個案總覽

Bikanervala was a fourth-generation Indian family business in the domestic fast-food and packaged-snacks industries. In its 65 years of existence, it had grown from a small outlet selling traditional Indian sweets and snacks to the industry’s second-largest player. This case traces the evolution of Bikanervala’s business model, which uniquely leveraged professional management practices along with strengths rooted in its family values. As the business expanded, Bikanervala faced further pressures to professionalize on several fronts, and the family was forced to consider whether its family-oriented management style could scale up indefinitely or whether family ownership and management had to be diluted to grow the business.

Bikanervala was a fourth-generation Indian family business in the domestic fast-food and packaged-snacks industries. In its 65 years of existence, it had grown from a small outlet selling traditional Indian sweets and snacks to the industry's second-largest player. This case traces the evolution of Bikanervala's business model, which uniquely leveraged professional management practices along with strengths rooted in its family values. As the business expanded, Bikanervala faced further pressures to professionalize on several fronts, and the family was forced to consider whether its family-oriented management style could scale up indefinitely or whether family ownership and management had to be diluted to grow the business.

In early 2016, WinnersTrend Pvt. Ltd. (WinnersTrend), which provided customized executive education and consulting services to senior business leaders in India, needed to decide whether or not to expand its operations to address a different market segment. It had been delivering value to its target market through its team of highly qualified and experienced facilitators, using a rigorous program design methodology; however, increasing competition and falling revenues compelled the founders to rethink their strategy. WinnersTrend received a large offer to provide programs for frontline executives. This market was estimated to have 50 to 100 times the end-users in the senior leadership sector, which could generate 15 to 30 times the revenue. Should the company pursue this offer? What would be the benefits and disadvantages of doing so? Could WinnersTrend use its current model to deliver programs to the frontline executive market? If not, what changes would be needed?

In early 2016, WinnersTrend Pvt. Ltd. (WinnersTrend), which provided customized executive education and consulting services to senior business leaders in India, needed to decide whether or not to expand its operations to address a different market segment. It had been delivering value to its target market through its team of highly qualified and experienced facilitators, using a rigorous program design methodology; however, increasing competition and falling revenues compelled the founders to rethink their strategy. WinnersTrend received a large offer to provide programs for frontline executives. This market was estimated to have 50 to 100 times the end-users in the senior leadership sector, which could generate 15 to 30 times the revenue. Should the company pursue this offer? What would be the benefits and disadvantages of doing so? Could WinnersTrend use its current model to deliver programs to the frontline executive market? If not, what changes would be needed?

Shirdi Infratech Pvt. Ltd. was in the wooden furniture manufacturing business and dealt with a wide range of diversified products such as modular kitchens, furniture, and doors. With its normal profit margin, the firm was growing, but not at a rate that satisfied the owner. At the same time, the business faced personnel management issues. The dilemma began in 2015 when the owner learned that one of his top performers had potentially leaked confidential information to a competitor and was offered employment by them. The owner recognized this employee’s importance, as well as the critical timing of the project he was working on. In light of this, would the best option be to retain that employee or let him go? The owner was also concerned about social capital management, and how to use the employee’s intellectual skills to develop others in the organization.

Shirdi Infratech Pvt. Ltd. was in the wooden furniture manufacturing business and dealt with a wide range of diversified products such as modular kitchens, furniture, and doors. With its normal profit margin, the firm was growing, but not at a rate that satisfied the owner. At the same time, the business faced personnel management issues. The dilemma began in 2015 when the owner learned that one of his top performers had potentially leaked confidential information to a competitor and was offered employment by them. The owner recognized this employee's importance, as well as the critical timing of the project he was working on. In light of this, would the best option be to retain that employee or let him go? The owner was also concerned about social capital management, and how to use the employee's intellectual skills to develop others in the organization.

In December 2015, the co-founder and chief executive officer (CEO) of Technology Uncorked LLP (TU) was facing decisions about the company’s future. TU was a four-year-old start-up that was set up as an ideation engine that would use crowdsourcing to generate ideas and then fast-track the development of the best of them. Faced with a previous choice between early success of a technology project in a single-product domain and remaining consistent to TU’s founding vision, the CEO had chosen to maintain the company’s original direction. This led to the early exit of one of her two partners. TU’s technology workshops had found a market, and TU was in a comfortable position financially. Should the CEO focus her resources on the workshops and scale up to become a technology training company, or should she move the business model online and shift resources to the back end of the business model, becoming more of an innovation platform? To move online, she might have to consider external funding sources, perhaps from a private equity investor. This would mean diluting the founders’ equity and losing some control over TU’s future direction. Alternatively, she could continue growing slowly but organically, and retain control.

In December 2015, the co-founder and chief executive officer (CEO) of Technology Uncorked LLP (TU) was facing decisions about the company's future. TU was a four-year-old start-up that was set up as an ideation engine that would use crowdsourcing to generate ideas and then fast-track the development of the best of them. Faced with a previous choice between early success of a technology project in a single-product domain and remaining consistent to TU's founding vision, the CEO had chosen to maintain the company's original direction. This led to the early exit of one of her two partners. TU's technology workshops had found a market, and TU was in a comfortable position financially. Should the CEO focus her resources on the workshops and scale up to become a technology training company, or should she move the business model online and shift resources to the back end of the business model, becoming more of an innovation platform? To move online, she might have to consider external funding sources, perhaps from a private equity investor. This would mean diluting the founders' equity and losing some control over TU's future direction. Alternatively, she could continue growing slowly but organically, and retain control.