個案總覽

The case challenges students to develop a turnaround strategy for a small-town retail business following the loss of a major supplier. The students must develop a retrenchment strategy (i.e., cost and asset reductions) and a recovery strategy to rebuild the core business and develop the adjacent possibilities (i.e., adjacencies). It was February 2009 in Columbus, Montana, population 2,000. Lois Frerck (frair ic) owned River Bend Trading (RBT), an apparel and gift shop located next to the Montana Silversmiths Outlet (Silversmiths). Silversmiths manufactured silver jewelry, rodeo trophy belt buckles, and other western products in Columbus. RBT was a Silversmiths' dealer, and 50 percent of its sales came from Silversmith's products. In 2006, RBT's sales peaked at $485,951, and Silversmiths decided to sell directly to its customers over the internet. In January 2007, it revoked RBT's dealer status. Devastated, Lois and Mary analyzed their options, but they were unable to offset the loss of Silversmiths' products with new products. With the onset of the recession in 2007, RBT's sales plummeted. In November 2008, Mary told Lois, "The business is dying. I can't handle it. I'm out of here! I'll take my half of the debt," and she left. As the recession took its toll on local businesses and the tourist trade, RBT's 2008 sales fell to $220,023. In February 2009 Lois asked her sister Amy, "What should I do?"

It was June 2008 at Midland Bull Test in south-central Montana. The (A) and (B) cases feature Leo McDonnell, Jr. and his wife "Sam," the owners of Midland Bull Test, a long-time leader in the performance testing of bulls. Leo was a charismatic entrepreneurial leader in the cattle industry. Sam was an astute manager of their business affairs. In 2007, the two invested $700,000 in a feeding and monitoring system to produce feed efficient cattle that consumed less feed and produced less methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Cattle produced 20% of the methane emissions in the US, and feed efficient cattle produced up to 40% less methane. Leo felt the potential for reducing methane production through increases in feed efficiency and other improvements in ranch practices was huge. He saw the feed efficiency program as environmentally unique. ... sustainable," and "part of a growing movement to reduce greenhouse gases in a socially responsible way." In June 2008, Sam was concerned about meeting their cash flow objectives. Leo said, "I agree, but global warming is important too." The conflicting interests emerge when Sam says, "Show me how 'social responsibility' adds value to Midland Bull Test. Why should we risk our money and reputation on going green?" The (A) case focuses on Leo and Sam's analysis of installing an anaerobic digester to convert the biogases in manure to electricity for use or sale. The (B) case focuses on their marketing strategy and the possibility of positioning Midland as a green business. In addition, Leo and Sam wanted to leverage the emerging relationship with Pfizer who was developing DNA-marker technologies to improve animal health, quality, and productivity.

The case features a dispute between the US Forest Service and conservation groups over forest management practices on the Bitterroot National Forest in Montana. The conservation groups sued the Forest Service in US District Court and the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Court with the Forest Service eventually winning on the issues. However, in August 2008, Dave Bull, the Forest Service Supervisor, was frustrated with the recurrent conflicts that impeded the Forest Service's ability to pursue important forest management projects (e.g., fuel reduction projects to protect people's lives and properties). Dave's staff of 145 people spent 80% of its time on data collection and analysis, much of it preparing for anticipated lawsuits, and 20% on project implementation. Dave wanted to reverse those numbers, but after 50 years of conflict, he was not sure where to start. He felt he needed a strategy to improve collaboration, but that carried some risks. If he made things worse, he might get an early retirement. As the case closes, Dave is examining the Forest Service's approach to collaboration. The Forest Service encouraged collaborative strategies but it said, "The final decision still rests with the agency." Given this caveat, Dave was wondering how he could effectively encourage collaboration among the stakeholders. The case explores this issue and gives Dave some direction.