Supplement to case SMU312. This is a three-part case. Case A introduces Rahzi Putera, a product manager at Samudera Pharma Corporation (SPC), one of Indonesia's largest manufacturer and distributor of generic pharmaceuticals. SPC had earlier that year entered into an agreement with Braxton Biotech Corporation (Braxton) in India, to distribute Epogex, a drug used for the treatment of anaemia. The regulators at the Ministry of Health gave a conditional registration that Epogex could be sold in the country, but only to the private sector, until SPC conducted a clinical study to monitor the safety and adequacy of the drug. Rahzi was tasked to manage the clinical study. When the Epogex shipment arrived, temperature readings showed that it had been frozen. Epogex's product leaflet very clearly stated that the product should be discarded if frozen. However, when Rahzi recommended throwing away the supply, he faced great resistance from both his colleagues and superiors at SPC, and Braxton. Braxton provided data from a quality assurance study it had conducted in 2012, which concluded that the product remained stable despite the temperature excursions. Rahzi now had to make a decision whether to commercially sell the once-frozen shipment of Epogex, which would not be used in the clinical study. Case B sees Rahzi sending an email to all the key decision makers at SPC, stating his concerns about selling the frozen shipment stock to the public, and strongly recommending that it be destroyed. However, he is once again pressured to approve the frozen batch of Epogex for commercial sale. In Case C, Rahzi speaks to his boss, Alia Iman, again to support him in destroying the stock. Alia agrees and convinces her boss, Bobby Suharto, to do so. Unhappy about how the incident was managed, Rahzi quits SPC shortly thereafter.
Chai Point is India's largest organized chai retailer. It has missed its target for retail store openings by approximately 25%, goals that are very important to its investors who are also their board members. However, it has developed an exciting new Internet based tea dispenser, that has the potential to dramatically increase Chai Point's market opportunity and growth rate but can be seen as a change in their growth strategy. The founder needs to decide his strategy for his next board meeting. Should he focus on their past performance? Or should he spend time outlining boxC.in's technology and potential, since this will be the first time that the institutional investors will be seeing this new capability?
This case explains how Ming Yung got the highest B Corp. assessment score in Taiwan and was invited by the US President Obama to attend the 2016 Global Entrepreneurship Summit in Silicon Valley. It also takes the reader through the process of how the founder Mr. Yang created something big from not only nothing but a huge debt.
Food Empire Holdings Limited (Food Empire) was a food and beverage brand owner and manufacturer of instant beverage products, frozen convenience food, confectionery, and snacks. Its main markets were Russia and Ukraine. When the political tensions between Russia and Ukraine erupted and their currencies depreciated in 2014, Food Empire’s bottom line was badly affected: its share price dropped 71 per cent in 30 months. In light of these developments, investors were not sure if they should sell their investments in Food Empire. Using financial statement analysis and various valuation concepts—including net tangible assets, dividend discount models, and peer multiples—it was hoped that the best course of action could be determined.
Midea Group Co., Ltd. was a white goods empire built by its Chinese founder over several decades; consequently, the Midea brand led the home appliance industry in China. In August 2012, the 70-year-old founder and chairman retired as board chairman. The founder’s chosen successor was a 45-year-old professional manager and the former chairman and chief executive officer of one of Midea Group’s firms. This manager faced a grim situation as he took over the position: business performance was plummeting, Midea Group was urgently in need of a strategic transformation, senior management would likely resist taking orders from him, and, at a basic level, the organization was overstaffed and ineffective. In addition, many senior managers felt that the founder’s son would have been a better choice as successor to his father, following Chinese cultural traditions. The manager knew that changes would be necessary to help Midea Group thrive, but such changes were complicated by complex organizational structures and the countless subcultures caused by Midea Group’s former growth-oriented focus. How could the company successfully navigate this succession process?
In 2012, after the U.S. government passed the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act, the founder of Hudson Integrated, a website development company, decided to launch StartupValley, an equity crowdfunding company focused on the Title III provisions of the JOBS Act. These provisions allowed companies to solicit equity investments directly from small investors by using an intermediary registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, consisting of either a broker–dealer or an approved funding portal. However, three years passed before all Title III regulations were finalized, and more than six months later, they came into effect. During that time, the market became crowded with both start-ups and established companies. In 2016, when the Title III provisions finally went into effect, the entrepreneur faced two key challenges. How should he position StartupValley for success in this new industry? And how should he balance his own time and resources between his existing web development business and the new venture?
In the early 1990s, the company now known as Gildan Activewear was a small children's wear firm with revenues of $40 million. Its competition, legendary companies such as Russell, Fruit of the Loom, and Hanes, had sales in the billions of dollars. From its small beginnings and through unparalleled growth, Gildan went on to dominate most segments of the world's activewear market. This case presents the history of both the company and the industry, with an overview of major competitors. It systematically outlines Gildan's march toward domination, explaining not only how it built its position but also the in-house development of all its functions to strengthen that position. Finally, the case describes the strategic focus of the company as well as the values that motivate its managers. 2010 (Case A) The 2010 Gildan case (A) shows how a single company can influence industry leaders and dynamics and provides a classic example of the importance of the three pillars of strategic management: environment, internal management, and leadership. 2016 (Case B) The 2016 Gildan case (B) describes the situation in 2016. It can be used as a conclusion to the 2010 case for an interesting discussion of the social responsibility of a large company, or as a standalone case.
Supplement to case HEC175. In the early 1990s, the company now known as Gildan Activewear was a small children's wear firm with revenues of $40 million. Its competition, legendary companies such as Russell, Fruit of the Loom, and Hanes, had sales in the billions of dollars. From its small beginnings and through unparalleled growth, Gildan went on to dominate most segments of the world's activewear market. This case presents the history of both the company and the industry, with an overview of major competitors. It systematically outlines Gildan's march toward domination, explaining not only how it built its position but also the in-house development of all its functions to strengthen that position. Finally, the case describes the strategic focus of the company as well as the values that motivate its managers. 2010 (Case A) The 2010 Gildan case (A) shows how a single company can influence industry leaders and dynamics and provides a classic example of the importance of the three pillars of strategic management: environment, internal management, and leadership. 2016 (Case B) The 2016 Gildan case (B) describes the situation in 2016. It can be used as a conclusion to the 2010 case for an interesting discussion of the social responsibility of a large company, or as a standalone case.
This two-part case deals with the events surrounding the monitoring by Human Rights Watch (HRW) of human rights violations targeting Rohingya Muslims in Burma in October 2012. The case focuses on HRW's decision to publish a report of the situation and the impact of that report in Burma and abroad. While most human rights violation investigations are 'business as usual' for HRW, the situation presented in this case was different: the primary material for the investigation was satellite imagery, not the eyewitness reports typically used by HRW. The case is designed to stimulate discussion of value creation by NGOs, the effect of technological development on NGO operations, and the development of new capabilities by NGOs. It also introduces students to human rights issues, a topic rarely discussed in business schools. Part A provides background to address questions concerning (1) whether or not HRW should report the violations and (2) how satellite imagery can provide sufficient evidence to raise awareness of a situation. Part B covers the impact of the report on the situation by looking at the response from the media, the United Nations, the United States, and the Government of Burma. The case also sheds light on the challenges faced by HRW in the fulfillment of its mission.
Supplement to case HEC178. This two-part case deals with the events surrounding the monitoring by Human Rights Watch (HRW) of human rights violations targeting Rohingya Muslims in Burma in October 2012. The case focuses on HRW's decision to publish a report of the situation and the impact of that report in Burma and abroad. While most human rights violation investigations are 'business as usual' for HRW, the situation presented in this case was different: the primary material for the investigation was satellite imagery, not the eyewitness reports typically used by HRW. The case is designed to stimulate discussion of value creation by NGOs, the effect of technological development on NGO operations, and the development of new capabilities by NGOs. It also introduces students to human rights issues, a topic rarely discussed in business schools. Part A provides background to address questions concerning (1) whether or not HRW should report the violations and (2) how satellite imagery can provide sufficient evidence to raise awareness of a situation. Part B covers the impact of the report on the situation by looking at the response from the media, the United Nations, the United States, and the Government of Burma. The case also sheds light on the challenges faced by HRW in the fulfillment of its mission.
The case study documents an incident involving one of the world's largest family-owned, publicly traded firms. The case is set in Hong Kong, where Chinese, Western, and local cultures intermingle, affecting the way corruption is viewed and dealt with. It involves issues related to conflicts within a prominent family leading to a high-profile scandal, describing tensions between the desire to maintain family control over the firm and the need to maintain proper governance and transparency for financial markets, respond to social pressure from a society that deals aggressively with corruption, and deal with a criminal inquiry that could lead to years in prison. This was all happening while complex political issues simmered in the background.
This case examines the challenges faced by a grassroots non-profit struggling to carry out its mission and stabilize its finances in an increasingly competitive and demanding funding environment over a twenty-year period. It examines the issues faced by non-profits as they chart a course for growth despite precarious funding and divergent stakeholder expectations, examining the often difficult and paradoxical decisions that non-profit managers must make to ensure the survival of their organizations. Santropol Roulant (SR) is a small, community-based non-profit offering a meals-on-wheels service to individuals living with a loss of autonomy. Founded in 1995, SR's mission is to provide an important service to the community while enabling young people to gain valuable work and leadership experience. Despite numerous setbacks, many typical of those encountered by grassroots non-profits, SR managed to grow and thrive without compromising its "ethos" and happily celebrated its 20th anniversary in 2015.
Supplement to case HEC183. This case examines the challenges faced by a grassroots non-profit struggling to carry out its mission and stabilize its finances in an increasingly competitive and demanding funding environment over a twenty-year period. It examines the issues faced by non-profits as they chart a course for growth despite precarious funding and divergent stakeholder expectations, examining the often difficult and paradoxical decisions that non-profit managers must make to ensure the survival of their organizations. Santropol Roulant (SR) is a small, community-based non-profit offering a meals-on-wheels service to individuals living with a loss of autonomy. Founded in 1995, SR's mission is to provide an important service to the community while enabling young people to gain valuable work and leadership experience. Despite numerous setbacks, many typical of those encountered by grassroots non-profits, SR managed to grow and thrive without compromising its "ethos" and happily celebrated its 20th anniversary in 2015.
Supplement to case HEC183. This case examines the challenges faced by a grassroots non-profit struggling to carry out its mission and stabilize its finances in an increasingly competitive and demanding funding environment over a twenty-year period. It examines the issues faced by non-profits as they chart a course for growth despite precarious funding and divergent stakeholder expectations, examining the often difficult and paradoxical decisions that non-profit managers must make to ensure the survival of their organizations. Santropol Roulant (SR) is a small, community-based non-profit offering a meals-on-wheels service to individuals living with a loss of autonomy. Founded in 1995, SR's mission is to provide an important service to the community while enabling young people to gain valuable work and leadership experience. Despite numerous setbacks, many typical of those encountered by grassroots non-profits, SR managed to grow and thrive without compromising its "ethos" and happily celebrated its 20th anniversary in 2015.
This case describes the evolution of a software development firm's infrastructure supporting the development, delivery, and operation of applications over two decades. The firm in question is C3 Solutions (C3), a small Canadian software development firm active in a niche market within the transportation and logistics industry. Focusing on the transformation of C3's business model, the case provides before and after pictures of the infrastructures in place and illustrates the evolution of infrastructures in software development firms. C3's success was originally based on the development and sale of on-premises software. Due to pressures originating from within the company and its environment, this business model became difficult to sustain, and the organization's survival was threatened. In response, C3 carried out a profound transformation of its business model, becoming a provider of software-as-a-service (SaaS). To achieve this transformation, the company had to modify its information technology (IT) infrastructure.
When choosing a CEO, boards typically take into account the particular circumstances the company faces: Is it in need of a turnaround, say, or will it be scaling for growth? But firms don't usually pay much attention to contextual challenges when hiring for and promoting people into lower-level leadership roles, instead preferring jack-of-all-trades candidates. A new study from CEB suggests that they will be more successful if they consider the specific leadership context when hiring for every level and identifies the 27 contextual challenges that matter most.
SST is a technology company that was formed to address a social problem: gun violence. SST is the global leader in gunfire detection and location technology. SST provides a scalable and reliable gunfire alert and analysis system, which is known as ShotSpotter. Gun violence is a problem in inner cities. As such, this service is most applicable to underserved communities. The company was founded in 1996 by an acoustic engineer who felt that sensors could detect gunfire. The ShotSpotter solution provides information to police departments in cities that have installed the technology to help them quickly respond to events where gun shots were fired. The case also highlights the Internet of Things (IoT) and Big Data, given SST's use of sensors and data to solve the problem of gun violence.