This case study presents the dilemma of a vice president of human resources at a health data processing company who must decide how to implement the results of digital productivity monitoring software that tracked employees' work activity via, among other things, keystroke tracking, monitoring websites visited, and checking email content. The data tracked through the software produced an overall employee productivity score meant to assess who was doing what and when and helped identify employees who had generally been inactive and unproductive. This software was controversial within the company. Many employees called it intrusive and dystopian. Other employees were positive about the software's use, claiming that it helped them be more productive and focused, and that it rewarded good workplace behavior. The decision the vice president now faces is how to adjust the salaries of all employees based on the productivity detected by the monitoring system in the face of internal polarization about the software. Should the vice president boost the salaries of those with the greatest productivity and decrease the salaries of those with low output?
Technologists, particularly product managers, do not make design choices in a vacuum. Often, they have quantitative objectives they hope to achieve as part of their quarterly goals. But purely pursuing those objectives without considering risks to various stakeholders-for example, erosion of users' attention or users becoming politically radicalized-may result in considerable harm for not only the product's users but also for the organization. This technical note helps managers think about the unintended consequences of shipping a given feature. It will also help identify win-win solutions that can enable one to hit target metrics while mitigating negative stakeholder consequences.
Jay Williams, cohead of the Nashville office of the William Morris Endeavor (WME), must decide how to respond to an incident involving Morgan Wallen, one of the talent agency's fastest-rising country music stars. Wallen, a white singer, was caught on home security footage using an ethnic slur with a group of white friends after a night of drinking. The following day, the footage was released to the public, and Wallen was swiftly disavowed by his record company, the two largest country music institutions, and hundreds of country radio stations. Williams faces pressure from executives in WME's Beverly Hills corporate office, because Black A-list clients are lobbying the agency to drop the enormously popular Wallen from the WME client roster. In this A case, Williams considers several complicating factors: (1) Dropping Wallen would hurt WME's bottom line, which was already damaged by the COVID-19 pandemic, and Williams does not want to be responsible for more layoffs. (2) The social justice movement from the summer of 2020 is still fresh in Williams's mind, and he knows that companies like WME need to take swift action after a racially charged incident or risk public backlash. (3) Wallen's agent is Austin Neal, the son of a WME partner, and forcing Neal to drop Wallen could permanently damage the company's relationship with this rapidly rising agent. (4) WME's parent company is preparing for an IPO, so there is extra pressure for the Nashville office's finances to look good, as well as to avoid controversy. This case set can be applied to a range of relevant topics: ethical decision-making, corporate responsibility, cancel culture, business and political polarization, employee (talent) representation, public relations and scandal management, and leadership.
Jay Williams, cohead of the Nashville office of the William Morris Endeavor (WME), must decide how to respond to an incident involving Morgan Wallen, one of the talent agency's fastest-rising country music stars. Wallen, a white singer, was caught on home security footage using an ethnic slur with a group of white friends after a night of drinking. The following day, the footage was released to the public, and Wallen was swiftly disavowed by his record company, the two largest country music institutions, and hundreds of country radio stations. Williams faces pressure from executives in WME's Beverly Hills corporate office, because Black A-list clients are lobbying the agency to drop the enormously popular Wallen from the WME client roster. In this A case, Williams considers several complicating factors: (1) Dropping Wallen would hurt WME's bottom line, which was already damaged by the COVID-19 pandemic, and Williams does not want to be responsible for more layoffs. (2) The social justice movement from the summer of 2020 is still fresh in Williams's mind, and he knows that companies like WME need to take swift action after a racially charged incident or risk public backlash. (3) Wallen's agent is Austin Neal, the son of a WME partner, and forcing Neal to drop Wallen could permanently damage the company's relationship with this rapidly rising agent. (4) WME's parent company is preparing for an IPO, so there is extra pressure for the Nashville office's finances to look good, as well as to avoid controversy. This case set can be applied to a range of relevant topics: ethical decision-making, corporate responsibility, cancel culture, business and political polarization, employee (talent) representation, public relations and scandal management, and leadership.
Jay Williams, cohead of the Nashville office of the William Morris Endeavor (WME), must decide how to respond to an incident involving Morgan Wallen, one of the talent agency's fastest-rising country music stars. Wallen, a white singer, was caught on home security footage using an ethnic slur with a group of white friends after a night of drinking. The following day, the footage was released to the public, and Wallen was swiftly disavowed by his record company, the two largest country music institutions, and hundreds of country radio stations. Williams faces pressure from executives in WME's Beverly Hills corporate office, because Black A-list clients are lobbying the agency to drop the enormously popular Wallen from the WME client roster. In this A case, Williams considers several complicating factors: (1) Dropping Wallen would hurt WME's bottom line, which was already damaged by the COVID-19 pandemic, and Williams does not want to be responsible for more layoffs. (2) The social justice movement from the summer of 2020 is still fresh in Williams's mind, and he knows that companies like WME need to take swift action after a racially charged incident or risk public backlash. (3) Wallen's agent is Austin Neal, the son of a WME partner, and forcing Neal to drop Wallen could permanently damage the company's relationship with this rapidly rising agent. (4) WME's parent company is preparing for an IPO, so there is extra pressure for the Nashville office's finances to look good, as well as to avoid controversy. This case set can be applied to a range of relevant topics: ethical decision-making, corporate responsibility, cancel culture, business and political polarization, employee (talent) representation, public relations and scandal management, and leadership.
Anna Bender, VP of product at Workaround, a large human resources (HR) software firm, had just been presented with a number of different recommendations from her employees on how to integrate the functionality and data from a recently acquired software company that had a leading chat app into Workaround's offerings. Although she was impressed by many of the suggestions, Bender was also ethically conflicted about some of them. The business opportunities and ethical implications of each of the three proposals weighed on Bender's mind as she prepared to meet with the senior leadership team the next day. Before doing so, however, she had to identify the potential ethical issues with each suggestion and analyze ways they might be minimized, particularly with regard to privacy and potential antitrust concerns. The worst possible outcome would be getting dragged up in front of Congress. Yet, more broadly, she wanted her decision to reflect the core values of Workaround's business and her own personal values.
These fictional caselets, some of which are based on lived experience, present dilemmas and ethical issues in the financial field. The situations include an investment-banking firm executive deciding how to handle an investment tip; an executive struggling with whether to push her tech start-up client to a lucrative IPO or to follow her company's directive to push a merger instead; an employee asked to contravene accepted accounting practice; an employee at a wealth-management firm pressured to promote two underperforming funds; a financial manager whose elderly clients unwisely want to liquidate a significant portion of their savings for a risky venture; and a fintech venture manager who is conflicted about the high interest loans his company offers. These caselets outline and convey the complexities and difficult choices that individuals in the world of finance often confront.
Will Cohen, the case protagonist, has recently been promoted to Bank of America's market sales executive for the mid-Atlantic region. In this position, he finds himself struggling with some of the conversations, personal interactions, and general dynamics he has had with his direct reports. Cohen had had a wildly successful decade-plus experience in wealth and investment advising for several large companies, including Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase & Co.. He had then been recruited to lead the Bank of America private bank team in Charlottesville, Virginia, where, again, he and his team had been enormously successful and effective, leading to his position with the mid-Atlantic region. However, in this position, Cohen had been somewhat disheartened by the workplace ethic, which included lethargy and complacency. He often wondered about his leadership skills, which was a totally new concern for him. After a recent difficult conversation with a team member, Cohen worried about how he was handling the challenges of his new position. His goal was to drive performance while at the same time encouraging the growth of his team members and creating a culture of teamwork, collective ownership, trust, and creativity. He just was not sure he was executing these goals successfully.
The protagonist in this case, founder of a successful, privately held tabletop board gaming company, has to make some tough decisions about whether to move forward with two of the company's board games. Recent years had seen a renaissance for board games and their audience, and the board game market, driven primarily by millennials, was estimated to be worth roughly $12 billion dollars by 2023. The decision is whether to print a second run of Taming the East or to publish a new game, Sixth Panzer Army. Both games had controversial elements. Taming the East, despite its wild success, had been the focus of some criticism because it involved maintaining a player's empire through often unsettling means: ruling through intermediary and puppet governments, adopting imperialist and colonialist tactics, and putting down rebellions, particularly in Asian countries, through suppressive, often strong-arm tactics. Although a bit more of a traditional game, Sixth Panzer Army nonetheless involved World War II combat and battles and prominently featured German soldiers, including some SS troops, many of whom had, in reality, been convicted of war crimes. It also referenced some horrific events, such as German soldiers massacring American POWs, and included war crimes as a playable event. While the gaming industry was no stranger to controversy, with a number of well-intentioned and even popular games attracting criticism for violent, sometimes atrocity-laden themes, this was still a tough decision. The protagonist, already conflicted about the nature of both games, will have to explain the decision to commission a second print of Taming the East, and likewise no doubt face criticism about going ahead with Sixth Panzer Army. The public and the gaming press would weigh in about the final decision, and not necessarily in a kind or understanding way.
Alisha Bhandari, vice president of operations at a successful and well-respected global supplier of paints, coatings, specialty materials, and optical products, had watched during her 10 years at the company a subtle disintegration of workplace culture. Her own observations, coupled with a recent employee survey, had revealed an overall mindset of complacency, lack of motivation, inflexibility, and a general malaise and unwillingness to be flexible to new ideas in the company. Some managers admitted to being fearful of suggesting changes and a distaste for deviating from the normal routine or even considering embracing anything innovative. Bhandari had also noticed greater stress and tension in various departments, and believed that this was already affecting company performance. She worried that the more motivated employees might be lured away by competitors and general malaise would grow larger and more problematic. For the sake of workplace efficiency, employee mental health, and the future success of the company, Bhandari knew that things needed to change, but she was uncertain what steps to take and strategies to put into place.
A consultant experienced in developing predictive models for his clients to improve business operations, Everett Blake, was working with the Richardson Eye Care and Surgery Center (RECSC), which wanted to explore ways to improve its no-show rate, classifying a "no-show" as an appointment not kept without 24-hours' notice. After running variables through an XGBoost model, Blake's company had identified predictive variables, which included age and gender. However, Blake was uncomfortable with these two variables, fearing that, if they were used to identify potential no-shows (and consequently not get follow-up calls about their appointments in the future), this could be considered discriminatory and might lead to a different quality of care for different groups of patients. With this in mind, Blake had to decide what his recommendation to RECSC should be.
Beth Collins, CFO of Software Sense, an American multinational computer hardware and software developer, contemplated various ways that her publicly traded company could embrace a more long-term orientation in its quarterly reports and throughout its reporting ecosystem. Like other publicly traded companies, Software Sense faced constant pressure from investors and analysts to increase short-term financial-performance metrics, particularly in its quarterly earnings calls. Many in business were concerned about the deleterious effects of short-termism, which referred to the practice of focusing on short-term rather than long-term performance and results; these effects included less attention paid to long-term value creation and innovation, strategy, and fundamentals; less R&D investment; and the implementation of high-risk strategies that could threaten the company's health. Recently, Collins had read about and heard presentations by Chief Executives for Corporate Purpose (CECP), an initiative encouraging business leaders to reframe investor calls away from short-term reporting and toward a more long-term strategic approach and orientation. As she researched CECP's recommendations and strategies, Collins could see the benefits of this approach-but also the potential problems.
TJ, a manager at an investment company, is alarmed when, during an evening out with Leslie, his female colleague, and five male prospective clients, the men behave in an overly familiar way with her. Although Leslie assures TJ that she can handle this type of attention, TJ nonetheless is very uncomfortable with the situation. What should he do?
The consulting field, with its variety of different experiences and scenarios, often presents numerous challenges and conflicts for those involved. These vignettes, some based on actual situations, present a number of dilemmas in which the protagonists must determine the right course of action, often when that is not easily identifiable. These vignettes identify situations in which one's values, ethical judgment, and sense of fairness might be tested and where the road to a good resolution might not always be clear.
Tessa Lyons was a rising star at Facebook. She had been the project manager in charge of news feed integrity for a little over a year, stationed at the front lines in the battle against misinformation and "fake news." However, in early 2019, she faced an ethical dilemma that could define her tenure at the company and perhaps her career: whether to ban Alex Jones and the content from his platform, Infowars, from the Facebook news feed.
As the head pharmacist and manager of Hedrick's Pharmacy, a family-owned, independent pharmacy in Pennsylvania, Samantha Hedrick had to decide whether to continue to stock a wildly popular supplement, Memoral, a blend of vitamins, minerals, and herbs that "may support memory and cognitive function." Despite its hefty price tag ($75 a month
This technical note offers students a definition of brand activism (as contrasted to corporate social responsibility) along with an explanation of the different forms that this corporate practice can take. Specifically, students are introduced to the concepts of both progressive and regressive brand activism, in addition to the different causes the activist efforts may champion, whether social, legal, or environmental, to name a few. In order to illustrate these different categories and the sensible ways for managers to approach brand activism, examples of both successful and unsuccessful brand activism initiatives are provided, including those of Benetton Group, Dove, Patagonia, and Pepsi. While these companies' moves were intentionally designed to resonate with consumers, students are also presented examples of companies that unwillingly elicited activist customer responses (including GrubHub, Uber, Nordstrom, Starbucks, and Papa John's). Finally, the examples of Jack Daniels and Chick-fil-A illustrate deliberate corporate decisions not to communicate their values, while an explanation of boycotting and buycotting helps students understand the impact that brand activism initiatives can have on the bottom line.
Olaf Tryggvason, owner of a fleet of fishing ships in a small northern Norwegian town, has been offered and has accepted a reality television deal about the fleet to create a show along the lines of "The Deadliest Catch" and "Big Shrimpin'." He now has to recommend which ships and kapteiner (skippers or captains) in his fleet should be the stars of the show. He also has to consider the various dangers and complexities inherent in making a show like this, and what responsibility he has to his employees and other stakeholders. In thinking through the decisions in the case, students will have to wrestle with how values shape their quantitative analysis and views of their moral responsibilities to employees, and how their own experiences and biases shape how they view moral issues.
As part of a biennial supplier review, Jennifer Schramm, a purchasing manager in the cocoa and chocolate division at Cardinal Foods, had been considering several different cocoa cooperatives. She wanted to (1) source high-quality cocoa in the proper particle sizes, (2) source cocoa from environmentally and socially conscious producers, (3) keep the cost of cocoa sourcing as low as possible, and (4) not increase any reputational risks to the company. Information and data from three cooperatives is given to assist in making a recommendation. From an operations perspective, the purpose of the case is to teach the dual concepts of capability and natural variability. The case can be used as a lead-in to the concept of statistical process control. From an ethical sourcing perspective, the case addresses the complexities involved in making a principled decision in a global supply chain.