個案總覽

Supplements the (A) case, UV4277.

This case finds Jack Wright and the Mega Corporation board having to deal with a conflict situation involving a director and a "sticky situation" that has emerged from another board on which the director sits. The discussion must deal with both the director's dilemma on the other board and Jack's responsibilities as Chair of the Mega board.

This case finds Jack Wright, now Chairman of the Mega Corporation board, having to deal with an offer from a director to buy the company, in either a friendly or unfriendly fashion.

This case deals with the issues of the corporation's organizational structure and capital structure. Jack Wright and the Mega Corporation board must consider a proposal to eliminate a large number of subsidiary companies to simplify the organization and another proposal to issue corporate bonds, the proceeds of which would be used to repurchase a large block of the company's outstanding shares.

There are many aspects of relationships between the board and management that are determined on a best effort basis. That is, the rules and by-laws of the company cannot pre-specify the detailed workings of the intersecting interests. Our system of capitalism depends on the good faith efforts of all concerned to derive effective working relationships. This case provides for a discussion of these issues in the context of Jack Wright and Mega Corporation.

The process by which the board determines the mix of vehicles for compensation of the CEO and the level of compensation is among the most important aspects of board responsibility. Additionally, the board must appraise the performance of the CEO, many aspects of which necessarily relate to the various methods of compensation. This case provides a vehicle for the discussion of many aspects of these topics.

Case #5 in the Jack Wright series provides for the discussion of issues relating to succession planning for the CEO, their selection and appointment, and the subsequent appraisal of their performance. These activities are among the most crucial that boards have to face, and directly impact the long-term performance of the company.

This case deals with the means by which a company's board assess its strengths and weaknesses, identifies the skills and experience it needs, derives a list of suitable candidates, conducts "due diligence" in the process of narrowing in the list, and invites desirable candidates to join the board.

This case provides for a discussion of the legal obligations of directors and their role in our corporate/capitalist system of corporate Governance.

This is the first case study of 12 in the Jack Wright series of cases on Corporate Governance. This first case describes the process by which Jack came to be asked to join the board of Mega Corporation. The case requires students to consider the pros and cons of board membership and decide whether they would recommend Jack join the board.

Waiting lines, sometimes called queuing situations, are encountered widely in business operations. Improvements to the waiting-line process would result, in many cases, in better use of labor, equipment and facilities, and a greater capability to provide customers with a level of service that matches the business objective. This note presents methods for determining the resources needed to provide particular service attributes in waiting-line situations.

The purpose of this case is to present a series of strategic issues faced by a $1 billion company. The situation called for a major restructuring immediately followed by a hostile takeover bid. The company won a Delaware State Court decision in the case of the hostile offer.

This case requires a decision on the possible consolidation of three Midwest business-travel centers. Significant cost savings in service representatives can be achieved by combining the front-end (booking) operations. The sensitivity of cost to service-productivity levels and customer waiting time is also explored. This case and related materials can be used as part of the Workforce Planning Module.

This case describes the situation faced by the general manager of the A's at the end of the 1980 baseball season. The A's star pitcher, in negotiating his contract, claims that attendance was noticeably higher at games in which he was the starting pitcher. Game-by-game data for the 1980 season on home attendance and ten variables affecting attendance are given. The case is suited for use near the end of a module on regression. It can be used to (1) review the t-test for a difference in means and relate the difference to regression with a dummy variable, (2) illustrate the importance of a model-building framework, even if used to evaluate someone else's models, (3) illustrate the use of dummy variables, and (4) point out the difference between conditional and marginal inference. The supplement, QA-0313, contains the results of several regression analyses of the A's 1980 home-attendance data and may be used with the A case to facilitate analysis of the situation. (The B case is UV3698.)