This case explores the downfall of a century-old family-owned and managed firm in Taiwan called Tatung. It follows its history from a construction company firm with large land holdings in Northern Taiwan to one of the most well-known makers of electronic appliances. The founder, Shang-Zhi Lin, was a visionary, and from the end of WW1 to the end of WW2 built a solid manufacturing company and established an educational institute to train the company's engineers. His son, TS Lin, transformed Tatung during the post-WW2 boom into a conglomerate, helping forge Taiwan as an economic powerhouse. It was one of the first Taiwanese companies to be listed on the stock exchange. However, Tatung's fortunes dimmed in the third generation as corruption went unchecked, leading to disgrace and the company's demise.

The Sackler family and their 100%-owned company, Purdue Pharma, produced OxyContin pills by the millions, amassing a vast family fortune in the process. Those painkillers were responsible for a devastating opioid epidemic in the United States. For a business family, the "Oxy-Sacklers" are distinguished by their greed and lack of moral compass. Their donations to cultural, academic and medical institutions (mainly in the US and the UK) named after the family, sparked controversy about the role of corporate philanthropy worldwide.

Founded in 578 AD, Kongo Gumi was a family-owned business until 2006, when the firm went into liquidation to pay its creditors. While its demise is briefly covered, the case study is focused on its longevity. A renowned builder of traditional temples, in a country where these are major tourist attractions, Kongo Gumi has left an indelible mark on Japanese culture and history. Many of the temples built by its carpenters are listed and some are UNESCO World Heritage Sites.

The case is about the Hoshi Ryokan, a hot springs hotel in Japan established more than 1,300 years ago, that is among the world's oldest family enterprises. Owned and managed by a descendant (or adopted son) of the founder for 46 generations, it is a popular with domestic and international tourists alike. The current owner will almost certainly pass the baton to his daughter, thus making her the first female to own the legendary inn. This gender re-balancing act, coming after 1,305 years of male ownership, coincides with efforts by the prime minister of Japan to create a more balanced and diverse business climate. The case also covers the intangible assets that have ensured the longevity of this unique family-owned hotel.

The case is about Birkenstock, the renowned German shoemaker, and two turning points in its 248-year history: the owner's decision to bring in a professional CEO in 2012, and the sale of a majority stake to a French-American investment firm in 2021. Founded by German cobbler Johann Adam Birkenstock in 1774, the company had always been 100% owned by the same family and managed by a single descendant, a tradition upended in 2002 when Carl Birkenstock, the CEO and owner, handed over his shares and job to his three sons. Ten years later, unable to agree on strategy and with tensions rising in the family, the brothers decided to bring in a professional CEO to put the struggling shoemaker back on its feet. Under the new manager, sales of Birkenstock sandals increased to such an extent that the company attracted the interest of investors. Meanwhile, one of the sons sold his shares to his two brothers, who then instructed the CEO to find a buyer. Offered the opportunity to become billionaires overnight, they sold the company to a private equity firm backed by the world's largest fortune and owner of LVMH, Bernard Arnault.

The case study is about the Japanese carmaker Suzuki. The 100-year company was founded at the peak of Japan's silk-production industry in the early 20th century. Michio Suzuki (1887-1982), a gifted inventor, started tinkering with weaving looms and in 1920 founded the Suzuki Loom Manufacturing Company in the coastal village of Hamamatsu. The case is an example of dynastic control - where the family control its strategic direction but own an insignificant number of shares - as well as an illustration of the role played by adult adoption in family businesses in Japan. When adopted son-in-law Osamu Suzuki retired in 2021 and his son took over as chairman, it was the first time the top job had gone to a natural heir since 1957, when the founder retired. The narrative follows the transformation of the small car company into a global player via a partnership strategy. Osamu was able to expand sales in North America following a tie-up with GM in 1981 (that lasted until 2008). Even more significant was his decision to enter the Indian car market in partnership with Maruti, a poorly performing state-owned carmaker, which would ultimately make Maruti Suzuki the biggest brand in India.

The case is an example of how a family can control a large conglomerate - TECO Electric & Machinery, a Taiwanese engineering business - yet with almost no ownership stake. Founded by five prominent business families in 1956, TECO has been run by Mao-Hsiung "Theodore" Huang for the past 50 years, the son in law of the former CEO and co-founder, who married into the dominant founding family and rose up the ranks. Theodore's eldest son, Eugene, is impatient take over the reins. However, he makes a discovery just before the Annual General Meeting in 2021 and reaches the conclusion that at 83, his father simply does not want his son to take over the leadership, and will control the company from behind the scenes via non-family professionals he has installed in the executive suite. The case highlights a dilemma facing many Asian family-owned companies dominated by octogenarians who don't know how to retire gracefully. It also addresses some of the ambiguities of bringing in non-family professionals when perhaps the ulterior motive is to avoid a change of leadership.

On 30 August 2016, Margrethe Vestager, the European Commissioner for Competition, ordered Ireland to recover €13 billion in illegal state aid (plus interest) that Ireland was alleged to have granted Apple over a decade from 2003. Within months of the ruling, both Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, and Enda Kenny, the Irish Prime Minister, appealed the Commission's judgment to the European General Court in Luxembourg, the EU's second highest court. In mid-July 2020, the General Court returned its verdict and annulled the Commission's ruling giving Commissioner Vestager two months and 10 days to appeal. At the very last minute, the Commissioner announced that she would seek an appeal before the EU's highest court, the Court of Justice of the European Union, citing "errors of law" committed by the lower court. No date has been set for the CJEU to decide on the merits of the appeal. The case explores these events from five analytical pillars: 1) the role of Ireland's low corporate tax rate in attracting FDI; 2) Apple's decision to allocate its earnings to a paper company in Ireland with no physical presence in the country; 3) the repatriation of foreign earnings to the United States; 4) the transfer payments that Apple makes to the USA to pay for R&D; 5) the Commissioner's decision to impose a retroactive tax penalty on a foreign company that acted in accordance with the tax arrangements granted by its host country.

The case covers the ongoing Wang family dispute over the inheritance of YC Wang, the billionaire founder of Formosa Plastics Group, one of Taiwan's most prominent industrial conglomerates, who died in 2008 at the age of 91 without leaving a will. Within six months of his father's death, his eldest son Winston Wong filed a lawsuit in the US to uncover the whereabouts of his father's hidden assets, most of which he believed were unaccounted for in the inheritance settlement in Taiwan in 2009. He discovered that his father had transferred huge blocks of FPG shares to offshore trusts in Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands (where they remain to this day). Having three wives and nine children, YC Wang took pains to maintain the family's control over FPG after his death and to protect his vast fortune from inheritance taxes in Taiwan. He also went to great lengths to ensure that his philantrophic activities in education and healthcare would endure. The case explores these and other options open to founders who plan ahead to ensure their wealth is not squandered by succeeding generations.

The case accounts for the gender pay gap in companies and industries around the world. In Europe, women earn on average 84 cents per hour for every euro men make. In the United States, they earn between 80 and 82 cents per hour for every dollar made by a man. The gap widens further after women have children. Iceland is a rare exception; companies in Iceland are under a legal obligation to prove that they offer equal pay. Elsewhere, the under-representation of women in leadership roles in government, industry, the boardroom and c-suite means a dearth of role models for girls. The case shines a spotlight on ingrained behaviours and perceptions that condone the gender pay gap on the grounds that men have more responsible jobs and hold more senior positions.

The case explores the murky world of tax havens and hidden wealth. The so-called 'Panama Papers', 'Paradise Papers', 'Swiss Leaks' and 'LuxLeaks' are essentially digital dumps that exposed where the the ultra-rich had for decades stashed their billions to evade paying taxes. Academics such as Gabriel Zucman have mined these revelations for insights about global wealth inequality. Their research and that of investigative journalists have put public policymakers under pressure to make laws to "regain control over globalized financial capitalism" as economist Thomas Piketty calls it, arguing that the continued legality of tax havens puts at stake the basic social contract on which democracies are founded, and that the resulting shortfall in tax revenues deprives advanced economies of resources for nation building for future generations.

The case examines the reforms to the French labour code made by President Emmanuel Macron after his election in April 2017, essentially designed to loosen restrictions on hiring and firing. The new laws gave smaller companies more flexibility in negotiating wages and conditions directly with employees (rather than being bound by industry-wide collective deals negotiated by trade unions) and the right to lay off workers in periods of economic difficulty. In the context of an upturn, Macron was hoping the reforms would encourage foreign investment such as financial institutions relocating in response to Brexit. He resorted to issuing executive decrees (ordonnances) to avoid the massive street protests typically sparked by macro-economic adjustments in France, ultimately consolidating his leadership at home and in the larger European Union.

This three-part case covers the history of Samsung from its origins as a small trucking company to one of Korea's largest conglomerates. Part A, "Drivers of Success, Family Assets and Business Strategy", charts the growth of Korea's the export-led economy after the end of Japanese occupation in 1945, driven by a handful of family-owned 'chaebols'. Founder Lee Byung-chull's trucking business, set up in 1938, diversified in the aftermath of the Korean War, as he forged a strong political network that enabled him to embed his family's influence and assets in the business strategy. Part B, "Heart Attack Puts Succession Planning at Risk", describes how the ill health of the second-generation leader Lee Kun-hee deprived the firm of a clear succession plan. As the de facto leader of Samsung, his son had to build up his power base to assume the role in the context of a complex ownership structure. Part C, "Court calls time out on Lee Jae-yong", examines how the de facto heir was convicted of bribery and given a five-year prison sentence, prompting speculation that he would run the Samsung empire from his cell.

This three-part case covers the history of Samsung from its origins as a small trucking company to one of Korea's largest conglomerates. Part A, "Drivers of Success, Family Assets and Business Strategy", charts the growth of Korea's the export-led economy after the end of Japanese occupation in 1945, driven by a handful of family-owned 'chaebols'. Founder Lee Byung-chull's trucking business, set up in 1938, diversified in the aftermath of the Korean War, as he forged a strong political network that enabled him to embed his family's influence and assets in the business strategy. Part B, "Heart Attack Puts Succession Planning at Risk", describes how the ill health of the second-generation leader Lee Kun-hee deprived the firm of a clear succession plan. As the de facto leader of Samsung, his son had to build up his power base to assume the role in the context of a complex ownership structure. Part C, "Court calls time out on Lee Jae-yong", examines how the de facto heir was convicted of bribery and given a five-year prison sentence, prompting speculation that he would run the Samsung empire from his cell.

This three-part case covers the history of Samsung from its origins as a small trucking company to one of Korea's largest conglomerates. Part A, "Drivers of Success, Family Assets and Business Strategy", charts the growth of Korea's the export-led economy after the end of Japanese occupation in 1945, driven by a handful of family-owned 'chaebols'. Founder Lee Byung-chull's trucking business, set up in 1938, diversified in the aftermath of the Korean War, as he forged a strong political network that enabled him to embed his family's influence and assets in the business strategy. Part B, "Heart Attack Puts Succession Planning at Risk", describes how the ill health of the second-generation leader Lee Kun-hee deprived the firm of a clear succession plan. As the de facto leader of Samsung, his son had to build up his power base to assume the role in the context of a complex ownership structure. Part C, "Court calls time out on Lee Jae-yong", examines how the de facto heir was convicted of bribery and given a five-year prison sentence, prompting speculation that he would run the Samsung empire from his cell.

A well-known lingerie retailer in Colombia, Leonisa is a family-owned company that barely survived a second-generation succession crisis. Brothers Joaquín and Julio Ernesto Urrea founded the firm in 1956, and over 50 years built one of the most recognizable brands in Latin America. While they each had an equal stake in the company, their respective families were not of equal size: Joaquín had 11 children including nine boys, Julio had three daughters. While the girls were interested in design and fashion, the boys were keen to create satellite ventures around the core brand. When one of the co-founders died, a family dispute erupted over whether the dividends should be plowed back into the business or distributed to the shareholders. A mediator obliged the warring branches to reach a settlement that would allow Leonisa to survive. The ousted sisters eventually had their own success story by launching a new business based on their core competencies.

One of the biggest logistics services providers in Colombia, Servientrega started out as a one-man courier operation on the streets of Bogota in 1982. Jesus Guerrero, an enterprising messenger boy, set up his own delivery service at the age of 18. After attracting more clients than he could handle, he persuaded his sister Luz Mary to join the company and invest her savings in exchange for half of the shares. Before long, Servientrega was growing so fast that they employed other siblings. Jesus gave one brother a 5% share in the business, expecting his sister to do the same. However, she held on to her 50% and used her majority shareholder position to take over, forcing her brother out of the CEO job. Jesus began acquiring new logistics operations that he consolidated into the Guerrero Group, which today has 39 subsidiaries (including Servientrega) and employs 28,500 people. The lawsuits that plagued the former partners and put their venture at risk ultimately prompted Jesus to launch a competitor to Servientrega, RedServi.

Carvajal traces the 110-year history of one of Colombian's oldest family-owned firms from a small print shop to one of the largest paper product conglomerates in Latin America. Founded in 1904 by Manuel Carvajal, a Colombian educator and erstwhile politician, the company has contributed to Colombia's economic and intellectual development ever since. By the 1950s Carvajal was the leading printer and publishing house in Latin America. Although the company benefitted from state protection, a tradition of technical innovation was established - in 1958 it printed the first telephone directory for Bogotá on two-sheet offset press - and thereafter expanded into neighboring countries, diversifying into inter-linked activities. Throughout the 20th century the firm was led by descendants of the founder. In the 21st century, a non-family CEO was hired for the first time.

Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal, had been a source of wealth, pride and prestige for the Bancroft family for much of the 20th century. From 1928 to 2007, the family lived off company dividends and left the day-to-day management of the publishing business to senior journalists who had worked their way up through the ranks of the WSJ. But in 2007, when Rupert Murdoch - whose global media empire dwarfed that of the Bancrofts - offered to buy Dow Jones at a generous premium, the family was split down the middle. To sell or not to sell? The case explores the events that led up to the dynasty's exit and the grandiose entrance of an Australian-American media mogul onto the US media scene.

The case highlights the infighting within a Thai family who own and operate a fresh-food market stall business in Bangkok. The case explores the depths to which the Thammawattana dynasty sank in order to keep control of a profitable cash-in-hand business that had made the matriarch, Suwapee Thammawattana, a billionaire by the time of her death at age 65.