On April 8, 1787, James Madison wrote to Governor Edmund Randolph of Virginia: "My Dear Friend, I am glad to find that you are turning your thoughts towards the business of May next." Madison was referring to the Federal Convention scheduled to begin the next month in Philadelphia to revise the Articles of Confederation. Madison's project was for an entirely new form of government-although the upcoming gathering had made clear its aim of merely improving the existing government under the Articles of Confederation. This case explores the extraordinary leadership of James Madison who had few stereotypical qualities of a leader.

On May 30, 1787, the second day of the Convention held in the Pennsylvania State House, six states voted "aye" and one "nay" to the proposal to establish "a national Government ... consisting of a supreme Legislative, Executive and Judiciary." In that moment, delegates who had gathered merely to revise the Articles of Confederation agreed to abolish it. In that moment, James Madison earned the title of Father of the Constitution, although he had not even introduced the proposal.

The CEO of a promising biotech company must decide how to respond to the macro-economic slump of late 2008. He had planned to pursue an aggressive schedule moving the firm's Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease imaging compounds through clinical trials and into the market. This involved expanding the firm's facilities and headcount and he planned to fund this by taking venture debt. Although clinical trial data is extremely encouraging, questions about raising his next venture round and the overall environment has made him question the wisdom of this plan. This case provides students an opportunity to explore the true cost of venture debt and when it is best used to achieve the goals of all parties--venture capitalists, entrepreneurs, and venture lenders.

In recent years, greater competition and diminished profits, due to domestic and global oversupplies as well as higher development costs, have led the automobile industry to engage in domestic and international mergers and strategic collaboration. This case examines one of the largest mergers and acquisitions (M&As) in the Korean automobile market in recent years: the acquisition of Kia Motors (Kia) by Hyundai Motors (Hyundai). The case describes the background conditions of the acquisition, the integration processes after the acquisition, and the requisites for Kia Motors to normalize management within a short time. Hyundai, in acquiring Kia, enhanced its competitive power in both domestic and global markets, achieving economies of scale and scope and strengthening its global market basis. That said, Hyundai/Kia faced several pressing challenges, among them the cooperation of Renault and Samsung Motors, the unclear domestic treatment of Daewoo Motors, and M&As taking place among top motor companies worldwide. This case study asks students to analyze the process of post-acquisition restructuring and the resulting synergy effects, inviting them to think through the strategies by which Hyundai/Kia may thrive in the global automobile market. Further, it illustrates both the current state of the domestic Korean automobile industry and recent trends in the global automobile market.

Mattel, an industry leader with a sterling reputation in corporate responsibility, was being pulled into a recall vortex that had seen affected a variety of products produced in and exported from China in 2007, including dog food, toothpaste, tires, and seafood. Mattel CEO Robert Eckert was faced with a crisis. By the time the dust settled, Mattel had recalled 19 million toys made in China. Mattel's stock price declined as they took a $40 million charge for recalls, and their costs increased because of added regulation in China and the United States. Customers threatened to boycott Mattel and all toys made in China. Bob Eckert had been called to testify before both U.S. House and Senate hearings on toy safety. Chinese government officials saw Mattel's recall public relations approach as blaming China's manufacturers for what was primarily a Mattel design problem. This unfavorable publicity drew attention from Chinese regulators, and resulted in Mattel making a highly publicized public apology to China and China's quality watchdog chief, Li Changjiang. When it looked like nothing could get worse for Mattel, Congress sent a letter to Mattel stating that Robert Eckert was not honoring the public commitment he had made to consumers during the initial recall incident. This tsunami of negative events left Mattel executives perplexed and reeling: How could a company so highly regarded as a toy industry model of corporate citizenship find itself mired in such a controversy? What next steps should they take to recover from the crisis? How should they protect their brand? What should they do to restore their reputation? Was this crisis a roadblock to achieving their vision of being the world's premier toy brand "tomorrow"?

Most companies around the world are family-controlled and/or closely held. The need to value these companies routinely arises in practice for a variety of reasons, e.g ., to buy out minority shareholders; for gift and estate tax purposes; to tie executive compensation to firm performance; to raise outside capital; or to sell the company outright. However, these companies present certain unique characteristics that can make standard valuation methods inappropriate for them.

Big Spaceship, a digital marketing agency, faced a rather big challenge: How to scale the distinctive culture that was essential to its competitive strategy? Renowned for the cutting-edge web sites that it developed to market major Hollywood movies and leading consumer brands, the firm had won numerous awards and garnered considerable attention within the advertising industry. In mid-2008, Big Spaceship remained small (it had fewer than 50 employees) but was poised for significant growth. For founder and CEO Michael Lebowitz, the central challenge was to figure out whether and how the agency could retain its boutique culture while transcending its boutique size. The case begins by briefly outlining Lebowitz's background, along with the history of Big Spaceship since its founding in 2000. Then the case shifts to a discussion of external dynamics: the firm's value proposition, which focused on providing start-to-finish, strategy-driven digital marketing solutions; its interaction with clients; and its relationship with established players in the advertising industry. Next, the case examines the firm's internal dynamics. Here, in addition to describing the culture of Big Spaceship, the case puts special emphasis on the firm's recent shift from a functional structure to a team-based structure. Finally, the case provides an overview of key issues that Lebowitz and his team must consider as they plan for the firm's growth--how to raise capital, how to gauge the optimal size for the company, how to manage an expanding staff. A major highlight of the case is the inclusion of more than a dozen graphically compelling exhibits, which help to illustrate the firm's value proposition, its innovation-oriented culture, and its evolving organizational design.

In January 2004, the chairman of the India-based Tata Group, announced that the Tata Group would focus its efforts on international expansion to become globally competitive. This largely domestic vehicle manufacturing firm subsequently acquired a leading established South Korean firm, Daewoo Commercial Vehicle Company (DCVC). This case focuses on the background of the firms and the acquisition, and the bidding and acquisition process. It provides information on the interests of the acquirer and target, and how both came to see the value in the acquisition. The Tata Group acquisition presents an uncommon situation of how an Indian firm acquired a firm in South Korea while overcoming a series of cultural and other barriers. An analysis of this case provides the basis for determining what criteria should be considered to guide a successful acquisition. A companion case is also available, Tata Motors' Integration of Daewoo Commercial Vehicle Company.

In January 2004, the chairman of the India-based Tata Group, announced that the Tata Group would focus its efforts on international expansion to become globally competitive. This largely domestic vehicle manufacturing firm subsequently acquired a leading established South Korean firm, Daewoo Commercial Vehicle Company (DCVC). This case complements the case Tata Motors' Acquisition of Daewoo Commercial Vehicles Company, #9B08M094. Commencing from the successful completion of the acquisition of DCVC, this case details the strategic, organizational and operational changes implemented to integrate the two firms. The value of this case is twofold: 1) it demonstrates how firms can effectively integrate an acquired firm, particularly in terms of the wide range of strategic and tactical actions; and 2) it provides an example of a firm that takes an unorthodox approach to integration. Students have an opportunity to evaluate the factors that determine the success of a post-acquisition integration.

This note introduces the Value Venture Chain (VVC) model, which applies the paradigm of the value chain, well-accepted in other industries, to the process of conceptualizing, funding and building new businesses. The VVC provides startup executives, corporate new-business-development professionals, service providers, venture investors and aspiring entrepreneurs with a conceptual framework and a shared language of commonly-understood terminology.

Public Private Partnerships (PPP) have emerged as one of the major approaches for delivering infrastructure projects effectively. This article develops a PPP framework for infrastructure development. It discusses examples of worldwide applications, as well as benefits and obstacles of PPP through a literature review on PPP-related research over the last 20 years. The syntheses of the knowledge present foundations from which the laws, regulations, and guidelines for effective and successful PPP implementation can be established. This analysis reveals that PPP can create new and long-term business opportunities with a chance to deliver infrastructure services of higher quality and efficiency. However, these benefits will only be materialized when a PPP project is properly planned and managed and both the public and private sectors work together successfully.

To understand the recent trend toward privatization of infrastructure assets (e.g., airports), this article proposes a valuation methodology based on real options and game theory analysis that enables assessing when investors might overpay for infrastructure assets over standard discounted cash flow methods and when a premium is justified for their operating flexibility or strategic growth option value. While some infrastructure asset acquisitions may involve financial transactions whose value derives primarily from their expected cash flows, many of these infrastructure investments provide a platform and create the strategic context within which the firm can grow.

Megaprojects require investment of $1bn or more to build infrastructure, usually involving a complex system of production consisting of discrete, routine, and high-volume repetitive processes. Many of these processes can be progressively standardized and replicated to improve overall productive performance. This article presents the findings of research on design and production of London's Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 (T5). The findings were used to develop a conceptual framework-which we call the systems integration model-to identify the project and operational processes that contribute to success in delivering megaprojects. The systems integrator is the lead organization in a megaproject, responsible for establishing a governance structure, managing risk, and coordinating processes performed by a large network of external suppliers. Innovations based on the "recombination" and "replication" of processes can be introduced to improve megaproject performance.

In recent years, infrastructure promoters have become interested in translating the Toyota lean management paradigm into new infrastructure development projects. This approach assumes client and project suppliers are willing to work cooperatively. To enable this prerequisite, clients have started to experiment with relational contracts. An empirical study on the use of a relational contract in the £4.2bn extension of Heathrow airport in London confirms, however, the old adage that the devil is in the details. Unarguably, relational contracts enable the project client and suppliers to work together for a common purpose. However, the interwoven ways in which the client implements the contract-writing up the commercial details, as well as adjusting and interpreting these details throughout the project-are critical to encourage the suppliers to work cooperatively and meet the expectations of the client. This study unpacks five factors for making relational contracts work in projects: suppliers are keen to reap reputation benefits from project participation; suppliers have flexibility in their production processes; client and suppliers choose the right people for the jobs; client learns to relationally contract in response to supplier feedback; and client aligns its practices to control and improve performance with the suppliers' skills.

The cumulative effects of individual purchase decisions are responsible for anthropogenic climate change. These very same private investment and consumption decisions are at the center of climate change mitigation efforts. This article shows that new market-based, incentive-compatible mechanisms could encourage win-win (green and profitable) behavior by private investors. Despite their availability and financial viability, people often overlook more efficient technologies in favor of the less efficient but familiar ones. The article provides a framework that shows how local policies can act as catalysts in providing profitable opportunities for private investors to bridge this so-called "efficiency gap."

Our annual survey of ideas and trends that will make an impact on business: Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Tyagi believe consumer credit should be made as safe as any other product. Paul Collier and Jean-Louis Warnholz reveal an increasingly investment-friendly climate in sub-Saharan Africa. Amy J.C. Cuddy asserts that warmth and competence are not mutually exclusive. John Sviokla predicts a surge of peer-to-peer lending in the wake of the financial crisis. Noah J. Goldstein explains the impact of social pressure on customers' behavior. Raymond Fisman urges the creation of a global forensic economics lab modeled on Interpol. Paul Saffo warns of a brain drain out of the U.S. Gurdeep Singh Pall and Rita Gunther McGrath contemplate the ramifications of immortalizing business meetings in searchable, high-quality digital video. Janine M. Benyus and Gunter A.M. Pauli illustrate the advantages of innovation copied from nature. Michael I. Norton observes that an investment of effort can lead to unduly glorifying its results. Peter Schwartz dispels the illusion that global temperatures are actually falling. Nicholas A. Christakis shows that personal influence wanes beyond three degrees of separation. Marcelo Suarez-Orozco sees the migrant millions as untapped brand emissaries to their relatives back home. Ian Bremmer and Juan Pujadas chart the growing influence of state capitalism in four industry sectors. Steve Jurvetson shares a fun way to stimulate the growth of new brain cells. Lew McCreary spotlights the interior designs of two adventurous architects who aim to counteract the degenerative effects of physical comfort. Tom Ilube explains the semantic web - a quiet revolution in technology that will radically change the internet. Alex Pentland weighs the benefits of combining two distinct kinds of social networking. Thomas H. Davenport and Bala Iyer look at the offshore outsourcing of decision making. R. Stanley Williams envisions a central nervous system for the earth.

Josh Lewis, a young staffer at Rising Entertainment, is frustrated because his boss, marketing chief Sarah Bennett, won't listen to his ideas about using new media to promote films. She's trapped in the 1990s, he thinks, when people actually watched network TV! Rushing through his assignment for a team presentation, he works up a plan and pitches it to the CEO in the hallway. The CEO loves it, but Sarah is upset with Josh for going over her head - and submitting subpar work on the presentation. How can these members of two different generations work together effectively? Three experts comment on this fictional case study in R0902B and R0902Z. Clashes between impatient Generation Y and pay-your-dues Generation X are inevitable but certainly manageable, says Ron Alsop, author of The Trophy Kids Grow Up. For starters, Sarah should reprimand Josh for bypassing her; he should respect her authority and work with her, not around her. But Sarah must address Josh's frustrations. Like many Gen Yers, he wants to know that his work is meaningful, and he needs constructive feedback on suggestions. Enterprise Rent-A-Car president Pamela Nicholson says that given the CEO's enthusiasm, Sarah should commend Josh's initiative but remind him to keep her in the loop. Sarah and Josh also might be able to forge a more productive relationship if Rising Entertainment set up training and feedback programs to help integrate Gen Yers into the workforce, as Enterprise has. Jim Miller, an executive VP at General Tool & Supply, thinks Josh put his team in jeopardy by doing his assigned tasks poorly. Sarah needs to coach him on being a team player and set clear expectations about performance and communication. However, she could have done a much better job of validating his good idea - perhaps by asking him to spearhead some experiments for the group.

Downturns offer a rare opportunity to outmaneuver rivals. But to do so, you must first systematically assess your organization's ability to weather the storm and take corrective action. David Rhodes and Daniel Stelter, of the Boston Consulting Group, offer a comprehensive approach to tackling this simultaneously defensive and offensive challenge. For some companies, the outcome of this process will be a program of immediate actions that represent a turbocharged version of business as usual. For others, it will be a painful realization that nothing short of an urgent corporate turnaround will suffice. To stabilize the business, companies must (1) protect their financial fundamentals by, for example, monitoring and maximizing cash flow, managing customer credit risk, reducing working capital, and optimizing their financial structure and financing options; (2) protect their existing business operations by reducing costs, increasing organizational efficiency, aggressively managing the top line, rethinking their product portfolio and pricing, reining in investment plans, and divesting noncore businesses; and (3) work to maximize their valuation relative to rivals by being proactive in their investor relations and favoring dividends over share buybacks. To seize advantage, companies must make farsighted investments, identify opportunistic and potentially transformative mergers, and consider possible redefinitions of their business models. This recession handbook will help companies not only to survive the recession but also to thrive in its aftermath.

Decision making lies at the heart of our personal and professional lives. Yet the daunting reality is that enormously important decisions made by intelligent, responsible people with the best information and intentions are nevertheless hopelessly flawed at times. In part, that's due to the way our brains work. Modern neuroscience teaches us that two hardwired processes in the brain - pattern recognition and emotional tagging - are critical to decision making. Both are normally reliable; indeed, they provide us with an evolutionary advantage. But in certain circumstances, either one can trip us up and skew our judgment. In this article, Campbell and Whitehead, directors at the Ashridge Strategic Management Centre, together with Finkelstein, of Dartmouth's Tuck School, describe the conditions that promote errors of judgment and explore how organizations can build safeguards against them into the decision-making process. In their analysis, the authors delineate three "red-flag conditions" that are responsible either for distorting emotional tagging or for encouraging people to see false patterns: conflicts of interest; attachments to people, places, or things; and the presence of misleading memories, which seem, but really are not, relevant and comparable to the current situation. Using a global chemical company as an example, the authors describe the steps leaders can take to counteract those biases: inject fresh experience or analysis, introduce further debate and more challenges to their thinking, and impose stronger governance. Rather than rely on the wisdom of experienced chairmen, the humility of CEOs, or the standard organizational checks and balances, the authors urge, everyone involved in important decisions should explicitly consider whether red flags exist and, if they do, lobby for appropriate safeguards.

Managers regularly implement new ideas without evidence to back them up. They act on hunches and often learn very little along the way. That doesn't have to be the case. With the help of broadly available software and some basic investments in building capabilities, managers don't need a PhD in statistics to base consequential decisions on scientifically sound experiments. Some companies with rich consumer-transaction data - Toronto-Dominion, CKE Restaurants, eBay, and others - are routinely testing innovations well outside the realm of product R&D. As randomized testing becomes standard procedure in certain settings (website analysis, for instance), firms learn to apply it in other areas as well. Entire organizations that adopt a "test and learn" culture stand to realize the greatest benefits. That said, firms need to determine when formal testing makes sense. Generally, it's much more applicable to tactical decisions (such as choosing a new store format) than to strategic ones (such as figuring out whether to acquire a business). Tests are useful only if managers define and measure desired outcomes and formulate logical hypotheses about how proposed interventions will play out. To begin incorporating more scientific management into your business, acquaint managers at all levels with your organization's testing process. A shared understanding of what constitutes a valid test - and how it jibes with other processes - helps executives to set expectations and innovators to deliver on them. The process always begins with creating a testable hypothesis. Then the details of the test are designed, which means identifying sites or units to be tested, selecting control groups, and defining test and control situations. After the test is carried out for a specified period, managers analyze the data to determine results and appropriate actions. Results ideally go into a "learning library," so others can benefit from them.