個案總覽

Leader Healthcare India (LHC) was a medical devices importer firm that dealt primarily in respiratory and anesthetic devices. The company imported medical devices from U.S. manufacturers and, for the most part, performed its own marketing, sales, and service activities. In 2016, the director of LHC was concerned about LHC’s multiple failed efforts at market expansion. The company wanted to grow, but its attempts had been unsuccessful. Lack of highly trained personnel, supervisory control, and sufficient financial resources had been the key reasons for the failure. Market expansion was even more critical as LHC wanted to launch a 24/7 service in the respiratory devices business, and success with this service depended on the size of LHC’s existing customer base. How could LHC grow?

Cembrit Holding A/S (Cembrit), the second-largest producer of fibre cement products in Europe, had experienced a period of restructuring, acquisitions, and consolidation as a result of having acquired fibre cement companies involved in production, sales, and distribution throughout Europe and closing down its own production in Denmark. After years of restructuring and struggling, growth had finally picked up, with turnover reaching an average of 11 per cent per year between 2003 and 2007. As of 2008, however, Cembrit faced numerous challenges: building and strengthening its new corporate identity; repositioning itself in the market; identifying opportunities for organic growth; transitioning to asbestos-free production; and determining its future within its parent company. How it addressed these challenges would affect Cembrit’s future well beyond 2008, including whether it would be retained or divested by its parent company.

Licensing is a strategy for technology transfer; and an approach to internationalization that requires less time or depth of involvement in foreign markets, compared to exports, joint ventures, and foreign direct investment. This note examines when licensing is employed, risks associated with it, intellectual property rights, costs of licensing, unattractive markets for licensing, and the major elements of the license agreement.

The founder of the Access to Medicine Foundation, based in the Netherlands, had a goal to research and publish a biannual, global survey of pharmaceutical companies and their rankings, in terms of their effects in providing needed medicines to people in developing countries. When the first two iterations of the Access to Medicine Index (ATMI) were published in 2008 and 2010 (see case A), the most prominent challenges were engaging stakeholders—government, pharmaceutical firms, nonprofit organizations, investors, and others—and securing funding to support ongoing research and analyses. <br>In 2016, the founder was preparing for the ATMI’s fifth iteration (see case B, 9B17M011), and he had a three-point focus: to improve engagement with pharmaceutical companies in an effort to increase the effect of the ATMI on companies’ practices; to incorporate the views of patients into the ATMI; and to engage with governments and regulators in the developing countries, where citizens were in need of access to medicines.

Supplement for product 9B17M010.

This exercise revolves around the rivalry between two financial analysts. Upset by their constant game of one-upmanship, an advisor to the governor of the Reserve Bank of India came up with a challenge for them to prove who was better. He provided them with financial data for the financial year ending March 2014 from 10 anonymous companies and asked them to match the financial data with specific industries given in a list. The challenge was timed, and the winner was to be determined on the basis of who could come up with the right combination first.

In May 2012, the director of human resources at Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited was involved in negotiating a long-term collective agreement between management and the unions at the large public-sector oil corporation in India. The negotiations had begun in 2009 and were stalled largely because of wage issues. Due to time-bound promotions and open-ended pay ranges, workers’ salaries had spiralled out of control. When economic conditions changed from an administered price mechanism with government subsidies to one in which the corporation was expected to compete with national and multinational private-sector companies, the issue of high operating costs had to be addressed. After 13 rounds of discussions, there was still no agreement. The management team needed to decide which of the issues originally identified were essential for resolution and which were only desirable. The team also had to decide how to approach the negotiation in order to secure agreement from the unions.

Decision-making is one of the few variables that crosses all business functions, affects all companies, and leads to success or failure wherever it is used. However, decision-making is not a science: it’s highly subjective and susceptible to cognitive biases. In an organization, cognitive bias works on individual and group levels, influencing decision-making and outcomes. The results are often errors or bad choices, such as Lehman Brothers’s excessive risk-taking, Toyota’s inadequate response to quality problems, and BP’s decisions to skimp on safety practices. Some errors are unavoidable, but systemic errors can be prevented, largely by addressing the propensity for bias. Types of bias can include overconfidence, confirmation bias, analogy bias, availability bias, and herd mentality (groupthink). While completely removing bias is probably impossible, avoiding systemic errors is possible by taking the following steps: 1) force awareness of the potential for bias; 2) conduct a frank self-examination; 3) critically evaluate the knowledge the organization uses to make decisions; 4) diagnose the cultural codes of groups; 5) reframe problems; and 6) actively seek out contrary viewpoints. However you deal with cognitive bias, begin with acknowledgement that it exists in all organizations and teams. To prevent bias from leading to poor organizational decision-making, inputs for decisions should be tested for quality just like inputs in manufacturing are tested for quality.

For many companies, peak condition is sustained through digital fitness—an ability to invest in and innovate using digital technologies. However, Accenture research has found that many companies are not actively building their digital muscles, even when they are in a strong financial position. When we examined the financial and digital performance of over 300 global companies, we found one category of business that was surprisingly strong on financial performance, especially profitability, but comparatively weak on digital performance. We call this group Business Leaders. Business Leaders have maintained financial strength thanks to their legacy business but, if not renewed over time, the strong legacy of today can become a challenge tomorrow. Accenture research shows that Business Leaders underperform on four broad company activities: a) digital strategy planning and execution, b) digital production and delivery, c) digital customer experience management, and d) digital corporate culture and operations. As a result, Business Leaders need to: 1) get motivated to excel at serial investments, 2) renew their business model, but not alone, and 3) make cultural disruption a routine. Business Leaders may underestimate the impact that nimbler, more tech-savvy competitors can have on their current financial lead position. To get fit to lead in the future, these companies must focus on investment, business model renewal, and a persistent culture of innovation.

Can innovations come from China? Some influential people don’t think so. Today, of course, Alibaba is the Chinese innovator that clearly stands out. This paper argues that Alibaba’s impressive rise as a leading innovator on the world stage was driven in no small way by the institutional voids that challenge other firms in the same business environment. Alibaba not only thrived in an institutional void, it was a filler of institutional voids. Alibaba’s success has been attributed to factors including the massive size and rapid growth of the Chinese market, an influx of foreign capital, and an ingenious mix of Chinese and Western business systems. However, there are four reasons why China’s institutional void effect cannot be ignored: Alibaba received selective government support, experienced a strong CEO effect, strongly fit the paradigm shift to e-commerce, and accrued great benefits through ecosystem development. Arguably, developing a broad business ecosystem offers more benefits in an environment with institutional voids. One key tenet of an institutional void is the lack of market information—both for consumers and for businesses—which inhibits effective business operations. However, Alibaba became an “infomediary” for consumers by collecting information to help them make informed shopping decisions. Alibaba then collected consumer behaviour data from its online ecosystem, which is expected to have a significant impact on China’s business world and society.

In the digital space, what is the next big thing? Nobody knows. Nevertheless, today’s companies are under pressure to discover it. But chasing the digital holy grail can jeopardize management’s focus on what’s really important—digital transformation. One can read many books on how companies can accelerate digital transformation. But before you start planning, you should make one simple commitment: build digital into every project. Every opportunity to capture the creative power of digital technologies should adhere to the following four realities of competing in a digital world: 1) Customer experience is vital. 2) Customers are moving targets with short-lived attention and fragile brand loyalty. 3) Business ecosystems co-create value because no single organization possesses all the data, digital skills, and capabilities to win over today’s demanding and dynamic digital customers. 4) Digital platforms boost value co-creation and digital innovation strength is dependent on your ability to combine your digital assets with those of others. Use these four guidelines the next time you appraise an innovative idea or assess a project proposal.

Rather than giving credence to generational stereotypes that pit, for example, Baby Boomers against Millennials, effective leaders must focus on growing a strong relationship culture within their organization. Understanding and exploring individual personalities helps to grow and nurture human connection, as opposed to ascribing generic characteristics to people based on their date of birth. It’s easy to follow the path of generational stereotypes—not least because the idea is so popular in the media. We are constantly reminded how generation theory explains office dynamics. However, there are better lenses through which to view the complexity of team performance. One of the most commonly cited factors is the idea of collaboration—supposedly a Millennial character trait. But the data doesn’t fit as neatly into the collaborative Millennial construct as one might think. This tendency to transpose technological features onto generational values is one of the flaws of generation theory. A more effective approach is to drive ongoing relationship skill development within the office through formal programs. Interpersonal skill development programs help teams to understand each other and put their varied strengths to work. Although individuals and generations may show a myriad of differences, most people—regardless of age—are similar in their search for meaning and value. When understood and properly harnessed, this fundamental human desire has the power to unite any organization.

Expert crowdsourcing isn’t easy to get right because the success of a virtual community of practice is fully dependent on fulfilling the crowd’s wants and needs.

Physical retailers of the future will deploy technology to achieve mass customization one customer at a time.

The trials and tribulations of Dare Foods, along with its well-drafted shareholders’ agreement, show how good corporate governance reinforces the ability of courts to defer to directors’ business judgment.

Student spreadsheet to accompany product 9B17C035.

In 2016, the chief operating officer (COO) of InteraXon Inc., a Toronto-based technology start-up in the health and wellness sector, needed to put together a revised supply chain that was consistent with the company’s new strategic plan. InteraXon’s flagship product was a lightweight headband called Muse, aimed at measuring the wearer’s brain activity. The COO needed to keep in mind two major requirements of the new plan: a) the company would be relocating the production of Muse from China to the United States and b) it needed to quickly scale up its manufacturing and marketing operations. What plan of action should the COO develop?

Canada’s economy could use a blast of innovation. After all, between 2005 and 2015, productivity averaged only 1 per cent per year, while economic growth averaged under 2 per cent. Unfortunately, despite public policy talk of supporting innovation, the government does not go far enough to provide innovation incentives. Indeed, the stimulants currently in place are inadequate to produce the high-performance economy that Canada requires. To help the Canadian economy return to the 3–4 per cent growth rates of our past, policymakers should consider three strategies. 1) Improve returns on innovation by lowering taxes and freezing or lowering capital gains and options gains tax rates. 2) Improve the regulatory environment: Excessive and poorly conceived regulations serve as an innovation killer, especially for small businesses that lack the financial resources to manage an excessive compliance process. 3) Innovate government services: One approach is to take the shackles off government-sector incentive systems and specifically reward efforts at innovation. Another, less controversial approach is a competitive grant program aimed at would-be government-sector innovators. Finally, universities and colleges through their teaching and research programs are a hotbed of innovation. Enhanced post-secondary education funding with proper targets and controls could be a boon to innovation.

America faces a previously unimaginable leadership crisis. And that is why businesspeople fleeing White House advisory councils over Trump’s response to the tragic events in Charlottesville—where a civil rights activist was killed during a violent clash—should be applauded, not attacked. Unfortunately, millions of Trump supporters don’t see a problem with the comfort that racists are taking from his leadership. And because these Trump supporters are also consumers, it is risky business for CEOs to take a stand against the man. Simply put, Trump doesn’t understand or care why there should be no presidential ambiguity when it comes to discrimination. As things stand, the president of the United States does not understand good leadership. His behaviour is dangerously erratic, childish, and divisive thanks to his unhealthy need for applause. Perhaps watching more and more CEOs choose to serve the country and their corporate stakeholders by taking a stand against his administration rather than supporting it will eventually cause Trump to reflect on his flaws as a leader. Either way, when something far more important than profits is on the line, choosing not to be associated with someone who has repeatedly attacked the foundation of American greatness is a sound business decision.

<p style="color: rgb(197, 183, 131);"><strong> AWARD WINNER - Urban Transition Challenges Award, European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) Case Writing Competition</strong></p><br>In 1995, many of the flights at Edmonton City Centre Airport (ECCA) were being diverted to Edmonton International Airport. By 2008, ECCA’s two runways required an estimated CA$10 million in capital upgrades and CA$35 million in additional maintenance costs over the next 10 years. In light of these facts, in November 2011, Edmonton’s city council had begun to consider whether maintaining ECCA was feasible or if other alternatives would put the land to better use. The options available included the following: 1) maintain ECCA and the status quo by completing the repairs, 2) sell the property to a real estate developer and generate immediate revenue for other city projects, or 3) close ECCA and have the city redevelop the land for a community project. City councilors needed to find a clear and sustainable solution to the challenges presented by ECCA.