Search results

The data for this case were obtained primarily through a series of in-person interviews in Penang between the authors and Pete Browning (a pseudonym) from 2017 to early 2019. The authors also consulted secondary data sources, including publicly available material on BMax and “Company B”.

This case examines a key decision, or set of decisions, in the life of a small- to medium-sized management consultancy group, namely, whether they might expand their operations in Southeast Asia, and if so, where. These key decisions came in the wake of their having already established a very modest scale presence there, with an operating base on the island of Penang just off the north western coast of Peninsular Malaysia. The initial establishment of a Southeast Asian branch had been somewhat spontaneous in nature – a former colleague of one of the two managing partners in the USA was on the ground in Malaysia and available: he became the local partner in the firm. But the firm had now been eyeing expansion within the region, with three markets under particular consideration (Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand) and a further two (Vietnam and China) also seen as possible targets, though at a more peripheral level. The questions facing the decision makers were “was it time they expand beyond Malaysia?” and “if so, where?”

This case could be used effectively in undergraduate courses in international business. The key concepts on which the case focuses are the factors affecting market entry, particularly the choice of market and the assessment of potential attractiveness such markets offer.

Identify the types of innovation that Gastón Acurio’s proposal has created. Understand the key strategies developed to grown and consolidate Peruvian food as a category internationally and as part of Acurio’s business. Identify elements of the business model using the business model canvas. Explain how elements of a business model are related, reinforce each other and drive results. Evaluate strengths, opportunities, weaknesses and threats to a business model. Analyze changes to the model that can capitalize upon or mitigate these factors based on evidence.

Gastón Acurio is a successful Peruvian chef and restauranteur who was key in shaping the country’s gastronomic industry. His innovative business model distinguished him from other Peruvian restauranteurs and allowed him to grow and take advantage of opportunities in Peru and internationally. His success and growth attracted US$52m in investment funding. However, his model’s challenges surfaced during a difficult restaurant launch exacerbated by a harsh review in the New York Times. Students must identify and analyze the key elements of Acurio’s business model to evaluate and propose changes to better take advantage of its strengths and opportunities, as well as to mitigate weaknesses and threats.

Master’s or MBA.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS 12: Tourism and hospitality.

This case discusses the best-selling security system for preventing shoplifting and the dilemma its startup manufacturer faced when it learned there was a very remote possibility that the system might interfere with heart pacemakers. The theme of the case is that when health is involved, a company must carefully consider any level of preventable risk a product poses, even if that level of risk is extremely low.

This critical incident offers students the opportunity to develop an understanding of the issues associated with intellectual property (IP) law and the ways to protect a business from its employees and potential unfair competition. Using a restaurant setting students can learn to apply IP concepts, discuss the issues of trademark, as well as develop a legal IP check list.

The following theoretical concepts are applicable to the case and its learning objectives: Stakeholder Power-Interest Matrix and Carroll’s Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Information was obtained in three separate interviews with PSEG. In February 2018, an introductory phone conference was conducted with a number of senior managers within PSEG, including the Director of Development and Strategic Issues, Kate Gerlach. In April 2018, an onsite interview was conducted with Gerlach, who connected the author with Scott Jennings. A phone interview was conducted with Scott Jennings in May 2018 and follow-up communication with him was handled via e-mail. The information obtained from these interviews was supplemented by material obtained from secondary sources. None of the information in the case has been disguised.

Scott Jennings, a Vice President at PSEG, the diversified New Jersey-based energy company, was the project leader for a large commercial wind farm that was to be built off the coast. The project, Garden State Offshore Energy, a joint venture between PSEG and Deepwater Wind, an experienced developer of offshore wind projects, had been announced over six years earlier, in late 2008. In the time that had passed, the Garden State Offshore Energy project team had waited for the New Jersey Bureau of Public Utilities, which had been tasked by Governor Chris Christie to evaluate the project costs before it could authorize the actual construction of the wind turbines. Justifying the project on a cost basis proved to be difficult; despite the growing public sentiment in favor of projects that utilized renewable energy sources such as wind power, the Garden State Offshore Energy team was unable to move the project forward. Scott needed to decide whether it made sense to continue to hold regular meetings with the Garden State Offshore Energy team. Scott’s colleagues suggested that Scott speak with senior management at PSEG to find out if the resources that had been dedicated to the Garden State Offshore Energy project could be shifted to other projects that might be more feasible.

This case is suitable for courses in Sustainability. It is appropriate to use the case in undergraduate courses to illustrate decision making in a regulated industry. Sufficient information is presented in the case to debate both sides of the offshore wind authorization issue.

In early 2016, after the success of its first two smartphones, the OnePlus One and OnePlus 2, China-based startup smartphone maker OnePlus was deciding how to build on its early success and grow into a global contender in the highly competitive smartphone market. Technology enthusiasts and geeks had flocked to purchase the first two generations of its smartphones and expectations were high for the company's next product. The company's founders, Pete Lau and Carl Pei, faced the challenge of broadening the appeal of OnePlus to address the mainstream market without alienating its core customer base.

“Crossing the chasm” from the early adopters to the mainstream market involved addressing three interrelated questions: First, what segments should OnePlus target as it sought to grow beyond its loyal fan base? Second, what value proposition and positioning strategy should it adopt to appeal to these target customers? Finally, what distribution and marketing communications strategy should it employ to make best use of its limited financial resources? A key consideration in formulating its strategy was to stay true to the company's culture and mission of “Never Settle” by charting its own course and not emulating the strategies of much larger competitors like Apple, Samsung, LG, and HTC.

This case investigation used firsthand statements, reports, testimony and regulatory records. While widely publicized in the popular press, this case is based on primary documents. On their website, many documents were obtained from Wells Fargo’s Corporate newsroom, such as the internal audit report shared with shareholders and press releases. Most other sources were from US regulatory websites (.gov) or congressional testimony. In a few places, quotes and comments came from reliable journalistic sites that cite their sources and follow a journalist’s code of ethics and conduct, ensuring that the reported remarks and data were verified.

Since 2016, Wells Fargo Bank has faced multiple customer mistreatment investigations and resultant fines. Public outcry and distrust resulted from Wells Fargo employees creating hidden accounts and enrolling people in bank services without their knowledge to meet desired levels of sustained shareholder growth. Over the past five years, Wells Fargo has been fined and returned to customers and stockholders over $3bn. Wells Fargo executives spent the first year of the scandal citing improper behavior by employees. Leadership did not take responsibility for setting the organizational goals, which led to employee misbehavior. Even after admitting some culpability in creating the extreme sales culture, executives and the Board of Directors tried to distance themselves from blame for the unethical behavior. They cited the organizations’ decentralized structure as a reason the board was not quicker in seeing and correcting the negative behaviors of these ‘bad apple’ employees. Wells Fargo faced multiple concurrent scandals, such as upselling services to retirees, inappropriately repossessing service members’ vehicles, adding insurance and extra fees to mortgages and other accounts and engaging in securities fraud. As time has passed, the early versions of a handful of “bad apples” seem to be only a part of the overall “poison tree.”The dilemma, in this case, is who is responsible for the misbehavior and the inappropriate sales of products and services (often without the customer’s knowledge)? Is strategic growth year-over-year with no allowances for environmental and economic factors a realistic and reasonable goal for corporations? This case is appropriate for undergraduates and graduate students in finance, human resources, management, accounting and investments.

An active case-based learning pedagogical approach is suggested. The materials include a short podcast, video and other materials to allow the faculty to assign pre-class work or to use in the classroom before a case discussion.

The Beringer Wine Estates Company has been expanding its market share in the premium segment of the wine industry in the 1990's. After operating as a wholly owned subsidiary of the giant Nestlé food company for almost a quarter of a century, the firm was sold in 1996 to new owners, in a leveraged buyout. For the next year and a half, management and the new owners restructured the firm and expanded through internal growth and strategic acquisitions. With a heavy debt load from the LBO, it seemed prudent for management to consider a significant rebalancing of its capital structure. By paying off a portion of its debt and enhancing the equity account, the firm would achieve greater financial flexibility which could enhance its growth rate and business options. Finally, a publicly held common stock would provide management with another “currency” to be used for enhancing its growth rate and overall corporate valuation. With the equity markets in turmoil, significant strategic decisions had to be made quickly. Should the IPO be completed, with the district possibility of a less than successful after market price performance and these implications for pursuing external growth initiatives? A variety of alternative courses of action and their implications for the financial health of the Beringer Company and the financial wealth of Beringer stockholders are integral components of this case.

This case study is a compilation of data gathered from secondary data sources.

Roger Federer has won a record setting 20 grand slam titles in his career and has an impressive 103 ATP singles titles to his name. He has stood the test of time and is widely acknowledged as one of the most distinguished players of all times. His personal charisma, classic shot making abilities and consistent stylish on-court performance over a long period of time has created a brand – Roger Federer. Inevitably, as he will have to wind down his career, it would be challenging to brace the brand and identify ways for its endurance. Various models of brand management, namely, Brand Identity Prism and Customer-Based Brand Equity model, have been applied for the brand – Roger Federer. An analysis of brand-building practices can help to understand how sportspersons build brand equity and factors which characterize personal brands that develop in a professional arena. This case study also helps to dwell on how human brands will sustain themselves after the players retire.

This case is designed to teach the concepts of brand in courses such as brand management, marketing management and sports marketing to both undergraduate and postgraduate classes of business management. This case can also be used in various executive programs and in customized short-term courses.

Ned Piper needs to improve the performance of Acme Lumber’s Broken Arrow store. There are two candidates for the store manager’s position, Larry Frazier and Chip Farmer. Larry has worked for Acme for 35 years in a variety of positions and is related to the Johnson family who has owned and managed Acme for three generations. Chip has worked for Acme for 19 years and has successfully helped to turn around another store. Chip is not related to the Johnsons. Ned is feeling pressure from the business and family to make the right decision. Which candidate should he select to become a manager?

The authors used a case study methodology.

Human resources, selection, staffing, and family business management.

Socioemotional wealth perspective, and agency theory.