The goal of the Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria Stakeholder Simulation is to illustrate the challenges in anticipating points of common interest, and the difficulties of overcoming initial antagonistic conditions in order to work together to develop better positions. The simulation illustrates the tensions, trade-offs, and challenges involved in mapping and addressing competing stakeholder demands in a long-standing conflict where players' positions are highly polarized. The students are organized in six teams and are asked to take on the position of six different organizations, map the interactions between these six players by taking a specific point of view, and publicly state their position before they begin the engagement exercise. The engagement exercise asks students to develop and execute a stakeholder engagement strategy by stepping into one of the six roles. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by each of the key players, students are asked to highlight their key strategic priorities, map stakeholders' interests, and anticipate their changes in position. They are asked to revive or break specific relationships as their own interests evolve in ways that best further their own engagement priorities and short- or long-term goals. The simulation also opens up a broader platform for exploring the complex dynamics of stakeholder engagement; the delicate balance of stakeholders' power, urgency, and legitimacy; the influence chains that help alter the positions of specific groups; and the logics that enable or hinder constructive collaboration with diverse and/or emerging stakeholders.
The A case begins with the arrival of a new leader at a troubled firm. Faced with a myriad of issues about both the leadership and the strategy of the organization, Stephen Oswald must prioritize what to tackle and how. See also the B case (UV1105).
The B case continues the story of Stephen Oswald's leadership by examining the actions he took during his first three years at the corporation. See also the A case (UV1103).
This case and "DOSA Motor Manufacturing" (UVA-OM-1349) provide data for the parties in a negotiation exercise. DOSA is seeking to buy a die-cast aluminum housing for a new motor design and has initiated negotiations with TONA Foundry, the incumbent supplier, for half of the housing in the current design. The new design will reduce some costs according to a cost model developed by TONA, and there are several potential additional opportunities for collaboration in the negotiation. The cost models developed by DOSA, however, do not match those developed by TONA.
This case and "TONA Foundry" (UVA-OM-1348) provide data for the parties in a negotiation exercise. DOSA is seeking to buy a die-cast aluminum housing for a new motor design and has initiated negotiations with TONA Foundry, the incumbent supplier, for half of the housing in the current design. The new design will reduce some costs according to a cost model developed by TONA, and there are several potential additional opportunities for collaboration in the negotiation.
The owner of Windhorse Farm (WHF), a sustainably run woodlot and woodshop that produces building products as well as "tonewood" (wood used for guitar, mandolin, violin tops), is reaching retirement age. Since there is no heir apparent to run the businesses, he needs to determine whether he should stay in or exit the building products business and/or the tonewood business. The decision must conform to the criteria set out by the "four pillars" (economic, social, environmental and spiritual), which guide the mission and strategy of WHF. Objectives: 1) To provide a rich opportunity for students to examine how a small business uses a triple (in this case, quadruple) bottom line approach to corporate mission definition and strategy formulation. 2) To demonstrate how product extension decisions need to be integrated into the dynamics of the overall company, especially in terms of the relationship between existing product lines and new marketing, production and personnel requirements. 3) To expose students to business and community-based strategies that can enhance the sustainability of the forest industry. 4) To present students with a decision-making opportunity in a market such as tonewood where market knowledge and available data are highly "impressionistic" and informal. 5) To highlight how personal priorities, such as retirement and succession, may override other concerns.
The A1 and A2 versions of the "Shareholder Activists at Friendly Ice Cream (A)" split the original A case into two parts. The A1 case ends as activists Sardar Biglari and Phil Cooley prepare to meet with CEO Don Smith at Friendly's headquarters in September 2006. The A2 case resumes the story just after the meeting and details Biglari's and Friendly's actions from that point on. The A1 and A2 cases are provided for instructors who wish more flexibility in the teaching plan. These cases do not omit or abridge any information contained in the original A case. Two activist investors, one a founder and one a hedge fund manager, seek to improve board oversight at a chain restaurant company. Prestley Blake founded Friendly Ice Cream in 1935 with his brother and the two created a chain of full-service restaurants. In 1979 they sold the business and retired. In 2000, Blake became concerned that Friendly's CEO, who owned approximately 10% of Friendly and also owned a larger percentage of another restaurant company, was shifting expenses between the businesses in a way detrimental to Friendly shareholders, but personally advantageous to the CEO. Further, Blake believed that Friendly's board of directors was not meeting their fiduciary obligations to shareholders by properly overseeing the activities of the CEO and that the directors had conflicts of interest because they were involved with the CEO's non-Friendly business activities. In 2003, Blake filed a lawsuit against the CEO and the company. In 2006, Sardar Biglari, a hedge fund manager who had invested in Friendly, entered into negotiations with Friendly for him to join the board of directors to help improve the management of the business. When these negotiations failed, Biglari launched a proxy fight against Friendly in 2007. While these two activist investors shared similar objectives, they worked independently and chose different strategies.
The A1 and A2 versions of the "Shareholder Activists at Friendly Ice Cream (A)" split the original A case into two parts. The A1 case ends as activists Sardar Biglari and Phil Cooley prepare to meet with CEO Don Smith at Friendly's headquarters in September 2006. The A2 case resumes the story just after the meeting and details Biglari's and Friendly's actions from that point on. The A1 and A2 cases are provided for instructors who wish more flexibility in the teaching plan. These cases do not omit or abridge any information contained in the original A case. Two activist investors, one a founder and one a hedge fund manager, seek to improve board oversight at a chain restaurant company. Prestley Blake founded Friendly Ice Cream in 1935 with his brother and the two created a chain of full-service restaurants. In 1979 they sold the business and retired. In 2000, Blake became concerned that Friendly's CEO, who owned approximately 10% of Friendly and also owned a larger percentage of another restaurant company, was shifting expenses between the businesses in a way detrimental to Friendly shareholders, but personally advantageous to the CEO. Further, Blake believed that Friendly's board of directors was not meeting their fiduciary obligations to shareholders by properly overseeing the activities of the CEO and that the directors had conflicts of interest because they were involved with the CEO's non-Friendly business activities. In 2003, Blake filed a lawsuit against the CEO and the company. In 2006, Sardar Biglari, a hedge fund manager who had invested in Friendly, entered into negotiations with Friendly for him to join the board of directors to help improve the management of the business. When these negotiations failed, Biglari launched a proxy fight against Friendly in 2007. While these two activist investors shared similar objectives, they worked independently and chose different strategies.
This exercise is meant to assess students' level of confidence around everyday business and general knowledge questions, for the purpose of identifying where they are overconfident and underconfident.
The new country director of CHF International (CHF), a U.S.-based organization that initiated operations in Sudan with USAID funding, must review the successes of CHF's early interventions, and its strategic interest in the fuel efficient stoves project. The practical decision concerns a US$65,000 investment in a local manufacturing facility that would allow CHF to scale up the production of a stove design endorsed by the Lawrence Berkeley National lab using locally tested prototypes with USAID support. Students are asked to contemplate whether and how economies of scale would bring the costs down to a tipping point where internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Darfuri camps could afford the benefits of greater efficiency and convenience. They also need to balance cost cutting considerations with alternative decision criteria for local development: the success of this project depends on IDPs' preference among alternative stove providers - which encompasses, in addition to fuel economies, the characteristics of the stoves themselves (i.e. quality, fuel efficiency), the engagement of the community in their production, and the ability to use and repair the stoves. The role play supplements M0862A to M0862F will highlight several aspects of the competitive dynamics among the key players. A summary of the dynamic interaction between the players is provided in the supplement Competing for Development (C): Success, Bittersweet.
Pat Fili-Krushel, CEO and president of WebMD and past president of ABC Network, contemplates accepting Richard Parson's offer to become the first executive vice president of administration at AOL Time Warner. Accepting this position would be a move back into mainstream media but also a career shift from line positions to a corporate staff role. The case profiles Fili-Krushel's media experiences, and her use of interpersonal influence and negotiation, leading up to the critical decision point. After consulting with colleagues throughout the media industry, Fili-Krushel's decision rests on her own career aspirations and her expectations about the future of AOL Time Warner.
Pat Fili-Krushel has agreed to take on the job of first executive vice president of administration for AOL Time Warner, leading corporate human resources, internal communications, real estate and facilities, and other administrative roles for the combined company. She must figure out how to structure the job, and how to start her relationship with her new boss, CEO Richard Parsons. Two factors complicate this decision. First, AOL Time Warner is experiencing significant internal conflict and Fili-Krushel is stepping into the middle of it. Second, Fili-Krushel has built her career on increasingly large line leadership positions, such as the president of ABC Network, and has no experience in getting things done without line authority. The case lays out the steps she takes to build authority and respect within the firm, and outlines the process of moving the firm's leaders from conflict to collaboration.
Frank Addante is a 28-year-old serial entrepreneur who is in the process of building his fifth venture. Of his first four ventures, two were sold, one went public, and in the last he decided to close the venture and return unused capital to his investors. With the passing of each venture, he has learned about forming founding teams, splitting equity with his co-founders, hiring executives to work for him, and when to take outside funding. Now, he's facing pressure from investors who aren't happy with how he is building his current team and are questioning whether he should remain CEO.
By 2008, a number of the firm's early cleantech investments were showing promise, and the companies were starting to need significantly more money to create the massive scale required in the energy sector. As Khosla thought about the hundreds of millions of dollars required by his portfolio companies, he wondered how he should position his firm at this stage of development. Should Khosla develop a new fund that focused on later-stage investments? Should he seek investments from large industry players such as the major oil companies? Should he try raising money from the managers of the sovereign funds in countries such as Singapore, Kuwait and China? How should the firm work with its strategic partners? Khosla knew that lining up enough later stage funding would be challenging, as the cleantech industry was still unproven for investors. Nevertheless, he was determined to continue his pattern of making bold investments in this emerging field.
A capital-intensive industry that requires sophisticated high technology and enormous economies of scale, the global large civil aircraft industry allows only a few profitable players and has been dominated by the duopoly of The Boeing Company ("Boeing") and Airbus S.A.S. ("Airbus"). Although outsourcing has been evident since the 1970s, since the 1990s, Boeing and Airbus have become increasingly reliant on foreign suppliers, especially those in newly emerging markets, such as China. Industrial offset arrangements allow the two giants to contract their production processes, and increasingly the actual design and engineering work, to Chinese suppliers in exchange for guaranteed sales of the finished aircraft to Chinese airlines. This case provides a brief introduction to the global large civil aircraft industry. It can be used to teach courses with a focus on economics, business management, production and operational management.
This case illustrates China's attempts at building its own regional jets and large civil aircraft. The case can be used to teach courses in international competitiveness and strategic management at the country, industry or firm level. It can also be used as an introduction to corporate mission and governance issues for companies that are dominated by government shareholders.
Anna Amphlett, a financial analyst at Textron Corporation, has been asked by the controller to benchmark the company's recent financial performance against competitors in the aerospace and defense industry. Top management plans to assess the performance of the company's supply chain and its future working capital requirements. Textron experienced impressive stock price growth in the last five years, but top management is particularly interested in understanding the company's sizeable investments in net working capital over the same period. In benchmarking Textron's performance, Amphlett must also consider what to do about accounting method differences across companies in the aerospace and defense industry, since they may have a significant effect on the interpretation of differences in reported performance.
This a role play supplement to Competing for Development (A): Fuel Efficient Stoves for Darfur, product # 908M61. The role plays feature additional background, motivations and decision priorities from the key local and international players in Darfur's fuel efficient stove interventions, including the Intermediate Technology Group , renamed to Practical Action in 2005 (ITDG/PA), the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, Aprovecho, the International Lifeline Fund, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and organizations representing local, female, internally displaced persons (IDPs).
This a role play supplement to Competing for Development (A): Fuel Efficient Stoves for Darfur, product # 908M61. The role plays feature additional background, motivations and decision priorities from the key local and international players in Darfur's fuel efficient stove interventions, including the Intermediate Technology Group , renamed to Practical Action in 2005 (ITDG/PA), the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, Aprovecho, the International Lifeline Fund, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and organizations representing local, female, internally displaced persons (IDPs).