Case studies

Tom McKillop, CEO of AstraZeneca, faced the classic quandary of large pharmaceutical firms. The firm's patent for Prilosec (active ingredient omeprazole) was expiring. Severe cost-based competition from generic drug manufacturers was inevitable. Patent expirations were nothing new for the US$15.8 billion in revenues drug firm, but Prilosec was the firm's most successful drug franchise, with global sales of US$6.2 billion. How could the company innovate its way around the generic cost-based competition and avoid the drop in revenues associated with generic drug market entry? AstraZeneca had other follow-on drugs in the pipeline—namely Nexium, an improvement on the original Prilosec molecule. Additionally, the company had the opportunity to introduce its own version of generic omeprazole, hence becoming the first mover in the generic segment, and/or introduce an OTC version of omeprazole that might tap into other markets. Ideally, AstraZeneca would like to move brand-loyal Prilosec customers to Nexium. In this market, direct-to-consumer advertising has remarkable efficacy. Classical marketing challenges of pricing and promotion need to be resolved for the Nexium launch as well as possible product and place challenges for the generic or OTC opportunity. Which combination of marketing options will allow the firm to best sustain the value of the original omeprazole innovation?

The central objective of the case is to teach students how marketing variables can be used by first movers with diverse product portfolios to fend off severe price competition. These variables include pricing, promotion, product, and place (distribution) options as considered in the context of branded, generic, and OTC pharmaceutical market segments.

The case opens with the Ford Motor Company seemingly on the path toward bankruptcy. Ford had been bleeding red ink for more than ten years when it decided in 2006 that continuing the same turnaround attempts was not going to right the ship. The company was facing significant external challenges, such as intense competition and changing consumer preferences, as well as internal challenges, such as quality and design issues and a stifling level of corporate complexity. As the case begins, CEO Bill Ford has taken the unusual step of hiring an auto industry outsider as his replacement. Alan Mulally, a thirty-seven-year Boeing veteran and principal architect of the venerable airplane manufacturer's own massive and successful turnaround, wasted little time in getting about the business of remaking Ford. He developed a plan to: focus on the Ford brand and divest the numerous other brands the company had acquired over the years; simplify and streamline the company's manufacturing operations; and remake the corporate culture from one of fiefdoms and false optimism to collaboration and facing reality. With an ardent belief in the plan's viability, Mulally raised nearly $24 billion and began to put his plan into motion. The case explores the many causes of this once-great company's decline and the steps it took to beat the odds and get back on the path of profitability.

This case demonstrates that internal issues alone can derail a company and emphasizes the importance of leadership in fostering the right corporate culture to turn a company around. Students will identify the key internal and external factors that can contribute to a company's decline and learn the importance of diagnosing issues within each of three major aspects of a company-strategy, operations, and financials-in order to develop a successful turnaround plan.

Bryan Preston, CEO of the Back Office Cooperative, leads several large human service providers through the process of building a shared-services platform to leverage scale and efficiencies. This successful collaboration matches the business case for restructuring against the constraints of mission-driven enterprises.

The case seeks to demonstrate how collaboration, scalability, and leadership interact in a nonprofit organization to produce desirable outcomes from which other organizations, leaders, and resource providers might learn.

The Global Health Initiative (GHI) is a tripartite collaboration among Northwestern University, non-profit donors, and commercial diagnostics companies. GHI attempts to bridge the gap between the market for sophisticated medical diagnostics equipment in wealthy nations and the need for point-of-care diagnostics in resource limited settings. In 2006 GHI narrowed its focus to HIV diagnostics for underserved nations. The case examines the accuracy-access tradeoff related to the roll-out of infant HIV diagnostics in Tanzania. Tanzania has a prevalent HIV/AIDS problem, particularly in children. As of 2007, Tanzania had an estimated 140,000 children infected with HIV. Existing lab-based diagnostic equipment was either inaccurate for use in infants or required highly skilled health workers. Tanzania's limited infrastructure also forced healthcare providers to choose between providing advanced care to a minority of the population and offering minimal care to the majority with poor access. A Kellogg MBA student research team performed more than thirty in-country interviews to collect data on stakeholder perceptions of three infant test concepts: the strip test, the squeeze test, and the filter paper test. Across the three tests, access decreased as accuracy increased---rural labs could not find or afford health workers skilled enough to conduct the test. In general, interviewees closely affiliated with the government preferred accuracy over access. In contrast, private health facilities had to follow fewer regulations and preferred access over accuracy. The case focuses on the decisions facing Kara Palamountain, the executive director of GHI, in her roll-out recommendations for infant HIV tests in Tanzania. It examines key factors of working in a developing country, including the need to operate in the absence of sufficient market research, balance the competing agendas of different stakeholders, and mitigate external risks such as major international funding.

This case was written to be used as a teaching case for students unfamiliar with how to approach and analyze a typical business school case. Unlike many cases used in specific classroom settings, this case is intended to be broad enough that any single student will not have a significant advantage because of his or her background. Moreover, the case is designed to guide students' thinking in a certain direction, using open-ended and more focused discussion questions provided at the case's end.

The Global Health Initiative (GHI) is a tripartite collaboration among Northwestern University, non-profit donors, and commercial diagnostics companies. GHI attempts to bridge the gap between the market for sophisticated medical diagnostics equipment in wealthy nations and the need for point-of-care diagnostics in resource limited settings. In 2006 GHI narrowed its focus to HIV diagnostics for underserved nations. The case examines the accuracy-access tradeoff related to the roll-out of infant HIV diagnostics in Tanzania. Tanzania has a prevalent HIV/AIDS problem, particularly in children. As of 2007, Tanzania had an estimated 140,000 children infected with HIV. Existing lab-based diagnostic equipment was either inaccurate for use in infants or required highly skilled health workers. Tanzania's limited infrastructure also forced healthcare providers to choose between providing advanced care to a minority of the population and offering minimal care to the majority with poor access. A Kellogg MBA student research team performed more than thirty in-country interviews to collect data on stakeholder perceptions of three infant test concepts: the strip test, the squeeze test, and the filter paper test. Across the three tests, access decreased as accuracy increased---rural labs could not find or afford health workers skilled enough to conduct the test. In general, interviewees closely affiliated with the government preferred accuracy over access. In contrast, private health facilities had to follow fewer regulations and preferred access over accuracy. The case focuses on the decisions facing Kara Palamountain, the executive director of GHI, in her roll-out recommendations for infant HIV tests in Tanzania. It examines key factors of working in a developing country, including the need to operate in the absence of sufficient market research, balance the competing agendas of different stakeholders, and mitigate external risks such as major international funding dry

This case was written to be used as a teaching case for students unfamiliar with how to approach and analyze a typical business school case. Unlike many cases used in specific classroom settings, this case is intended to be broad enough that any single student will not have a significant advantage because of his or her background. Moreover, the case is designed to guide students' thinking in a certain direction, using open-ended and more focused discussion questions provided at the case's end.

Bruce-Alfred Technologies (BAT) has built a successful business selling packaged software. Its marketing has long promised free technical support to all customers, a key point of differentiation from BAT's competitors. However, the call center providing tech support is now in crisis. Wait times for callers are unacceptably high, leading to low customer satisfaction and negative press. BAT managers are evaluating the Fast Track Proposal, which would create two classes of calls. Fast Track calls would be promised a one-minute wait but pay for service. Standard calls would still be free but be given lower priority and have no wait time guarantee. Considers both the operational impact of this change and the strategic considerations of backing away from free tech support.

To emphasize the impact of priorities and alternative ways of managing capacity, discuss different ways of pricing services--i.e., pay-per-transaction vs. subscription, and demonstrate the basics of the relation between utilization and delay.

This case features Bel-Brand's efforts to position its flagship brand The Laughing Cow in the United States. The challenges in this case are twofold. First, choose a viable position for a brand after a period of high growth following the South Beach Craze. The difficulty here is that the initial driver of the brand's position, the South Beach Craze, an environmental factor, is dwindling and is not sustainable. Second, the brand was receiving pressure from global stakeholders to try to unify the positioning in the United States with the global brand positioning. These are both challenges that were faced by the marketing team and raised in the case.

This case can be used to teach the following topics: 1) Developing a sustainable positioning. This case gives students the valuable experience of making a positioning choice and supporting the rationale for the positioning chosen. Furthermore, it demonstrates how a brand maintained a position after the initial support/argument for that position has dwindled or disappeared. 2) Managing global versus local positioning. The case also showcases a real life example of where positioning in the United States was extremely misaligned from the global positioning of the brand, and how the brand responded to this. 3) Write a positioning statement. One important exercise that students could be asked to do is write a positioning statement and become more familiar with concepts such as point-of-parity (POP), point-of-difference (POD), and reason-to-believe (RTB).

A midwest hospital purchases new CT Scanners which are much faster than the existing technology. Processes in the radiology department are optimized to the older, existing scanners and technicians are unable to take full advantage of the new scanner speed. The hospital finds itself working to change the processes to suit the new scanners capabilities and take full advantage of their speed.

This case allows students to analyze process capacity and time performance in different settings and understand how process structure impacts both operational and financial performance.

The (A) case describes the evolution between 1999 and 2005 of an unusual innovation team within the office of the chief information officer at oil and gas giant BP. This team helped business units conceive, develop, and implement novel, value-added applications for emerging information technologies. The team leader, vice president and chief technology officer Phiroz Darukhanavala (“Daru”), eschewed a large group and venture budget in favor of a small, lean team intimately engaged with BP's business units. The case describes several mechanisms created by the CTO office during its early evolution: “Blue Chalk” events that expanded executives' appreciation of emerging technology capabilities, a network of relationships through which emerging technologies were scouted and vetted, a structured technology transfer process, and annual “game-changer” projects.

The (B) case describes how the CTO office team members in 2011 again solicited advice from their ecosystem of thought leaders and held workshops to significantly enhance their impact. As a result, they began developing solutions for broader, more fundamental business problems that came to be known as Grand Challenges: extremely difficult business problems whose solutions could potentially create hundreds of millions—or billions—of dollars in business value.

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

• Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

• Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

• Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

• Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program

Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program

The (A) case describes the evolution between 1999 and 2005 of an unusual innovation team within the office of the chief information officer at oil and gas giant BP. This team helped business units conceive, develop, and implement novel, value-added applications for emerging information technologies. The team leader, vice president and chief technology officer Phiroz Darukhanavala (“Daru”), eschewed a large group and venture budget in favor of a small, lean team intimately engaged with BP's business units. The case describes several mechanisms created by the CTO office during its early evolution: “Blue Chalk” events that expanded executives' appreciation of emerging technology capabilities, a network of relationships through which emerging technologies were scouted and vetted, a structured technology transfer process, and annual “game-changer” projects.

The (B) case describes how the CTO office team members in 2011 again solicited advice from their ecosystem of thought leaders and held workshops to significantly enhance their impact. As a result, they began developing solutions for broader, more fundamental business problems that came to be known as Grand Challenges: extremely difficult business problems whose solutions could potentially create hundreds of millions—or billions—of dollars in business value.

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

• Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

• Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

• Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

• Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program

Understand the management challenges associated with realizing the business value of new technologies

Explore how innovation management evolves as an innovation team learns from its successes and failures and, more importantly, builds a reputation within and outside the company

Examine a prototypical “advocate” model of corporate entrepreneurial practice

Explore a leading example of a successful internal innovation program