Mysore Saree Udyog is an iconic retail store in Bangalore for sarees, fabric and other Indian traditional wear. Its success rests on the family's merchandising skills and the delivery of a personalised in-store experience, both of which are difficult to replicate. The next generation has a different vision and does not want to be involved in day-to-day operations. The founders have concluded that the best way forward is to professionalise and expand geographically, but they are worried about the associated risks. The case offers insights into a structured approach for family businesses to build a professional culture and maximise Enterprise value while minimising risks.

In May 2019, project managers with the Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society (Jeevika) in Patna, India, met to consider their role in creating farmer producer companies (FPCs) that helped poor agricultural producers access markets and receive fair prices for their produce, mainly litchi fruit. The creation of such producer companies was not a spontaneous process but often required a catalyst to harness community-based networks. While Jeevika, a project supported by the Government of Bihar and the World Bank, had been successful in alleviating poverty among those at the base of the economic pyramid, the project managers were now reflecting on the way forward for the producer company. Their overarching aim was a comprehensive understanding of the effects of their efforts on the community and the key variables affecting the sustainability of their efforts. They were aware that they could not support the community indefinitely, and they needed to consider how best to empower the producers to do this work on their own once Jeevika was no longer available. What new capabilities would farmers need to develop over time? How would the relationships between farmers and other stakeholders change when support from Jeevika was reduced or removed?

In May 2019, project managers with the Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society (Jeevika) in Patna, India, met to consider their role in creating farmer producer companies (FPCs) that helped poor agricultural producers access markets and receive fair prices for their produce, mainly litchi fruit. The creation of such producer companies was not a spontaneous process but often required a catalyst to harness community-based networks. While Jeevika, a project supported by the Government of Bihar and the World Bank, had been successful in alleviating poverty among those at the base of the economic pyramid, the project managers were now reflecting on the way forward for the producer company. Their overarching aim was a comprehensive understanding of the effects of their efforts on the community and the key variables affecting the sustainability of their efforts. They were aware that they could not support the community indefinitely, and they needed to consider how best to empower the producers to do this work on their own once Jeevika was no longer available. What new capabilities would farmers need to develop over time? How would the relationships between farmers and other stakeholders change when support from Jeevika was reduced or removed?

At the end of 2014, the owner of India-based Thakur Engineering Works (TEW) was at a crossroads in determining his company’s future. After more than two decades of solidly building the family business’s reputation at home, the producer and supplier of auto parts was poised for expansion either domestically or globally. TEW already produced parts that were shipped overseas via domestic exporters. The owner could not help but wonder about the possibility of simply shipping the parts directly to foreign clients. While that decision would require changes to its logistics and operations and would incur costs related to exports, the owner could not ignore the pay-off in profits. In India, the auto parts market was experiencing a slowdown, resulting in fierce competition, price reductions, and pressure to deliver parts faster. Despite these challenges, the Indian market was one he understood, so expansion there carried little risk. Should TEW continue to focus on increasing its market position domestically or was the time right for TEW to target the more profitable global market?

At the end of 2014, the owner of India-based Thakur Engineering Works (TEW) was at a crossroads in determining his company's future. After more than two decades of solidly building the family business's reputation at home, the producer and supplier of auto parts was poised for expansion either domestically or globally. TEW already produced parts that were shipped overseas via domestic exporters. The owner could not help but wonder about the possibility of simply shipping the parts directly to foreign clients. While that decision would require changes to its logistics and operations and would incur costs related to exports, the owner could not ignore the pay-off in profits. In India, the auto parts market was experiencing a slowdown, resulting in fierce competition, price reductions, and pressure to deliver parts faster. Despite these challenges, the Indian market was one he understood, so expansion there carried little risk. Should TEW continue to focus on increasing its market position domestically or was the time right for TEW to target the more profitable global market?

<p>Nissan&rsquo;s Strategy in Operations Management&nbsp;</p> <p>Nissan's resilience strategy&nbsp;in&nbsp;international&nbsp;business&nbsp;had been considered an exemplary response to the triple disaster in Japan in March 2011. The Japanese automobile industry made their respective recovery efforts to resume production and delivery of vehicles after suffering damage from an earthquake, tsunami, and a nuclear crisis, but it took months before they could reach pre-disaster levels of operations. Nissan's resilience practices,&nbsp;operations management,&nbsp;and supply chain disruption management were acknowledged as superior to those of their peers and were appreciated by experts and analysts. Nonetheless, it took Nissan more than a month to resume production, and each day of lost production cost Nissan $25 million.&nbsp;</p>

Nissan's resilience strategy had been considered an exemplary response to the triple disaster in Japan in March 2011. The Japanese automobile industry made their respective recovery efforts to resume production and delivery of vehicles after suffering damage from an earthquake, tsunami, and a nuclear crisis, but it took months before they could reach pre-disaster levels of operations. Nissan's resilience practices and supply chain disruption management were acknowledged as superior to those of their peers and were appreciated by experts and analysts. Nonetheless, it took Nissan more than a month to resume production, and each day of lost production cost Nissan $25 million.