This case set uses the example of Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Justice Sonia Sotomayor to discuss issues of communicating identity at work and to explore possible options for impression management over the course of one's career. As a law student, attorney, and lower court judge, Sotomayor leaned into her Latina identity, often referencing it as an important part of who she was. When then President Barack Obama nominated Sotomayor for SCOTUS, she faced scrutiny over past comments, some identity related, that were construed to be evidence of judicial bias and that, in the eyes of some, made her unfit for the job. Sotomayor is faced with various options as to how she should respond in her nomination hearings before Congress. This case recounts Sotomayor's early life, education, and career history, as well as the controversy surrounding her nomination. Opponents were disturbed by her "wise Latina" comment, interpreted as Sotomayor advocating for individuals' past experiences to shape their judicial decisions. This case offers an overview of conversations about Sotomayor in the political, legal, and public arena leading up to her nomination hearings. This case set examines the choices that many professionals, particularly those who are underrepresented in a professional space, face at various career stages when managing their identities at work. To what extent should individuals adjust their self-presentation if they are receiving signals of disapproval? Might identity-communication strategies vary depending on one's career stage? Students have an opportunity to proactively ponder how they want to present themselves at work while uncovering the benefits and costs of trying to merge aspects of their authentic selves with expected professional standards. This case series would be appropriate in courses on gender and leadership or ones about diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) more broadly. The cases could also be used in a leadership communication course to discuss how individuals communicate aspects of themselves in professional settings.

This case set uses the example of Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Justice Sonia Sotomayor to discuss issues of communicating identity at work and to explore possible options for impression management over the course of one's career. As a law student, attorney, and lower court judge, Sotomayor leaned into her Latina identity, often referencing it as an important part of who she was. When then President Barack Obama nominated Sotomayor for SCOTUS, she faced scrutiny over past comments, some identity related, that were construed to be evidence of judicial bias and that, in the eyes of some, made her unfit for the job. Sotomayor is faced with various options as to how she should respond in her nomination hearings before Congress. This case, a follow-up to "'A Wise Latina': Sonia Sotomayor's Journey to the Supreme Court (A)" (UVA-OB-1429), reveals how Sotomayor framed her identity to establish common ground and also how she navigated criticism about identity expression. This case set examines the choices that many professionals, particularly those who are underrepresented in a professional space, face at various career stages when managing their identities at work. To what extent should individuals adjust their self-presentation if they are receiving signals of disapproval? Might identity-communication strategies vary depending on one's career stage? Students have an opportunity to proactively ponder how they want to present themselves at work while uncovering the benefits and costs of trying to merge aspects of their authentic selves with expected professional standards. This case series would be appropriate in courses on gender and leadership or ones about diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) more broadly. The cases could also be used in a leadership communication course to discuss how individuals communicate aspects of themselves in professional settings.

This case set uses the example of Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Justice Sonia Sotomayor to discuss issues of communicating identity at work and to explore possible options for impression management over the course of one's career. As a law student, attorney, and lower court judge, Sotomayor leaned into her Latina identity, often referencing it as an important part of who she was. When then President Barack Obama nominated Sotomayor for SCOTUS, she faced scrutiny over past comments, some identity related, that were construed to be evidence of judicial bias and that, in the eyes of some, made her unfit for the job. Sotomayor is faced with various options as to how she should respond in her nomination hearings before Congress. This case, a follow-up to both "'A Wise Latina': Sonia Sotomayor's Journey to the Supreme Court (A)" (UVA-OB-1429) and "'A Wise Latina': Sonia Sotomayor's Journey to the Supreme Court (B)" (UVA-OB-1430), provides a glimpse into how Sotomayor approached issues of identity and professional image after she was appointed. This case set examines the choices that many professionals, particularly those who are underrepresented in a professional space, face at various career stages when managing their identities at work. To what extent should individuals adjust their self-presentation if they are receiving signals of disapproval? Might identity-communication strategies vary depending on one's career stage? Students have an opportunity to proactively ponder how they want to present themselves at work while uncovering the benefits and costs of trying to merge aspects of their authentic selves with expected professional standards. This case series would be appropriate in courses on gender and leadership or ones about diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) more broadly. The cases could also be used in a leadership communication course to discuss how individuals communicate aspects of themselves in professional settings.

This technical note addresses when and how gender is relevant in a negotiation setting. It provides an up-to-date summary of existing research as well as advice for practitioners (particularly those identifying and/or presenting as women) as they navigate their careers. This note can be used in general negotiation courses (undergraduate, MBA, or executive education) or in programming specific to women in leadership. It is currently used in the Darden Executive Education program "Women in Leadership."

In 2013, Jonathan Martin, a starting lineman for the Miami Dolphins, left the team. He cited the negative effects of the team's culture-specifically, bullying and mistreatment by several of his teammates-on his well-being, saying it had contributed to depression and thoughts of self-harm. The news of Martin's departure exploded across media channels in the following days. At the behest of the Dolphins' ownership, the US National Football League (NFL) hired a law firm to investigate. On February 14, 2014, the law firm's findings (called the Wells Report) were released to the public, and they were damning. There was clear evidence of harassment targeting Martin as well as others on the Dolphins team. But while some within the NFL reacted to the findings with dismay, others said that playing football was ""a man's job,"" and indicated that the behavior called bullying and harassment was simply part of the high-testosterone culture. This public-sourced case and its follow-up, ""A Dolphin Bullied: Jonathan Martin's NFL Experience in Miami (B)"" (UVA-E-0481) use the context of the NFL to expand student understanding of gender binaries as shaped by racial and socioeconomic factors, and to discuss possible interventions to diminish turnover and promote inclusion. They promote a discussion of how underrepresented individuals navigate a work environment where they are not prototypical. This case also allows for a discussion of mental health as part of a broader focus on wellness at work.

This case should be used after students have read "A Dolphin Bullied: Jonathan Martin's NFL Experience in Miami (A) (UVA-E-0477). It provides a brief update on actions taken by different stakeholders following the release of the Wells Report in 2014. The case also directly addresses issues of sexuality in the NFL.

In 2007, Eastman Chemical (Eastman), a global specialty chemicals company based in Kingsport, Tennessee, was set to launch Tritan, Eastman's latest specialty plastic. The development team was excited about Tritan because it demonstrated heat resistance and durability properties that might allow Eastman to compete in the lucrative polycarbonate plastics market. But the decision had not been made regarding which applications Eastman should target first with Tritan.

Most talented executives can recognize when an acquisition has strategic or financial benefits, and in this case, the decision to be acquired was an appropriate exit strategy for a successful start-up. Peter Street's start-up had been growing quickly and was building a reputation for reliability in a booming industry when a Japanese firm offered to pay a premium for the U.S. firm. Having done business in Japan (and extensively with the acquiring company) before the sale of his company, Street entered the acquisition with enthusiasm. As part of the deal, Street's former company would continue to operate in the United States as a division of its parent company and Street would remain as CEO. A few months into the transition, however, Street discovered a huge difference between working with and working for the Japanese firm. Cultural norms for confronting seemingly small problems quickly became bigger operational issues, and Street experienced a growing dichotomy between corporate (in Japan) and his division (in the United States). This case focuses on the challenges of implementing a cross-border acquisition.

How we voice our disagreements may say a lot about our cultural influences. Confrontations are not always angry fights; sometimes they happen when there is a need to deliver bad news, or to say no to what another person is asking of you. Many managers ask questions such as "What is the right way to say no to a boss?" "What is the right way to challenge or oppose someone else's opinion?" "What is the right way to deliver criticism to a colleague?" The answer to these questions depends to an extent on the context. And one important element of context is whether the parties are from direct- or indirect-confrontation cultures. This technical note offers insight and research on distinguishing the difference between the two and strategies to pick up on and appropriately interpret expressions of confrontation in a way that allows you to respond effectively.

This case demonstrates the growing importance of water policy and water scarcity on key business decisions. It uses the merger of two drip irrigation companies to show how the business models of multinationals were shifting to accommodate current and expected water crises in many parts of the world. In 2012, Jain Irrigation Systems, a multinational founded in India, became sole owner of the Israel-based NaanDan Joint Venture, a privately held, well-respected irrigation technology firm. The creation of NaanDanJain evidenced the increasingly visible role of India as a global player whose multinationals acquired high-tech companies from more advanced economies. But more important for this case, when considering demographic and economic variables for each country, the merger illustrated the challenges of providing irrigation to small farmers. This case situates the formation/establishment of NaanDanJain within the divergent water policies and water practices of both Israel and India.

"This field-based case gives supply-chain educators the ability to teach the newsvendor model with pricing under a capacity constraint using real-life decisions. This case won the prestigious INFORMS Case Competition during the 2013 annual conference. By 2005, Eastman Chemical Company, based in Tennessee, had created a new specialty plastic, Tritan, which demonstrated heat resistance and durability properties that might allow Eastman to compete in the lucrative polycarbonate plastics market. Development of this product was a major breakthrough for both Eastman and the broader chemical industry. The Eastman specialty plastics team had to contend with numerous challenges, however, before producing Tritan at full scale. First, Eastman had to commercialize a completely new material that only had been produced in the lab; second, the team had to develop a supply chain to manufacture a new component (monomer) and a new product (polymer) simultaneously; and finally, it had to analyze market entrance options given capacity constraints. Thus, the specialty plastics team faced several dilemmas: who should be the initial launch partners, given Eastman's limited manufacturing capacity, and how aggressively should Eastman price Tritan, given that price would drive demand in the launch markets and in new markets? "