In 2018, Software development corporation iQmetrix Software Development Corp. (iQmetrix), headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, had experienced exponential growth and success over the past two decades. The company's head of People and Culture, was interested in the debate over the ideal performance appraisal process. After reading a few articles in the Harvard Business Review, she was considering dropping traditional performance appraisals and replacing them with written feedback only. To make an informed decision, she conducted a quasi-experiment by assigning employees to different performance evaluation conditions and then examined employee perceptions six months later to determine which evaluation format she should adopt company-wide.
In 2018, Software development corporation iQmetrix Software Development Corp. (iQmetrix), headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, had experienced exponential growth and success over the past two decades. The company’s head of People and Culture, was interested in the debate over the ideal performance appraisal process. After reading a few articles in the Harvard Business Review, she was considering dropping traditional performance appraisals and replacing them with written feedback only. To make an informed decision, she conducted a quasi-experiment by assigning employees to different performance evaluation conditions and then examined employee perceptions six months later to determine which evaluation format she should adopt company-wide.
In 2018, iQmetrix Software Development Corp. (iQmetrix), a software development corporation headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, had experienced exponential growth and success over the past two decades. To preserve its innovative culture, iQmetrix restructured using the increasingly popular self-management system holacracy, which was intended to empower individual employees to plan, monitor, and regulate their own work tasks. One year later, iQmetrix's head of People and Culture wanted to examine the outcomes of this implementation. To do so, she conducted a company-wide survey of employee perceptions of holacracy and several important indicators. The survey also collected qualitative feedback about the holacracy implementation. What would the survey responses tell her about employees' perceptions of holacracy and about the effectiveness of its implementation at iQmetrix?
In 2018, iQmetrix Software Development Corp. (iQmetrix), a software development corporation headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, had experienced exponential growth and success over the past two decades. To preserve its innovative culture, iQmetrix restructured using the increasingly popular self-management system holacracy, which was intended to empower individual employees to plan, monitor, and regulate their own work tasks. One year later, iQmetrix’s head of People and Culture wanted to examine the outcomes of this implementation. To do so, she conducted a company-wide survey of employee perceptions of holacracy and several important indicators. The survey also collected qualitative feedback about the holacracy implementation. What would the survey responses tell her about employees’ perceptions of holacracy and about the effectiveness of its implementation at iQmetrix?
Using raw, uncut footage, this video case asks students to evaluate the effectiveness of the first contact that took place in November 2016 between representatives from two technology companies—iQmetrix and Straker Translations. The two firms are contemplating a business partnership in which Straker will provide iQmetrix with translation services. First contact calls generally precede every business partnership and are normally completed only after the respective business-development or sales representatives have prepared for the call by learning the basics about the other side’s organization—in particular, whether there is a good fit between what the buyer needs and what the supplier can provide in terms of quality, cost, and capabilities of service.
Using raw, uncut footage, this video case asks students to evaluate the effectiveness of the first contact that took place in November 2016 between representatives from two technology companies-iQmetrix and Straker Translations. The two firms are contemplating a business partnership in which Straker will provide iQmetrix with translation services. First contact calls generally precede every business partnership and are normally completed only after the respective business-development or sales representatives have prepared for the call by learning the basics about the other side's organization-in particular, whether there is a good fit between what the buyer needs and what the supplier can provide in terms of quality, cost, and capabilities of service.
In late 2017, the leader of the implementation circle at iQmetrix, a software firm based in Vancouver, Canada, was reviewing her company’s progress with Holacracy. This radical new organizational design was centred on employee self-management and based on a philosophy that focused “on roles (accountabilities for work), not souls (people).” All parts of the organization were now arranged in circles, which were the basic building blocks of the Holacratic organizational design, and all employees had completed their initial training and were now meeting in circles to fulfil the work of the organization. But was it enough? Could iQmetrix truly consider that it was now fully Holacratized? Nearly one year after the launch of Holacracy, the implementation leader looked back over the past year and assessed whether the implementation of Holacracy was now complete, whether the process had been a success, and what to do next.
In late 2017, the leader of the implementation circle at iQmetrix, a software firm based in Vancouver, Canada, was reviewing her company's progress with Holacracy. This radical new organizational design was centred on employee self-management and based on a philosophy that focused "on roles (accountabilities for work), not souls (people)." All parts of the organization were now arranged in circles, which were the basic building blocks of the Holacratic organizational design, and all employees had completed their initial training and were now meeting in circles to fulfil the work of the organization. But was it enough? Could iQmetrix truly consider that it was now fully Holacratized? Nearly one year after the launch of Holacracy, the implementation leader looked back over the past year and assessed whether the implementation of Holacracy was now complete, whether the process had been a success, and what to do next.
Software development company iQmetrix Software Development Corporation (iQmetrix), headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, had enjoyed success and growth for over two decades. In July 2017, iQmetrix was confronted with the challenge of managing this growth while maintaining its organizational culture as a non-hierarchical, innovative, and open place to work—a place where the best ideas could come from anywhere and where people shared ideas openly and transparently with all. iQmetrix was considering the implementation of holacracy, an organizational design based on the fluid structuring of roles and teams and broadly shared leadership. As the company’s five executives prepared to meet, they needed to consider whether the organization could adopt such a radical organizational form and whether this would foster the continued success of the firm.
Software development company iQmetrix Software Development Corporation (iQmetrix), headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, had enjoyed success and growth for over two decades. In July 2017, iQmetrix was confronted with the challenge of managing this growth while maintaining its organizational culture as a non-hierarchical, innovative, and open place to work-a place where the best ideas could come from anywhere and where people shared ideas openly and transparently with all. iQmetrix was considering the implementation of holacracy, an organizational design based on the fluid structuring of roles and teams and broadly shared leadership. As the company's five executives prepared to meet, they needed to consider whether the organization could adopt such a radical organizational form and whether this would foster the continued success of the firm.
The Regina Auto Racing Club (RARC) had been operating the Kings Park Speedway since 1967. In 2016, the race track and facilities were beginning to show their age and were in need of costly upgrading. Unfortunately, the club had also been suffering from declining attendance over the past five years, and the associated decline in ticket revenue had led to a shrinking race schedule. At the end of the race season in 2016, the club managed to break even financially and had a modest bank account balance. Although RARC was a non-profit organization, the continued financial viability of the club was at risk, and action was required to increase revenue. The club needed to decide among four non-mutually exclusive business strategies. Should it repair and rebuild the facilities to renew the appeal of the venue and attract more spectators? Should it increase its advertising and promotion activities to improve awareness of the club and events? Should it increase the number of race classes and special racing events, or should it introduce non-racing events to the facility to take advantage of other revenue-generating opportunities?
The Regina Auto Racing Club (RARC) had been operating the Kings Park Speedway since 1967. In 2016, the race track and facilities were beginning to show their age and were in need of costly upgrading. Unfortunately, the club had also been suffering from declining attendance over the past five years, and the associated decline in ticket revenue had led to a shrinking race schedule. At the end of the race season in 2016, the club managed to break even financially and had a modest bank account balance. Although RARC was a non-profit organization, the continued financial viability of the club was at risk, and action was required to increase revenue. The club needed to decide among four non-mutually exclusive business strategies. Should it repair and rebuild the facilities to renew the appeal of the venue and attract more spectators? Should it increase its advertising and promotion activities to improve awareness of the club and events? Should it increase the number of race classes and special racing events, or should it introduce non-racing events to the facility to take advantage of other revenue-generating opportunities?
In early 2017, the directors at Protospace, a makerspace in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, faced some challenges. The nine-year-old member-run organization operated as a “do-ocracy,” with a minimum of official oversight. However, the directors and some of the membership wondered whether Protospace could and should scale its growth by recruiting and accepting new members. Would a larger membership help or hinder the membership-driven makerspace? Should the organization hire a staff member so that members would have more time to work on their projects? What would be the implications of a having larger membership and a paid staff member?
In January 2016, two entrepreneurial brothers attended an academic conference on small business and entrepreneurship to sell their product, the Online Venture Challenge, a web-based software-as-a-service retail simulation system. The brothers also hoped to demonstrate their second product idea, Launchboard, an interactive product that enabled users to make development plans and record their progress. Both products were intended as tools for entrepreneurship educators. The brothers did not have much success selling their first product during the conference, but two professors wanted to use Launchboard that semester. The brothers needed to decide how to position their product line. Should the Online Venture Challenge be promoted as one primary product that offered multiple complementary features? Or should their two products be positioned as two separate but complementary products? Or was it better to have two stand-alone products and two corresponding businesses? The brothers needed to better understand their own business ideas to determine the approach they should take. Fittingly, Launchboard, the new tool they had created, might actually help them to do just that.
In early 2017, the directors at Protospace, a makerspace in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, faced some challenges. The nine-year-old member-run organization operated as a "do-ocracy," with a minimum of official oversight. However, the directors and some of the membership wondered whether Protospace could and should scale its growth by recruiting and accepting new members. Would a larger membership help or hinder the membership-driven makerspace? Should the organization hire a staff member so that members would have more time to work on their projects? What would be the implications of a having larger membership and a paid staff member?