個案總覽

The three-case series is about how a medium-sized Taiwanese company approached competition with 3M in global markets. The series covers a 14-year period. The A case starts in 1994, when 3M decides to launch a lawsuit against companies (including Hopax) selling repositionable notes that compete with 3M's highly successful Post-It notes in the United States. How should Hopax respond? The B case explains that, unlike the other players, Hopax decides to fight in court. Staples, Hopax's largest customer in the United States, decides to cancel its contract. What should Hopax do now? The C case recounts the events that follow until 2008 and explains how the company applies principles of judo strategy to become the second largest supplier of repositionable notes in the world. The series allows students to explore options to smaller innovative companies as they try to compete in global markets with large, resource-rich, players who do not hesitate to use courts to try to eliminate their smaller competitors.

"Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (M&M) is a manufacturing leader in the utility vehicles (UVs) segment in the Indian automotive industry. Since 2004, M&M has been exporting UVs to South Africa, the only country in the African continent with a significant middle-class population. M&M has set up a fully owned subsidiary in South Africa, where it has also established a servicing and spare parts infrastructure and a dealer network. This subsidiary enjoyed the growth wave in the South African automotive industry up to 2007, then fell into a three-year slump, largely as a result of a recession in the global automotive industry. Now on the verge of industry renewal in 2011, the subsidiary needs to plan its next steps in South Africa, where most global automotive companies have established either manufacturing or trading outposts in response to South Africa's long-term potential and the industry-friendly policies of its government. The case is positioned as of May 2011, when M&M's subsidiary must choose from among four alternatives. M&M can continue with its prevailing business model of importing completely built units (CBUs) from its Indian operations to meet local demand while using South Africa as a re-export hub to target the burgeoning markets in sub-Saharan Africa. It can also choose to collaborate with a local vendor to assemble vehicles locally from completely knocked down (CKD) components imported from India. Alternatively, M&M may choose to set up a manufacturing facility of its own in South Africa, a model followed by many of its competitors. Lastly, M&M can choose to wait and watch until it notes definitive signs of revival in demand, which would make it more certain of its steps. The case provides an opportunity for students to examine each alternative and make a decision on M&M's way forward in South Africa."

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (M&M) is a manufacturing leader in the utility vehicles (UVs) segment in the Indian automotive industry. Since 2004, M&M has been exporting UVs to South Africa, the only country in the African continent with a significant middle-class population. M&M has set up a fully owned subsidiary in South Africa, which enjoyed the growth wave in the South African automotive industry up to 2007, then fell into a three-year slump, largely as a result of a recession in the global automotive industry. Now on the verge of industry renewal in 2011, the subsidiary needs to plan its next steps. The case is positioned in May 2011, when M&M’s subsidiary must choose from four alternatives. M&M can continue with its prevailing business model of importing completely built units (CBUs) from its Indian operations to meet local demand while using South Africa as a re-export hub for the burgeoning markets in sub-Saharan Africa. It can also choose to collaborate with a local vendor to assemble vehicles locally from completely knocked down (CKD) components imported from India. Alternatively, M&M may choose to set up its own manufacturing facility in South Africa, like many of its competitors. Lastly, M&M can choose to wait and watch until it notes definitive signs of revived demand. The case provides an opportunity for students to examine each alternative and make a decision on M&M’s way forward in South Africa.

From the perspectives of the senior executive of Mittal and the senior executive of Arcelor, this case looks at post-merger integration. As with many mergers, the ArcelorMittal merger was touted as a merger of equals. Unlike most, it was actually managed as such and it worked. The case series looks at three critical decision points (one for each case) and challenges that the two senior executives faced from the line organization during the execution of the integration. Also see supplemental cases ArcelorMittal (B), product #9B10M002 and ArcelorMittal (C), product #9B10M003.

From the perspectives of the senior executive of Mittal and the senior executive of Arcelor, this case looks at post-merger integration. As with many mergers, the ArcelorMittal merger was touted as a merger of equals. Unlike most, it was actually managed as such and it worked. The case series looks at three critical decision points (one for each case) and challenges that the two senior executives faced from the line organization during the execution of the integration. Also see ArcelorMittal (A), product #9B10M001 and ArcelorMittal (C), product #9B10M003.

From the perspectives of the senior executive of Mittal and the senior executive of Arcelor, this case looks at post-merger integration. As with many mergers, the ArcelorMittal merger was touted as a merger of equals. Unlike most, it was actually managed as such and it worked. The case series looks at three critical decision points (one for each case) and challenges that the two senior executives faced from the line organization during the execution of the integration. See ArcelorMittal (A), product #9B10M001 and ArcelorMittal (B), product #9B10M002.

In August 2008, there was a large explosion at a propane facility located in Toronto, Ontario. The Technical Safety and Standards Authority (TSSA) was a not-for-profit corporation that was responsible for the delivery of regulatory services and ensuring technical safety, and fell under the supervision of the Ministry of Small Business and Consumer Services (the Ministry). By day four of the crisis, the TSSA was perceived to be underperforming and the minister was called to deliver a statement. He decided neither to support nor reject the TSSA but instead called for the TSSA to audit all propane facilities in Ontario. The audits revealed that many of the facilities had minor compliance issues. The reporting of these results, combined with intense public scrutiny of the event, again called TSSA's credibility into question. Faced with TSSA's damaged reputation, the minister evaluated three actions: 1) change TSSA's leadership; 2) bring TSSA back into the government; or 3) perform an organizational review.

In August 2008, there was a large explosion at a propane facility located in Toronto, Ontario. The Technical Safety and Standards Authority (TSSA) was a not-for-profit corporation that was responsible for the delivery of regulatory services and ensuring technical safety, and fell under the supervision of the Ministry of Small Business and Consumer Services (the Ministry). After the explosion, with the TSSA facing intense public and political scrutiny, the Ministry requested that the TSSA perform audits at every propane facility in Toronto. The audit results were reported by the media in such a way as to damage TSSA's reputation. The Ministry then ordered an organizational review of the governance structure of the eight Delegated Administrative Authorities (DAAs) of which the TSSA was one. Determined to act in the best interests of the province, the Ministry subsequently ordered a 30-day Propane Safety Review but needed to make three decisions: 1) select an insider or outsider to lead the panel? 2) should the leader be a prominent figure or technical expert? 3) what is the optimal timing of the review?

In August 2008, there was a large propane explosion at a propane facility located in Toronto, Ontario and the resulting media coverage was nothing short of extensive. Within 24 hours of the explosion, media coverage shifted from developments at the site to the responsibilities of the Technical Safety and Standards Authority (TSSA). The TSSA was a not-for-profit corporation that was responsible for the delivery of regulatory services and ensuring technical safety in a number of areas. It currently fell under the supervision of the Ministry of Small Business and Consumer Services (the Ministry), although it had been separated from the government since 1996. By the fourth day of the crisis, the TSSA was perceived to be underperforming and had lost all credibility with the media and public. Opposition parties were calling for the TSSA to be brought back in-house. The Ministry was under criticism for actions of this arm's-length body, and was determined to deliver a media statement that would accurately capture the nuances of this politically sensitive event, thus showing leadership without taking ownership.

From the perspectives of the senior executive of Mittal and the senior executive of Arcelor, this case looks at post-merger integration. As with many mergers, the ArcelorMittal merger was touted as a "merger of equals." Unlike most, it was actually managed as such and it worked. The case series looks at three critical decision points (one for each case) and challenges that the two senior executives faced from the line organization during the execution of the integration. Also see supplemental cases ArcelorMittal (B), product #910M02 and ArcelorMittal (C), product #910M03.

The three-case series is about how a medium-sized Taiwanese company approached competition with 3M in global markets. The series covers a 14-year period. The A case starts in 1994, when 3M decides to launch a lawsuit against companies (including Hopax) selling repositionable notes that compete with 3M's highly successful Post-It notes in the United States. How should Hopax respond? The B case explains that, unlike the other players, Hopax decides to fight in court. Staples, Hopax's largest customer in the United States, decides to cancel its contract. What should Hopax do now? The C case recounts the events that follow until 2008 and explains how the company applies principles of judo strategy to become the second largest supplier of repositionable notes in the world. The series allows students to explore options to smaller innovative companies as they try to compete in global markets with large, resource-rich, players who do not hesitate to use courts to try to eliminate their smaller competitors.

This supplement to Hopax (A), product number 910M04, recounts the events that followed until 2008 and explains how the company applied principles of "judo strategy" to become the second largest supplier of repositionable notes in the world.

This supplement to Hopax (A), product number 910M04, explains that, unlike the other players, Hopax decides to fight in court after Staples, Hopax's largest customer in the United States, decides to cancel its contract.

The three-case series is about how a medium-sized Taiwanese company approached competition with 3M in global markets. The series covers a 14-year period. The A case starts in 1994, when 3M decides to launch a lawsuit against companies (including Hopax) selling repositionable notes that compete with 3M's highly successful Post-It notes in the United States. How should Hopax respond? The B case explains that, unlike the other players, Hopax decides to fight in court. Staples, Hopax's largest customer in the United States, decides to cancel its contract. What should Hopax do now? The C case recounts the events that follow until 2008 and explains how the company applies principles of "judo strategy" to become the second largest supplier of repositionable notes in the world. The series allows students to explore options to smaller innovative companies as they try to compete in global markets with large, resource-rich, players who do not hesitate to use courts to try to eliminate their smaller competitors.

This supplement to Hopax (A), product number 9B10M004, recounts the events that followed until 2008 and explains how the company applied principles of judo strategy to become the second largest supplier of repositionable notes in the world.

This supplement to Hopax (A), product number 9B10M004, explains that, unlike the other players, Hopax decides to fight in court after Staples, Hopax's largest customer in the United States, decides to cancel its contract.

From the perspectives of the senior executive of Mittal and the senior executive of Arcelor, this case looks at post-merger integration. As with many mergers, the ArcelorMittal merger was touted as a "merger of equals." Unlike most, it was actually managed as such and it worked. The case series looks at three critical decision points (one for each case) and challenges that the two senior executives faced from the line organization during the execution of the integration. Also see ArcelorMittal (A), product #910M01 and ArcelorMittal (C), product #910M03.

From the perspectives of the senior executive of Mittal and the senior executive of Arcelor, this case looks at post-merger integration. As with many mergers, the ArcelorMittal merger was touted as a "merger of equals." Unlike most, it was actually managed as such and it worked. The case series looks at three critical decision points (one for each case) and challenges that the two senior executives faced from the line organization during the execution of the integration. See ArcelorMittal (A), product #910M01 and ArcelorMittal (B), product #910M02.

The president and chief executive officer (CEO) of Holey Soles - a developer, manufacturer and distributor of injected-molded footwear - was optimistic and upbeat. Sales had grown at 300 per cent in each of the past two years, it ranked number four in a leading publication's 2006 Canada's Emerging Growth Companies, and the CEO herself was a finalist for the 2007 Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award. Sustaining the momentum that had been building since the company had been bought in 2004 was proving to be a challenge. Fast growth was stretching the capabilities of Holey Soles in all areas: securing financing, sourcing, developing new markets, maintaining high quality, expanding the product portfolio and management talent. The CEO wondered what the available options, priorities and next steps would be to continue to build a strong foundation for growth, and to reach her aggressive target of $40 million in sales by 2009.

Dr. Reddy's Laboratories (Dr. Reddy's), a large pharmaceutical company in India, is trying to acquire the fourth largest generics manufacturer in Germany. Dr. Reddy's quoted $570 million in a competitive bidding situation. The company's chief negotiator is getting ready to close the deal if selected. Students will examine the issues for the chief negotiator, such as: is the price right, is the fit strategic, will the acquisition add value, how can the synergies be fully exploited and how should management proceed with the integration. The (A) case is positioned just before the acquisition and hints at the possible risks. The supplement case, Dr. Reddy's Laboratories (B), product #908M65, is positioned two years post-acquisition and examines a major risk which, as it unfolded, brought the viability of the business model into question.