Describes the ways in which Washington Mutual preserved and reinforced its brand through two phases of expansion, the first based on acquisition and the second on organic growth. The Washington Mutual brand is shown to be grounded in a well designed customer experience. This experience was the result of careful attention by Washington Mutual to hiring policies for its staff, incentives that encouraged entrepreneurship, empowerment of both "store" managers and "sales associates," and a strong culture that valued the community, innovation, fairness in treatment of customers, care for its employees, and high-speed implementation.
AstraZeneca is preparing for the launch of Crestor, the company's first entrant in the enormous and fast-growing statin category. The team responsible for the product launch is considering how best to bring Crestor to market. Should AstraZeneca simply follow the example set by Pfizer with the exceptionally successful launch of Lipitor? Or should the company instead launch Crestor as a niche product?
Describes how four independent, community-based nonmedical centers that offered professional services and programs to cancer patients on a voluntary non-fee basis in the 1990s came together to form the Cancer Health Alliance in 2003-2004 as a separate nonprofit to help achieve more of their mission and be more sustainable.
A second-generation, multi-billion-dollar Asian family business, run for decades by six brothers, faces issues of ownership, family employment, management, leadership, governance, and succession as it transitions to the third generation of siblings and cousins.
Encyclopaedia Britannica was the leading provider of encyclopedias in the English language, but after sales declined rapidly in the early 1990s the company was forced to file for bankruptcy. Many different organizational and market factors contributed to this crisis, such as the diffusion of the PC, the invention of Encarta, the technical challenges of moving text to electronic formats, and the difficulties of inventing a new format while also operating the leading seller of books. Looking back, what could the company have done differently?
By 2006, Wikipedia had achieved the type of success that only a handful of young organizations could ever dream of reaching. It had grown from almost nothing in 2001 to become one of the consistently highest ranked and most visited sites on the Internet. This success brought new problems at a scale that no organization of this type had ever before faced. Exposes students to Wikipedia's brief history, the causes of its success, and the issues it faced going forward. Two topics form the focus: The first concerns the rules and norms for submission and editing, which raise questions about the ambiguity of Wikipedia's authority and the virtual cycle that keeps the site going; The second concerns the need to alter its practices as it gains in popularity, raising questions about what any wiki site, profit-oriented or open source, must do to scale to large numbers of participants and entries. These issues arise as part of a discussion about the site's priorities going forward.
The case is based on a real supply chain outsourcing management decision at a major manufacturing company. The company has been disguised for confidentiality reasons. The case discusses different types of outsourcing, supply chain management, the benefits and risks of outsourcing, and various pricing models for outsourcing contracts. Students must make a management decision and answer these questions: Is supply chain outsourcing a viable option for DB Toys? What will the return on investment be? What is the best outsourcing model? What is the best pricing model?
The case centers on Shilling & Smith's acquisition of Xteria Inc. and the resulting need to quickly scale the company's IT infrastructure to accommodate the acquisition. The case is based on a real leasing problem faced by a major retail firm in the Chicago area when it purchased a small credit card processing firm and scaled the operations to handle the retail firm's credit card transactions. The CIO of Shilling & Smith needs to determine which lease option is the best means of providing the technical infrastructure needed to support the firm after the acquisition of Xteria. Several issues will drive this decision, including the value and useful life of the equipment, as well as the strategic context of the firm. This case examines how to evaluate different lease options when acquiring data center information technology infrastructure. Specifically, the case addresses software vs. hardware leasing, different lease terms, and choosing between different lease structures depending on the strategy and needs of a company. This case enables students to understand the different types of technology leases and in which situations these leases would be employed.
Technology projects are inherently risky; research shows that large IT projects succeed as originally planned only 28 percent of the time. Building flexibility, or real options, into a project can help manage this risk. Furthermore, the management flexibility of options has value, as the downside risk is reduced and the upside is increased. The case is based upon real options analysis for an enterprise data warehouse (EDW) and analytic customer relationship management (CRM) program at a major U.S. firm. The firm has been disguised as Global Airlines for confidentiality reasons. The data mart consolidation or EDW marginally meets the hurdle rate for the firm as analyzed using a traditional net present value (NPV) analysis. However, different tactical deployment strategies help mitigate the risk of the project by building options into the project, and the traditional NPV is expanded by the real option value. Students analyze the different deployment strategies using a binomial model compound option Excel macro, and calculate the volatility using Monte Carlo analysis in Excel. A step-by-step tutorial is provided to teach students how to accomplish the real options analysis for a simplified project, and this tutorial is easily generalized by students to the case scenario. In addition to the tactical options, the case also has the strategic growth option of analytic CRM. Students must therefore analyze both the tactical and strategic growth options and make a management recommendation on funding the project and also recommend an optimal deployment strategy to manage the project risk.
A self-employed innovator developed and patented a novel combination pen and stylus device to complement the recently released Palm Pilot personal digital assistant. He presented his design to Palm, under a nondisclosure agreement to discuss the market response to the product, and his company, ttools, was subsequently allowed to advertise the device in a monthly e-mail to Palm customers. After ttools' release of the Throttle pen/stylus, Palm and the design firm IDEO introduced a similar pen/stylus device that appeared to infringe on ttools' patent. ttools, being a small, resource-constrained company, was in a precarious position. Its competitive advantage and rights as a patent holder were being threatened. It had few financial resources to draw upon, and thus its livelihood as a company was at stake. Investigates the available options ttools had to respond to Palm and IDEO's actions.
ESPE, the market leader, is a medium-sized German manufacturer of precision dental impression materials competing in a shrinking market. To grow the business, ESPE invests substantial resources in innovative impression materials and associated distribution mechanisms. Squeezed by the shrinking market, the competition is increasingly using the proprietary channels (dispensing mechanisms) and brand equity (trademark) of ESPE to maintain their market share. There is a potential infringement. Explores how ESPE is organized to execute on the options imbedded in its IP rights.
The case concerns a real $25 million program consisting of nine concurrent projects to deliver and implement a custom-built in-store customer relationship management (CRM) system and a new point-of-sale system in 400 stores of a national retail chain. The name of the company has been disguised for confidentiality reasons. Once deployed, the new system should give Clothes 'R' Us a significant strategic advantage over competitors in the marketplace; it will increase in-store manager productivity, cut costs, and ultimately drive increased sales for the retail chain. The program is in crisis, however, because the product managers have just left to join a competitor. The explicit details of the program are given, including examples of best practice program governance and the real activity network diagram for the program. Detailed Excel spreadsheets are also provided with the actual earned value data for the program. Students analyze the spreadsheets and the data given in the case to diagnose the impact of the most recent risk event and past risk events that occurred in the program. Ultimately students must answer the essential executive questions: What is wrong with the program? How should it be fixed, and what is the impact in time and money to the program? In addition, qualitative warning signs are given throughout the case-these warning signs are red flags to executives for early proactive intervention in troubled projects.
Technology projects are inherently risky; research shows that large IT projects succeed as originally planned only 28 percent of the time. Building flexibility, or real options, into a project can help manage this risk. Furthermore, the management flexibility of options has value, as the downside risk is reduced and the upside is increased. The case is based upon real options analysis for an enterprise data warehouse (EDW) and analytic customer relationship management (CRM) program at a major U.S. firm. The firm has been disguised as Global Airlines for confidentiality reasons. The data mart consolidation or EDW marginally meets the hurdle rate for the firm as analyzed using a traditional net present value (NPV) analysis. However, different tactical deployment strategies help mitigate the risk of the project by building options into the project, and the traditional NPV is expanded by the real option value. Students analyze the different deployment strategies using a binomial model compound option Excel macro, and calculate the volatility using Monte Carlo analysis in Excel. A step-by-step tutorial is provided to teach students how to accomplish the real options analysis for a simplified project, and this tutorial is easily generalized by students to the case scenario. In addition to the tactical options, the case also has the strategic growth option of analytic CRM. Students must therefore analyze both the tactical and strategic growth options and make a management recommendation on funding the project and also recommend an optimal deployment strategy to manage the project risk.
Tom McKillop, CEO of AstraZeneca, faced the classic quandary of large pharmaceutical firms. Within the year, the firm's patent for Prilosec (active ingredient omeprazole) was expiring. Prilosec was a US$6.2 billion/year blockbuster that revolutionized the treatment of chronic gastro-esophageal reflux disorders (GERD). Severe cost-based competition from generic drug manufacturers was, however, inevitable. Patent expirations were nothing new for the US$15.8 billion in revenues drug firm. AstraZeneca had Nexium, an improvement on the original Prilosec molecule, in the pipeline. Ideally, it would like to move brand-loyal Prilosec customers to Nexium. Additionally, the company had the opportunity to introduce its own version of generic omeprazole, hence becoming the first mover in the generic segment, and/or introduce an over-the-counter (OTC) version of omeprazole. Tactically, AstraZeneca would like to use regulatory incentives and intellectual property rights to strengthen its competitive position. How could the company use its entire portfolio of intellectual properties-including patents and trademarks-to actively manage the priced-based competition and achieve a revenue growth strategy in the GERD market?
Tom McKillop, CEO of AstraZeneca, faced the classic quandary of large pharmaceutical firms. The firm's patent for Prilosec (active ingredient omeprazole) was expiring. Severe cost-based competition from generic drug manufacturers was inevitable. Patent expirations were nothing new for the US$15.8 billion in revenues drug firm, but Prilosec was the firm's most successful drug franchise, with global sales of US$6.2 billion. How could the company innovate its way around the generic cost-based competition and avoid the drop in revenues associated with generic drug market entry? AstraZeneca had other follow-on drugs in the pipeline-namely Nexium, an improvement on the original Prilosec molecule. Additionally, the company had the opportunity to introduce its own version of generic omeprazole, hence becoming the first mover in the generic segment, and/or introduce an OTC version of omeprazole that might tap into other markets. Ideally, AstraZeneca would like to move brand-loyal Prilosec customers to Nexium. In this market, direct-to-consumer advertising has remarkable efficacy. Classical marketing challenges of pricing and promotion need to be resolved for the Nexium launch as well as possible product and place challenges for the generic or OTC opportunity. Which combination of marketing options will allow the firm to best sustain the value of the original omeprazole innovation?
Nutrorim's products have been gaining national attention. In particular, sales of the company's organic, performance-enhancing sports supplement powder, ChargeUp, have gone through the roof. Now the new and improved version, called ChargeUp with Lipitrene, has recently hit the market, and expectations are high. CEO Don Rifkin has tried hard to build an inclusive, democratic culture at this successful company. But the organization's open decision-making process has proved problematic, especially during times of conflict and crisis--and a crisis there is. Several months after ChargeUp with Lipitrene is initially released, an investigator from the Minnesota state department of health calls Rifkin to report "11 cases of gastrointestinal distress" among those using the supplement. Nutrorim's top executives must now decide whether to recall the product. The head of R&D, Steve Ford, insists there is nothing wrong with the new ChargeUp, citing elaborate toxicity studies in animals and humans. Meanwhile, the heads of PR and legal want to stem any negative publicity by recalling the product and issuing a press release to that effect. The company decides to recall the supplement--but, two weeks later, the health department investigator calls back with good news: The people who had become ill, it turns out, had actually picked up a bug from their gym's smoothie bar. In other words, Nutrorim is exonerated. But the close call prompts Nutrorim to bring in a consultant to review the company's methods for making decisions. Among the many questions he's asking is, What's the right decision-making process for Nutrorim? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0601A and R0601Z are Christopher J. McCormick, the president and CEO of L.L.Bean; Hauke Moje, a partner at Roland Berger Strategy Consultants; Ralph Biggadike, a professor of professional practice at Columbia Business School; and Paul Domorski, the vice-president of service operations at Avaya.
Sometime around the middle of the past century, telephone executive Chester Barnard imported the term "decision making" from public administration into the business world. There it began to replace narrower terms, like "resource allocation" and "policy making," shifting the way managers thought about their role from continuous, Hamlet-like deliberation toward a crisp series of conclusions reached and actions taken. Yet, decision making is, of course, a broad and ancient human pursuit, dating back to a time when people sought guidance from the stars. From those earliest days, we have strived to invent better tools for the purpose, from the Hindu-Arabic systems for numbering and algebra to Aristotle's systematic empiricism to Friar Occam's advances in logic to Francis Bacon's inductive reasoning to Descartes' application of the scientific method. A growing sophistication with managing risk, along with a nuanced understanding of human behavior and advances in technology that support and mimic cognitive processes, has improved decision making in many situations. Even so, the history of decision-making strategies has not marched steadily toward perfect rationalism. Twentieth-century theorists showed that the costs of acquiring information lead executives to make do with only good-enough decisions. Worse, people decide against their own economic interests even when they know better. And in the absence of emotion, it's impossible to make any decisions at all. Erroneous framing, bounded awareness, excessive optimism: The debunking of Descartes' rational man threatens to swamp our confidence in our choices. Is it really surprising, then, that even as technology dramatically increases our access to information, Malcolm Gladwell extols the virtues of gut decisions made, literally, in the blink of an eye?
When we make decisions, we're not always in charge. One moment we hotheadedly let our emotions get the better of us; the next, we're paralyzed by uncertainty. Then we'll pull a brilliant decision out of thin air--and wonder how we did it. Though we may have no idea how decision making happens, neuroscientists peering deep into our brains are beginning to get the picture. What they're finding may not be what you want to hear, but it's worth listening. We have dog brains, basically, with human cortexes stuck on top. By watching the brain in action as it deliberates and decides, neuroscientists are finding that not a second goes by that our animal brains aren't conferring with our modern cortexes to influence their choices. Scientists have discovered, for example, that the "reward" circuits in the brain that activate in response to cocaine, chocolate, sex, and music also find pleasure in the mere anticipation of making money--or getting revenge. And the "aversion" circuits that react to the threat of physical pain also respond with disgust when we feel cheated by a partner. In this article, HBR Senior Editor Gardiner Morse describes the experiments that illuminate the aggressive participation of our emotion-driven animal brains in decision making. This research also shows that our emotional brains needn't always operate beneath our radar. Although our dog brains sometimes hijack our higher cognitive functions to drive bad, or at least illogical, decisions, they play an important part in rational decision making as well. The more we understand how we make decisions, the better we can manage them.