedures. Discusses several key nonprofit management issues, including change management, the role of leadership in a crisis, the challenge of informal personnel networks and knowledge management, and key financial issues facing nonprofit organizations.

The purpose of this case is to introduce the topic of socially responsible investing from both the investor and investee perspectives. The students will walk away with an understanding of 1) how to evaluate a portfolio company on a social/environmental mission and on traditional financial criteria, and 2) what considerations should be top of mind for a social venture considering accepting an equity investment. Wes Selke is a portfolio manager at Good Capital, an investment fund created to increase the flow of capital to innovative nonprofit and for-profit social ventures that are using market-based solutions to solve problems of poverty, illiteracy, and inequality. In 2007, Good Capital is ready to make its first growth equity investment in a for-profit social enterprise and Selke is considering Better World Books as the firm's primary target. Selke must evaluate whether or not the firm is a financially sound investment and if its social and environmental missions can be preserved upon a liquidation event. If Good Capital proceeds with the investment, Selke must also rework some of Better World Books' current procedures, including fine-tuning the philanthropic giving strategy that is the main component of its social mission.

To expose students to both the investor and investee perspectives in social venture capital (SVC) deal ensuring they understand the criteria that must be considered when evaluating a potential investment in a for-profit social enterprise (investor perspective) and know what questions to ask both the investor and your organization before accepting an equity investment (investee perspective). To emphasize the importance of structuring a deal so that the social/environmental mission of a portfolio company is preserved upon exit.

The purpose of this case is to introduce the topic of socially responsible investing from both the investor and investee perspective. The students will walk away with an understanding of: 1) how to evaluate a portfolio company on a social/environmental mission as well as on traditional financial criteria and 2) what considerations should be top of mind for a social venture considering accepting an equity investment. Wes Selke is a portfolio manager at Good Capital, an investment fund created to increase the flow of capital to innovative non- and for-profit social ventures that are using market-based solutions to solve problems of poverty, illiteracy, and inequality. In 2007, Good Capital is ready to make its first growth equity investment in a for-profit social enterprise and Selke is considering Better World Books as the firm's primary target. Selke must evaluate whether or not the firm is a financially sound investment, and if its social and environmental mission can be preserved upon a liquidation event. If Good Capital proceeds with the investment, Selke must also rework some of Better World Books' current procedures, which includes fine-tuning the philanthropic giving strategy that is the main component of its social mission.

To expose students to both the investor and investee perspectives in social venture capital (SVC) deal ensuring they understand the criteria that must be considered when evaluating a potential investment in a for-profit social enterprise (investor perspective) and know what questions to ask both the investor and your organization before accepting an equity investment (investee perspective). To emphasize the importance of structuring a deal so that the social/environmental mission of a portfolio company is preserved upon exit.

By early 2009 Starbucks had nearly 17,000 stores worldwide, with about a third of these outside the United States. Despite multibillion-dollar annual revenues, the giant coffee retailer's yearly growth had declined by half, quarterly earnings had dropped as much as 97 percent, same-store sales were negative, and its stock price was languishing. Factors such as a global economic downturn and increasing competition in the specialty coffee market from large players such as McDonald's and Dunkin' Donuts had driven this decline, resulting in the closings of hundreds of domestic stores already, with many more planned. Founder Howard Schultz, who had recently returned as CEO, and his executive team were convinced that Starbucks's growth opportunities lay overseas, where the firm already had a strong foothold in markets like Japan and the United Kingdom and was preparing to open hundreds of new stores in a variety of locations. But recent international challenges, including the closing of most Australian stores due to sluggish sales, made clear that Starbucks had more to learn about bringing its value proposition—a combination of premium coffee, superior service, and a “coffeehouse experience”—to foreign soil. The key question was not whether Starbucks could transport its value proposition overseas, but how the value proposition's three elements would play in recently entered and new markets. And the stakes of making the right international moves rose with each U.S. store closure. Schultz and his team also faced a broader question, one that applied to both their U.S. and foreign stores: Could they “grow big and stay small,” remaining a huge retailer that delivered both high-quality products and a consistently intimate and enjoyable experience to consumers worldwide? This case presents this challenge in the context of Starbucks's history, well-established value proposition, and domestic and international growth and vision.

The key objectives of the case focus on the successful growth of local city brand, to a country brand, to a global brand, leaving the questions: 1. How much more can it grow? 2. Can it? 3. What is the impact of new competitors in a given market and/or the impact of the global economy on discretionary spending by a loyal customer base? 4. How important is it to the sustain a brand's core value(s) proposition when innovating for new audiences and customer preferences?

This case describes a newly promoted middle manager in a global, multi-cultural organization who is challenged by a number of factors in the workplace which are impacting her and her team's ability to perform to the expectations of her regional manager. While it would be easy to blame the new manager, deeper analysis in fact reveals that many forces are at work here in addition to her inexperience including communication of strategy and performance objectives, mismanaged team members, cultural inconsistencies, and a lack of leadership direction and/or skill from the very top to her supervising manager.

After reading and analyzing the case, students should be able to 1) analyze and diagnose unmet expectations for performance at work, 2) apply motivation theories and constructs to common behavioral and attitudinal challenges in a team setting, and 3) learn to avoid the fundamental attribution error described in the social psychological literature on judgment in decision-making.

Founded in San Francisco in 2009, Square finished 2012 as the darling of Silicon Valley; flush with more than $340 million in funding, the firm had grown to several hundred employees in just three short years. It processed more than $10 billion annually in credit and debit card payments from small business owners that used Square’s smartphone-enabled card swipe device wherever cellular or wireless Internet service was available.

However, Square’s success had attracted new entrants into the mobile payments processing space, both in the United States and abroad, threatening to derail the company’s remarkable trajectory. With its latest financing round valuing the company in excess of $3.4 billion, management and investors were considering which strategies would continue—even accelerate—the company’s growth

Square presents an opportunity for classes in strategy and technology management to contemplate the following:

• How can a startup disrupt an established set of incumbents without provoking a harsh competitive response?

• How can a growth company in a rapidly changing industry expand beyond the core competency that fueled its initial growth?

• Which growth platforms make the most sense for a company in a complicated ecosystem with many players offering divergent solutions?

How can a startup disrupt an established set of incumbents without provoking a harsh competitive response?

How can a growth company in a rapidly changing industry expand beyond the core competency that fueled its initial growth?

Which growth platforms make the most sense for a company in a complicated ecosystem with many players offering divergent solutions?

Jonathan Miller appeared in September 2009 on “Shark Tank,” the ABC television reality show featuring entrepreneurs versus angel investors in a discussion of the business value proposition and to win a negotiation for an investment from one of the 4 Sharks. The company he founded, Element Bars, a maker of custom energy bars, needed investment capital. Prior to appearing on the show, Miller had considered several financing options available to entrepreneurs: loans and other debt capital and equity capital, each of which are evaluated in the case. Miller had a good feel for the different types of capital to use for this new venture, having started several ventures in the past and winning the Kellogg School of Management business plan competition, the Kellogg Cup, in 2008. The case includes Miller's decision to forego the investment offer he won on television, instead he pursued lower cost of capital equity.

Students several aspects of raising capital, including raising equity and debt capital. Students need to learn to know as much or more about fundraising as the professionals who provide the capital-in fact, entrepreneurs have to understand the interaction among combinations of capital within their enterprise-whether debt and/or equity in different combinations. Often, teaching about equity relates to teaching how venture capital investment professionals look at deploying funds. Receiving equity into the entrepreneurial firm has much different attributes and issues. Teaching about debt often occurs at much higher volumes in typical MBA courses; this entrepreneurial debt must occur at a much smaller dollar value. This protagonist, Jonathan Miller, has exceptional preparation habits, which teaches students the value of the skills to prepare themselves and their businesses for investment.

Key State Blue Cross and Blue Shield Plan (a disguised case of an actual BCBS Plan) is the merged product of three state plans. Initially burdened with a reputation of poor customer service, Key State's executives decided to invest heavily in service improvement, eventually achieving superior levels. Key State's high-quality customer service emerged as a true competitive advantage for its customers, who were primarily businesses and health benefits consultants who influenced corporate purchasers of health insurance. The Key State brand came to be synonymous with personal service, security, choice, and dependability. But the health care insurance market was changing under Key State's feet. Spiraling costs meant that high-quality service became less of a competitive advantage as employers were lured by low-cost, low-service providers. Many employers cut or dropped health care benefits entirely, swelling the ranks of the under- and uninsured, who in turn were extremely price-sensitive when shopping for health insurance on their own. Finally, the health care insurance market was being revolutionized by financial institutions willing to hold health benefit accounts and pay providers directly, thereby eliminating the need for Key State as a mediator. Key State executives were aware of these changes but were challenged by the mindset, culture, and organizational design custom-fit to their business accounts. The case asks the reader to consider whether Key State has the right number of target markets, whether it should have one brand or several for its different target markets, what it should do for the uninsured, and how it should improve its brand experience in light of the industry's changing landscape. All of these decisions will have significant implications for the organizational design of Key State.

To better understand the challenges involved in a successful health insurance company to cope with a rapidly changing and unpredictable environment; to formulate a new strategy and a new organizational design to accomplish this adaptation.

The case depicts Krispy Kreme's franchise system growth and decline as a lesson to entrepreneurs running a company as a franchisor. Burton D. Cohen, retired senior vice president and chief franchise officer for McDonald's Corporation from 1980 to 1999, explains the strengths and weaknesses in Krispy Kreme's franchising strategy during the period from 1997 to 2006. Areas examined in the case include: franchisee agreements, accounting practices, volatility in stock valuation, franchise system growth, franchise ownership structure, product distribution strategy, and commissary growth. The case depicts how Krispy Kreme started and how it ended up in a low point.

Students learn: 1.

Middleby Corporation was a designer and manufacturer of commercial food processing and food service equipment for fast food as well as high-end restaurants. During the latter half of the 1990s, Middleby became increasingly unfocused as its number of product lines increased dramatically. Margins and sales slipped. At the same time, some of the company's high-profile product development initiatives ended in failure. Although Middleby's top management recognized some of these apparent warning signs, rather than take action, they seemed eager to blame the disappointing results solely on the company's overseas operations. This inaction caused Middleby's financial performance to deteriorate further, resulting in violations of its loan covenants. To finally correct the situation, Selim Bassoul was moved from his role as general manager of Middleby's Southbend plant up to chief operating officer for the entire corporation. Bassoul had taken the underperforming Southbend plant and turned it into a star performer, correcting and improving customer service, operations, and finances and establishing a clear strategic direction. Bassoul had to craft a turnaround plan for the entire company in the areas of strategy, operations, and finance. He cut the number of products substantially, fired some key customers after a customer profitability analysis, and focused product development on innovative products that saved Middleby's customers time and money. Following these changes and others, the company returned to profitability and Bassoul was named CEO. Bassoul then decided to present a major acquisition opportunity to the board of directors.

1. Successful turnarounds require three essential elements to be addressed: strategy, finance, and operations, all under the CEO's leadership. Students will learn how each element alone and in combination work to make a successful turnaround. 2. Students will learn turnaround leadership skills and see their parallel as entrepreneurial leadership skills. 3. Students will learn that decisions on products, customers, and employee motivation all affect a turnaround strategy.