Case studies

This case presents the dilemma of a multinational oil and gas company, ExxonMobil, as it factors in the ethical issues related to the environment and cultural differences in deciding whether to proceed with building a pipeline in Chad and Cameroon, two of the poorest and most corrupt developing countries in West Africa. The many players in this project included the World Bank--which cofinanced the project and put restrictions into place that would hopefully prevent pipeline-related government corruption in both Chad and Cameroon--and many environmental and human rights groups that warned of potential disaster. The case also covers the environmental and social analysis of the areas that would be affected by the pipeline.

The strategic management literature states that firms who wish to have a competitive advantage through high customer service (rapid response) and product differentiation need to restructure their organization into empowered, self-managed work units so as to ensure that there is “value-added” at each stage of the value chain. (Porter, 1985; Hill and Jones, 2001) In this case, Vanguard altered part of its structure through the development of teams in order to maximize its operations; and given their results Vanguard successfully put theory into practice. When the major supporter of team management, Mike Wesley, leaves the firm, he is replaced by Wendy Kiefer, a strong supporter of team structures. Her replacement, Shari Lastarza, however is the “old” assembly manager and does not buy into the team concept. Could this be anything but a formula for disaster?

David Walker, a senior attorney in a busy white-shoe law practice is involved in an in-office dispute between his administrative assistant and a respected colleague. He had spent numerous hours listening to both sides tell their stories and has no answers. How was he ever going to help two people he valued greatly work out a compromise between their extremely polar positions? The case provides opportunities to explore the sources of interpersonal conflict, causes of escalation, and ways of diffusing and resolving it.

This case presents the challenges facing a new pastor at Whitney Avenue Congregational church. For many years the church has seen declining membership. Karl, the new pastor, is expected to help foster growth, but as he has learned, some organization members fear that he may want to change more than they would like to see changed. Karl must decide how to conduct himself at the next church council meeting. He also must decide on an approach to effect positive change in the organization.

Russ Clark is a successful NAPA Auto Parts franchisee in Yuma County, Arizona. He sees opportunity in the neighboring Mexican city of San Luis Rıo Colorado. But crossing the border with an after-market auto parts store will require building relationships with others, lots of learning to overcome the significant barriers, and some savvy decision-making in addition to the usual evaluation of business opportunities. Clark must consider a location decision, product mix, human resource issues, and how to promote the new business in an uncertain and unfamiliar context. Clearly, his current American business model will require a great degree of adaptation to make the venture a success. This case was developed from extensive field interviews and shadowing Mr. Clark for a day. In addition, Mr. Clark and his store manager, Rigoberto made classroom presentations describing their experiences surrounding the case situation.

An employee&s husband made violent threats to the store manager of a Las Vegas shop specializing in skin care, makeup, fragrance, and hair care products of an international company. The manager wanted the employee terminated. The employee confessed that her husband also threatened her. The employee's personnel file contained no performance problems, but the store manager admitted that she had kept a separate file with such documentation. The Executive Director and the Director of Human Resource Management wondered what they should do.

Jan Jaśkiewicz was a successful small grocer in Białystok, Poland, a city of about 300,000. When Poland became a capitalistic nation again in the late 1980s, Jaśkiewicz was among the early entrepreneurs. In the late 1990s, multi-national grocery chains from across Europe began building new, large stores on the outskirts of most Polish cities, including Białystok. In early summer 2000, a few days before the case begins, local independent grocers had been called together by Lewiatan, a Polish wholesale grocer. Lewiatan could offer the smaller grocers the advantages of the chains: bulk buying, Lewiatan-branded goods, slotting fees, and cooperative advertising. The local grocers liked many of the benefits Lewiatan would bring, but were suspicious and wanted someone they knew to be the area representative before they would agree to join Lewiatan. They had called a second meeting to try and find someone to fill the role. Jaśkiewicz was a natural choice: he had been in both the retail and wholesale grocery business, had been in business longer than almost everyone else, and was well-respected. Jan was tempted. Not only did he want to grow his own business, he wanted other Poles to be successful business owners and felt that if he could help Lewiatan, Lewiatan could help others compete with the new, large, foreign-owned and professionally-managed stores.

In 2005, LPP SA was one of the fastest growing firms in Poland’s apparel industry, with popular brands such as RESERVED and CROPP. This case focuses on the apparel industry, LPP’s business and international strategies, and its internal capabilities. The case also offers a background on the communist rule in Poland and how it led to economic malaise that sparked the strikes by Solidarity under the leadership of Lech Walesa. These strikes eventually cascaded into the demand for reforms and the collapse of the communist regime. Thus, the case tracks Poland’s transition into an “emerging market” and the environment within which LPP developed. The case concludes by asking readers whether LPP needs to reorient its strategies and develop new capabilities to sustain its growth.

This case examines the ethical issues raised when businesses contract for the military during time of war. Dow Chemical Company was a military contractor during the Vietnam War and the primary producer of Agent Orange - a defoliant used to clear vegetation. Agent Orange has been linked to a number of serious medical conditions in war veterans and Vietnamese civilians. In 2004, Vietnamese citizens filed suit against Dow for illnesses they believe were caused by exposure to Agent Orange. Dow thought the issue should have been addressed through political and social policy, while Vietnamese citizens and U.S. Vietnam war veterans believed Dow was ethically responsible. As the case moved through the U.S. judicial system, some of Dow's investors grew uncomfortable with how it was handled. Dow CEO Andrew Liveris was left to wonder what his company could have done differently and what they could learn from the Agent Orange episode that might prevent similar problems in the future. This incident appeared to be a relatively distinct case, but in July of 2007 it was reported that the number of private contract employees in Iraq exceeded that of U.S. military personnel. Consequently, it is likely that companies and their stakeholders will have to address similar issues.