As founders of First Interstate BancSystem, which held $8.6 billion in assets and had recently become a public company, and Padlock Ranch, which had over 11,000 head of cattle…
Abstract
As founders of First Interstate BancSystem, which held $8.6 billion in assets and had recently become a public company, and Padlock Ranch, which had over 11,000 head of cattle, the Scott family had to think carefully about business and family governance. Now entering its fifth generation, the family had over 80 shareholders across the US. In early 2016, the nine-member Scott Family Council (FC) and other family and business leaders considered the effectiveness of the Family Governance Leadership Development Initiative launched two years earlier. The initiative's aim was to ensure a pipeline of capable family leaders for the business boards, two foundation boards, and FC.
Seven family members had self-nominated for governance roles in mid-2015. As part of the development initiative, each was undergoing a leadership development process that included rigorous assessment and creation of a comprehensive development plan. As the nominees made their way through the process and other family members considered nominating themselves for future development, questions remained around several interrelated areas, including how to foster family engagement with governance roles while guarding against damaging competition among members; how to manage possible conflicts of interest around dual employee and governance roles; and how to extend the development process to governance for the foundations and FC. The FC considered how best to answer these and other questions, and whether the answers indicated the need to modify the fledgling initiative.
This case illustrates the challenges multigenerational family-owned enterprises face in developing governance leaders within the family. It serves as a good example of governance for a large group of cousins within a multienterprise portfolio. Students can learn and apply insights from this valuable illustration of family values, vision, and mission statement.
Details
![Kellogg School of Management](/insight/static/img/kellogg-school-of-management-logo.png)
Keywords
Robert F. Bruner, Robert E. Spekman, Petra Christmann, Brian Kannry and Melinda Davies
This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Chrysler Corporation: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1240). Set in February 1998…
Abstract
This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Chrysler Corporation: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1240). Set in February 1998, the case places students in the position of negotiators for the company; their task is to value both firms, assess the potential earnings dilution of a combination, and negotiate a detailed agreement with their counterpart. The case can be used to explore such interesting negotiation issues as determination of a share-exchange ratio, treatment of major stockholders, and structuring a deal. Also, the case and exercise can be used to spark a discussion of acquisition in comparison with strategic alliance, or other less formal models of combination.
Details
![University of Virginia Darden School Foundation](/insight/static/img/university-of-virginia-darden-school-foundation-logo.png)
Keywords
Robert F. Bruner, Robert E. Spekman, Petra Christmann, Brian Kannry and Melinda Davies
This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Daimler-Benz A. G.: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1241). Set in February 1998…
Abstract
This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Daimler-Benz A. G.: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1241). Set in February 1998, the case places students in the position of negotiators for the company; their task is to value both firms, assess the potential earnings dilution of a combination, and negotiate a detailed agreement with their counterpart. The case can be used to explore such interesting negotiation issues as determination of a share-exchange ratio, treatment of major stockholders, and structuring a deal. Also, the case and exercise can be used to spark a discussion of acquisition in comparison with strategic alliance, or other less formal models of combination.
Details
![University of Virginia Darden School Foundation](/insight/static/img/university-of-virginia-darden-school-foundation-logo.png)
Keywords
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
Michael Mazzeo and Greg Merkley
In December 2011 the Lego Group (TLG) announced the launch of Lego Friends, the company’s sixth attempt to market a product to girls. Lego Friends, which was supported by a $40…
Abstract
In December 2011 the Lego Group (TLG) announced the launch of Lego Friends, the company’s sixth attempt to market a product to girls. Lego Friends, which was supported by a $40 million global marketing campaign, was designed to introduce the fun of building with Lego bricks to girls, who represented less than 10 percent of Lego’s audience.
The company’s poorly executed brand extensions and move from free-form building sets to story-driven kits had nearly cost it its independence in 2004, so the launch of Lego Friends was strategically important. However, within hours of the product’s appearance it was heavily criticized for reinforcing gender stereotypes and damaging the valuable Lego brand.
Jørgen Vig Knudstorp, CEO since 2004, had saved TLG and ushered in an era of sales growth with a series of successful strategic initiatives. Would Lego Friends be another addition to TLG’s graveyard of failed products for girls, or would it prove popular and finally enable the company to double its sales and profits by reaching this segment?
After analyzing the case, students should be able to:
Understand the connection between a firm’s assets and its activities
Identify new resources and capabilities required for a change in strategic focus
Recognize the consequences of poorly matched assets and market opportunities
Understand the connection between a firm’s assets and its activities
Identify new resources and capabilities required for a change in strategic focus
Recognize the consequences of poorly matched assets and market opportunities
Details
![Kellogg School of Management](/insight/static/img/kellogg-school-of-management-logo.png)