個案總覽

Industry self-regulation has, in general, a lousy track record. Many studies have shown that it is often ineffective unless backed by the power of the state, and that in some cases it serves rather to forestall government intervention or to reduce competition than as genuine self-regulation. Many observers doubt that accelerated private sector regulation could really make a difference against the major public goods issues of our time. Yet we live in a time when many public goods issues are global and global governance mechanisms are at the very earliest stage of development, and in industry after industry leading firms are banding together in an attempt to regulate conduct-designing metrics, relying on independent auditors, and attempting to enforce compliance. Is this a plausible path forward? This note summarizes work in history, political science, and economics-drawing particularly on the work of Eleanor Ostrom-to explore this issue in depth.

This case is designed to be used with HBS Note: Industry Self-Regulation: Sustaining the Commons in the 21st Century, HBS No. 315-074.

This brief follow-up complements the case on The LEGO Group: Stepping Up in Asia (9-113-054), and discusses the aftermath of the scenario planning session, in which LEGO managers contemplated the risks of their new Asian strategy. The scenario planning exercise played a role in managers' realization that the Group could not simply "copy-paste" its existing operating model across the diversity of Asian markets. LEGO invested significantly in Asia throughout 2012-2013 in order to adapt its playbook to the anticipated challenges. The case also describes how, in 2013, scenario planning became part of the business-planning process at the LEGO Group. It allows students to understand the difference between a tailored scenario planning exercise, and the tenuous future-gazing processes that generally fail to get traction among business managers.