個案總覽

Our Call for Papers focused on breaking established patterns and models and showcasing management innovation in a world in which Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity (VUCA) reign. VUCA is both an outcome of disruptive innovation and a driver of it; and frequently VUCA is used as an excuse to avoid planning and action. While research has pursued the four elements independently, interaction and integration have been lacking. This article introduces three papers and offers 15 challenges as well as implicit and explicit recommendations to manage in the unpredictable and challenging VUCA world.

The world in which today's businesses operate has become not only riskier but also more volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA). Organizations that hew too closely to traditional ways of operating will be hampered in their ability to succeed. In contrast, those that focus on new product and process developments coupled with business model innovation will leverage their dynamic capabilities. An essential overlay is entrepreneurial leadership from top management teams. Strong dynamic capabilities are impossible without it. This article examines how business model innovations, dynamic capabilities, and strategic leadership intertwine to help organizations thrive in VUCA worlds.

Technology is rapidly changing, and customers are seeking not just products and services but experiences. Traditional approaches to strategic planning using product and technology roadmaps are no longer sufficient. This article describes the emergence of what the authors call "design roadmapping" approaches that are grounded in the creation of customer experiences, and which drive the choices of features, functionality, and technology. Design roadmapping provides stability for the future, even as technologies are changing, and keeps organizations more focused on the customers they are serving.

While much literature on strategic agility has focused on strategic flexibility and adaption at organizational levels, there is a need to provide specific guidance at lower, more discrete levels of analysis. This article focuses on the context of a particular professional group, executive information technology (IT) leaders, who have received attention in recent years for their evolving strategic role at the forefront of firms. It identifies and illustrates a number of practices these actors demonstrate in building and maintaining strategic agility, and it concludes by conceptualizing these practices in an agenda and framework for managers.

Emerging market companies create new management practices for an environment characterized by increased volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA). This article shows how Haier developed a platform of management practices called Rendanheyi to transform itself from a conventional hierarchical manufacturing firm to a highly responsive online-based entrepreneurial company. It demonstrates how the organizational, competitive, institutional, and technological contexts mattered for the development of Rendanheyi, showing how context-dependent management innovations are created to allow emerging market firms such as Haier to deal with a high VUCA world and creating an extended process model of management innovation that managers can readily apply.

The sharing economy has emerged in recent years as a disruptive approach to traditional business models. Drawing on a multi-year research program and a design-based methodology, this article introduces a framework and generative tool called the Sharing Business Model Compass. As an actionable framework, the Compass helps elucidate the multiple, innovative forms sharing economy businesses are adopting. As a generative tool, it enables entrepreneurs, investors, incubators, and incumbents interested in entering the sharing economy to create, present, and evolve a compelling sharing business model as well as evaluate its extent of robustness.

The case begins with a brief biography of Dr. Askwar Hilonga, and background on the myriad problems created by insufficient access to fresh water. Having grown up in rural Northern Tanzania, Dr. Hilonga observed first-hand the difficulties and devastation caused by this problem, such as disease and death; lack of water for toilets and for bathing and cleaning; and difficulty delivering pre- and post-surgical care, for example. These challenges are especially dire in sub-Saharan Africa. After obtaining Master's degrees in Chemistry and in Public Health and a Ph.D. in Nanotechnology, Dr. Hilonga developed and patented a water filtration system designed to purify drinking water at the point of use. Users provide samples of the local water they intend to filter. Dr. Hilonga tests the water and customizes a nanofilter, which, working in conjunction with two standard filters, comprise a three-tiered system standing about six feet tall. The filtration efficacy rate is 99.99%. Water is periodically re-tested and filters are replaced to ensure quality. With his wife Ruth, who has Master's degrees in Business Management and in Accounting, Dr. Hilonga formed Gongali Model Company, Limited ("GMC") in 2010. With some funding and an interest-free loan, he developed prototypes and worked in the Arusha, Tanzania area to educate communities and provide demonstrations of the product. GMC works with local entrepreneurs ("LEs") who operate one or more filtration stations with the goal of attaining 100 customers each. Most LEs rent the station and, after an initial $15 installation fee, they pay $3 per week rental charge and keep everything they collect over this amount. They are required to provide data six days per week to the GMC headquarters on the number of liters filtered and sold. This information is essential for GMC to determine when to replace filters to maintain quality. A small staff work at GMC headquarters in Arusha.

How important are virtue and character when the future of a company is on the line? How does the leader decide between two pressing options? Set in 1981, this case examines decisions taken by Hussamuddin Yaacub, co-founder of the Malaysian publishing company Karya Bestari at a time when the company was in deep distress. The company's future was in doubt thanks to an unsuccessful partnership with Omar, a printer, who had earlier bought a 50% stake in Karya Bestari. This case suggests the managerial usefulness of the concepts and practice of "character" and "virtue," which are little employed in Western management but are central to some Asian companies and cultures. The case also illustrates the paradox that the most effective way to use virtue in business is not to use it for a business purpose. Virtue can be most profitable when it is practiced for its own sake, not for the sake of profit.

How important are virtue and character when the future of a company is on the line? How does the leader decide between two pressing options? Set in 1981, this case examines decisions taken by Hussamuddin Yaacub, co-founder of the Malaysian publishing company Karya Bestari at a time when the company was in deep distress. The company's future was in doubt thanks to an unsuccessful partnership with Omar, a printer, who had earlier bought a 50% stake in Karya Bestari. This case suggests the managerial usefulness of the concepts and practice of "character" and "virtue," which are little employed in Western management but are central to some Asian companies and cultures. The case also illustrates the paradox that the most effective way to use virtue in business is not to use it for a business purpose. Virtue can be most profitable when it is practiced for its own sake, not for the sake of profit.

The financials that are common in the business world are those that track past performance. With these statements, if we know past performance, we can better predict future performance. For a prospective business that has not previously existed, on the other hand, preparing financial statements is much more difficult. There is no past history to build on, there are no real numbers to start with, and it is not certain how the venture will materialize. It is not likely the numbers will be correct, so why do this? The main reasons for creating financials fall into internal and external arguments: 1. Your numbers reflect your positioning and business model. They can inform you about the viability of your business and help you determine whether and how to move forward. While some numbers are likely to be wrong, your initial approach to the business is also likely to be wrong in some aspects. If these numbers can help put you on a more viable path (sooner rather than later), this information is undeniably valuable. 2. Investors and other stakeholders will want to understand the viability of your business and how you intend to pursue the opportunity. They want to know that you have thought through the economic representation of your business model and that you have done your homework in crafting logical financials. While most sophisticated investors and other experts often believe entrepreneurs are overly optimistic with financial projections, they also want to see how ambitious you are in your thinking about launching the business.

Managers have long been obsessed with improving business processes, and a host of initiatives, such as lean production and Six Sigma, have gained traction in recent years. But a new study shows that the gains from such initiatives often fade quickly. Examining 204 lean projects launched at a European bank, the researchers found that just one-third held on to their gains after two years, and only about the same number were still showing continuous improvement. They identify several factors that can lead to sustained improvements: visible support from the board and senior leadership; consistent measuring and monitoring; communication in a clear narrative that aligns with organizational purpose; directing efforts toward pain points whose easing would clearly benefit employees; and ensuring that senior leaders act as coaches. Includes a Q&A with Helen Bevan who oversees change initiatives at England's National Health Service.

Employers used to take a dim view of job candidates with body art. But times have changed. New research shows that there's no longer any labor-market penalty for tattoos--even if they're large, visible, and offensive.

Hop Compost (Hop) was a Canadian start-up that took food scraps destined for landfill and converted them to an organic, highly nutrient compost using novel, licensed technology. The company was approaching the end of its first year and facing two decisions. First, it had to decide whether to pursue third-party accreditation for its environmental and social impact. The accreditation would demand time and money but could help Hop with its growth plans. Second, the company's founder wondered how to position Hop's environmental and social impact to appeal to potential investors, who would be primarily interested in financial returns.

In 2013, the Swiss sports data company Sportradar debated whether to expand from its core business of data provision to bookmakers into sports media products. Sports data was becoming a commodity, and in the future, sports leagues might reduce their dependence on third-party data feeds such as Sportradar's, prefering to develop data services in-house. Thus, CEO Carsten Koerl believed the company needed to branch into sports media, not just supplying data to companies, but finding ways to tell stories about that data. However, Sportradar's core business was thriving, whereas a recent attempt to branch out into video player tracking systems had proved a costly failure. The team weighed the pros and cons of various media ventures, including online sports betting minigames, a social media site, and streaming of sports content.

In the spring of 2018, Israel was set to celebrate its 70th anniversary. While there was much to rejoice in reaching this milestone, the country's brand image internationally was far from ideal. Past efforts to impact perceptions of Israel, spearheaded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as various Jewish organizations, were mainly aimed at "explaining" Israel's political position and convincing the world that the country was acting in a just manner. However, a series of seminal market research studies revealed that many people in the U.S. and Europe primarily associated Israel with military imagery, held views of the country as steeped in conflict, and believed its people were devoutly religious and unwelcoming. Making matters worse, many expressed an indifferent attitude towards the country and felt that Israelis were dissimilar to them. In an attempt to change the situation, several individuals and entities embarked on various initiatives aimed at branding Israel differently and "broadening the conversation" about the country. These efforts included: generating a brand book for Israel that suggested a guiding brand position of "creative energy"; inviting social media influencers to partake in trips focused on lifestyle interests; generating appealing, non-conflict related content linked to Israel and attracting online viewers to the content; appointing a goodwill ambassador to communicate the culture and day-to-day life in Israel; and multiple measures to draw in more tourists (Jewish and non-Jewish) to the country. Taking stock of these efforts revealed a mixed picture at best, and it was unclear whether Israel's brand image among international audiences was indeed shifting in the intended direction. Several observers were further worried that the younger generation was finding Israel even less relevant and urged for devising a new approach.

The case describes the scenario that faced Thijs Thijssen and Brother Isaac, co-CEOs of the Netherlands-based La Trappe Brewery, in 2015 as they considered how to consolidate the success they had had with the business since Thijssen had joined the organisation in 2005 and build on this success for the future. Sales had risen throughout 2013 and 2014 and La Trappe had been exporting its beer to markets outside the Netherlands for a few years, with exports now making up 40% of the company's revenue. This rise in revenue had allowed the brewery to expand capacity and facilities again, and in 2014 they had stopped producing beer under licence for Bavaria, another Netherlands-based brewing company, from whom they received a share of royalties on sales. Thijssen now calculated that the brewery could potentially double the production of La Trappe beers within the existing buildings and facilities. To prepare for the future, Thijssen and Brother Isaac wanted to map out the company's strategy, in a way that could be understood by all employees. One pertinent issue was their use of foreign agents to secure exports. These were sometimes difficult to vet in terms of whether they were using channels and methods consistent with La Trappe's brand and vision; in New Zealand, for example, Thijssen had discovered that the agent had no contacts in bars and restaurants, but instead went directly to retail, a model La Trappe had eschewed in the Netherlands in order to protect brand identity. To sort out these issues and establish a clear path to sustainable growth, Thijssen and Brother Isaac began the process of mapping out a future strategy, with the help of executives from Bavaria. One question in particular vexed Thijssen: he could not figure out why the brewery had grown so rapidly over the last six years, given the challenging economic climate. It seemed very counter-intuitive.

The case series describes strategic transformation at Takeda, the largest Japanese pharmaceutical company, with a special focus on the R&D function. Since 2015, the 237-year-old industry doyen has narrowed its strategic focus from six to three therapeutic areas, reorganised its global R&D footprint around one Japanese and two US sites, and engaged in over 180 new partnerships across multiple modalities of drug discovery around the world. The pipeline of new drugs, a key gauge of future growth, has shifted from 7% partner-based pre-transformation to approximately 45% partner-based today, and an entrepreneurial, geocentric way of working has taken hold. At Takeda, a generation's worth of strategic transformation has been compressed into three years.From the outset of the transformation process, outgoing Chairman Yasu Hasegawa and incoming CEO Christophe Weber made it a point to sound out major shareholders and engage candidly with the union, working with different stakeholders to find novel organisational solutions. Once plans crystallised in 2016, Hasegawa and Weber moved to reconstitute the board of directors, changing its composition and renegotiating its modus operandi to further strategic dialogue. During the course of the same year, the executive team was recast around people - internal and external - who had the skills and the mindset to take the company forward on its new path. Early in 2017, executives finally initiated a review and adjustment of existing structures in R&D, particularly as they pertained to the burgeoning partnership portfolio. In other words, Takeda stands out not only as a rare example of a large company reinventing itself, but also as a case that illustrates the importance of proactively addressing the governance of transformation.

The case series describes strategic transformation at Takeda, the largest Japanese pharmaceutical company, with a special focus on the R&D function. Since 2015, the 237-year-old industry doyen has narrowed its strategic focus from six to three therapeutic areas, reorganised its global R&D footprint around one Japanese and two US sites, and engaged in over 180 new partnerships across multiple modalities of drug discovery around the world. The pipeline of new drugs, a key gauge of future growth, has shifted from 7% partner-based pre-transformation to approximately 45% partner-based today, and an entrepreneurial, geocentric way of working has taken hold. At Takeda, a generation's worth of strategic transformation has been compressed into three years.From the outset of the transformation process, outgoing Chairman Yasu Hasegawa and incoming CEO Christophe Weber made it a point to sound out major shareholders and engage candidly with the union, working with different stakeholders to find novel organisational solutions. Once plans crystallised in 2016, Hasegawa and Weber moved to reconstitute the board of directors, changing its composition and renegotiating its modus operandi to further strategic dialogue. During the course of the same year, the executive team was recast around people - internal and external - who had the skills and the mindset to take the company forward on its new path. Early in 2017, executives finally initiated a review and adjustment of existing structures in R&D, particularly as they pertained to the burgeoning partnership portfolio. In other words, Takeda stands out not only as a rare example of a large company reinventing itself, but also as a case that illustrates the importance of proactively addressing the governance of transformation.

On April 26, 2017, Suniva Incorporated, a Chinese-owned U.S. manufacturer of solar cells and panels, filed a Section 201 trade case seeking protection-specifically, temporary relief-from foreign manufacturers of crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) cells and modules. U.S. trade law permits the president of the United States to grant some form of temporary relief against foreign imports that are found to officially injure a domestic industry. The filing ignited a firestorm of controversy in the solar industry inside and outside of the U.S. The sought-after protection was opposed by many renewable energy interest groups, including most of the U.S. solar energy industry itself. Opponents believed that a tariff on CSPV cells and modules would cost more jobs than they would save and, even with import protection, there was no future for CSPV manufacturing in the U.S.