In 2018, Mustafa Koita, Founder and CEO of Dubai-based organic milk company Koita has to decide whether or not to pursue an investment from a potential competitor who is coming into his local market.
According to many analysts and industry observes, in 2018 Amazon became the largest retailer of apparel in the United States and the second largest in the world, behind Alibaba. Much of Amazon's apparel was made by third party retailers on its platform, but Amazon had been working to build its own fashion retail skills for more than 15 years, and had made a number of acquisitions to this end. Having failed to convince leading brands to sell on Amazon, the company had also launched several private label lines to boost its presence in fashion apparel. However, in 2017, it had finally convinced leading brand Nike to sell direct on its platform. President of Amazon Fashion since June 2017, Christine M. Beauchamp (Harvard Business School MBA, 1997) was contemplating next steps. Meanwhile, leading online and fast-fashion specialists such as ASOS in the UK and Inditex in Spain did not appear to have much to be concerned about. However, many traditional fashion retailers, struggling to build effective multi-channels strategies, were facing slow growth and pressure on margins. Would 2018 mark the beginning of the demise of traditional fashion retailing? What role would the bricks and mortar channel in fashion retailing play in the future? What might the future look like for the fashion industry? And what role might Amazon play in it?
On April 30, 2018, the athletic director of Grand River University was drafting a plan for his department to be reviewed by the school's board of trustees. Grand River University was a small university supporting several varsity sports teams that competed regionally and nationally. The men's hockey, men's basketball, and women's basketball programs had struggled in recent years. In fact, the women's hockey program had been cut several years earlier. The school wanted to reduce the athletics program's dependence on grants. With the university facing increasing costs and stagnant revenue, the athletic director had to provide information that clearly outlined the cost to the school of each program and athlete. A group of researchers had used activity-based costing to show that the actual cost of having a team was much higher than schools had reported. The athletic director wondered what his school's costs would look like after applying that method to his calculations.
The chief operating officer at Farro Biomed, an independent laboratory in the health care sector, was a talented negotiator, and could be credited with a great deal of the company's success. But inside the company, he was known to be a bully. One of his favourite targets was a middle manager who was responsible for running the executive offices and the board's secretariat. Her work subsequently declined, leading to problems with the board's secretariat. A board member complained, and the chief executive officer eliminated her position. The manager struck back with a demand for a large severance package, claiming a toxic work environment, bullying, and sexual harassment. The chief executive officer had no choice but to take the matter to the board for direction. The board needed to decide how to proceed.
In 2018, Al Islami Foods CEO Marwan Al Garem and Chairman Saleh Saeed Lootah have to decide on a potential investment partner. They hope to find the best match for a strategic investment in their Dubai-based halal foods company from a list of three global food companies.
MedAvante, a provider of clinical trial services and technology solutions to the pharmaceutical industry, struggled to find product/market fit for many years, because its innovative service offering met fierce resistance from other stakeholders in the ecosystem. A strategic pivot to work with the ecosystem, not against it, saved the company and brought its co-founders to the brink of a successful exit. This case explores the difficulties of bringing innovation to a deeply conservative, highly regulated industry. It also analyzes the role that other stakeholders in a market ecosystem can play in encouraging, or blocking, the adoption of a startup's products/services.
In 2003, 19-year-old Elizabeth Holmes founded a startup dedicated to making blood testing easier and more affordable. By 2015, her company, Theranos, was worth $9 billion. It boasted a star-studded board and contracts with national pharmacy and supermarket chains Walgreens and Safeway to bring Theranos technology, which could purportedly perform hundreds of tests with a pinprick of blood, to consumers around the country. Over the next few years, however, Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou published a series of articles demonstrating that Theranos' proprietary technology produced inaccurate results, relied heavily on non-proprietary devices to perform its tests, and violated multiple regulatory standards. In 2018, after a three-year stream of revelations about the company's operating practices, corporate culture, and technology, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charged Theranos with fraud and the company soon collapsed.
Schneider Electric competes in tough but stable markets around energy management, automation, and control of infrastructures ranging from homes to production plants. New technologies and new approaches to serving markets are challenging the status quo. To take advantage of these changes, the company has been experimenting with different organizational structures to take advantage of these radical innovations. The case describes the challenges facing the company as well as the latest iteration of structures and systems. In particular, the company has put together "Innovation at the Edge," which includes tools ranging from corporate venture capital to corporate accelerator. Managers at Schneider Electric have to evaluate whether these tools are enough to fulfill the needs of the company, how to fully take advantage of them, and how to further adapt them.
This case covers the rise and fall of Theranos, the company founded by Elizabeth Holmes in 2004 to revolutionize the blood testing industry by creating a device that could provide from a small finger prick the same results and accuracy as intravenous blood draws. As founder and CEO, Holmes was hailed as the most successful female tech entrepreneur ever. In October 2015, however, a Wall Street Journal article exposed internal struggles and questioned the startup's trajectory. Subsequent investigations revealed that Theranos, despite commercial operations in 40 retail locations, lacked a functioning product. Set in 2017, the (A) Case opens with Theranos' motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit filed by two investors who claimed that Theranos and its officers had violated California's securities law and engaged in fraud.
Symphony Limited, an air cooler company decided to buy International Metal Products Company (IMPCO) in 2009. IMPCO, based in Mexico manufactured industrial coolers that complemented Symphony's product line. Additionally, the acquisition provided Symphony access to the US market. IMPCO, however, was a loss making company and was on the verge of bankruptcy. On taking over IMPCO, Symphony dealt with several issues like financial crisis, operational inefficiencies, low employee productivity, IMPCO's poor brand image, lack of product innovation and weak sales and distribution. This case briefly describes the history of Symphony and outlines the various challenges faced by the organization in turning around IMPCO. The case closes with another opportunity that lands on Symphony's lap - acquisition of Munters Keruilai Air Treatment Equipment Co Ltd (MKE), an air cooler manufacturing company in China. Like IMPCO, MKE was also a loss-making air cooler company. But otherwise, the challenges and the context were starkly different in the two cases. Achal Bakeri, founder and CEO of Symphony wondered how the Symphony team should approach the newest challenge.
The Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS) of the Gujarat government was a complex system that spanned multiple departments and stakeholders. It had been operational since 2009. However, over time, the underlying technology had become obsolete and the government wanted to upgrade to IFMS Phase-II on a new platform and provide additional functionality and integration with other systems that had not been a part of IFMS earlier. The government had floated a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the same. This case may be used to evaluate and identify factors for a clear, well-defined RFP. It also explores the challenges in coming out with such an RFP.
Royal Challengers Bangalore, an IPL franchise cricket team, was representing Bangalore city in the Indian Premier League (IPL). The team had a huge fan following and a brand valuation of USD 88 million in 2017. RCB made profits worth INR 3.15 crore for the first time in FY 17. Tickets formed a very small yet crucial part of team's revenue. Given the current leeway available for pricing the tickets, the team had to come up with a pricing model that is appropriate for its revenue model. The case revolves around the future pricing strategy to be adopted by the franchise to target the different segments of the customers to get a full house in the stadium and to maximise its revenue given the demographics of Bangalore city.
After selling SeaMicro, Inc. to AMD, in 2012, Andrew Feldman started a process he called "lightly sifting", trying to stay updated on the ideas and businesses being built in Silicon Valley. Eventually, he started spending more and more time with four of his former colleagues from SeaMicro: Gary Lauterbach, Michael James, J.P. Fricker, and Sean Lie. The casual conversations quickly evolved to regular ideation sessions in which the group discussed and tried to find an idea that would allow them to "do something big." In March 2016, after a few months of ideation, the team stumbled on an idea that was as exciting as it was risky: a computer chip that would be 60 times bigger than the biggest chip ever made, specialized in machine learning. "It is the most audacious hardware product that most people have ever seen," Feldman explained at the time. Now, it was time to decide: Should they pursue the business concept?
Electric cars had long been championed by environmentalists as a superior solution to the internal combustion engine (ICE), but, despite large government incentives and strong pioneering efforts by a few automakers over the years, electric and hybrid cars and light trucks still accounted for less than 1% of total global production in 2016. However, events took a turn in 2017 and 2018, when many governments committed to banning ICE vehicles. In response, leading automakers announced plans to launch hundreds of electric vehicle models within five years. Early pioneer Tesla, which, in 2017, had built a stock market valuation exceeding that of General Motors (GM), despite only delivering 103,000 cars compared to GM's 9.0 million, looked as if it were about to be engulfed by this new competition. But not all were convinced that electric cars would soon displace conventional ICE vehicles. It was not clear that the infrastructure was in place to charge all these electric vehicles. There were also questions concerning the electrical generating capacity to meet the new demand. Would battery prices fall enough to make mass-market demand a possibility? In low gasoline cost jurisdictions, such as the United States, the economics of owning an electric vehicle didn't appear justified, unless subsidies were maintained indefinitely. In Europe, where gasoline taxes were high, the case for electric vehicles was stronger. But European governments depended on those taxes to meet their budget needs. Would a significant uptake of electric vehicles necessitate higher taxes on electricity? In 2018, electric cars were an expensive novelty for the rich subsidized by the poor. Would the sudden rush of new models change the balance?
The case examines the development and launch of an exchange-traded fund (ETF) based on JUST Capital's socially responsible corporate ranking methodologies. The case provides a market overview of Environment, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) and socially responsible investing (SRI), what has driven growth in those areas worldwide, and several best-practice investment approaches. Following the overview, the case describes the founding and development of JUST Capital, explores JUST Capital's ranking methodologies, and presents the decision point faced by the CEO: requisite selection of one of three strategies in order for JUST Capital to generate "self-sustaining" revenue.