Search results

Organizational Justice Theory serves as a useful frame for discussion of this case, focusing on perceptions of fairness in the workplace. Such perceptions are shaped by outcomes, procedures, information and interpersonal treatment. Perceptions of justice in these four dimensions are associated with job performance, citizenship behaviors and some mental health outcomes. The Exit, Voice, Loyalty, Neglect (EVLN) Model outlines four potential responses (exit, voice, loyalty and neglect) to perceived job dissatisfaction, serving as a useful framework for students to discuss potential employee reactions to Starbucks’ decisions.

This case was developed from secondary sources, including news reports, company annual reports and websites. The case has been classroom tested with undergraduate students in Principles of Management (online and face-to-face) Human Resource Management (online asynchronous) and Labor/Management Relations (online synchronous).

In June 2020, Starbucks became immersed in controversy when its dress code policy conflicted with its public support for national protests over police brutality against Black Americans, including the death of George Floyd while in police custody. While publicly supporting the protests in a series of tweets, an internal memo forbidding employees from wearing Black Lives Matter attire was leaked to the press, generating national outcry, threats of a boycott and forcing Starbucks to reverse course immediately. This case examines the benefits and challenges of a corporate dress/uniform policy, and the implications of corporate involvement in social justice issues.

This case can be used in a wide range of undergraduate and graduate courses, but particularly in Principles of Management and Human Resources courses.

The case was written using publicly available information from library databases, news articles and other print and video sources. Where possible, direct quotes were obtained from recorded interviews, official announcements and other primary sources of data.

The case follows Fran Drescher (she), president of the actors’ union Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Radio and Television Artists, as she navigates the historic labor strike that brought Hollywood to a standstill over the summer and fall of 2023. As film and TV productions continued to be delayed and actors remained out of work, Drescher’s leadership style faced criticism, not only from the opposing side in the negotiation process but from her own constituents as well. Through the case, students explore the interplay between gender, leadership and power in the labor negotiation context.

The case is designed for a course in organizational behavior and may be taught to either an upper-level undergraduate and/or graduate audience. The instructor’s manual has been thoughtfully designed to guide instructors through the available options in terms of learning objectives, discussion questions and suggested teaching activities. Broadly speaking, the case may be integrated into any course after the topics of power and/or women in leadership have been taught.

The case and supporting teaching note were developed through the use of secondary sources such as company documents and archives, news articles and academic publications.

Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO and the first woman to lead a major Wall Street bank, found herself at a crossroads. Weeks prior to the company’s 2022 annual shareholder meeting, Citigroup announced it would provide reproductive health-care benefits to employees traveling out of state for an abortion. Prompted by legal developments that hinted at the potential for a widespread ban on abortions, the announcement resulted in threats from Republican lawmakers to change course or suffer financial consequences. Through the case, students explore the role of business and corporate leadership in response to controversial political issues, including the potential opportunities and threats.

The case is best-suited for management or other business students at the undergraduate or graduate/MBA level. The learning objectives of the case would fit well within any of the following courses: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)/Business and Society; Business Ethics and Decision-Making; and Strategic Management. Instructors should position the case after students have been introduced to the topic of corporate social responsibility, ethical decision-making and/or CEO activism.

This case addresses stakeholder theory by asking students to consider the various entities that have a vested interest in Delta’s response to the passage of the Senate Bill (SB) 202. Stakeholder theory holds that businesses are responsible to broader constituents in society and not only to stockholders/shareholders or owners. This perspective suggests that businesses do not exist to maximize profit alone but also to enhance society in their day-to-day decisions. To this end, stakeholders are defined as entities that affect or are affected by an organization’s decisions. Stakeholder theory is based on three arguments: descriptive, instrumental and normative arguments.

The information presented in the case was sourced from secondary sources, including both company and media publications. Several media sources from a breadth of political orientations were used to capture the complexity of the issue and the decision at hand. The case development and premise started at the Eastern Academy of Management 2021 Annual Conference Case Hackathon. The case was piloted by eight students (seven undergraduates, one graduate student) in two different courses at two institutions. The student feedback helped to highlight where clarifications were needed within the case and resulted in modifications to the exhibits, appendices and discussion questions.

On March 26, 2021, the media was buzzing about the passage of the Georgia SB 202, which included voting regulations perceived to negatively target black voters. As the head of the state’s largest employer, Delta Airlines’ Chief Executive Officer Edward Bastian found himself at the center of a heated political issue. While Delta had initially shown support for the bill, the rise in opposing voices and pressure to boycott Delta presented increasing pressure to think about its various stakeholders and potentially reevaluate the company’s handling of the situation. Should Bastiasn stay consistent with Delta’s initial support of SB 202, speak out to oppose it or remain silent?

Undergraduate students within business ethics or business in society courses are the best audiences for the case. The case may also be used in courses that have a portion of their content on business ethics or business in society; these related courses with subsections, modules or themes in this area may include corporate strategy, social responsibility and political activism.

This study aims to understand differences in perceptions of CEO compensation between working adults and business students in the USA before and after reading CEO pay information.

Participants completed a survey about their perceptions of chief executive officer (CEO) compensation before and after reading CEO compensation information that included the median CEO-to-employee ratio and salary in 2021.

Working adults and business students had similar levels of concern about CEO compensation. Participants were more concerned with CEO compensation after reading information about CEO pay but also believed CEO pay was more justified, contrary to equity theory (Adams, 1965). Among the student and adult samples, women and noninvestors were more likely to have concerns about CEO compensation than other participants.

Individuals may not understand the components of CEO compensation, and the size of CEO salaries may be difficult to comprehend. Educators and the media should consider presenting CEO compensation information in a different way, for example, how long it takes a CEO to earn as much as an average employee does annually, for the public to understand how much more CEOs are paid than their employees.

Little research exists on CEO compensation understanding and concerns. This research opens the opportunity for future studies on CEO compensation, for example, that consider variables other than CEO pay (e.g. equity and other forms of compensation) and what individuals believe CEOs do that justifies their high compensation.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework that clarifies the construct of pay secrecy.

Paralleling organizational justice research, two continua of pay information – a distributive continuum about pay raise outcomes and a procedural continuum of pay raise processes – are crossed to produce a 3 × 3 matrix with nine distinct forms of pay communication.

Drawing on the substitutability effect from the organizational justice literature, the matrix highlights the importance of considering how the communication of different types of pay information interact with one another as individuals form pay perceptions.

The matrix framework illustrates that not only information content shapes pay perceptions, but also the extent to which different types of pay information are communicated, and how these different types of information interact. As with any conceptual framework, the current manuscript is limited by a lack of empirical testing.

Managers should be cognizant of the many different ways in which pay information can be communicated. A call is made to reconsider the use of traditionally binary terminology (secret or not) in favor of more accurate descriptions of the nuanced ways in which organizations communicate pay information.

The value of the pay communication matrix lies in the nine unique forms of pay communication arising from the interaction of two different forms of pay information – distributive (outcomes) and procedural (process).