In October 2020, after spending almost a decade to turnaround Southern Bancorp, an Arkansan bank founded with the mission to provide financial services to rural, underserved communities, CEO Darrin Williams is wondering how Southern Bancorp should continue to grow. Since taking the helm of the bank, Williams has worked with his team to revamp the bank's finances, provide liquidity to its investors, raise new capital, and prove that the bank's operations (dubbed "the margin") reinforced its mission to provide financial services to underserved communities. Williams has several questions to consider in preparing Southern Bancorp's next phase of growth: Should he continue Southern Bancorp's efforts to grow in preparation for a traditional public offering? Or should he take advantage of the increasing public and private capital dedicated to racial equity to deepen the bank's mission and become a central player in the effort to close the racial wealth gap? Would listing Southern Bancorp in public markets disrupt the delicate balance between the mission and the margin? Was Southern Bancorp attractive enough to receive the dedicated capital flooding to close the racial wealth gap?
This note provides general information about climate change and its implications for business. Included is an overview of climate change science and a number of its impacts, including rising sea levels, changing weather patterns and extreme weather, pressure on water and food, political and security risks, human health risks, and impact on wildlife and ecosystems. Next, responses to climate change are outlined, including improvements in energy efficiency, moving away from fossil fuels, changes in land use and agriculture practices, and geoengineering. The note concludes with the debate over how much should be spent to mitigate and adapt to climate change, who should pay, and the implications for the private sector.
This case is designed to support a lively discussion about the relative merits of shareholder vs. stakeholder perspectives in the context of a company that provides a vital public service that has important environmental implications. The 2007 purchase of TXU, the largest utility in Texas, was the largest leveraged buyout in history. Yet, within seven years TXU was bankrupt. TXU (A) examines the spectacular turnaround of TXU from 2004 through 2007, in which shareholders received a tenfold increase in the share price and the CEO was rewarded with nearly $280 million in compensation in four years. But other stakeholders objected to the company's strategy of aggressive price increases and building new coal-fired power plants. Amidst growing pressure from regulators, elected officials, and consumer groups the board decided to sell the company to the private equity firms KKR and TPG. TXU (B) covers the period after the transaction and the reasons for the buy out's failure, including its enormous financial leverage and a "one-way bet" on natural gas prices that exceeded the exposure of any of the world's largest integrated energy companies.
This case is designed to support a lively discussion about the relative merits of shareholder vs. stakeholder perspectives in the context of a company that provides a vital public service that has important environmental implications. The 2007 purchase of TXU, the largest utility in Texas, was the largest leveraged buyout in history. Yet, within seven years TXU was bankrupt. TXU (A) examines the spectacular turnaround of TXU from 2004 through 2007, in which shareholders received a tenfold increase in the share price and the CEO was rewarded with nearly $280 million in compensation in four years. But other stakeholders objected to the company's strategy of aggressive price increases and building new coal-fired power plants. Amidst growing pressure from regulators, elected officials, and consumer groups the board decided to sell the company to the private equity firms KKR and TPG. TXU (B) covers the period after the transaction and the reasons for the buy out's failure, including its enormous financial leverage and a "one-way bet" on natural gas prices that exceeded the exposure of any of the world's largest integrated energy companies.
Mark Bertolini, chairman and CEO of the health insurer Aetna, faces a number of questions as he seeks to transform Aetna from a classic insurance company, into a business that will engage much more deeply with its members around their personal health goals. His strategy depends on Aetna's ability to facilitate behavioral changes amongst its members to live healthier lives, and requires very significant investments in digital capabilities and on the ground community orientated health care resources. Will it work? Can he implement it? The case explores both the strategic issues inherent in this potential transformation and the organizational and leadership questions that it raises. Bertolini is a highly purpose driven leader, and the case allows for a rich discussion of the degree to which this changes both his strategic and his organizational options.
In late 2015, Jeff Seabright, Chief Sustainability Officer at Unilever, had to report to Unilever CEO Paul Polman on the effort to transform the cultivation of oil palm. Historically, palm oil was produced using unsustainable methods that included burning large tracts of forest land which destroyed wildlife habitats, displaced native populations, and emitted greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Global demand for palm oil was increasing which made the situation worse. Unilever was the largest single buyer of palm oil, purchasing about 3% of global production, and had been an active promoter of sustainable palm oil production. In 2015, 60% of globally traded palm oil was covered by sustainability commitments, up from 5% in 2008, but there was more to be done. Palm oil-driven deforestation and different kinds of social issues continued across the world, especially in Indonesia and Malaysia, which produced 80% of palm oil. The case discusses the sustainability strategy implemented by Unilever across time with regards to palm oil, together with the efforts implemented by other organizations such as the Consumer Goods Forum, the Roundtable On Sustainable Palm Oil, social and environmental NGOs, Unilever's competitors and the local governments in Southeast Asia. What more could Unilever do to advance the diffusion of sustainable palm oil?
In 2005, Walmart, the world's largest retailer, launched a sustainability initiative aimed at reducing waste and making the company more environmentally and socially conscious. By 2015, the company had made progress in multiple dimensions: energy efficiency in its stores and its supply chain, lower levels of greenhouse gas emissions, safer products for customers and manufacturers, and better treatment of its workers. The company promoted the idea that its size gave it significant influence in the economy and that if it took steps to operate more sustainably, and demanded its suppliers do the same, this would have an impact on its own bottom line and make the world a better place for everyone. Students can explore whether Walmart is making these changes to improve its battered public image, improve its bottom line, or because it is the right thing to do.
In 2010, Human Rights Watch, a well-regarded international NGO, approached Barrick Gold asserting that members of the company's security force at the Porgera Gold Mine in Papua New Guinea had on multiple occasions raped women who were trespassing onto the mine's waste dumps in search of gold. Subsequent investigations identified significant evidence to support the allegations, and the revelations led to broad ranging change at both Porgera and at Barrick more generally. Drawing heavily on the United Nation's Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (GPs), Barrick not only moved to make efforts to provide restitution to the women involved, but also designed and rolled out a comprehensive set of policies designed to embed the protection of human rights into the entire company. Barrick also played a central role in leading the development of an auditing and verification framework for the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (the VPs), a set of commitments embraced by most of the world's largest extractive companies. The case provides students with an opportunity to analyze the challenges that arise from operating in environments with weak state institutions; to examine the challenges of implementing voluntary frameworks, such as the GPs or VPs, and their potential as alternatives to state institutions; to learn about the field of business and human rights; and to develop an analytic framework for evaluating the responsibilities of business leaders to society, especially from the perspective of human rights.
The case describes Shanghai's decision to abandon growth of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as its primary metric of measuring success. Within this context, the case presents the historical roots of GDP and how the measure is calculated. Moreover, the case discusses the prominence of GDP as a measure of economic success. After a discussion of China's and Shanghai's use of GDP growth targets, the case discusses Shanghai's past successes and failures. Specifically, the case describes the enormous economic growth that Shanghai has experienced alongside significant economic, social, and environmental failures such as the inefficient use of resources, pollution, and growing inequality. The case concludes with the decision to abandon GDP growth as a measure of success and opens questions about what this means for Shanghai and China. Moreover, the case raises the question of what alternative metrics measuring success might look like.
Industry self-regulation has, in general, a lousy track record. Many studies have shown that it is often ineffective unless backed by the power of the state, and that in some cases it serves rather to forestall government intervention or to reduce competition than as genuine self-regulation. Many observers doubt that accelerated private sector regulation could really make a difference against the major public goods issues of our time. Yet we live in a time when many public goods issues are global and global governance mechanisms are at the very earliest stage of development, and in industry after industry leading firms are banding together in an attempt to regulate conduct-designing metrics, relying on independent auditors, and attempting to enforce compliance. Is this a plausible path forward? This note summarizes work in history, political science, and economics-drawing particularly on the work of Eleanor Ostrom-to explore this issue in depth.
MONDRAGON, the largest cooperative in the world, and the inspiration for several U.S. cooperatives, faces a challenge in 2013 after one of its largest cooperatives votes to leave the group and another goes bankrupt.