個案總覽

The 2015 case "Royal Bank of Canada: Transforming Managers (A)" discusses programs that the bank put in place between 2011 and 2013 to improve managerial effectiveness. The case looks at the traits that make good managers, how to use data to create visibility into managerial effectiveness, the features of a successful intervention action plan, and the challenges with finding ways to reward good managers. Specifically, the case focuses on a pilot intervention program within the Canadian Banking operations division that was designed by Human Resources thought leaders in collaboration with Canadian Banking operations' top leaders. The program had multiple parts: 1) Using an analytics model based on the employee opinion survey to rank all managers in the division based on effectiveness; 2) Dividing all managers into four effectiveness cohorts (roughly in quartiles); 3) Identifying the managers most in need of, and most likely to benefit from, manager effectiveness training; and 4) creating and carrying out action plans. The action plans included formal coaching by each of the targeted managers' managers (the most effective intervention), feedback, and formal training. The case concludes as the bank waits for the results of the next employee opinion survey to gauge how effective its management improvement programs were. The companion case, "Royal Bank of Canada: Transforming Managers (B)," discusses the results of the programs.

The 2015 case "Royal Bank of Canada: Transforming Managers (B)" details the success of the manager improvement pilot intervention program discussed in the companion case, "Royal Bank of Canada: Transforming Managers (A)." Within one year, the division that ran the program, the Canadian Banking operations division, saw marked improvement in nearly all of the managers who participated in the program. Based on these results, the division continued to hone the intervention program details, and RBC expanded the program across the bank.

John Park, the owner of 401 Games in Toronto, was wondering where to take his store in the future. One of his product lines, board games, was in the midst of a massive expansion and he was at the forefront in the Toronto market. This provided many opportunities for him to explore. He could expand into online sales, as had most of his competitors. As for his bricks-and-mortar store, he would have the opportunity in the next year to rent out additional space as the second and third floors of his current building would become available. Were he to rent out that space, he thought he would open a board-game café. Another option open to him was to open more stores in other parts of Toronto, or other cities entirely. In addition to overall strategic options, he also had decisions to make about product, promotion and price.

Two business partners were considering adding product lines to their international custom software business in Toronto, Canada. From 2009, Myplanet had grown ever more focused, in turn yielding an increase in average project size to US$1 million and a staff that grew from six to 100. Until they created RelayRobin, a system that was similar in capability to Skype, the two partners had achieved their remarkable growth almost exclusively through custom projects for large, well-known U.S. clients. In seeking the next major growth markets, they identified communication services - in particular, the telecommunications industry - as a prime opportunity. Targeting telecom carriers had produced disappointing results, so Myplanet instead opted to turn to original equipment manufacturers. The early results were encouraging.

The U.S.-based executive vice-president (EVP) of Glenmark Generics Inc., the subsidiary of an Indian generic manufacturer, is weighing his options on whether or not to proceed with what is known as a Launch @ Risk in the U.S. market. Defined as a "risk taken by a generic company when it puts a product on the market before resolving outstanding patent lawsuits against it," Launch @ Risk is a widely acknowledged route to gain an entry into the world's largest and most profitable pharmaceutical market. The focal product is the generic version of a hypertension drug whose patent is set to expire in 2015. Glenmark Generics has just secured approval from the U.S. Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) to launch a low-cost generic version of the patented drug but the FDA approval is being contested in a court of law by the patent holder. While awaiting the court's ruling, the EVP must evaluate his company's options and decide whether to proceed, in the interim, with the product launch.

In the years after 2009, Qualcomm navigated the wireless industry's transition from 3G to 4G, retaining its technological leadership and experiencing dramatic growth in revenue and profit. In March 2014, Qualcomm appointed a new CEO, Steve Mollenkopf, who had to contend with a rash of new challenges, ranging from new technologies and new competitors to anti-trust battles and an activist shareholder disappointed by weak stock performance. This brief case brings the analysis of Qualcomm's competitive position up to 2015, when it was preparing for the evolution to 5G, while also investing in new areas, such as IoT, automobiles, eHealth, and eEducation, despite a mixed record in diversifying beyond wireless communications technology.

To achieve its goal of redefining success in business, B Lab recognizes it needs to scale. Its strategy to do so requires B Lab to depend heavily on new partners, venture into new markets, influence new audiences, and to strike a balance between standards and flexibility. Is this the right strategy to achieve B Lab's ambitious goals? Is the business world ready to commit, with real accountability, to purposes beyond shareholder value?

Spreadsheet supplement for case 215058.

This Reading explores how entrepreneurial leaders develop strategies, build capabilities, design their organizations, and address leadership and governance issues as they transition to growth and pursue increased scale and scope. It covers 3 ventures in detail, 2 of which achieved economies of scale as they grew their existing businesses, and economies of scope as they expanded into new products and markets. It also examines a business that demonstrates the challenges many entrepreneurial leaders face as they pursue increased scope. Traditionally, many assumed that entrepreneurial leaders who launch a startup are unable to adjust their approach to meet longer-term needs of a growing businesses. Others, including the author, claim that the skills required for growth can be learned. Regardless, entrepreneurs who wish to stay with their business must acquire new skills and capabilities and bring on the resources their growing company needs.

Tagit is a Singapore-based mobile solutions company. The company's offering was based on Mobeix, a ground-breaking technology that allowed enterprises to build secure, scalable and innovative mobile applications across multiple mobile devices and operating systems. Leveraging on Mobeix, Tagit had successfully secured its first contract from PVR Cinemas in India, offering the first online ticket-booking platform. Following this, in 2007, Tagit was contracted by Singapore Airlines to develop a mobile app for the airline's passenger services. Facing intense competition and rapid technological advancement in the online ticketing space, Naffi and his business partners started to consider other options to grow revenues and profits. At that time, many banks in Singapore were looking to offer mobile services. Tagit therefore seized such an opportunity and managed to get Citibank India signed up as a client. On the one hand, winning the Citibank contract opened up a whole new business space for Tagit. On the other, new business lines required the operations of Tagit to be scalable, yet controllable. Naffi was pondering over the possible solutions to this dilemma. Is Naffi able to handle the changes and expansion of business lines? Can Tagit's business model be scaled up? How can Naffi build up the credibility of Tagit?

GiveIndia is an online donation platform that bridges the gap between the donors and credible Non-Governmental Organizations. The focus of GiveIndia has been on individual donations with a vision to create a culture of giving, where every Indian donates at least 2% of their income for the poor. In 2013, the Government of India introduced Corporate Social Responsibility Bill, which mandates corporates to invest at least 2% of their profits in CSR activities. At present, GiveIndia has not been seeking corporate, but now they find themselves at the right position to exploit this opportunity. Dhaval, the CEO faces a dilemma. Corporate donations could significantly increase his funding; however, it could also lead deviations from the mission to creating a giving culture. There were other problems to contend with, such as the question of investing in GiveIndia brand, how to pitch business reasons for philanthropy and employee compensation and retention issues. This case presents the evolution of GiveIndia from a modest start to becoming India's largest donation platform in 2013 with over 5.4 million US$ revenues from direct and indirect contributions. It provides a rich context to understand the working of a social enterprise which adopts business principles for a philanthropic cause, and the challenges it faces. The case highlights issues related to the philosophical moorings of the organization and the tension resulting from emerging opportunities and the chances of a mission drift. It also focuses on the problems which social enterprises typically face as they straddle two different worlds of a business enterprise and a social/charitable organization. The case can be used to discuss issues related to marketing, branding and Human Resource Management in a social enterprise and helps develop a holistic understanding of complex linkages across disciplines.

This case describes the innovations of a medical practitioner over six decades of practice. It provides an opportunity to the participants to analyse the motivation, processes, constraints and outcomes or innovating efforts of individuals as opposed to corporate. During his career Dr. Shah has experimented with novel methods of treatment, applications of known solutions and new product formulations. At the end of his career Dr. Shah is wondering whether the innovating efforts were worth their while.

In February 2010, Germany's national railway broke ground on a project that had been under negotiation for more than 20 years-the Stuttgart segment of the European Magistrale, a 930-mile cross-Europe high-speed rail line that would one day extend from Paris through Munich and Vienna to Budapest and Bratislava. At long last, the German national railway, the state of Baden-Württemberg, and the city of Stuttgart had come to agreement on the routing and station design of the megaproject. Yet within the year, the project would spark the largest citizen demonstrations Germany had seen since the reunification of the country. The Stuttgart 21 opponents were diverse, and so were their concerns, but nearly all were united by one overriding contention: that political elites had conceived the plan without public input and had later refused to take citizen objections seriously. The case provides basic background and context for this controversy, then describes four kinds of public participation that took place in the course of developing the project: (1) a city-sponsored open-participation process in 1997 allowing citizens to weigh in on the neighborhood re-development portions of the project; (2) a petition drive by opponents to hold a city referendum on the project, later followed by mass demonstrations; (3) a state-sponsored mediation process between supporters and opponents of the project; and (4) a state election followed by a state referendum on the project.

The case describes Uruguay's soft drink industry, starting with the arrival of Coca-Cola in 1945 and reviewing the industry's track record until 2000. The industry is characterized by having two different periods: one spanning until the mid-1990s, with two highly profitable players -Coca-Cola and Pepsi- and a second one unfolding in the second half of the 1990s, when three new players emerged: Caribeño S.A., with its Nix product, a group of b-brands, and smuggled sodas. At the time of the case, the two large international players have started losing increasing amounts of money, while the new players seem profitable. The case also explores several developments that heavily influenced the industry, such as the introduction of PET disposable bottles, the tax scheme applied to soft drinks by the Uruguayan government, and the lax enforcement of regulations and legal control of industry players. The case ends with Caribeño's CEO, Dr. Marcelo Viera, wondering what to do once he learns that his company is about to replace Pepsi as the second leading soft drink brand in Uruguay.

Founded in 1951 in Argentina, Arcor Group consolidated as an industry leader in the manufacturing of food, candy, crackers, cookies, chocolates, and ice-cream for consumers in over 120 countries across all five continents. This case focuses on the process carried out by Arcor Group to introduce and institutionalize sustainability in its management and strategy, describing how the process unfolded and highlighting the challenges that were faced, particularly revolving around the decisions that the company had to make to integrate sustainability to its day-to-day business management and to engage employees in this endeavor in late 2010. "Creating Business Value: Arcor Group and Sustainability" includes two documents: the case itself and its epilogue, which provides information on later developments.

Epilogue to case US0007. Founded in 1951 in Argentina, Arcor Group consolidated as an industry leader in the manufacturing of food, candy, crackers, cookies, chocolates, and ice-cream for consumers in over 120 countries across all five continents. This case focuses on the process carried out by Arcor Group to introduce and institutionalize sustainability in its management and strategy, describing how the process unfolded and highlighting the challenges that were faced, particularly revolving around the decisions that the company had to make to integrate sustainability to its day-to-day business management and to engage employees in this endeavor in late 2010. "Creating Business Value: Arcor Group and Sustainability" includes two documents: the case itself and its epilogue, which provides information on later developments.

The region around Cambridge, England (known colloquially as Silicon Fen) is home to a cluster of high-tech startups and established businesses. It has a deep history stretching back to the foundation of the city's elite university in 1284. Silicon Fen shares many characteristics with Silicon Valley (a leading research university, a large pool of skilled workers, a robust startup environment, and the presence of leading high technology firms) but it also has a distinctly different entrepreneurial environment. What factors account for these differences? This case is most effective when paired with Tom Nicholas and James Lee, "The Origins and Development of Silicon Valley, "HBS No. 813-098 (Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing, 2013).

Peter and Kate Rose are a young couple looking to buy their first home in the Boston area. They have narrowed down a target list to three homes, but are also considering whether it makes sense to buy a home in the first place. They must make decisions regarding which home to buy, a price, a broker, a mortgage package, and how to source a down payment. Both quantitative and qualitative factors are considered in their decision making.

The managing partner of Proto3000, a 10-year-old 3D Printing services and supply firm, was both gratified by the recent explosion of popular media coverage of 3D Printing that was certain to bring his firm additional opportunities, and concerned as to how his company could maintain their broad leadership position as new competitors began to join the fray. As the managing partner began thinking about what to do next, he wondered whether he should stick with his biggest market segments or diversify into new markets that seemed to hold a lot of promise. In addition, he wondered which challenges associated with the disruptive technology that his industry revolved around he needed to consider as he plotted a course forward for Proto3000.

A senior account manager at Boise Automation Canada Ltd. was disappointed with the news that he had just lost the $1.2 million opportunity with Northern Paper Inc. (Northern), a paper mill in Rocky Falls, Ontario.The opportunity was to design, supply and install an automated control system for Northern's wood-chip handling system. With over 20 years experience selling automation systems in heavy industry, had he won the order, it would have easily put him over his target quota for 2011 and significantly boosted his incentive payout. Now, with less than 3 months before the end of the year, he was unlikely to meet his target for the year. The senior account manager wanted to understand what had gone wrong, and to learn from the experience, to avoid repeating it. What should he have done differently?