Goldman Sachs was a bank, but it did not take deposits, issue credit cards, make mortgage loans, or interact with consumers. For most of its history Goldman was organized as a partnership and operated as an investment bank engaging in underwriting new securities to raise funds for corporations and public agencies, advising clients as in mergers and acquisitions, and managing assets for clients. It began to engage in securities trading and risk arbitrage in the 1950s, when it developed its philosophy of being "long-term greedy," which the bank understood as focusing on long-term profitability rather than short-term performance. Goldman went public in 1999, forecasting that its investment banking business would continue to provide most of its revenue and profits. Soon, however, its proprietary trading and trading on behalf of clients began to dominate both its revenue and profit streams. The leadership of the firm also shifted from investment bankers to traders, such as Henry Paulson and CEO Lloyd C. Blankfein. Goldman was a major player in the events leading to the financial crisis and was a major participant in the CDO market. As with most financial institutions Goldman was heavily criticized for its role in the crisis. The disclosure that Goldman had allowed an investor to select securities for inclusion in a CDO that the investor intended to short caused an uproar, particularly because the purchasers were not informed of the investor's role. The media covered the issue extensively, Congress held hearings, the SEC filed a lawsuit against Goldman, private investors filed lawsuits, and some issuers of securities shunned the company. Goldman's reputation was damaged. The company faced the decision of how to rebuild its reputation as it addressed new regulations on banks as a result of Dodd-Frank and Federal Reserve actions.

Despite concerns about censorship and putting users in jeopardy, Google decided to launch Google.cn in 2006. Google stated that it would monitor conditions in China and even reconsider its approach to China if warranted. Three years later, in December 2009, Google detected an extensive and sophisticated cyber attack that targeted companies and specific employees within the companies. Google investigated the attack and announced that it would change its approach in China. Google would no longer censor results in China and acknowledged that this move might result in shutting down Google.cn. It then moved its search business to Hong Kong to outside the great firewall. This case explores the ethical dilemmas raised by Google's foray into the Chinese market while trying to adhere to its motto of "Don't Be Evil." The case also identifies the market consequences of its decision to withdraw from China and the reactions of its competitors and Chinese firms with which it had been working.

Tesco PLC, the largest retailer in the United Kingdom, was pondering India. India's booming economy and absence of major retail chains provided opportunity to both domestic and foreign firms. Entry of foreign retailers, however, was limited by restrictions on foreign direct investment (FDI) in retailing. India had gradually been removing its restriction on FDI in other sectors but had not done so in retailing because of concerns about the fate of small retailers. Removal of FDI retailing restrictions was inevitable, prompting many large Indian industrial groups to hastily enter the retailing sector before global retailers could. In 2006 Reliance Industries, the largest business group in India, explained that its strategy was to establish "a pan-India footprint of multi-format retail outlets" with large rural hubs to purchase produce and dairy products directly from farmers as part of its "field-to-fork" control of the supply chain. This posed a substantial problem for the global retailers. They could enter the market now with constraints on their investments and hence on their organizational forms, or they could wait for further relaxations of the FDI regulations. India was Tesco's last remaining major market opportunity-Tesco had to decide whether to enter the market, how to enter it, and when to do it.

MTN, a very successful South African wireless telephone company, began in 1994 with the founding of the cellular telephone company M-Cell. In May 2008, MTN entered into exclusive discussions with Reliance Communications Ltd., the second largest wireless company in India, regarding possible business combinations including a merger. The two companies operated in different markets had somewhat different strengths. MTN was experienced in entering new national markets and in efficiently building infrastructure while Reliance Communications was experienced in serving very poor customers in rural areas. Regardless of whether the two companies agreed to some sort of combination, MTN had to deal with challenges in its ongoing operations and evaluate new opportunities in emerging markets. This case explores various issues influencing MTN's analysis, with a focus on non-market factors including taxation, government regulation, and political barriers to financing.

In November 2006, 200 German police officers raided the headquarters of Siemens AG, Europe's leading engineering company, seeking evidence pertaining to widespread bribery. The raid followed extensive investigations of Siemens' activities that originated from a bank's internal scrutiny of accounts believed to be used for money laundering. Amid broadening suspicions, the Siemens initiated its own internal investigation, identifying €420 million in suspicious transactions in its telecommunications unit. The company hired a private law firm to conduct an independent internal investigation. The law firm reported that it had identified €1.3 billion in suspicious payments since 1999 and had received "important ... new information" that could implicate high-ranking executives. This case follows the bribery investigation, touching on possible causes, the company's handling of the allegations, and potential safeguards to protect against future problems.

In 2005, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) received approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to market Requip (Ropinirole) for Restless Leg Syndrome. Requip had already been approved for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Prior the FDA's approval, GSK had already undertaken an intensive promotional campaign for Requip, issuing press releases, advertising to doctors in medical journals, and advertising direct-to-consumer. In 2003 it began developing consumer awareness of RLS with an advertising campaign stating that a "new survey reveals a common yet underrecognized disorder-restless legs syndrome-is keeping Americans awake at night." While GSK explained that its campaign was simply raising awareness about RLS, others disagreed. GSK was accused of 'disease mongering,' or trying to turn normal people with ordinary experiences into patients. This case explores GSK's tactics and the distinction between raising awareness and inappropriately promoting a drug.

After hearing a talk by Muhammad Yunis, a Bangladeshi economist, about an innovative program to provide loans to beggars, Jessica Jackley Flannery became convinced that microfinance "was the coolest thing in the world." In 2004 she and her husband, Matt Flannery, went to Africa and began discussing how they could contribute to microfinance. In October 2005 they ran a pilot Internet trial with eight Ugandan entrepreneurs. The couple sent an email to people on their wedding guest list announcing the opportunity to lend-over the weekend all eight entrepreneurs were fully funded. The duo also sent out a press release that was posted on Daily Kos, and $10,000 was raised in one day. The first person-to-person micro-lending organization had been born. This case describes Kiva's operations and introduces the challenges that the organization faced as it pondered growth.

Banco Compartamos was formed in 1990 as a non-governmental organization to aid the poor in rural areas of Chiapas and Oaxaca, Mexico by providing microloans. In 2001 Carlos Danel and Carlos Labarthe took the organization private and then in 2007 took Compartamos public in an IPO valued at $1.53 billion. Compartamos executives received $150 million of the $450 million in proceeds. Banco Compartamos became one of Mexico's most successful banks, with an average return on equity of 40 percent since becoming for-profit. Critics, however, charged that Compartamos managed its business to benefit its investors, not its borrowers and did a disservice to the world of microfinance. This case briefly explores Banco Compartamos and microfinance approaches.

Reacting to the 1973-4 Arab oil embargo, Congress enacted a Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) system in 1975 that required an increase in automobile fuel economy from 14.2 miles per gallon in 1974 to 27.5 mpg in 1984. Since that time, Congress had made no changes to CAFÉ, with efforts in 1990 and 2002 both failing. By 2007, however, circumstances had changed significantly enough that Congress was poised to enact a 40 percent increase in required fuel efficiency. Although the automobile industry had initially opposed any major increase, the seemingly inevitable increase convinced to industry to instead focus on details of the pending legislation and how to influence those details. This case explores the response of the auto industry to the pending fuel efficiency increases, setting up an evaluation of the industry's strategy to help craft the legislation.

In 2006 Merck received FDA approval for Gardasil, the first vaccine for human papilloma virus (HPV) which had been identified as the cause of cervical cancer. Merck priced the vaccine at $360 for the three injections and was working on programs for the use of Gardasil in developing countries at much lower prices. Projected sales of Gardasil were $1 billion a year and billions more if states mandated vaccination. Prior to FDA approval, Merck began to develop a market for Gardasil and launched an intensive campaign to get states to make HPV vaccination of girls entering middle school mandatory. As the public and organized private groups became aware of Merck's efforts, however, the campaign generated a backlash against mandatory vaccination. Merck subsequently suspended its campaign and reflected on the experience in deciding its next moves.

In 2007 the House of Representatives passed legislation that would treat carried interest as ordinary income instead of a long-term gain. The move threatened to increase the tax rate from 15 percent to 35 percent on the income of partners in private equity firms, venture capital firms, and some real estate and oil and gas partnerships. This case follows the arguments and actions made by both proponents and opponents of the potential tax increase, setting up an evaluation of the strategy used by the private equity industry to combat the threatened increase.

In late 2006 and early 2007 a number of imports from China, including toys, were found to pose health risks. With safety concerns about Chinese imports on the minds of readers, on July 26, 2007 the New York Times carried a feature article on the precautions Mattel, the world's largest toymaker, took to ensure the safety of its toys. In contrast to other toymakers, Mattel owned the factories in China where its most popular toys, such as Barbie dolls and Hot Wheels cars, were made. Mattel's precautions, however, were not sufficient to shield it from health hazards in the toys it made in China. This case follows a number of product safety snafus, mainly around high lead levels, that Mattel faced from its various suppliers in China. In each situation, Mattel must weigh legal, ethical, and business considerations in determining how to best react.

Google had become an extraordinarily popular website because of the efficiency of its search engine and that popularity spiraled through its applications. The key to Goolge's financial success was placing advertisements tailored to the search queries of each user. Google's objective was "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible," and it's strategy had three components: search, ads, and applications. An expanding set of nonmarket challenges accompanied Google's success and growth. Challenges came from all areas: competitors, producers of complementary products, content producers, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and the public. This case explores Goolge's nonmarket challenges, including privacy issues in both the United States and European Union, the spectrum auction, intellectual property, corporate social responsibility, and Google's business practices in China.

Describes the initial considerations of Gilead Sciences as it designed a strategy for delivering its AIDS drug Viread to developing nations in Africa. In October 2001, Gilead Sciences received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the commercial sale of Viread, a significant new drug for the treatment of HIV/AIDS. Viread proved to be an immediate success, increasing rapidly in sales and market share in the United States within its first year on the market. As Gilead made plans to take the drug global in early 2003, a high priority was to make the drug readily available to millions of people in the least developed nations, where the HIV virus was having its most devastating effects. Pricing and distribution were key considerations. Gilead did not have a distribution system in place in any of these countries, and the price charged in the United States would be prohibitive in the developing world.

Using servers located in the United States, Google began offering a Chinese-language version of Google.com in 2000. The site, however, was frequently unavailable or slow because of censoring by the Chinese government. After extensive debate within the company, Google decided to offer a modified version of their site, Google.cn, using servers in China. Explores how Google and various foreign Internet companies entering the Chinese market responded to Internet censorship. Companies offering Internet services had to pledge not to circulate information that "damages the honor or interests of the state" or "disturbs the public order or destroys public stability." Google.cn did not include features that allowed users to provide content--it offered neither e-mail nor the ability to create blogs--since user-generated material could be seized by the Chinese government, putting individuals in jeopardy of being arrested. Google planned to exercise self-censorship, conform to Chinese laws, and be thoughtful about the services it provided. Along with other Internet companies, however, Google faced severe criticism and political pressure in the United States for what was seen as cooperating with Chinese government censorship. Google had to decide whether to change its operating policies and what to do about the criticisms.

In 2002, when Wal-Mart became the largest U.S. company in sales, it began to attract considerable attention. Its expansion into the grocery business seemed to ignite a firestorm of contention and bad press. Wal-Mart was criticized for providing low wages and inadequate health care benefits, driving small merchants out of business, damaging the culture in small towns, harming the environment, and violating workers rights. The company realized that its practice of focusing solely on customers and employees was no longer sufficient--it needed a nonmarket strategy to address the criticism and repair its deteriorating reputation. This case explores the opposition that organized around Wal-Mart's practices and the issues raised. It sets the stage for developing and analyzing a successful nonmarket strategy for Wal-Mart.

In 2004 and 2005, Wal-Mart began to implement a nonmarket strategy to respond to detractors and improve its image. This case details the many steps that Wal-Mart took, from becoming politically involved to creating community relations offices to working with special interest groups. Wal-Mart ran ads in various newspapers, launched a major environmental initiative, extended health care benefits, set up a diversity task force, and announced support for local businesses in communities in which it planned to open new stores. Study questions set up a discussion of Wal-Mart's actions.

After successful litigation against tobacco companies, a handful of lawyers turned their attention to the fast food industry and its possible connection to obesity. McDonald's was a prime target. Details McDonald's response to the litigation and the question of its role in the rise of obesity in the United States. Study questions guide students in analyzing both the market and nonmarket strategies that McDonald's employed.

In the summer of 2002, Brad and Brent Handler established Exclusive Resorts, a luxury vacation residence venture, to meet the demand for luxury vacation residences that avoided the hassles of owning a second home and being tied to a single location. The challenge was to position the venture in both the market and nonmarket environments. The positioning in the market environment was successful, and Exclusive Resorts was an instant success. In the nonmarket environment, Exclusive Resorts was organized like a country club, allowing it to avoid state time-share regulations. The success of Exclusive Resorts soon spurred others to enter the luxury vacation residence club industry and, at the same time, nonmarket threats began to grow. The American Resort Development Association (ARDA) had many concerns: Were luxury vacation residence clubs operating outside the law (consumers were not protected by state time-share law)? Were contractual arrangements transparent to consumers? Could possible fraud or failures among the clubs tarnish the entire resort development industry, including its members? ARDA sought to have luxury vacation residence clubs registered in the states in which they held properties and in which they sold memberships. If state registration were required, Exclusive Resorts would be subject to costly and burdensome regulations. Indeed, a core component of the Exclusive Resorts business model, inventory replacement via the sale of residences, would be prohibited.