學門類別
哈佛
- General Management
- Marketing
- Entrepreneurship
- International Business
- Accounting
- Finance
- Operations Management
- Strategy
- Human Resource Management
- Social Enterprise
- Business Ethics
- Organizational Behavior
- Information Technology
- Negotiation
- Business & Government Relations
- Service Management
- Sales
- Economics
- Teaching & the Case Method
最新個案
- A practical guide to SEC ï¬nancial reporting and disclosures for successful regulatory crowdfunding
- Quality shareholders versus transient investors: The alarming case of product recalls
- The Health Equity Accelerator at Boston Medical Center
- Monosha Biotech: Growth Challenges of a Social Enterprise Brand
- Assessing the Value of Unifying and De-duplicating Customer Data, Spreadsheet Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise, Data Supplement
- Building an AI First Snack Company: A Hands-on Generative AI Exercise
- Board Director Dilemmas: The Tradeoffs of Board Selection
- Barbie: Reviving a Cultural Icon at Mattel (Abridged)
- Happiness Capital: A Hundred-Year-Old Family Business's Quest to Create Happiness
Yes Bank Limited: Too Big to Fail?
內容大綱
The case tracks the rapid evolution of Yes Bank from a new private sector bank in 2003, to being regarded as a highly successful mid-size bank a decade later, to finally going through significant governance challenges that eventually led to burgeoning non-performing assets (NPAs) and a potential collapse necessitating a rescue by the government. It also briefly discusses the details of the bailout plan to rescue the bank. The case is useful for a discussion on the choices made by the founder of the bank over the years which led to phenomenal growth but may have also led to its eventual collapse. This allows for a discussion on the role of various corporate governance mechanisms that operate in an organization (such as the board of directors, legal rights of shareholders, auditors, external observers, and regulators), and the extent to which each mechanism can satisfy the commonly expected governance objectives. The case also presents an opportunity to debate the justifications for a regulator, especially when they potentially limit the rights of shareholders in an organization.