Welspun India Limited (Welspun) was a global leader in home textiles, supplying to top global retailers like Costco Wholesale Corporation, IKEA, Tesco plc, and Bed, Bath and Beyond, Inc. Welspun undertook many sustainability actions like eliminating freshwater usage through a sewage treatment plant in Anjar, improving energy efficiency in manufacturing and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, using transportation modes to leave a smaller carbon footprint, and creating products out of waste material. In order to move forward, the chief executive officer needed to decide how to use sustainable fashion to gain a competitive advantage. Was becoming a circular company the answer? If so, what steps needed to be taken for Welspun to become circular?
At the start of 2020, the main strategic challenge for UBits (a start-up focused on online corporate training in Latin America) was how to continue to scale up the operation. Although UBits had gained a foothold in Colombia, Mexico, and Peru, the company had no presence in Brazil—Latin America’s largest economy—or in any other major regional economies, including Chile and Argentina. UBits was offering only one type of service—subscription-based courses for corporate clients. The management team was contemplating targeting individual customers directly to leverage the growing UBits library that held more than 300 locally produced courses. However, the ideal strategic direction for the company's expansion was unclear, and its current financial situation did not permit pursuing all options.
In June 2020, UBits faced the uncertainties of a global health crisis—the COVID-19 pandemic. The company had experienced several temporary setbacks, but the chief executive officer and co-founder was encouraged by the shifts in market dynamics that seemed to hold a bright future for online training. However, major competitors had also intensified their efforts to capitalize on the new opportunities in the market. UBits needed to re-evaluate its options for growth, as new opportunities and challenges were arising from the pandemic’s impact on society.
Virtual reality (VR) technology is predicted to become indispensable in the business world, as it fundamentally reimagines the ways in which firms interact with customers. This technology has sparked a VR ecosystem, with multiple types of firms and other stakeholders interacting to create value. Firms need to define their roles in this ecosystem in order to capitalize on the opportunities and address the challenges they face when navigating its complexities. This article develops a VR value chain that illustrates how the use of VR technologies adds value to key stakeholders. It also provides an understanding of the current state of the VR ecosystem and serves as a source for strategic managerial decision making and future VR research.
At the start of 2020, the main strategic challenge for UBits (a start-up focused on online corporate training in Latin America) was how to continue to scale up the operation. Although UBits had gained a foothold in Colombia, Mexico, and Peru, the company had no presence in Brazil-Latin America's largest economy-or in any other major regional economies, including Chile and Argentina. UBits was offering only one type of service-subscription-based courses for corporate clients. The management team was contemplating targeting individual customers directly to leverage the growing UBits library that held more than 300 locally produced courses. However, the ideal strategic direction for the company's expansion was unclear, and its current financial situation did not permit pursuing all options.
In June 2020, UBits faced the uncertainties of a global health crisis-the COVID-19 pandemic. The company had experienced several temporary setbacks, but the chief executive officer and co-founder was encouraged by the shifts in market dynamics that seemed to hold a bright future for online training. However, major competitors had also intensified their efforts to capitalize on the new opportunities in the market. UBits needed to re-evaluate its options for growth, as new opportunities and challenges were arising from the pandemic's impact on society.
In 2020, the three cofounders of Holaluz, a newcomer to Spain's electricity retail market, are preparing to launch a new offering: installing and managing solar panels on households' roofs at no extra cost for the consumer, who would still benefit from the energy savings stemming from the panels' production. Holaluz would fund the installations via a special purpose vehicle and use the surplus energy to power neighboring Holaluz clients at lower costs. There were many challenges in the new venture, like how to market the offering and if investors would buy into the new business. And what if Holaluz went a step further, got rid of all its tariff offerings and disrupted the market with a monthly "unlimited" flat rate for electricity consumption like telecom operators did with mobile phones bills? Was the market ready?
In the spring of 2018, the marketing team at Nike Inc. (Nike), based in Oregon, was faced with a decision regarding whether to follow the suggestion of the company's long-standing advertising agency to sign Colin Kaepernick as the face of its upcoming "Just Do It" promotional campaign commemorating the 30-year anniversary of the slogan. Kaepernick was an NFL quarterback who had famously begun kneeling during the US national anthem in 2016 to protest social inequality and police brutality. At this juncture, the US political climate was extremely polarized, President Donald Trump had spoken out very negatively about Kaepernick's "take-a-knee" protest, and the campaign would mark the first time in Nike's history that the company adopted a clear political position in its promotional messaging. The company had to carefully weigh several issues, including the impact using Kaepernick would have on sales and on Nike's brand image. Should Nike partner with Kaepernick on its campaign or pick a less controversial spokesperson? What market segments would be affected, and how? What were the implications for company sales and brand image?
The case considers the entry of Germany's leading retailer, Kaufland Warenhandel GmbH & Co KG (Kaufland), known for its hypermarket retail format and low prices, into the Australian market. Before entering Australia in 2016, the retailer had only expanded into Eastern European countries. Australia was its first developed market. In April 2019, a change in chief executive officer (CEO) took place at Kaufland, with the new CEO, Klaus Gehrig, demanding more centralized decision making. In Australia, Kaufland was struggling to get approval for its larger stores. Competitors in Australia, such as Woolworths and Coles, were also gearing up for the competition, with Coles sending a team of executives to study Kaufland's operations in Germany. In November 2019, after a series of weather-related issues in Australia, the retail price of several grocery items increased. Kaufland was still searching for suppliers and working on opening its stores. Experts felt that Kaufland Australia had the potential to make an impact on the grocery market, as higher prices offered by other retailers would lead consumers to shift to it. Going forward, Gehrig faced a challenging decision: Should he revisit the decision to expand into the Australian market? How might his competitors retaliate?
Recent advances in digital technology and the shift to digital activity accelerated by COVID-19 make digital mastery more essential than ever. In this article, Didier Bonnet of IMD and George Westerman of MIT's Sloan School reappraise the elements of digital capability and identify where the opportunities lie for gaining competitive advantage in customer experience, internal operations, employee experience, and business model innovation, as well as the digital platforms needed to access them.
The case describes two transformation journeys for ABN AMRO bank. The first transformation is cultural and the second is digital. It explores the interplay between these two journeys from the perspective of the head of the Personal Banking. The case goes into detail regarding how to bank rebuilt its internal operating model. The hierarchy was delayered and replaced with agile ways of working, employee empowerment, and a new performance management approach. At first, there was a lot of chaos, but, after some time for adjustment, benefits started to appear, such as higher NPS scores, and better financial results. The new approach also helped the bank cope with the COVID-19 pandemic as many of the changes were linked to remote working for employees and technology-mediated service provision for customers. Yet, the case describes the appearance of some new challenges. While some teams embraced the new ways of working, others had trouble letting go of legacy approaches. There were some inconsistencies and confusion around performance measurement. Despite improving performance in some areas, multifunctional teams were not necessarily delivering the best customer experiences. Sick leave was increasing, and there were signs that employee engagement was falling. The reader is placed in the shoes of the head of Personal Banking must to come up with solutions to these challenges.
In March 2020 the United States was facing an outbreak of the highly infectious and potentially life-threatening COVID-19 virus that had already spread throughout much of Asia and Europe. As medical facilities prepared for the worst, it became clear that ventilators, the medical device used to "breathe" for patients in severe respiratory distress, were in short supply. Following a presidential declaration of a federal emergency on March 13, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) began coordinating procurement and distribution of medical supplies and equipment, including mechanical ventilators. The process required that state authorities send requests to FEMA-however the process soon proved imperfect with states receiving only a fraction of the ventilators they ordered.
The case considers the entry of Germany’s leading retailer, Kaufland Warenhandel GmbH & Co KG (Kaufland), known for its hypermarket retail format and low prices, into the Australian market. Before entering Australia in 2016, the retailer had only expanded into Eastern European countries. Australia was its first developed market. In April 2019, a change in chief executive officer (CEO) took place at Kaufland, with the new CEO, Klaus Gehrig, demanding more centralized decision making. In Australia, Kaufland was struggling to get approval for its larger stores. Competitors in Australia, such as Woolworths and Coles, were also gearing up for the competition, with Coles sending a team of executives to study Kaufland’s operations in Germany. In November 2019, after a series of weather-related issues in Australia, the retail price of several grocery items increased. Kaufland was still searching for suppliers and working on opening its stores. Experts felt that Kaufland Australia had the potential to make an impact on the grocery market, as higher prices offered by other retailers would lead consumers to shift to it. Going forward, Gehrig faced a challenging decision: Should he revisit the decision to expand into the Australian market? How might his competitors retaliate?
In the spring of 2018, the marketing team at Nike Inc. (Nike), based in Oregon, was faced with a decision regarding whether to follow the suggestion of the company’s long-standing advertising agency to sign Colin Kaepernick as the face of its upcoming “Just Do It” promotional campaign commemorating the 30-year anniversary of the slogan. Kaepernick was an NFL quarterback who had famously begun kneeling during the US national anthem in 2016 to protest social inequality and police brutality. At this juncture, the US political climate was extremely polarized, President Donald Trump had spoken out very negatively about Kaepernick’s “take-a-knee” protest, and the campaign would mark the first time in Nike’s history that the company adopted a clear political position in its promotional messaging. The company had to carefully weigh several issues, including the impact using Kaepernick would have on sales and on Nike’s brand image. Should Nike partner with Kaepernick on its campaign or pick a less controversial spokesperson? What market segments would be affected, and how? What were the implications for company sales and brand image?
In March 2020, the founder of an auto mechanic shop in a Toronto suburb was contemplating a five-year growth strategy. Given the disruptions in both the auto mechanic sector and the automotive industry at large, she wondered whether her plan was realistic. Should the founder execute the growth strategy according to plan or change the plan and lead the business in a completely different direction?
On January 12, 2020, Michael McCain, the president and chief executive officer (CEO) of Maple Leaf Foods Inc., posted four tweets on the company's social media platform, venting his anger at the US administration over a civilian airplane shot down in Iran. Specifically, he expressed his anger at the loss of life—including that of the wife and 11-year-old son of an employee of Maple Leaf Foods—which, according to McCain, stemmed from “a needless, irresponsible series of events in Iran. McCain cast blame on US president Donald Trump for escalating tensions with an ill-conceived plan to divert focus from political woes. Should McCain, as CEO, have expressed his personal views on Maple Leaf Foods' Twitter feed? Would his tweets damage the company's brand and destroy shareholder value?
In March 2020, the founder of an auto mechanic shop in a Toronto suburb was contemplating a five-year growth strategy. Given the disruptions in both the auto mechanic sector and the automotive industry at large, she wondered whether her plan was realistic. Should the founder execute the growth strategy according to plan or change the plan and lead the business in a completely different direction?
On January 12, 2020, Michael McCain, the president and chief executive officer (CEO) of Maple Leaf Foods Inc., posted four tweets on the company's social media platform, venting his anger at the US administration over a civilian airplane shot down in Iran. Specifically, he expressed his anger at the loss of life-including that of the wife and 11-year-old son of an employee of Maple Leaf Foods-which, according to McCain, stemmed from "a needless, irresponsible series of events in Iran." McCain cast blame on US president Donald Trump for escalating tensions with an "ill-conceived plan to divert focus from political woes." Should McCain, as CEO, have expressed his personal views on Maple Leaf Foods' Twitter feed? Would his tweets damage the company's brand and destroy shareholder value?