The series of Janet Ames cases follow a fictional alumna of Harvard Business School into her consulting career in Boston. Over the series of cases, Ames is first offered the opportunity to join the board of a Boston-based non-profit organization, which offers students a chance to consider what questions they may have should such an opportunity arise within their first four to five years out of graduate school. Ames does join the board, and in the subsequent cases, questions emerge about whether an organization should have a fundraising screen, succession planning, and fiscal controls. The cases can be taught in a lively single session as each concludes with a discrete choices and opportunity for rich class debate in a realistic and, for some, likely set of personal and professional choices.

The series of Janet Ames cases follow a fictional alumna of Harvard Business School into her consulting career in Boston. Over the series of cases, Ames is first offered the opportunity to join the board of a Boston-based non-profit organization, which offers students a chance to consider what questions they may have should such an opportunity arise within their first four to five years out of graduate school. Ames does join the board, and in the subsequent cases, questions emerge about whether an organization should have a fundraising screen, succession planning, and fiscal controls. The cases can be taught in a lively single session as each concludes with a discrete choices and opportunity for rich class debate in a realistic and, for some, likely set of personal and professional choices.

There are numerous restrictions against trading on material, nonpublic information (MNPI)-typically called "insider trading." This note describes the limitations facing managers and investors as enforced civilly and criminally within the United States.

This case is designed to provide an engrossing overview of stakeholder capitalism through a vigorous discussion of the conflicts that can arise when trying to serve multiple stakeholders. In 2007, Johnson & Johnson's (J&J) subsidiary Janssen has to decide whether or not to launch a new opioid painkiller-the first such launch in 25 years-amidst growing concerns about opioid abuse in the U.S. The (A) case starts with the history of human interaction with opioids, the most effective painkillers known, from the Sumarians through the innovation of controlled release opioids, led by Purdue Pharma's OxyContin. By the time J&J is ready to launch a new opioid, this innovation has led to increased opioid addiction, complicating the launch decision. Benefits to customers are now murky, employees may no longer feel the company is living up to its Credo, and society as a whole may be harmed. The (B) case summarizes the fallout of the opioid crisis, and how J&J's participation in that crisis has affected their brand, and society.

Ray White is an Australian real estate business that has been owned and operated by the White family for four generations. The business has expanded and prospered. However, as the industry faces new challenges and opportunities, how should the White family respond? This case also describes how the company has dealt with the COVID-19 crisis.

This research note provides an understanding of income inequity, which is a component of broader income inequality. It begins by describing the difference between inequality and inequity before examining inequity within the workplace. Using the firm as the unit of analysis, the note discusses possible causes of inequity and the challenges of identifying and measuring inequity. It concludes by focusing on attempts to address inequity and discussing academic research that examines the impact of addressing inequity.

TJX Companies reported a CEO pay ratio of 1,596-to-1 in 2019, leaving board chair Carol Meyrowitz with a host of questions about whether, and how, she could take action to address concerns raised by having one of the highest pay ratios in the S&P 500. As a retail company, TJX had 270,000 employees, many making about $10 an hour. On the other hand, CEO Ernie Hermann made $19 million in 2019 as he successfully steered the company through the tumultuous retail environment. Meant to be read in tandem with the research note "Income Inequity and Income Inequality," this case examines the current disclosures companies make related to income inequality and asks whether they are sufficient or how they can be improved. This discussion around disclosure also provides opportunities to examine the role of the firm in creating income inequality and how the firm should balance its obligations to shareholders and employees when those obligations may be in conflict. Lastly, the case and note address the CEO pay setting process to give students an understanding of how pay is determined.

In 2019, Nigerian entrepreneur Dr. Ayoola (Ayo) Oduntan is accelerating distribution of Noiler, a genetically optimized breed of poultry, to smallholder farmers across Nigeria. The bird was bred to be productive as a source of both meat and eggs and to thrive in the rural Nigerian context-e.g., living in harsh outdoor conditions and relying on forage and kitchen scraps for food. The Noiler breed was developed by Oduntan's poultry business, called natnudO Group, which operates feed mills and hatcheries, processes broilers and layers, and sells poultry products to Nigerian restaurants and retailers. The Group had revenue of about $64 million in 2019. Oduntan wants to get Noilers into millions of poor households in Nigeria and other West African countries as fast as possible. His mission is to tackle protein-related malnutrition in Nigeria, which afflicts millions of children. He has devised a unique value chain model to build sustainable markets for Noilers, with a focus on creating economic opportunity for poor farmers, empowering women, and most of all getting protein to children who need it. In late 2019, he is considering next steps for the Noiler enterprise. Should it remain within a commercial entity or be spun off as a not-for-profit? What would that look like? Should he sell the genetics? How important is it for this to remain a Nigerian enterprise versus bringing in multinational partners? What could reinforce or threaten the model's scalability and sustainability?

This case is designed to provide an engrossing overview of stakeholder capitalism through a vigorous discussion of the conflicts that can arise when trying to serve multiple stakeholders. In 2007, Johnson & Johnson's (J&J) subsidiary Janssen has to decide whether or not to launch a new opioid painkiller-the first such launch in 25 years-amidst growing concerns about opioid abuse in the U.S. The (A) case starts with the history of human interaction with opioids, the most effective painkillers known, from the Sumarians through the innovation of controlled release opioids, lead by Purdue Pharma's OxyContin. By the time J&J is ready to launch a new opioid, this innovation has lead to increased opioid addiction, complicating the launch decision. Benefits to customers are now murky, employees may no longer feel the company is living up to its Credo, and society as a whole may be harmed. The (B) case summarizes the fallout of the opioid crisis, and how J&J's participation in that crisis has affected their brand, and society.

By mid-2019, more than the 18 years since its inception, mjunction had grown to become India's largest e-commerce player and the world's largest e-marketplace for steel. The company had extended its presence to multiple business units, such as coaljunction, teajunction, and straightline.in, all of which operated under the corporate name of mjunction. Some of the business units enjoyed a strong brand identity, while others did not. The chief executive officer was worried about the implications of the diverse brand names being used. Should the organization use a common corporate name for all of its businesses, or follow an individual brand name strategy? And if mjunction chose to transition to a single brand name, how could it minimize the loss of brand assets and other issues?

Convertible notes are often used to raise early-stage financing for start-up companies, frequently due to their advantages related to delayed valuation, greater speed, and lower cost of completion compared to venture capital financing. As a result, there has been a large increase in the number of early-stage companies raising capital through convertible notes over the past decade. Investors have made this form of financing more available, believing that small amounts of money can significantly advance the development of young companies. Entrepreneurs often find that convertible notes are easier to raise than a first round of venture capital. The ease of convertible note financing, however, sometimes belies the hidden risks and costs associated with its use. This technical note discusses the most frequently used terms and arrangements of early-stage convertible notes, the estimation of the noteholder's equity ownership from delayed valuation, and the costs and risks of this form of financing to both entrepreneurs and investors. The case "MedMetric, LLC: Seed-Round Convertible Note Financing" (UV7929) can be assigned with the note as an application of this form of financing.

By mid-2019, more than the 18 years since its inception, mjunction had grown to become India's largest e-commerce player and the world's largest e-marketplace for steel. The company had extended its presence to multiple business units, such as coaljunction, teajunction, and straightline.in, all of which operated under the corporate name of mjunction. Some of the business units enjoyed a strong brand identity, while others did not. The chief executive officer was worried about the implications of the diverse brand names being used. Should the organization use a common corporate name for all of its businesses, or follow an individual brand name strategy? And if mjunction chose to transition to a single brand name, how could it minimize the loss of brand assets and other issues?

A senior manager of marketing and sales at a large medical devices firm has convened his team to help him choose a new manager that will be capable of attracting new business and promoting overall revenue growth. The decision has been narrowed down to two, equally qualified candidates: an outgoing and outspoken woman, and a well-liked man. The conversation is going in circles until someone mentions that the woman's behavior at the office party was inappropriate "for a mother." Students are asked how to manage difficult decisions where latent bias may be a factor first from the point of view of this senior manager, and then from the point of view of his female boss, whom he consults with in the second part of the case. This case, which disguises the facts of an actual scenario, is designed to surface and explore students' instinctive decision-making tendencies around a high-stakes leadership situation. Thus it is short enough to be read and responded to in class. Students are assigned readings and assignments related to the case after class discussion, in which they are encouraged to further reflect on their initial responses. This case can be used to focus on the decision itself-whom to promote-or on how the decision should be made (i.e., on the decision-making discussion). The case is quite flexible and would work in any course that deals with leadership, ethics, decision-making, organizational behavior, human resources, and related topics. It is appropriate for a range of levels and audiences, including undergraduate, MBA, and executive education.

After 15 years of steady growth and expansion, Edita, a leading Egyptian snack producer, faced a series of challenges in the wake of the Arab Spring. In January 2011, the Egyptian Revolution sparked political and economic turmoil that reflected the waves of protest and violence already spreading throughout North Africa and parts of the Middle East. Hani Berzi, CEO of Edita, managed to navigate the company through this period, though the severe devaluation of the Egyptian pound in November 2016 meant yet another period of crisis for the country's economy and, with it, the snack food industry. Hani was faced with a series of hard decisions that would determine Edita's future. He held a crisis management meeting with his executive team and on the agenda were two key decisions. Should they increase their prices as a short-term strategy to survive the turbulent period at the risk of losing market share? Should Edita aim to diversify risk by tapping into underserved rural areas in Egypt or rather by expanding its presence in regional markets? Or, should the company adopt some combination of both strategies, or neither, and instead devise another course for addressing the crisis?

Unilever is making strides to integrate the operations of Mae Terra-one of Brazil's leading brands for packaged organic foods-into its own structures, after acquiring the company in 2017. Mae Terra's CEO, Alexandre Borges, must decide whether to implement his original plan as written into the purchase and sales agreement to create an advisory board to help ensure that the company maintain its mission, values and practices as part of a volume-driven multinational like Unilever- and, if so, how the board will operate and who its members will be. Some executives believe that such a board is not necessary given Unilever's own culture and commitments.

The case concerns the sale of Mae Terra, one of Brazil's leading brands for packaged organic foods, to the consumer goods giant Unilever in 2017. Working with Unilever management, Mae Terra's CEO Alexandre Borges must determine whether and how to keep Mae Terra's B Certification, which attests to its commitment to having a positive social and environmental impact, and what internal governance mechanisms will enable MaeTerra to maintain its mission, values, and practices even as it is integrated into a large volume-driven multinational whose governance follows standard listed company principles.

After years building a solid customer base by cross-selling its financial service offerings, Wells Fargo was engulfed by a scandal over unauthorized accounts opened in customers' names. Regulators discovered that hundreds of thousands of fake accounts had been opened by bank employees scrambling to meet sales quotas. Was it the work of rogue employees, or the result of an unethical corporate culture coupled with an unrelenting drive to "sell, sell, sell"?