Case studies

After a successful transition from a projects-based IT business services company to a platform-driven analytics company, Saama's core leadership team gathered in 2017 to brainstorm the next phase of its growth. The year before, the team had decided to narrow its target market to the life sciences vertical. Saama now had to decide how to execute on this focused strategy by choosing a growth pathway within the life sciences vertical. Saama's leadership team was considering three alternatives: acquiring new customer accounts, developing existing customer accounts, or developing new products by harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain technologies. The team had to evaluate these growth pathways in terms of both short- and long-term revenue potential, as well as their potential for sustaining Saama's competitive advantage.

In the summer of 2014, a large energy company was poised to begin expanding its unconventional natural gas operations in northeastern British Columbia in the hopes of capitalizing on the Canadian province's determination to build a liquid natural gas industry. The company had secured mineral rights from the province but had not simultaneously pursued surface rights from a First Nation community that historically had used the land. When a seismic exploration team appeared on the tribe's traditional territory without consulting it, as was customary (and in some cases legally required), the company unwittingly ignited a firestorm of protest from both First Nation and non First Nation local citizens. Recognizing the importance of social acceptance both to operations and profitability, the company sent senior vice president Maria Paquet to participate in fireside discussions with tribal, regional government, and environmental leaders in the hopes of finding some common ground. Could these leaders arrive at sufficient trust and agreement to allow the company to move forward with its plans? Or would the company face gridlock, community blocking, or even financial peril? In a small-group role-playing exercise, students will step into the shoes of each of these stakeholders as they try to forge a path forward that is acceptable to all.

In 2008, Starbucks was in crisis as a result of undisciplined growth and loss of focus, and its stock declined almost 70%. In August of that year, Howard Schultz, the founder of Starbucks, came out of retirement to take over as the CEO. The company regained its footing by refocusing on its core and driving strong organic growth. By 2014, the stock price had reached $40, an all-time high. To prevent history from repeating itself, Schultz wanted to ensure that Starbucks' growth strategies not only addressed market opportunities, but also were aligned with the company's brand image, assets, and capabilities.

Starbucks announced a five-year growth plan in December 2014 with ambitious goals that included nearly doubling its revenues from $16 billion to $30 billion, doubling operating income, and expanding its footprint to more than 30,000 stores globally by 2019. The growth plan consisted of seven specific growth strategies, one of which was the New Occasions strategy. The objective of New Occasions was to drive growth by diversifying Starbucks' revenues beyond breakfast to the lunch, afternoon, and evening dayparts. Starbucks created specific offerings for each daypart, called the Lunch, Sunset, and Evenings programs. The case focuses on evaluating these three occasions-based growth opportunities and identifying the best path forward.

Polaris Battery Labs was an Oregon-based startup that provided innovation services to companies in the lithium ion battery industry. Its operating philosophy and expertise in this fast-growing industry enabled it to provide great value to its clients, but as a startup that was seeking growth the company was subject to multiple risks.

For Polaris, taking clients, developing new manufacturing capabilities to meet unproven battery technologies, and even extending credit to its clients posed real risk. Many of its clients were startups themselves and had a significant probability of failure. Others were established firms testing new and unproven battery technologies, many of which were unlikely to gain traction in the market.

The case examines how a technology-driven firm managed the risk of working with startups, claiming appropriate intellectual property, and developing a sustainable portfolio of clients.

Dr. Phillip Hoopes, a LASIK surgeon, is considering how to respond to discounting by his competitors. He had built a high-end practice with costly advanced technology, but discounters had recently entered the market and other high-end practices in the area were starting to offer deep promotions in an effort to compete.

Risk managers have more tools than ever to help protect their companies from risk. Complex financial instruments, intricate mathematical models, and access to massive amounts of data can help the risk manager structure a multifaceted strategy to decrease volatility and protect the company from a catastrophic event. However, these tools have their own risks that can complicate a risk manager's job.

Analyzing corn price volatility helps students understand four best practices for risk managers, regardless of the specific risks they face or the strategies they employ: quantify the company's exposure; understand the nature of the risk; understand how the hedge works in practice; and separate hedging and speculation.

As founders of First Interstate BancSystem, which held $8.6 billion in assets and had recently become a public company, and Padlock Ranch, which had over 11,000 head of cattle, the Scott family had to think carefully about business and family governance. Now entering its fifth generation, the family had over 80 shareholders across the US. In early 2016, the nine-member Scott Family Council (FC) and other family and business leaders considered the effectiveness of the Family Governance Leadership Development Initiative launched two years earlier. The initiative's aim was to ensure a pipeline of capable family leaders for the business boards, two foundation boards, and FC.

Seven family members had self-nominated for governance roles in mid-2015. As part of the development initiative, each was undergoing a leadership development process that included rigorous assessment and creation of a comprehensive development plan. As the nominees made their way through the process and other family members considered nominating themselves for future development, questions remained around several interrelated areas, including how to foster family engagement with governance roles while guarding against damaging competition among members; how to manage possible conflicts of interest around dual employee and governance roles; and how to extend the development process to governance for the foundations and FC. The FC considered how best to answer these and other questions, and whether the answers indicated the need to modify the fledgling initiative.

This case illustrates the challenges multigenerational family-owned enterprises face in developing governance leaders within the family. It serves as a good example of governance for a large group of cousins within a multienterprise portfolio. Students can learn and apply insights from this valuable illustration of family values, vision, and mission statement.

It was early 2015 and executives in iShares' Factor Strategies Group were considering the launch of a new class of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) called smart beta funds. Specifically, the group was considering smart beta multifactor ETFs that would provide investors with simultaneous exposure to four fundamental factors that had shown themselves historically to be significant in driving stock returns: the stock market value of a firm, the relative value of a firm's financial position, the quality of a firm's financial position, and the momentum of a firm's stock price. The executives at iShares were unsure whether there would be demand in the marketplace for such multifactor ETFs, since their value added from an investor's portfolio perspective was unknown. Students will act as researchers for iShares' Factor Strategies Group and conduct detailed analysis of Fama and French's five-factor model and the momentum effect, smart beta ETFs including multifactor ETFs, and factor investing with smart beta ETFs to help iShares make its decision.

In this case, lessons from the Chicago Benchmarking Collaborative illustrate key principles of collaborative action and the importance of using data to achieve SMART goals.

In 2015, the Chicago Benchmarking Collaborative (CBC) was a network of seven agencies in Chicago, Illinois, serving 12,000 low-income residents. Each of the agencies had early childhood, school-age children, and adult education programs. At the prompting of the Chicago Community Trust, they came together to (1) benchmark their education programs outputs and outcomes; (2) learn and share best practices through developing a common set of metrics and measurements and implementing these measurements into a case management software system; and (3) share the costs of the case management software system to be used for program evaluation and continuous quality improvement.

Three aspects of CBC are particularly noteworthy. First, there are no joint program activities or clients among these agencies. Their exchange is limited to sharing data and other information. This makes CBC distinct from collaborations formed to begin a program or to advocate for a policy. Second, the group requires each agency to enter data on a timely basis and to set SMART goals based on the data reports. The agencies are held mutually accountable for their work to achieve their own SMART goals during the year and report on progress. Third, CBC used monetary incentives to ensure that data entry and SMART goal action remained a priority for each agency.

Alice Monroe, a 30-year-old married mother of two, was an admissions officer at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. She was just completing her first year of service at Northwestern and qualified for the university's 403(b) retirement plan. It was early October 2017, and she had until the end of the month to decide if and to what extent she would participate in Northwestern's retirement plan–that is, how much of her salary should she put into the retirement plan, and into which mutual fund or funds should she allocate her savings?

The case includes background on defined contribution and benefit plans as well as mutual funds. It goes into detail about Northwestern's retirement plan, including data on the performance of 15 of the plan's core mutual funds. The case also provides each fund's strategy, Morningstar Rating and Morningstar Category, expense ratio, assets under management, turnover rate, and historical performance for the last 10 years.

Using modern portfolio theory (diversification and risk-return trade-off) and with an understanding of mutual fund fees and the tax advantages of retirement savings, students will decide how much Alice should invest and in which mutual funds.