Case studies

The case delves into the significant factors contributing to the steep decline of Sintex shares, examining both external and internal factors. Internally, the primary drivers were the expansion plan, the demerger decision, financial mismanagement and the delayed and inadequate integration of Information Technology (IT) into the business.

Sintex, a prominent private sector company listed in the Indian stock markets, operated in the textile and plastics sectors. However, in 2017, Sintex underwent a demerger into two separate entities: Sintex Industries Limited (SIL) and Sintex Plastics Technology Limited (SPTL). While SIL focused on textiles, SPTL dealt with plastics. However, soon after the demerger, the share prices of both companies began plummeting, leading to significant losses for investors. This case investigates the reasons behind this decline through a step-by-step analysis.

This case is suitable for postgraduate students pursuing an MBA, MMS and executive programs such as PGDBM and PGDM, with a specialization in business strategy. It is also beneficial for participants in management development programs (MDPs) designed for higher level executives. Additionally, the case can serve as training material for executives undergoing strategic role training within an organization. It is recommended to teach the case toward the end of the course, where the instructor can provide a summary of the previous classes’ teachings.

CCS7: Management Science

This case was designed to facilitate discussion of how a cyberattack was remediated by a major public university. Students are challenged to think through how to best manage the remediation project, including the application of best practices such as risk management, stakeholder management, communication plans, outsourcing/procurement management, and cyberattack remediation. The Phoenix Project was a success from multiple perspectives, and as such provides a useful example of how to manage an unplanned, mission-critical project well.

Communication Solutions (CS), a woman-owned business, experienced fast growth at its inception, and then found itself slowing after the mid-2000s recession. The firm provides consulting services, primarily to government agencies. The owners have brought the business to sales of about $10.5 million in 2012, but revenues declined following that peak year because of cutbacks in government spending and founder Jennifer Madison’s detachment from the business. Even though they recognize that it may not be an ideal time to sell, they are tired of running the business and want to sell now, as long as they can pay off their debts.

This case was researched through multiple interviews with Mark and Jennifer, who provided all of the financial data and background. All financial statements given in the case provide actual CS numbers. The name of the company and the names of the owners have been changed, at their request to disguise the company. At the time this case was written, the owners were in negotiation with a potential bidder, and did not want their names or their company name to be used. Market information and information about comparable companies was researched using publicly available financial data bases.

This case has the potential to be used in a variety of classes, depending on what the instructor wishes to emphasize. The author uses the case as a valuation case in a corporate finance class (suitable for undergraduates or MBAs), allowing students practice in discounted cash flow valuation and comparable multiples valuation. It could be used in an investments class which teaches business valuation, particularly in teaching valuation using market multiples. The case could be used in an entrepreneurial finance class. The author uses this case to illustrate the difficulties of business valuation with messy (but real) data.

This case explores small business valuation and exit strategies for founders. Students can put themselves in the position of small business owners who are ready to exit. Students should value the firm using discounted cash flow and multiples valuation, which includes making assumptions about the future growth of the firm. While there is likely to be reasonable agreement on the “as is” valuation, there may be great variation concerning the assumptions and valuations of the company as it could be. Students can discuss (and implement) adjustments made when using large company comparables to value a much smaller company.

This case traces through a 20-year history of a Chinese high-tech company, Maipu Communications Technology Company. Throughout the company’s growth, Maipu adjusted its innovation models in order to ensure that they remained compatible with corporate strategies, resources and external environments. However, as the company grew bigger, it was finding it more and more difficult to meet its innovation goals. Its current innovation model is a market-driven platform + distributed innovation. While Maipu has achieved some success under this model, it is faced with a myriad of challenges during the execution of the model. The key questions raised by this case are whether Maipu’s current innovation model is suitable for the company at this stage and how the innovation model should be adjusted to propel new innovation and growth opportunities for Maipu in this increasingly competitive market.

This case was a field research case. The authors paid three visits to Maipu Communications Technology Company, during which the authors conducted in-depth interviews with Mr Zhao, the Head of Maipu’s R&D and Innovation group, and several senior and functional managers of the company. Follow-up communication via telephone and e-mail was conducted to verify the accuracy of the written case.

This case is well suited for courses in the areas of strategic management, innovation management, high-tech management, entrepreneurship, and international business. The target audiences of the case are primarily MBA students, although this case can also be used in upper-level undergraduate business courses.

The theoretical basis for this case includes the following management theories: strategy formulation and strategy implementation, business-level and corporate-level strategies, enterprise life-cycle, corporate strategies at various stages of growth, patterns of innovation and applications, and implementation of innovation strategies.

This case could be used in entrepreneurship, strategy, and small-business courses. It presents classic issues regarding successful start-ups such as how to choose from a multitude of growth opportunities; how to pace growth so as not to dilute quality control and financial risk tolerance; and how to choose a strategic focus.

This case describes the evolution of an entrepreneur's venture-capital fund-raising from seed-stage financing through later-round efforts. The case focuses on where the “action” is in venture finance: the exploitation of social capital by an entrepreneur and investors. Much of the teaching materials on venture finance focus on the economics of financing; while these materials provide useful information about the mechanics of valuation and how to structure venture-capital agreements, they miss the social side of venture-capital investing. The case illustrates the theoretical concept that social capital (i.e., a person's relationship to other people in society) influences venture finance. The case can be used in a class on entrepreneurship or venture finance.

The business-travel department of American Express is facing rapid growth in demand but is plagued with overstaffing in some offices because of the broad distribution of client demand. Management's challenge is to reduce costs in local offices while maintaining a high level of service. One alternative under consideration is a centralized regional business-travel center to handle reservation functions for up to 20 other Amexco offices. This case gives students the opportunity to apply queuing theory to a practical situation. Normally, in order to facilitate the numerous calculations required, it is used with the UVA “QUEUE” program.

Lewis Byrd, a partner in the private equity firm Opportunity Capital Partners, is managing a number of interconnected issues. First, in his role as investment professional responsible for the firm's investment in a doghouse manufacturing company called Dogloo, he has to manage a relationship with an entrepreneur who has behaved in a way that has made coinvestors nervous about his skills as a CEO. The CEO, Aurelio Barretto, is a Cuban immigrant who has established a close confiding relationship with Byrd, who is an African American. Barretto has increasingly relied on Byrd to run interference for him with investors, while also providing the strategic advice that typically supports an investor-entrepreneur relationship. Another issue is that there is a potentially costly lawsuit looming involving copyright infringement by a larger, well-funded competitor in the pet products market. Byrd has to manage potentially volatile relationships while determining what's best for his firm from an investment standpoint and how best to advise Barretto to proceed. The case provides insights into the challenges in private equity investing that occur after the striking of the financial deal. The case also provides information for students about the technical and legal structure of private equity financing.

This case explores the decision of a fast-growing company to expand its distribution network. Financial information is provided in it so students can understand the basic distribution network design covering inbound transportation, outbound transportation, distribution-center operations, and inventory.

This case is used in Darden's Supply-Chain Operations elective. The field-based case gives supply-chain educators the ability to teach the newsvendor model with pricing under a capacity constraint using real-life decisions. By 2005, Eastman Chemical Company, based in Tennessee, had created a new specialty plastic, Tritan, which demonstrated heat resistance and durability properties that might allow Eastman to compete in the lucrative polycarbonate plastics market. Development of this product was a major breakthrough for both Eastman and the broader chemical industry. The Eastman specialty plastics team had to contend with numerous challenges, however, before producing Tritan at full scale. First, Eastman had to commercialize a completely new material that only had been produced in the lab; second, the team had to develop a supply chain to manufacture a new component (monomer) and a new product (polymer) simultaneously; and finally, it had to analyze market entrance options given capacity constraints. Thus, the specialty plastics team faced several dilemmas: who should the initial launch partners be, given Eastman's limited manufacturing capacity, and how aggressively should Eastman price Tritan, given that price would drive demand in the launch markets and in new markets?