Kelly R. Hall and Ram Subramanian
This secondary source case is based mainly on legislative documents (that tracked the initiation and progress of the Parental Rights in Education bill that later became an Act)…
Abstract
Research methodology
This secondary source case is based mainly on legislative documents (that tracked the initiation and progress of the Parental Rights in Education bill that later became an Act), corporate documents (published by The Walt Disney Company) and news articles from publications such as The New York Times and Bloomberg. All sources are cited in the case narrative and as end notes.
Case overview/synopsis
In April 2022, The Walt Disney Company and its CEO, Robert Chapek, were at the center of a controversy over the company’s opposition to the State of Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill. The bill, dubbed “Don’t Say Gay” by its critics, prohibited instruction on sexual identity and gender orientation in the state’s elementary schools. The controversy stemmed from Disney’s initial non-reaction to the bill and its later strident opposition and call for its repeal. Chapek was pressured by negative media publicity and employee disgruntlement on the one hand and adverse economic consequences for opposing the bill by the state’s Governor, Ron DeSantis. Chapek and the Board had to respond to the political threats to Disney’s economic well-being while appeasing its employees and other stakeholders who wanted the company to be a corporate champion in diversity, equity and inclusion.
Complexity academic level
The case is best suited for advanced undergraduate or graduate leadership, strategic management and marketing courses. From a leadership and strategic management perspective, the case is well-suited for demonstrating the evolving expectations of leaders and corporate social responsibility, as well as the concepts of issue framing and nonmarket management. Instructors may also leverage the case in marketing courses (e.g. brand management), as CEO activism (i.e. messaging and practice) is one characteristic of brand activism (Animation Guild, 2022).
Details
Keywords
Marketing
Abstract
Subject area
Marketing
Study level/applicability
The case is suitable for MBA/MS students.
Case overview
The famous Taj Mahal Palace and Towers became the centre of one of the most deadly terrorist attacks in the Indian sub continent on the night of 26 November 2008, which became famous as “26/11”. Terrorists created havoc shooting guests on sight and throwing grenades. The attacks lasted for three days but all of the four terrorists who entered Taj were killed. The terrorists had killed 160 people across Mumbai. Of these, 36 died at the Taj Mahal Palace and Towers, Mumbai. The dead included 14 guests, most of whom were foreign nationals. However, due to the selfless and extraordinary behavior of the employees and the staff of Taj, many guests were saved. They put forth an extraordinary example justifying the Indian code of conduct towards guests, “Atithi Devo Bhav” meaning “Guest is God”. In spite of knowing back exits and hiding spots, the employees did not flee, instead helping guests. The employees' behavior during the crisis saved the lives of nearly300 guests. This gesture of Taj employees was much talked about, but it was amusing even for the management to explain why they behaved in that manner. The condition of Taj after the attacks was so disastrous that it would have been profitable to leave the hotel as it was rather than reopening it. This, however, would have dented the Taj brand as a whole, as well as the spirit of all employees and staff who had behaved bravely. Taj started its restoration and reopened a part of the Taj Mahal Palace and Towers on 21 December 2008. It became operational by August 2010. The case provides an opportunity to closely examine employee behavior in an extreme crisis situation, and the possible reasons and motivation behind such exceptional behavior which ultimately helped to sustain the Taj brand. However, the scope of the case can also be extended to illustrate recovery efforts typical to service industries.
Expected learning outcomes
The case is designed to enable students to understand: the employees role in service delivery; the service profit chain; the relationship between profitability, customer loyalty, employee satisfaction and loyalty, and productivity; service failure; service recovery; and the service recovery paradox.
Supplementary materials
Teaching notes are available. Please consult your librarian for access.