個案總覽

Student spreadsheet for product 9B14N012.

Excel spreadsheet for students.

A student in his final year at a management school has been asked by his uncle to suggest an optimal investment portfolio for the reinvestment of his retirement account. His uncle wants to invest only in mutual funds managed by reputed asset management companies that have historically given superior returns. He also wants to limit the risk involved to less than 10 per cent per annum. The student now needs to prepare a portfolio that offers the highest possible return for the risk defined by his uncle.

In January 2001, the chief executive officer (CEO) of Canadian Pacific Limited (CPL) was contemplating the future of his firm. CPL was one of Canada’s oldest conglomerates with operations in railways, shipping, natural resources and hotels. Its stock market capitalization of CDN$13.5 billion reflected a conglomerate discount, estimated at 12 to 35 per cent of the value. In order to eliminate this conglomerate discount and maximize shareholder value, the CEO weighed the pros and cons of asset divestitures or spinoffs. Would it make sense to keep some of the related business together to preserve economies of scale and scope and to maintain synergies? What would be the tax implications of each option? There were numerous operational and legal implications to consider. Knowing he had to make a decision quickly, the CEO looked for the option that would unlock the most value for CPL’s shareholders.

By 2009, since the introduction of liberal economic policies by the government of India in 1991, many Indian companies manufacturing leather cloth were closing down due to cheap imports from China and Taiwan. There had been no new investment or expansion in this field at all. In such a business environment and against the advice of many trade analysts, the chief executive officer of Northern India Leather Cloth Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd., based in the industrial town of Faridabad, India, decides to beat the competition by investing in new technology. He undertakes a rigorous examination of the company’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, as well as listing and prioritizing four associated factors — technological, business, cultural and social, and financial — to identify the potential advantages and challenges associated with new technology absorption. Should he invest or not invest in new technology, and, if so, which of three possible technologies should he choose?<br><br>There is a supplement to this case, <br>9B14M069.

In this, the B case, the chief executive officer wonders how to enlist and prioritize important qualitative factors, along with financial factors in evaluating the shortlisted technologies from which he must choose. He consults a leading industrial pundit for his advice on multi-criteria decision-making techniques used by many practitioners in industry. They decide to use the analytic hierarchy process methodology, which had gained huge popularity among managers due to its simplicity and its ability to incorporate tangible and intangible factors alike. In training sessions involving managers with varied experiences across business processes such as manufacturing, quality, commercial, human resources and marketing, the three technologies were subjected to a close analysis and a decision was made about which one would best achieve the goal of expanded future growth for the company. See A case 9B14M068.

At 6:05 a.m., the head office at Golden Horseshoe Constructors (GHC) was understandably empty and very quiet. The vice-president (VP) of purchasing settled in at his desk to review the bids for an upcoming condominium project and to then decide which window and door installation firm he would recommend for that portion of the job. GHC's president was expecting the decision first thing that morning. Just a day earlier, the president had strongly suggested that the work be given to Monyash Doors and Windows, a firm that had not submitted the lowest bid. In practice, all else being equal, the firm with the lowest priced bid would win the contract, but the VP was unsure how to proceed with the president’s request and which of the four bids he should recommend.

The owner of Escapes Outdoor Living Designs (Escapes) must decide what to do with his small landscaping and construction business. Escapes has been doing well, but has not had any sustainable growth over five years. The owner feels the business lacks focus and will need a good strategy in order to grow successfully. Facing problems with employee retention and shifting market opportunities, he has to perform an in-depth analysis of his current business to decide where it should go in the next few years or if it should be closed down altogether.

In March, 2014, the founder and chairman of the board of Yama Ribbons & Bows Co., Ltd., the world's largest polyester ribbon manufacturer based in Xiamen, China, was reflecting on the awards, accolades, victories and revenue growth that he had achieved over the past 16 years. In spite of the problems that beset the Chinese ribbons industry — intense competition, rising labour and production costs and strict international regulation of imports — the company had not only launched a successful subsidiary in the United States and was poised to open a second in Hong Kong but planned to outsource some of its manufacturing operations to a new plant in India. It had won a major trademark dispute and successfully survived an investigation by the U.S. Department of Commerce joint investigation into anti-dumping and anti-subsidy practices. By concentrating on superior customer service through its make-to-stock strategy and in-house research and development, the company was able to control inventory while achieving an excellent product deliverable on time anywhere in the world. As he reflected on his growth goals for the company, the founder wondered what, if anything, he was missing. How could he best grow the company over the next decade?

Lance Armstrong, a world-famous cyclist, was charged with using performance-enhancing drugs (i.e. “doping”). Armstrong had vehemently denied similar charges a few years earlier; however, this time there was substantial proof available and Armstrong accepted the charges. Subsequent to this news, most of the brands that had endorsed Armstrong terminated their contracts with him. As a cancer survivor, Armstrong had started Livestrong Foundation, an organization to support cancer patients, caregivers and survivors. This foundation depended heavily on sponsorships received by Armstrong. To protect his foundation from the negative impact of the doping controversy, Armstrong immediately resigned from both his post as chairman of Livestrong and from its board of directors. Despite his efforts, Livestrong was losing its sponsorships and a solution was needed to reduce the negative publicity, stop the loss of funding and identify new sources of funding.

Liferay, an enterprise portal and content management system, uses an open-source development model. Its flagship portal (also named Liferay) is distributed under a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) licence. This licence allows users to access, modify and distribute Liferay’s source code, and to re-license their derivative work. Open-source licencing has significant implications for Liferay’s adoption process. Organizations simply download the Liferay portal for free, try it out for different business requirements and engage the vendor for dedicated service-level agreements for more advanced usage support. Several developers and users outside Liferay participate in the software development process and make significant contributions. However, unrestricted access and liberal distribution norms allow other software organizations to make free use of Liferay’s efforts. These organizations slightly modify Liferay’s source code (particularly Liferay’s core system) and repackage the software. By 2010, this scenario has become particularly difficult. Liferay’s recent adoption of a platform strategy is based on preserving the uniformity and stability of the core system. Due to unconstrained modifications to the source code, the core system could soon become fractured and non-standardized. The CEO has to select a suitable licencing framework that will align with the newly adopted platform strategy but at the same time retain Liferay’s adherence to open source. Alternately, Liferay could abandon open source altogether.

Flipkart.com is one of India’s best known online retailers. Founded in 2007, with the ambitious dream of becoming India’s Amazon.com, Flipkart.com started out selling books and quickly expanded its product portfolio to include laptops, computer peripherals, consumer durables, consumer electronics, fashion accessories, media and games. Flipkart’s products were competitively priced, its customer service was exemplary and it offered innovative solutions to enhance the customer experience such as its cash on delivery service. These factors, coupled with a smart marketing mix and catchy advertisements that sensitized the Indian consumer to the online shopping experience, contributed to its rapid growth. While the customer viewed the company with rose-tinted glasses, all was not well within Flipkart. It was plagued by a multitude of issues, including a business model that swallowed cash faster than it was generated, increasing constraints on its operational and supply chain capabilities and deteriorating investor confidence. Indeed, Flipkart found itself in trouble in late 2012. With competitors hot on its heels and the imminent entry of Amazon.com into the Indian market, Flipkart had to evaluate its options carefully and make some smart moves if it was to survive and regain investor confidence.

In 2013, after years of success, Samsung, a manufacturing conglomerate based in Korea but with offices, research and development divisions and factories worldwide, is established as a global powerhouse in the smartphone industry. But success has revealed opportunities and challenges that need to be addressed as the company navigates the competitive landscape. Samsung has sold more phones than rivals such as Nokia and Apple and is also a major player in the increasingly popular tablet computer market. Given the volatility of the industry and the market, in addition to the dynamic relationships between suppliers, manufacturers, technology providers, application developers and operating systems, Samsung needs to think carefully about its next competitive steps. Specifically, it has to think about one very important issue: should it continue to rely on Google’s Android operating system, or should it seriously consider an in-house software ecosystem?

A newly appointed state program manager for a non-governmental organization (NGO) has been given the responsibility of managing several health centres in rural India. The state program manager quickly found that his new business environment was full of interpersonal difficulties and unprofessional conduct, which were threatening to derail the organization’s goals. Despite being a newcomer to a well-established and structured NGO, the manager knew that he would have to find a way to persuade his staff to work as a team and to focus on the tasks at hand: the question was, how?

In 2013, the chief executive officer of South Africa’s fourth largest bank, the Nedbank Group Limited, is considering the past and future of his organization. The company is in the process of transformation from a low point in 2003 of poor staff morale and falling share prices, with the threat of losing its licence because of poor capital liquidity, to the best bank in Africa, winning praise for its efforts in environmental sustainability and promoting the post-Apartheid government’s broad-based black economic empowerment policy. Through acquisitions and joint ventures, the company is expanding into neighbouring countries with the result that, after a period of retrenchment, the number of branches and staff has grown. Clearly, his and his predecessor’s clear vision, measurement and focus on culture have enabled the turnaround and subsequent organizational transformation. Yet, in the midst of the global financial crisis, the company is facing increasing competition not only from other banks throughout Africa but from telecommunications companies and retailers that operate financial services. The question now is: Can these transformation efforts be sustained?

The director of analytics and reporting at The Leading Hotels of the World and his team were to present their new idea to the company’s executive team: the hotel engagement scorecard (HES). HES was received well and gained recognition from the executive team of 10 members, becoming one of four company goals for the year. HES was to be implemented across all of The Leading Hotels of the World’s 25 global offices and more than 430 member hotels. As the founder of the idea, the director of analytics and reporting felt responsible and motivated to make HES as strong as possible before its implementation. He wondered how HES innovation could move forward and assist member hotels as much as possible.

Student spreadsheet for product 9B14C047.

The case explores a public-private partnership initiative on environment education in India, highlighting the strategic, institutional, and reputational implications for corporate social responsibility in an emerging country context. Launched in 2010 with a target to reach 200,000 schools, “Paryavaran Mitra” (Friends of the Environment) was a multi-layered collaboration with three primary and more than 160 secondary partners. The case is positioned in 2013, when the senior manager of corporate responsibility for the firm that serves as the corporate sponsor of the project must make a decision about the future of the initiative.

Under the guidance and vision of founder Peter Munk, Barrick Gold Corporation had risen to become an industry leader and the world’s largest gold producer. The company had grown, mostly through mergers and acquisitions, from one single mine in Northern Ontario to 26 operating mines on five continents, with more than 20,000 employees worldwide. By 2013, however, weak gold prices, asset value writedowns and operational cost overruns have negatively affected the company’s stock price. Many attribute the company’s problems to Munk’s personality and his control over the board of directors. Munk has announced that he will retire in 2014 and will be replaced as chairman by his current co-chairman, John L. Thornton. How can Thornton effectively chair Barrick’s board in the wake of Munk’s legacy? Will his vision for the company conflict with Munk’s dream of turning it into an international diversified mining company? How much of a role will Munk play in the future given his level of informal power? Finally, what can Barrick do to lift itself out of an industry mired in volatility and financial uncertainty?

Bitcoin is part of a new wave of financial technology – or fintech – innovations. These innovations are disrupting the technical, highly regulated financial industry that has been dominated by large banks and other financial institutions.After three years of trading in relative obscurity, the emergence of bitcoin in 2013 as a viable cryptocurrency is promising both to open up new possibilities to entrepreneurs and incumbent firms and to pose challenges to regulators such as the U.S. Federal Reserve. Rising in value from just $0.05 in mid-2010 to over $1,000 by November 2013, bitcoin is to some people the 21st century version of Tulipmania and to others a viable alternative to fiat currencies. Bitcoin’s popularity has prompted the development of competing cryptocurrencies, the establishment of a foundation to promote its interests and the emergence of legitimate and grey market entrepreneurs looking to capitalize on the currency itself and its features. Its position as a currency concerns regulators around the world, and hackers have already exploited security gaps in service providers such as Mt. Gox, a bitcoin exchange platform, for their own benefit. Looking at recent developments, what will the future of bitcoin be?