Connor, a managing director at an investment bank, finds himself in a bind when a superstar on his team, Alysha, announces that she's leaving to join a competitor. Making matters worse, she may take another employee, Trent, with her. Connor has to decide whether to make Alysha a counteroffer, entice Trent to stay with a promotion, or try to recruit an outside hire. This fictional case study by Boris Groysberg features expert commentary by Mehtab Bhogal and Krista Mathews.
Kondo, the head of a successful consulting business and the author of several best-selling books about tidying, talks about her motto--"Keep only what sparks joy"--and about tidying at work.
Connor, a managing director at an investment bank, finds himself in a bind when a superstar on his team, Alysha, announces that she's leaving to join a competitor. Making matters worse, she may take another employee, Trent, with her. Connor has to decide whether to make Alysha a counteroffer, entice Trent to stay with a promotion, or try to recruit an outside hire. This fictional case study by Boris Groysberg features expert commentary by Mehtab Bhogal and Krista Mathews.
Connor, a managing director at an investment bank, finds himself in a bind when a superstar on his team, Alysha, announces that she's leaving to join a competitor. Making matters worse, she may take another employee, Trent, with her. Connor has to decide whether to make Alysha a counteroffer, entice Trent to stay with a promotion, or try to recruit an outside hire. This fictional case study by Boris Groysberg features expert commentary by Mehtab Bhogal and Krista Mathews.
After United Airlines baggage handlers damaged Dave Carroll's guitar, he spent months fruitlessly seeking compensation. Then he created a music video about the experience and posted it on YouTube. Within three days "United Breaks Guitars" had been viewed by 1.5 million people, many of whom chimed in with their own grievances. United's stock plunged, with many observers attributing the drop in part to the PR debacle.This incident and others like it prompted researchers led by KEDGE Business School's Dennis Herhausen to analyze nearly half a million negative comments posted in the public Facebook communities of 89 companies, along with the firms' responses. As a result of that work, they developed recommendations for detecting and preventing potential online firestorms and limiting the damage if one erupts. Among the findings: Posts containing intense emotions were more likely than others to spread. Strong ties between a post's author and the community drove contagion, as did linguistic similarities. Companies should respond to negative posts, and fast; the worst thing a firm can do is ignore an unhappy customer. Apologies and requests to switch to a private channel lowered virality, as long as they were communicated right away. But offering compensation early on had the opposite effect; it sometimes prompted other customers to post complaints in the hope of being rewarded themselves.
The conventional wisdom tells us that we learn from failure, but new research suggests it often has the opposite effect: When things go wrong, people feel threatened and tune out.
Zomato, a leading restaurant discovery and review platform, entered the highly competitive hyperlocal food delivery space in 2014. Though Zomato was a leading platform for search and discovery, it trailed behind the market leader in the delivery landscape. While Zomato's attempt to increase profitability by implementing a subscription model proved popular among customers, it antagonized a significant segment of its restaurant partners. As December 2019 drew to a close, the key decision-makers at Zomato wondered whether entering the growing delivery market and the subsequent transition would be worth the cost of competition. The startup would have to make a strategic decision with respect to its market dominance and competitive moves in the delivery market. Should it focus on the large, hypercompetitive markets in major cities to build high-density delivery networks, or should it focus on pre-empting the competition by nurturing small-town markets? Would acquiring its competitors help in rapid scaling, or should Zomato engage in another round of business model innovation by focusing on cloud kitchens and private labels?
In August 2019, WeWork filed for an initial public offering; investors in its 14 venture capital rounds were anxious for an exit. Softbank had invested US$6 billion in WeWork, including US$2 billion in the Series H round that valued the firm at US$47 billion; consequently, it hoped for a positive reception from Wall Street. While WeWork had 100 per cent recent sales growth, its net income was US$1.9 billion, and it was on pace to spend over US$5 billion in 2019; it needed capital. WeWork's chief executive officer met with SoftBank in Tokyo to discuss a "dramatic reduction in its valuation." Should they proceed with the IPO, even if it required a reduction in its valuation, or should they cancel the IPO and pursue an additional round of private capital?
Bird Electric Vehicle Sharing (Bird)'s value proposition seems to be to offer inexpensive, on-demand transportation that can deliver riders directly to their destination in metropolitan areas. Electric scooters can be unlocked with a smartphone and left anywhere after use, minimizing the burden on consumers but also causing tremendous traffic problems for city administrators. The disruption created by Bird not only drew the attention of urban commuters but also resulted in its product being banned in cities like San Francisco and Denver. This case explores these issues in depth and sets up the challenge that Bird faces in extending its initial success. Bird must contemplate not only the individual components of its value chain but possibly also the business model itself, in evaluating the best course of action to ensure its future success.
With more than 72,000 employees and revenues approaching the $50B mark, Cisco Systems is one of the largest information technology and networking firms globally. As the company grew and expanded into different lines of businesses, Cisco consistently looked outwards for acquisition targets that could supplement its considerable size and reach. As a follow-up to its well-received $2.7B acquisition of SourceFire in 2013, which seamlessly integrated new cybersecurity offerings into the Security business group, Cisco began conversations with OpenDNS. OpenDNS was a fast-growing start-up with credibility in the cloud security space, but there were also concerns about how its Silicon Valley culture and flat organizational culture would mesh with Cisco's more staid corporate environment. This case considers the dilemmas that two Cisco executives, Karen Ashley and Dianne Nakanishi, face as they make a final decision about whether and how to acquire and integrate OpenDNS.
Bird Electric Vehicle Sharing (Bird)’s value proposition seems to be to offer inexpensive, on-demand transportation that can deliver riders directly to their destination in metropolitan areas. Electric scooters can be unlocked with a smartphone and left anywhere after use, minimizing the burden on consumersbut also causing tremendous traffic problems for city administrators. The disruption created by Bird not only drew the attention of urban commuters but also resulted in its product being banned in cities like San Francisco and Denver.<br><br>This case explores these issues in depth and sets up the challenge that Bird faces in extending its initial success. Bird must contemplate not only the individual components of its value chain but possibly also the business model itself, in evaluating the best course of action to ensure its future success.
Kathy Ayers, Vice President of Marketing and Communications for Land and Nature (L&N) Jerky Company, needs to make a recommendation about L&N's 2020 promotional spending. L&N's CEO, Tim Ryan, wants her to calculate different scenarios using historical data to determine which option to recommend. Specifically, Ryan wants Ayers to recommend one of the three options: reduce the promotion budget by 30%, increase spending on consumer promotions by $200,000, or increase spending on trade promotions by $200,000. Ryan's goal is to achieve an operating profit of at least 7% of L&N's sales in 2020. To make a recommendation, Ayers must first evaluate the effectiveness of past consumer and trade promotions and then determine how to allocate promotional spending to achieve Ryan's operating profit goal. The case can be used to discuss positioning and integrated marketing communications. It demonstrates how return-on-marketing-investment (ROMI) varies with changes in gross profit. Students will need to evaluate strategic information as well as calculate quantitative information. The case is recommended for upper-level undergraduate students or first-year MBA students studying marketing management. It can also be used in a course on consumer marketing, promotions management, or integrated marketing communications.
Mumbai-based Entropy Innovations Private Limited (Entropy) was incorporated by three friends who hoped to revolutionize the motorcycle and scooter washing industry in India through their technological solution, an automatic bike washing machine. Starting with one city in 2014, Entropy expanded gradually and aimed to become a ₹500 million company by 2020. But as 2019 drew to an end, the company was not gaining the traction the founders had expected. Although many options were available, the choices and their implications were unclear. What was the appropriate business model for the growth phase of their firm? How should they stabilize the company in the Indian market? Should they focus on the two-wheeler washing industry, or should they diversify into the four-wheeler all-terrain vehicle (ATV) market?
In addition to Google, LLC (Google) facing multiple litigations around the globe, India's antitrust watchdog, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), had recently launched its own investigation into the company. This was not the first occasion of an antitrust probe being initiated against Google in international markets. The company had already paid an astonishing US$ 9 billion in fines for abusing Android's dominant position in the smartphone market to boost its dominance in other areas, such as web searching, browsing, and mobile apps. In 2019, Google was in trouble in India, again, for similar reasons. The CCI alleged that Google forced smartphone manufacturers to pre-install Google Search and the Google Chrome browser on their devices, thus misusing its dominant position by stopping smartphone manufacturers from opting for alternative versions of its mobile operating system (OS). However, Google strongly denied these allegations, arguing that it had not indulged in anti-competitive practices; rather, it claimed it had promoted relevant market competition. Which marketing practices of Google invited the antitrust probe and allegations of abuse of their dominant position in India? Why were competition watchdogs concerned about the growing dominance of Google in the Indian mobile operating software (OS) market? In an oligopolistic market comprising multiple players, why did the CCI consider Google to be a dominant player in the Indian mobile OS market? Could Google do something to avoid antitrust lawsuits and allegations of abuse of dominance in the future?
Beyond Meat Inc. (Beyond Meat), a manufacturer of plant-based protein products founded in 2009 and based in Los Angeles, California, had become a success, despite supply chain and manufacturing issues. However, as competition flooded the market, the firm's founder and chief executive officer (CEO) faced a number of challenges: Beyond Meat was investing more and more in differentiation and innovation, and even refining the recipe of its bestselling Beyond Burger-something the CEO himself considered risky. Beyond Meat filed for an initial public offering in May 2019, and by the end of July 2019, the company's share price had increased by over 800 per cent, but analysts considered Beyond Meat stocks to be overvalued given that the company's increasing revenues and high-priced products had not prevented increasing losses. Still, Beyond Meat was expected to disrupt the animal-based protein industry. What should the CEO do to justify the valuation of Beyond Meat? How should he handle competitive forces? Did his venture hold any potential to disrupt the animal protein industry?
Plastic has become essential to global day-to-day activities, yet it is also causing extreme environmental degradation. Many leaders in the plastics industry are starting to question its sustainability. This case presents insights into the future of the plastic packaging industry. Students will follow Sander Defruyt of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) and his New Plastics Economy initiative that aims to engage industry-leading companies-such as Amcor, Danone, SC Johnson, Coca-Cola, and L'Oreal-to work toward a common goal of creating a circular economy and reducing unsustainable plastic packaging. The case highlights how a circular economy is not possible within the current system and that industry actors need to rethink the entire plastics market to implement sustainable changes.
Mumbai-based Entropy Innovations Private Limited (Entropy) was incorporated by three friends who hoped to revolutionize the motorcycle and scooter washing industry in India through their technological solution, an automatic bike washing machine. Starting with one city in 2014, Entropy expanded gradually and aimed to become a ₹500 million company by 2020. But as 2019 drew to an end, the company was not gaining the traction the founders had expected. Although many options were available, the choices and their implications were unclear. What was the appropriate business model for the growth phase of their firm? How should they stabilize the company in the Indian market? Should they focus on the two-wheeler washing industry, or should they diversify into the four-wheeler all-terrain vehicle (ATV) market?
In addition to Google, LLC (Google) facing multiple litigations around the globe, India’s antitrust watchdog, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), had recently launched its own investigation into the company. This was not the first occasion of an antitrust probe being initiated against Google in international markets. The company had already paid an astonishing US$ 9 billion in fines for abusing Android’s dominant position in the smartphone market to boost its dominance in other areas, such as web searching, browsing, and mobile apps. In 2019, Google was in trouble in India, again, for similar reasons. The CCI alleged that Google forced smartphone manufacturers to pre-install Google Search and the Google Chrome browser on their devices, thus misusing its dominant position by stopping smartphone manufacturers from opting for alternative versions of its mobile operating system (OS). However, Google strongly denied these allegations, arguing that it had not indulged in anti-competitive practices; rather, it claimed it had promoted relevant market competition.<br><br> Which marketing practices of Google invited the antitrust probe and allegations of abuse of their dominant position in India? Why were competition watchdogs concerned about the growing dominance of Google in the Indian mobile operating software (OS) market? In an oligopolistic market comprising multiple players, why did the CCI consider Google to be a dominant player in the Indian mobile OS market? Could Google do something to avoid antitrust lawsuits and allegations of abuse of dominance in the future?