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.

Carol O'Reilly is the Executive Vice President of a regional bank in the New York metro area. She is evaluating an investment in online banking as an extension of bank services. Her bank, East Side Bank, is one of the most productive in the U.S. In fact, it was named America's most efficient bank in 1998. This became a cornerstone of their marketing strategy and they fiercely protected their efficiency ratio. She received a visiting contingent of bankers from Finland. Their use of technology and online banking was far more developed than most U.S. banks. Yet they were not nearly as efficient as the top U.S. banks. They discovered on their visit, that their cross selling had suffered as their online capability advanced. The U.S. bank customer was more profitable because they used multiple bank services and were willing to pay higher fees for the personal contact. This case centers on the implications of this revelation to East Side Bank.

The primary subject matter of this case concerns the potential impact of the adoption of online banking to a commercial bank. Secondary issues include strategic decision making in the banking industry and a comparison of the impact of technology on banks in Finland and the U.S.

The case has a difficulty level of three, which makes it appropriate for a junior level course. The case is designed to be taught in ½ hours and requires about 3 hours of preparation. It is designed for use in Strategy, Marketing, Money and Banking, or International Business courses.

John Caldwell, president of Kio-Tek (KT), presents his company's business plan to a group of 30 venture capitalists at the November 2001 annual meeting of the Portland Venture Group. John's presentation is included in the case as an exhibit. The case begins with a brief overview of the meeting and John's presentation. The body of the case describes the question and answer period immediately following John's presentation.

Included in the case is a set of exhibits that John has handed out to the audience as supplemental information. These exhibits provide additional information on marketing, management, and financial issues facing the company and John refers to them throughout the question and answer period. The VC's ask John a variety of questions in an effort to determine whether KT is an attractive investment opportunity

This case, developed from a wide variety of publicly available information, presents ethical and economic issues arising from the development, marketing, and pricing of a biotech drug. Genentech developed TPA, the first genetically engineered drug that could be used in clot-dissolving therapy for heart attack, and marketed it as Activase. Public outrage focused on the disparity between the drug's $10 direct manufacturing cost and what Genentech charged for its drug. Activase/TPA was priced at $2200 a dose, raising immediate concerns about its affordability and therefore availability to those who needed it. Additional issues arise from other events, including concern over related-party relationships between the company and organizations which researched and recommended TPA, as well as aggressive marketing of TPA to physicians and the company's refusal to participate in an international drug study to compare TPA with competitor drugs.

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.

This case looks at the design and implementation of a risk management strategy. It reviews the early moves by Great Plains Energy (GPE) to establish a corporate-wide Enterprise Risk Management program. The corporate Chief Risk Officer is Andrea Bielsker. Andrea appointed Jana Utter to take charge of coordinating the design and implementation of the ERM program. Utter faces a number of challenges. She has had to first conceptualize the program given the charge by the Board of Directors, then design a process by which she identifies the risks that the corporation faces, assist in designing measures for the risks, and work with the various divisions and functional areas to put processes in place to mitigate the identified risks.

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.

Doris, the Executive Director of the JCC, had a Board of Directors that lacked the requisite skills, perspective, behaviors, and willingness to change policies and practices in order to meet external environmental opportunities and threats or to address internal competencies and competitive capabilities. Changes in the external environment were exacerbating the JCC's internal deficiencies. In addition, the Board created impediments to the professional staff's efforts to implement good managerial practices and policies. The current management team was acutely aware of the changes in the external environment, how these changes impacted the JCC's operations and what the JCC needed to do in order to meet these challenges. The management team was frustrated by a Board that did not provide leadership, fulfill their responsibilities, hold each other accountable and undermined management by intervening in day-to-day operations. The staff was passively hostile to the Board and to the management team. As consumers, the members' expectations were higher and more demanding. Doris and her management team had to resolve a myriad of strategic and operational issues that confronted the organization.