Case studies

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.

The case puts students in the shoes of Todd Davis, founder and CEO of a boutique brownfield redevelopment firm, Hemisphere Development, in 2010. Davis is wrestling with decisions and processes surrounding the potential acquisition and redevelopment of the former Delphi Automotive plant in Columbus, Ohio. When making the investment decision, Davis (and students) must consider various factors: What is Hemisphere's implicit investment strategy, and what are the firm's core competencies? How should the firm finance this transaction to achieve an acceptable return?

• Practice creatively structuring and financing unique transactions

• Describe the importance of baseline analysis in dealing with contaminated or potentially contaminated properties, and understand that the timing of baseline analysis can be crucial in determining the viability of a transaction

• State the importance of each type of constituent in public-private transactions

• Recognize the benefits of specialized/niche expertise in deal-makin

Practice creatively structuring and financing unique transactions

Describe the importance of baseline analysis in dealing with contaminated or potentially contaminated properties, and understand that the timing of baseline analysis can be crucial in determining the viability of a transaction

State the importance of each type of constituent in public-private transactions

Recognize the benefits of specialized/niche expertise in deal-makin

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?

Hewlett-Packard (HP) had a long history of engaging in corporate citizenship, dating back to its founding. By 2009, however, under the leadership of its latest CEO, Mark Hurd, the company had lost its focus on corporate social responsibility (CSR). Hurd instead focused on undertaking a financial turnaround and overcoming other reputational challenges; he viewed CSR and philanthropic efforts as costs rather than as strategic levers. He instituted widespread cost-cutting measures to get HP back on track, including reducing CSR expenditure. The HP board, however, did not want to let CSR go by the wayside; in fact, it wanted HP to reorganize and restrategize its approach to corporate citizenship.

The case focuses on this strategic transformation from traditional, cost-center CSR to business-aligned social innovation. It outlines the details of the board's approval of the new strategy, and then discusses how HP employees worked to reorganize their CSR activity. The new team, the Office of Global Social Innovation (OGSI), had to devise a pilot project to demonstrate the new approach. The project under consideration was an engagement that would improve the early infant diagnosis process for testing infants for HIV in Kenya—an area virtually unknown to HP. The case asks students to assess the work of the OGSI team thus far, and to put themselves in the shoes of one team member who had to justify the project to HP's leadership.

The case is especially important for demonstrating the most recent shifts across some leading companies regarding how they position CSR, as well as how for-profit leaders can structure partnerships for impact.

After reading and analyzing the case, students will be able to: understand current shifts from traditional corporate social responsibility work to social innovation; understand the challenges facing leading companies as they seek to do well (enhance the company's bottom-line performance) by doing good (making social impact); identify best practices for developing partnerships for impact; articulate a project's social impact and how it aligns with a desirable business impact.

One Acre Fund (1AF) is a nonprofit organization in rural western Kenya that helps farmers lift themselves out of poverty by providing a bundle of products and services that support farmers with quality inputs, training on farming techniques, access to credit, and assistance in achieving optimal prices. Since the organization's founding nearly a decade ago, it has grown to serve over 180,000 farm families annually as of July 2014. This high level of penetration into rural Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi, and Tanzania makes 1AF a potential distribution channel for rolling out new products and technologies that could benefit farmers and their families. The organization prides itself on its innovative culture, and always strives to offer new products and methods to its farmers. In 2011 1AF realized that it needed to formalize its innovation process to ensure it was confident in new products before rolling them out across its entire farmer network. It therefore created a robust, multistep evaluation framework to assess new innovations on four criteria: impact, adoptability, simplicity, and operability.

After reading and analyzing the case, students will be able to:

• Articulate the importance of understanding the user's needs and perspective throughout the innovation process

• Identify key factors for a successful product launch into an existing channel

• Employ an assessment framework to analyze the viability of a potential innovation

• Design a test pilot for evaluating the launch of new innovations within an organization

Articulate the importance of understanding the user's needs and perspective throughout the innovation process

Identify key factors for a successful product launch into an existing channel

Employ an assessment framework to analyze the viability of a potential innovation

Design a test pilot for evaluating the launch of new innovations within an organization

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.

The Joyoung brand was launched in 1994 when a group of recent college graduates invented the world's first automatic hot soymilk-maker home appliance. After some ups and downs, the Joyoung manufacturer founded the Shandong Joyoung Electric Appliances Co., Ltd. in 2002. It was further reorganized to the current Joyoung Company Limited in September 2007. Joyoung's sales grew rapidly from RMB 6 million in 1994 to 120 million in 1999, and this trend has continued into the new century. By the first quarter in 2006, the signature product of Joyoung—the soymilk makers—alone have already surpassed the sales by Philips Home Appliances in the Chinese market. Contrary to its current success, however, Joyoung Soymilk Maker's launch did not go smoothly. When the first model of the automatic soymilk maker was introducted in 1994, people had no idea what this new creature was supposed to do. The first 2,000 units of Joyoung products remaintroducedined stacked in storage for months. Joyoung then decided to conduct some marketing research. Joyoung's repositioning strategies and new product developments based on their marketing research have been evidently successful, and they have defined a new product category in China and in the world.

A married couple who have a successful industrial B2B business evaluate whether or not to sell the business to two of their offspring, who are both entrepreneurial MBA graduates. Complicating factors include the fact that the sale price and structure need to finance the couple's retirement and give fair inheritance treatment to the remaining siblings. In addition, the father has had some health issues and the business is doing well, so there is a lot of forward momentum to sell to the next generation

Evaluate whether or not, and how, to keep a business founded and run by entrepreneurs as a family business into the sibling generation. Explore “escalation of commitment” and how it influences decisions to keep the business in the family or not.

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.