Over the past few decades, the market for used books had declined and many used bookstores around the world have closed. Sydney, Australia, where Ampersand Bookstore and Café was located, was no exception to this trend. Yet, Vangel Cvetkovski, co-owner and operator of Ampersand, has steered it towards financial success. Established as a bookstore café, a familiar environment accessible to most university students, this case examines how Vangel and his partner overcame the limitations of the used bookstore and café industries to create a hybrid business model and how they got it to work.

This case study, a companion case to "Ampersand Bookstore and Café (A): Surviving the Bookstore Apocalypse" (HBP Product ID: ST90), extends the main case (A) by taking the Ampersand story further. While the main case focused mainly on how Ampersand had previously succeeded, this companion case examines how the protagonist might continue to grow and expand the business. Thus, it is suggested to be taught as an extension to the main case (A).

This case study is based on a Hong Kong technology start-up, Morllex (Morllex is a disguised name of a real company), specializing in chemicals for the electronics industry. The company received substantial private funding, as well as funding from a government-backed incubation program, Hong Kong Science and Technology Park. The three founders encountered conflicts in various strategies, including relationships with the two non-executive shareholders, several key suppliers such as a marketing consultant, and a China sales agent. There were substantial pressures to build sales and marketing traction and ensure timely delivery of the product to distributors. Over two years, the three founders and two non-executive shareholders (all anonymized here) had nurtured Morllex from an award-winning concept to a market-ready product. Yet, the partners struggled to reach an agreement on some major decisions, such as whether to register the business in Shenzhen or Hong Kong. Also, the partners had an ongoing debate about whether to manage marketing and distribution in-house or to outsource it. One partner favored the former option while the other partners had a different point of view. These conflicts left the founders questioning the future of a company in which they had believed so strongly and invested so much time and energy. In this case study, students will play the roles of the founders and shareholders. The case is designed to set up conflicts among the players to teach students how hostile team dynamics can make inherently solvable problems intractable.

Although systematic preparation is a key factor in negotiation success, negotiators often become ensnared in their own planning. Negotiators sometimes do not reveal what they really want, fail to discern hidden agendas, or dwell on arguments of little importance. This article proposes viewing negotiation as a paradox called structured spontaneity. It explains how three fundamental levels of awareness exist in every negotiation. Positions are what the other side claims it wants, often in the form of a simple demand; Interests may underlie these stated positions; and Perceptions reflect how the negotiating partner sees the world. Building on this, the authors propose an “improvisational iceberg” with three more levels. Head is where the discovery of the other side’s position takes place; Heart is where we invite connections between interests and keep open minds; and Core constitutes business philosophy and corporate culture. Structured spontaneity in negotiations can be taught through improvisation training. In switch games, actors play out improvised scenarios and swap roles; in wordless negotiation, participants try to convey what they want non-verbally; in monologues, negotiators tap into the Core of the other side. Ultimately, improvisational training for negotiators is about the tension between strategic preparation and willingness to follow the other side in a new direction on short notice.

In May 2006, Dawn Ostroff, president of entertainment of the newly formed CW Television Network, was faced with the task of choosing the final set of programs for the 2006 fall schedule, which she would present to advertisers at the annual "upfront" market in New York one week later. Only four months earlier, CBS Corp. and Time Warner Inc. had announced they would close their UPN and The WB networks, and run the CW as a joint venture. This unusual partnership, a first in the history of network television, had created a unique challenge for executives: an unprecedented number of existing shows would have to be cancelled. Ostroff and her colleagues--who had received thousands of letters, petitions, and gifts from desperate fans begging for the renewal of their favorite shows--had filled the empty slots. The final decision was the toughest: although four popular shows were still in contention--Everwood, One Tree Hill, 7th Heaven, and Veronica Mars--there was only room for three. Which show would be the last to be axed? And what would be the best time slots for the three last additions to the line-up? Allows for an in-depth examination of marketing issues in launching and operating a major broadcast television network, in particular making programming and scheduling decisions and managing relationships with audiences and advertisers. Provides unique insights into the launch of a network--a rare enterprise--and the associated marketing and branding campaign. Also contains rich television ratings data that can form the basis for a discussion on product portfolio management, in particular, continuation and pruning decisions (i.e., series renewals and cancellations). Finally, can be used to facilitate an assessment of challenges and opportunities in developing sustainable businesses in a rapidly changing media environment.