Infosys BPO, a 350-million USD BPO firm, is preparing a bid for a new customer engagement. In the process, it has to consider various issues such as resource planning, productivity improvement, pricing model, quality management, and human resource management. The case provides scope for carving a strategic growth path for the firm.
The case "Mother Earth - Great Design, Great Values" can be used in a Competition and Strategy course to illustrate a firm employing a focused differentiation strategy and to explore the growth and execution strategies employed by the firm. The case also has a specific focus on the bottom of the pyramid and can be used to study sustainability issues in electives pertaining to Corporate Strategy and the Environment and Social Enterprises. Besides this, the case can also be used in entrepreneurship and marketing courses. The case describes the journey of Mother Earth (ME) since its inception as a company that believes in social sustainability and aims at discussing the strategic challenges at the end of 2010. The focus at the beginning was to utilize market mechanisms to create demand for Indian craft both in India and globally. The export markets turned out to be inconsistent in terms of demand and the financial downturn further aggravated matters; hence ME shifted its focus to expand domestically. The focus was now on giving artisanal products a new contemporary identity with better design and increased utility. ME had achieved significant growth over the last couple of years but was yet to turn profitable. With investment from Future Group, the company is poised for rapid expansion in the local market with significant efforts on building the brand ME and what it stands for.
One Acre Fund, a young, international, nonprofit social enterprise--governed by friends of the founder--had grown rapidly since its inception. It now faces increasing demands for resources and key connections to major potential donors, expertise in going to scale, and managing expansion. The case presents this issue, which is commonly faced by new nonprofits, and how the organization, led by the board chair, seeks to resolve it through redesign of the board and major changes in board membership.
As of 2012, the Physician Payments Sunshine Act of 2009 requires medical device manufacturers to track any payments or gifts they make to physicians that are worth more than $10 and then starting in 2013 to report those that exceed a total of $100 per year to any given doctor. While a majority of doctors, academic medical centers, and pharmaceutical and device companies generally support the principle of greater transparency when it comes to physician-industry collaborations, many have raised concerns that over regulating potential conflicts of interest could be detrimental to the development and commercialization of new treatments. Particularly in the medical device industry, physicians play a host of essential roles that span commercialization and, more importantly, product development. Any requirements that negatively affect the willingness or ability of physicians to partner with industry have the potential to hinder medical device innovation because, by its very nature, it is incremental and doctor-dependent This note provides a taxonomy of the different roles physicians play in device innovation and identifies which ones are most susceptible to conflicts of interest that may not be well managed by today's institutions. It also makes recommendations on how to better manage conflicts without jeopardizing the ability of physicians and companies to collaborate for the betterment of patient care.
The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, focused on building the organizational capabilities of nonprofits that served the disadvantaged youth in the United States, has recently been named an intermediary in the federal government's new social innovation fund (SIF), which is intended to bring together public-private funds to help expand effective solutions across three issue areas: economic opportunity, healthy futures, and youth development. SIF intermediaries would be responsible for directing resources to innovative community-based nonprofit organizations that were seeing results. Edna McConnell Clark Foundation had long been a promoter of evidence-based accountability and grantmaking and saw the absence of an efficient capital market in the nonprofit sector as a major impediment to funding growth, increasing scale, and building the sustainability of successful nonprofit organizations. With its Growth Capital Aggregation Pilot (GCAP), Edna McConnell Clark Foundation had seen positive results in taking a "syndicate" approach to funding a select group of nonprofits. With it being named an SIF intermediary, Edna McConnell Clark was ready to build on its GCAP experience and continue to evolve a model that would provide, at increased efficiency, growth capital for successful organizations. The foundation hoped to build a capital aggregation approach that would serve as a model for philanthropy.
This note summarizes basic principles of tort law and is intended as background information for business students studying legal aspects of management.
This case deals with the commercialization challenges that a premier research institute in an emerging economy faces despite conducting cutting-edge research. The case is set in 2009 in Hyderabad, India, soon after the appointment of CCMB’s new director, Dr. Mohan Rao. Rao has to decide how to proceed with incentivizing the scientists to find potential applications for their research when most scientists are merely interested in doing basic research and when, at the same time, the government is increasing its emphasis on the use of public science for societal good. The case also deals with the role of commercialization and technology transfer, publishing versus patenting, basic versus translation sciences, and incentives.
This case deals with the innovation challenges of a medium-sized firm (under $1 billion) in an emerging economy (India), particularly the challenges of product development and commercialization. The management has to decide how to proceed with a promising novel formula for oral insulin — promising both in terms of financial returns as well as social impact. The company has spent several years of research and development in getting the drug through Phase I and Phase II trials, and is entering the most critical stage, Phase III. The case is set in 2009, a period that was punctuated with a lot of economic uncertainty. Students are asked to decide if Biocon should go ahead with Phase III and, if so, whether it should be done locally or globally and with a partner or alone. The case also deals with transitioning research and development strategies in emerging markets, wherein firms that have traditionally focused on “imitation” (or generic drugs) are moving to high-risk drug discovery.
In October 2008, President George W. Bush signed into law a requirement that certain private health insurance plans provide coverage for mental illness equal to coverage provided for medical-surgical illness as part of an economic stimulus package, capping more than a decade of advocacy in both houses of Congress by a bipartisan coalition of Congressmen and Senators for mental health parity. Through multiple changes in Congressional leadership, the coalition - including Senators Pete Domenici (R - N.M.), Paul Wellstone (D - MN), and Edward Kennedy (D - MA) and Representatives Patrick Kennedy (D - R.I.) and Jim Ramstad (R - MN) - remained consistent and employed multiple procedural, political, and negotiation strategies to increase the visibility of mental health parity and advance their cause through piecemeal efforts. The sixteen-year path of mental health parity from first introduction in Congress to eventual enactment is an example of the impact of personal commitment, personalities and personal relationships, and the importance of the committee structure, political party leadership, and windows of political opportunity.
This case continues the story of the evolution of GE's business initiatives Africa. Between November 2010 and March 2011 several significant structural changes and leadership appointments were announced at GE, which reflected the company's commitment to global growth in all its regions outside the U.S., including its business in sub-Saharan Africa. In November 2010, John Rice, vice chairman of GE and president and CEO of GE Technology Infrastructure, was named vice chairman of GE and president and CEO of Global Growth and Operations (GGO). In this new role, Rice was based in Hong Kong and in charge of GE's growth in regions outside the U.S. In March 2011, Jay Ireland, a 31-year GE veteran and corporate officer, was appointed president and CEO for GE Africa, effective April 15, reporting to Rice. Additionally, three senior executives were appointed to Ireland's team: Lazarus Angbazo was promoted from president and CEO, sub-Saharan Africa, to president and CEO, GE West, East & Central Africa and Africa commercial leader; Thomas Konditi, a native of Kenya, rejoined GE as CFO for Global Growth and Operations, GE Africa; and Tamla Oates-Forney was promoted from human resources leader for sub-Saharan Africa, GE Energy, to senior human resources manager, GE Africa. While many were optimistic about GE's future in Africa, several issues still needed to be considered.
The Clorox Company needs to decide on the marketing strategy going forward for its three sustainable brands, Brita, Burt's Bees and Green Works. These brands had fared differently over the past 3 years and each presents multiple courses of action heading into 2011. Management also needs to assess the role the sustainable brands play in Clorox's overall Corporate Responsibility strategy and the implications they have for the other brands (such as Clorox Bleach, 409, and Hidden Valley). The company has set aggressive financial targets in light of its upcoming centennial in 2013. Students need to evaluate whether sustainability is an enduring trend that Clorox should embrace for future growth or whether focusing on its core brands, which currently represent 90% of sales, is a better approach.
The entrepreneurs had offered to purchase one Fabric Super-Store franchise; management had countered with vendor take-back (VTB) financing toward the purchase of two stores if the entrepreneurs would agree to buy and operate both locations. The VTB debt would be in second position to the bank in the event of a bankruptcy. The couple was convinced they could be successful franchisees with both stores, but were concerned with the high proposed interest rate on the VTB offer. While there was no penalty for early repayment (as in their secured bank loan), the bank had offered very competitive rates. After evaluating the financial implications of Fabric Super-Store's counter offer, it was clear that without an immediate and substantial increase in sales at both stores, the entrepreneurs would find themselves unable to operate the business due to the high financing costs. Although both parties were motivated to make a deal happen, some important roadblocks would need to be navigated in order to actually get it done.
The two entrepreneurs met with Fabric Super-Store's executive management team to present an offer to purchase the Kitchener store and a right of first refusal (ROR) on a second, nearby location in Cambridge. Upon consideration and rejection of the ROR, management responded with an intriguing counter-offer in terms of a "vendor take-back" offer (VTB). Fabric Super-Store offered vendor financing terms over three years provided the entrepreneurs purchased both locations. Somewhat complicating their decision to buy was discovering that the Cambridge location had machinery much newer and larger than that in the Kitchener store. Should Cambridge be sold to another party, it could threaten the success of the Kitchener store. The entrepreneurs concluded that they would either need to buy both locations, or pass on the opportunity completely. What to do?
The Indian business landscape is marked by uncertainty, turbulence, hyper-competition, and non-linear growth, as exemplified by the automobile sector. Increasing competition from foreign automobile organizations and homegrown ones such as Tata Motors are posing a threat to the market leader, Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. A fierce battle for market share is ensuing among these automobile giants. However, Maruti Suzuki has succeeded in maintaining its leadership position. Yet with more companies venturing into the territory of Maruti Suzuki — the small car segment — the threat to Maruti Suzuki’s market share is looming larger than before.<br><br>This case illustrates Maruti Suzuki’s journey and depicts the changes in its organizational strategy, HR strategy, and work culture in response to new challenges. Maruti Suzuki had to change from a government-owned organization and a monopoly, to a firm capable of competing with world-class automobile companies. This case describes the various challenges faced by the organization and how HR has assisted in bringing about much-needed transformation. The challenges include having to create a performing workforce, changing the mindset of the employees, coping with cross-cultural issues and, most significantly, engaging in breakthrough innovation. HR needs to create an organizational culture that not only supports breakthrough innovation but also helps retain employees.
This case describes a unique insurance scheme in India called Krupa Arogya Suraksha, promoted by the Shree Krishna Arogya Trust. The product was designed with the aim of extending basic health coverage to the “base-of-the-pyramid” population at an affordable premium. The services were provided by Shree Krishna Hospital, of which the Trust was an associate. The Trust and the hospital were looking at a win-win situation: in providing modern health services to a larger, lower-income group, the facilities of the hospital would be better utilized. In the five years since the scheme’s creation, membership had increased threefold to 43,000. These members accounted for 13 per cent of patients treated by the hospital. Thus, the dual objectives of extending affordable health care to the lower-income segment and increased utilization of the hospital facilities had been achieved, to some extent. However, the Trust was unable to meet the cost of the health care offered under the scheme from the premiums collected and was dependent on donors to cover the difference. The Trust’s management was concerned about the sustainability of such an arrangement and was looking for ways to make the scheme pay for itself.
The Pop Shoppe was once a leading player in the Canadian soft drinks market, but changing market conditions and corporate mismanagement drove the company into bankruptcy in the early 1980s. In 2003, an entrepreneur purchased the rights to the brand, and was considering reintroducing it in the market. The entrepreneur suspected that many Canadians would be as fond of the Pop Shoppe as he was. However, he had little experience in the beverage industry and consumer habits had changed in the many years since the brand died. Looking at the market, the entrepreneur wondered if there was an attractive space for Pop Shoppe. His instincts told him that older consumers would embrace the reintroduction of the old brand, but it was difficult to know if they were a sustainable market segment. Would older consumers be able to turn their children onto the brand? With little experience and limited funds, he knew that if he proceeded with the idea, he could not afford to make many mistakes. If he chose to reintroduce the Pop Shoppe, he questioned how true he should stay to the original concept. Could a new Pop Shoppe compete in the current market? Despite the entrepreneur’s love for the old brand, he wondered how he could raise enough consumer and retailer interest to make the brand succeed.