Case studies

This is the sixth in a series of articles about case research, writing, teaching, and reviewing. In this article, the protagonist, Prof. Moore, consults experienced case reviewers and learns several different approaches to reviewing cases for journal publication. The article is written as if it were a case; it is fictitious.

Erick Wilson and Richard Hyche, managers of Hughes Family Furniture Store in Charlotte N.C. are exploring new ways to motivate their sales force to sell more of one of their most profitable items, a Furniture Protection Plan. They are considering a new compensation plan but are concerned about how this new change might affect their sales force.

Management scholars and researchers have long been concerned about the impact and relevance of their work. Here we chronicle the teaching, research, management, and personal leadership development lessons that have arisen from a collaborative, decade-long relationship between three management faculty members and the senior management team of a major Norwegian-based global shipping and logistics company. This relationship grew from the creation of a teaching case in 1997 to many years of productive and meaningful work together, including the development and delivery of the all-conference Plenary Session at the 2006 Eastern Academy of Management Meeting, held concurrently with the annual CASE Association Conference. At the 2006 Plenary Session, each of the authors expressed powerful personal and professional development through their collaboration over the years, which is summarized in this article. Reflections, lessons and future research directions are provided.

The ABB (A) case describes the situation leading up to a decision that has to be made concerning closing a manufacturing subsidiary of ABB and moving its operations to Thailand. The Plant/subsidiary manager is placed in a conflict position regarding this decision due to the matrix form of management structure employed by the parent ABB. His direct line manager in charge of the global product line wants the move to take place. He has the support of his supervisor, who sits on the Executive Committee of the parent company. The ABB Country Manager for Denmark wants the plant to stay where it is. The subsidiary manager also reports to him, as part of the matrix structure. The subsidiary manager has recently been promoted to his new position, with the support of the Country Manager. The previous subsidiary manager had been promoted to head up a larger, Danish subsidiary of ABB. The previous year, the Country Manager and the previous subsidiary manager had managed to over rule the same request, in no small part, due to their connections within ABB as well as within Denmark. The new subsidiary manager needs to make a recommendation as to what should be done. The ABB Transformers (A) case can be used separately, or in conjunction with the (B) case.

The (B) case follows up on the (A) case. The decision was made to leave the plant in Denmark. It was revisited one year later, and the subsidiary manager is in even more of a quandary. The former Country Manager has been promoted to the Executive Committee of ABB. At a meeting of the new Country manager (not previously from within ABB), the Product Manager, his supervisor from the Executive Committee, the former Country Manager, and the subsidiary manager, the discussion is primarily between the new Country Manager and the Product Supervising Executive Committee Member, who has also been given added responsibility for all of Asia and the Pacific region. The former Country Manager, now responsible for European operations, remains quiet during the discussions. He later notes that this is a relatively small decision in the context of European operations. The subsidiary manager still needs to make a decision, but is now unsure of what has happened during the past year to allow this issue to be raised for the third time. The (B) case can be used to demonstrate how politics, promotions, and transfers can radically alter the environment within the context of a strategic decision. The focus is now on organization culture and power, and on the problems of operating within a matrix structure. The (B) case should be used in combination with the (A) case.

Bright Lights is a small non-profit organization in Lincoln, NE offering a summer enrichment program to school aged children. Post 9/11, the organization faces challenges in its efforts to sustain financial resources. With enrollment and course offerings on the rise, funding is more important than ever. At the second to the last meeting of the year at which budgets are established, the Bright Lights' Board of Directors asked the Executive Director, Kathy Hanrath, and the Co-Owner/Director of Education Services, Barb Hoppe, to come up with some alternatives for fundraising top present at the final yearly meeting. Kathy has recently attended some sessions on franchising at a local entrepreneurship conference and would like to explore franchising as an option for Bright Lights growth. Kathy feels that franchising might have the potential to both increase performance and funding. This case focuses on issues associated with the exploration of franchising as a method of distribution and capital acquisition for a social organization. It calls attention to the appropriate situations for franchising, the importance of organizational assessment for franchise readiness, and other legal, economical, and organizational considerations.

The ‘Game’ is really a multi-industry case that aims at developing participants' awareness of the links between firms' strategic choices and the financial structures the choices engender. Participants are provided with Balance Sheet percentages and common ratios for firms in 12 different industries and list of different businesses and asked to match the figures with the kind of business. The goal is for participants to understand how industries' operating models impose certain financial structures.

The case is run as a kind of mystery game but leads to rather sophisticated analysis of industry and business models. The case leads students to a better understanding of the essential concepts of a business strategy course: 1) external analysis by helping students ‘see’ the structures of different industries; 2) making clear the link between the competencies and capabilities needed by firms in their internal environment to successfully compete in their industries by matching the key success factors at work; 3) providing a tangible illustrations of the competencies that must be developed to successfully pilot business strategies like cost leadership and differentiation; and, 4) developing insight into integration and outsourcing strategies and their effects.

A detailed Teaching Note accompanies the case.

Fonkoze is the largest Microfinance Institution in Haiti whose clients are mostly poor women. The authors had access to documents and meetings of the organization for an extended period, and observed the growth of the organization from a single office to 21 branch offices. In so doing, their staff had to spend increasing time in fundraising so that they could make more loans to the existing and new customers. This case presents the decisions of the Board and the management to alleviate some of those problems. Against a backdrop of political and civil turmoil, the case could be instructive for students and instructors alike. The Board had to decide whether to apply for status as a regulated bank, or to transform into some other financial entity.

East Texas Oxygen (ETOX) delivered high-pressure cylinders of gases such as oxygen and nitrogen to twelve wholly-owned branches scattered throughout East Texas and Louisiana. Employees loaded and unloaded individual high-pressure cylinders off of and onto trailers manually and the firm had never had a related accident. Robert Jenkins had been challenged to decrease the cost of supplying the branches with cylinders and other supplies. He was considering recommending the palletization of delivery operations which required numerous changes within the organization. This case required students to determine the best routing for the delivery truck(s) and to determine whether or not the number of trucks and drivers could be reduced under palletization. Students were then required to do a capital budgeting analysis and make a recommendation of whether or not to palletize.