個案總覽

Daktronics Corporation made score boards and large displays for sports venues. The company had been the "Cadillac" of the industry and commanded nearly 70 percent share of the college and professional sports venue market for large displays. Recently, however, increasingly complex, technological installations and maturing manufacturing processes and sourcing had enabled new players to enter the market. Further, buyers in the large sports venue market had been including consulting firms in the decision process. Where Daktronics had often been the unchallenged choice, they were now being challenged by greater competition and channel influences that threatened both share of market and gross margins. Jay Parker, Daktronics Sales Manager for Large Sports Venues, was trying to understand the new market realities and devise an approach that would maintain Daktronics' market leadership and profits.

In July of 2007 the management of East Central Ohio Freight (ECOF) met to decide whether to increase the company's efforts in the volume less than truckload (VLTL) freight market. While the company's limited experience in the VLTL business had been positive to date, expansion would require considerable capital expenditure and expansion of the work force to meet the anticipated demand. Times were difficult in the trucking business and there were no guarantees that the company would be able to generate new business sufficient to support the necessary commitment of resources.

The Reflexite Corporation made plastic films and other products engineered to focus reflected light. The company had recently shifted their strategy to include new applications in broader markets. In March, 2007, the organization structure and compensation systems that had successfully guided the company to this time were under fire. Michael Foley, Chief Executive Officer of the Reflexite Corporation had to decide whether to proceed with a change in company's employee stock ownership plan. The management and employees had held two rounds of "town meetings" to discuss changes in the allocation formula that determined how much stock employees would receive. Their recommendation was to change to allocate stock based on corporate-wide performance. Previously, the company based allocations on business-unit performance, causing wide variance in the amount of stock employees received. While the non-binding "town meeting" vote favored the change by a wide margin, the Chairman of the Board of Directors was adamant in his opposition. Foley, still in his first year as CEO wondered; the employees had spoken, but when the man who had built the company strongly objected, shouldn't one listen?