個案總覽

In January 2010, global automotive manufacturer Toyota faced the task of notifying customers of a recall that involved a faulty accelerator pedal on 1.7 million vehicles, spread across eight different models. In some cases the faulty accelerator pedal was found to stick in depressed position and be slow to return to the idle position, causing unintended vehicle acceleration. With the throttle stuck in the open position a vehicle would continue to accelerate while the driver is trying to brake and slow the vehicle down. Toyota had already come under intense public scrutiny in the previous year over an existing floor mat recall that affected 4.2 million vehicles. Lessons in the automotive industry had been learned the hard way from tire manufacturer Bridgestone. A public backlash occurred in 2003, with class action law suits against Bridgestone for faulty tires that caused some vehicles to roll over. In an attempt to reach the masses, Toyota created a letter to customers that was featured in major newspapers and on its own website. The letter released caused anger and outrage as Toyota stayed clear away from apologizing to consumers. Instead it talks about the companies 50 year heritage and how they are halting production to focus on fixing the vehicles that are on the road. Just days later Toyota drafted and released a second letter to customers. This time they attempt to use better language, but missed the mark on taking full accountability for the problem.

Tracy Chan, managing director of the Student Learning and Writing Services (SLWS) at St. Charles University in Calgary Alberta was faced with a difficult situation. Her newest employee Michael Hinske, had just emailed her a list of faculty members he had contacted to educate on the SLWS graduate writing initiatives. Chan quickly noticed that the faculty names were contacts that had already been initiated. There was no indication that Hinske had made any attempt to discuss the program with other faculties on campus. Since joining the team six months earlier Hinske's mandate for the academic year was to create a series of workshops and liaison with different faculties on campus. Due to restructuring the funding request for the position originally made by Chan was resubmitted under Nicole Duncan, the associate director of the Faculty Educational Development Office (FEDO). The result was the approval of a position that would see the SLSW receive a staff member four days per week and one day per week in the FEDO. Duncan wanted to have a direct role in the recruiting since she was to be responsible for the overseeing of the budget for the initiative. She called Chan to inform her that a resume from Michael Hinske had been sent directly to her and that it should be included in the pile if potential candidates. After the interview process Duncan stated that the best candidate for the position was Hinske. Chan stated her hesitation with the candidate given that he lacked any formal training in writing theory and the disciplines of writing at the university level. However, Duncan stated that she wanted the job filled before she went on vacation and Hinske should be given the job. Problems started when Hinske asked for other team member's presentations and curriculum material. Over the next two months Chan and other staff members noticed that Hinske seemed distant.

As the largest food and drink company in the world, Nestlé S.A. prided itself on a solid reputation built over the past 150 years. On March 17, 2010, the chairman of the board of directors was surprised by a YouTube video created by the environmental activist group Greenpeace. The graphic and provocative video criticized Nestlé for its use of palm oil in Nestlé products. It helped Greenpeace make a bold statement: Nestlé products were leading to deforestation and the extinction of orangutans. Within 24 hours, the video had more than 100,000 views and anti-Nestlé campaigns quickly emerged on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media networks around the world. At the same time, Greenpeace activists dressed up as orangutans and protested at Nestlé’s headquarters and factories in Europe. Activists urged the company to stop sourcing palm oil from companies that destroy forests in the process. Considering the popularity and force of social media, how should Nestlé react to the YouTube video?

This case is a supplement to Nestlé: A Social Media Nightmare (A).

Under pressure from the Rainforest Action Network to make their lending policies more sustainable, executives at the Royal Bank of Canada who deal with issues of corporate citizenship and sustainability must decide whether to continue financing companies involved in extracting oil from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada. The case asks students to consider the following questions: 1) Should banks lend to any business or industry the government deems to be sustainable? 2) What are the risks of lending to businesses some stakeholders deem unsustainable? 3) How should banks respond when pressured by an interest group? 4) How does a bank decide what is sustainable lending practice? The supplement B case RBC-Financing Oil Sands (B), product number 9B10M016, is also available.

Under pressure from the Rainforest Action Network to make their lending policies more sustainable, executives at the Royal Bank of Canada who deal with issues of corporate citizenship and sustainability must decide whether to continue financing companies involved in extracting oil from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada. The case asks students to consider the following questions: 1) Should banks lend to any business or industry the government deems to be sustainable? 2) What are the risks of lending to businesses some stakeholders deem unsustainable? 3) How should banks respond when pressured by an interest group? 4) How does a bank decide what is sustainable lending practice? This is a supplement to RBC-Financing Oil Sands (A), product number 910M15.

Under pressure from the Rainforest Action Network to make their lending policies more sustainable, executives at the Royal Bank of Canada who deal with issues of corporate citizenship and sustainability must decide whether to continue financing companies involved in extracting oil from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada. The case asks students to consider the following questions: 1) Should banks lend to any business or industry the government deems to be sustainable? 2) What are the risks of lending to businesses some stakeholders deem unsustainable? 3) How should banks respond when pressured by an interest group? 4) How does a bank decide what is sustainable lending practice? The supplement B case RBC-Financing Oil Sands (B), product number 910M16, is also available.

Under pressure from the Rainforest Action Network to make their lending policies more sustainable, executives at the Royal Bank of Canada who deal with issues of corporate citizenship and sustainability must decide whether to continue financing companies involved in extracting oil from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada. The case asks students to consider the following questions: 1) Should banks lend to any business or industry the government deems to be sustainable? 2) What are the risks of lending to businesses some stakeholders deem unsustainable? 3) How should banks respond when pressured by an interest group? 4) How does a bank decide what is sustainable lending practice? This is a supplement to RBC-Financing Oil Sands (A), product number 9B10M015.

Transkin Income Fund provided freight transportation services in Canada and the United States. In mid February 2009, in response to a sharp fall in demand for transportation services due to the economic crisis, the chief operation officer had suggested that each of his six freight divisions and six support divisions and the corporate division should all implement a salary rollback. The chief operating officer (COO) believed that a strong message needed to be sent to customers, shareholders, banks, owner-operators, drivers and suppliers that Transkin was being proactive by taking action internally to ride out the crisis. Two of the 13 general managers resented the COO's plan. The two dissenters were from Transkin's two most profitable divisions; they were also the most senior executives. Both had their own reasons to resist the COO's idea. The COO wondered how he should respond to both dissenters - he wanted the support of every general manager for the salary rollback.