Search results

The data used to present this case was collected from secondary data sources. These sources included media reports associated with Michael Jordan and his trajectory since entering the sport, as well as specific information published about his time at the Chicago Bulls. Another key source of information is the ESPN documentary conducted specifically on Jordan’s relationship with his National Basketball Association (NBA) team.

The case follows the story of Michael Jordan, who took his team, the Chicago Bulls, to fame in a rather controversial manner. To do so, Michael Jordan had to alter his leadership style over the years to be respected as a leader and motivate his team to win one NBA championship after another. On 20th April 2020, ESPN’s “The Last Dance”, a 10-part documentary about Michael Jordan and his time playing for the Chicago Bulls was released to much acclaim. The documentary became highly noted as Jordan himself, both directed and starred in the documentary. Jordan’s great achievements stood out, but so did the conflicts that the basketball star had with The Bulls’ management team and mainly, his teammates. Relationships between teammates were far from harmonious, which led to questions around whether Michael Jordan was as good a leader, as he was a star player. Cultural change within the organisation was primarily linked to the often-contested leadership of Jordan.

The case can be used at UG, MSc and MBA levels. It works for in-person teaching and for online teaching. It is most suitable in leadership, strategy and strategy in practice courses. However, it is critical to note that the case can shed light on the dynamics that leaders and teammates have within their teams. Therefore, this case may be valuable to students studying courses where they themselves must work in groups and oftentimes encounter challenges in managing their team. These challenges can arise at all levels of experience. As such, the case provides particularly useful reflection for decision makers who may be beginning to develop their leadership skill (UG), those who have already experienced working in teams (MSc) or leading teams themselves (MBA, Executive MBA). The case addresses the challenges associated with achieving high team motivation and performance. It also sheds light on the challenges associated with leading a cultural change within a team and the approaches of different actors involved. It may be best to introduce the case in the context of a (1.5–2 h) workshop once students understand the basic frameworks and tools used to analyse leadership styles and their characteristics.

This case is intended for use in undergraduate, MBA and Executive Education courses in Strategy, Business in Africa, Entrepreneurship and Investing in Emerging Markets.

Strategy, Business in Africa, Entrepreneurship and Investing in Emerging Markets.

Eric Kyere founded Brouges in 2015, an African brand, with the objective of designing, manufacturing and selling great shoes. His original plan was to produce Brouges’ shoes in Africa, but had several problems with suppliers (e.g. poor quality, poor raw materials, etc.). Therefore, Brouges had to partner with a European manufacturer to produce its first batch of shoes. Shortly thereafter, Eric partnered with Michael Asare Bediako, a young Ghanaian investor and entrepreneur, who had advanced plans to build a shoemaking factory in Ghana. The factory was likely to open in early 2021, following major delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This would be a major milestone for Brouges and a key step in Eric’s entrepreneurial journey. However, how can Eric and Brouges manage the challenge of growing and building a manufacturing and retail organization? How could they succeed where others had failed?

This case has five pedagogical objectives: strategic choices: evaluate the strategic choices that companies need to make (based on their predefined goals and aspirations) and show that they are effectively an integrated cascade of choices that need to be consistent and coherent; strategic planning: apply and analyze the key steps and key decision to be made as part of a high-level strategic plan; value proposition: apply and analyze the concept and key components of a company’s value proposition, leveraging Tovstiga’s framework; doing business in Africa: evaluate the specific generic challenges of doing business in Africa, particularly in the manufacturing sector; generalizability of frameworks: this case shows that the same frameworks that are used to analyze large firms and mature markets can be applied to smaller firms in less developed markets.

This case is intended for use in undergraduate, MBA and Executive Education courses in Strategy, Business in Africa, Entrepreneurship and Investing in Emerging Markets.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS: 3 Entrepreneurship.

This case is taught at the University of Virginia McIntire School of Commerce in the fourth year course, “Corporate Restructuring.” The case is suitable for advanced undergraduates or MBS students that have already completed a course in corporate finance or valuation. The material would fit well in a second Corporate Finance class, particularly if the instructor would like to devote some time to discussing financial distress and restructuring. It could also work well in a business reorganization class at a law school. Danfurn LLC is a U.S. manufacturer and retailer of high-end furniture that is in financial distress following a 2007 LBO and subsequent declines in profitability in the wake of the financial crisis of 2007–08. The nearly 50-year-old company has recently blown through cash flow covenants on its $100 million senior financing facility and is seeking a restructuring of its capital structure that will allow the company to survive. Although Danfurn's lenders are hopeful that a consensual decision can be reached on how to restructure the company without resorting to a bankruptcy filing, filing for bankruptcy or even liquidating the company are very real possibilities. This case is an exercise in negotiating a consensual restructuring of a financially distressed company when stakeholders have varied incentives, legal rights, potential remedies, and interests in how the company will be managed going forward. The case discussion works best if students are divided into groups representing the different stakeholder groups—the senior lender, mezzanine lender, board, private equity owner, and founder interests—and are asked to think about how best to maximize their positions while recognizing the costs of failing to reach a negotiated outcome.

This case describes a community-based healthcare clinic and the issues facing the management and board of directors. The issues raised are common problems faced by all types of nonprofit organizations: insufficient fundraising and marketing policies to guide board decision making, confusion over staff and board roles in decision making, poorly thought-out bylaws that contribute to the confusion over board and staff roles, the challenge of harnessing the diverse backgrounds and opinions of a community-based board of directors, and lack of sound financial planning.

The Whitney Clinic case identifies common pitfalls in board governance and includes a roleplay to help students understand the difficulties inherent in implementing the basics of good governance.

The case compares two U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) programs from the 1970s and 1980s: (1) “stealth” combat aircraft, capable of evading detection or engagement by anti-aircraft systems, and (2) precision attack of hardened ground vehicles from “standoff” distances, i.e., far behind the battle lines. Conceived at roughly the same time, motivated by the same strategic challenge, and initially driven by the same DoD organization, stealth combat aircraft progressed from idea to deployment in less than eight years---an astounding pace for a complex military system---while a demonstrated system for standoff precision strike against mobile ground targets was not fully implemented. The case highlights the critical role of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), part of the DoD, regarded as one of the most innovative entities in the U.S. federal government.

The case highlights factors that facilitate rapid, successful implementation of radically innovative or disruptive concepts. Students are introduced to the organizational realities facing such projects, including issues of strategic clarity, interdepartmental competition and cooperation, executive leadership, and timing. Comparing the differences in implementation of the two programs in the case reveals issues relevant to any large organization seeking to bring innovative concepts to fruition.

This case features a county planning director as he approves or turns down a permit application for the Harvest Wind Farm Project, located in Klickitat County on the Columbia Plateau in Washington State. The utilities involved and Klickitat County stood to benefit through new revenue generation and a favorable federal construction grant associated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and certain landowners stood to make substantial royalties. However, other landowners were also worried about declining property values, environmental groups had raised objections to the effect of turbines on the pristine Columbia River view, and uncertainty about health effects had recently become more of an issue. Nationally, “wind turbine syndrome” and “shadow-flicker” effects had been linked to wind farm operations. Given these concerns and the uncertainty, would the gains to stakeholders justify signing off on the project?

A midsize community hospital must choose a strategy to compete with an expanding regional rival. The strategy, focused on acquiring patient volume, includes expanding investment into integrated care, setting the reimbursement structure for revenue collection, and moving to a capitation-based payment system. The case presents an evaluation of revenue models to select that which best supports a given business strategy.

This case is designed to introduce a health care audience to financial analysis. It provides a straightforward introduction to hospital financial-statement ratio analysis and hospital operating statistics, so it can also serve to introduce any audience with a business or medical background to hospital finance.

This case requires students to evaluate alternative dual-share-class corporate structures that allow companies and entrepreneurs to pursue profit with purpose. The case explores Impact Makers, an IT consulting company based in Richmond, Virginia. While original founders of the firm hold all voting rights, the cash flow rights belong to two nonprofits setting the stage for a Newman's Own model of management consulting. The case discusses whether and how the alternative corporate structure aids the firm's overall strategy to attract top-quality employees, pay them competitive salaries, and provide superior service to its clients while donating 100% of its lifetime value to charitable causes, largely through partnerships with various nonprofit organizations. More importantly, the case asks students to evaluate how such a dual-share-class and dual-purpose company can raise capital to fund continued growth.

The case opens with CEO Michael Pirron reminding himself of all the questions he had run through to execute a strategy to further grow Impact Makers' consulting business both through expanding a menu of services and through conquering new geographical markets. To do either, or both, the company needed a cash infusion. Internal cash was limited, as up to 40% of it flowed to charitable partners, demonstrating Impact Makers' commitment to its mission. Raising debt for a company without fixed assets was challenging and time consuming. Complicating it all was that being structured as a nonstock corporation rendered equity raising difficult. Could Impact Makers raise money to grow and stay true to community values at the same time?

International business

Undergraduate/graduate/executive education.

China has become the world's largest producer of automobiles, surpassing the USA and Japan. The Chinese auto industry differs quite significantly from those countries though. While the industry exhibits a substantial degree of concentration in the USA and Japan in early 2011, it remained highly fragmented in China. The Chinese Central Government had announced a desire for consolidation, yet it remained unclear whether a significant shakeout would occur in the near term.

Like many Chinese automakers, Chang'an partnered with well-known global auto makers to develop, produce, and distribute its products. In the coming years, Chang'an hoped to develop more independence from its foreign partners, including the production and distribution of self-branded cars. However, the company grappled with how it could strive for independence while managing its existing joint ventures. Executives worried too about how to compete with foreign automakers who had achieved global economies of scale.

The case provides a rich description of the evolution of the Chinese auto industry, and it documents how the Chinese industry differs from other global markets. Readers can analyze the extent to which they believe scale economies provide foreign firms an advantage over smaller Chinese rivals, and they can evaluate the conventional wisdom regarding the industry's minimum efficient scale. The case also provides a detailed account of Chang'an's rise to prominence. The case concludes by offering an in-depth description of the firm's key rivals, and it presents the key questions being considered by Chang'an executives in 2011.

Enables students to examine how and why an industry's structure can differ substantially across geographic markets.

Enables students to examine whether the need to achieve economies of scale may cause substantial consolidation in the Chinese auto industry.

Provides an opportunity to evaluate the pros and cons of the joint venture strategies employed in China.

Provides an opportunity to examine how a relatively small firm can position itself against large multinationals in a high-growth emerging market.

Teaching notes.

Pebble Technology Corporation (Pebble) was an early entrant into the smartwatch industry. Pebble’s Founder, Eric Migicovsky, began thinking about creating a smartwatch in 2008 while still an undergraduate engineering student. After selling about 1,500 prototype watches, he was accepted into Silicon Valley’s prestigious Y Combinator business start-up program. Finding it difficult to attract investors, Migicovsky launched a crowdfunding campaign that raised a record-breaking $10.27m on Kickstarter. The case concludes shortly after Apple’s unveiling of its soon-to-be-released Apple Watch. The case provides an opportunity to evaluate Pebble’s various strategic options at the time of Apple’s announcement.

The authors observed over 30 h of video and audio recordings of speeches, interviews and other events involving Pebble’s founder, other Pebble executives, investors and competitors. These recordings are all publicly available. Whenever possible, the authors also reviewed the Twitter feeds, Facebook sites and personal websites of Pebble’s top executives over time. Similarly, the authors followed Pebble’s official website, corporate blog and Kickstarter campaign websites. The authors also drew from numerous media reports. Due to the public nature of the data, no company release is provided nor has any information been disguised in any way.

The case is designed for both undergraduate and graduate students for courses in strategic management.