The case documents Tetra Pak's ambitious efforts to collaborate with the governor of Nasarawa State in Nigeria in the setting up of a school feeding program based on a non-milk product that will eventually use local cereals; Nutrisip. This is a business, and not a philanthropic initiative that is also aimed at kick-starting local industry (thus relieving poverty) while improving child nutrition at the same time. It is engaging Tetra Pak in tackling many challenging business and development issues. The case shows the experience of Tetra Pak over the first two years of the program and illustrates the challenges and obstacles encountered by the company while trying to get this ambitious program off the ground, promote local production of Nutrisip and secure the supply and distribution chain for the product. Learning objective: 1. Change traditional perceptions of the role of business in society 2. Show how innovation can be introduced in a sustainable manner and in a developing country 3. Understand the challenges of working in a developing world context at its most challenging 4. Understand the power of partnerships to reinforce corporate sustainability initiatives.

The case describes Shell's evolution within the context of sensitive human rights issues related to oil exploration and exploitation in Nigeria. Given that much of the revenue from Nigerian oil resources was being "siphoned" off by corrupt state governors, the case focuses on issues relevant to government transparency and corruption. It describes Shell's involvement in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and its collaboration with the Nigerian Government to instigate a more transparent reporting on oil revenues. However, since two senior Shell executives involved in EITI and negotiations with the government are about to retire from the company, the prospect of briefing their successors on the complexity of the Nigerian situation brings a number of questions that still remain to be answered "to the table". Learning objective: Participants learn about the invasive nature of corruption and its effect on human rights, but more specifically about the role of a multinational versus the role of the government when trying to deal with such issues. Participants will also learn a great deal about the complexity of sustainability issues for corporations, particularly human rights, issues. There is also learning about the scope and limits of corporate responsibility, and the difficulties that all players face in tough market conditions and a on a "non-level playing field". Participants can develop new insights on ways of operating responsibly, creating valuable partnerships and interacting in a global, but socially responsible, context.

The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) is an NGO -headquartered in London and established by WWF and Unilever in 1997 to set up a certification and eco-labeling system for sustainable fishing. The case describes the MSC's initial and more recent challenges including the Tragedy of the Commons, a wide range of less willing stakeholders, and the complexity of certifying fisheries on sustainability criteria. It also outlines management decisions to meet at least some of the challenges: improved transparency and engagement with stakeholders, new governance structures and certification methodologies. Learning objectives: Participants should 1) see the challenges associated with the certification of sustainable business practices (in general and in fisheries in particular); 2) reflect on the institutional dilemma presented by the wide range of often conflicting stakeholder demands; 3) see the necessity to carry out strategic (i.e. focused) stakeholder engagement (find the most important allies) and establish effective governance structures.

This three part case series centers on a new business model developed by Hindustan Lever (HLL) to tap the business and sustainability potentials hidden in rural India. It focuses on a win-win partnership with rural, female self-help groups (SHGs). HLL assists SHGs to access micro credit, which is usually restricted. SHGs in turn buy HLL products and sell them in their villages in a decentralized way, thus creating various opportunities for rural communities such as training and income opportunities for women as well as better overall living conditions for their families. The A-case describes the cornerstones and key decisions reached during the inception phase of the project. It details the value chain and expected deliverables for the stakeholder groups. This first case of the series ends when the system has been set up and launched, but reveals none of the actual results.

The B-case of this three part series shows how performance lagged behind expectations. Women dropped out of the scheme, sales decreased during the harvest season, and the system risked losing momentum. HLL needed to decide whether to wait for the system to eventually take off, or to implement changes to the complex system of interdependent variables and players. This case shows how a mere innovation, as outlined in the A-case, is insufficient to create a sustainable model. Learning, facing reality, and giving the system time to evolve are key success factors.

The C-case of this three part series presents the actual changes that were implemented, the rather impressive successes achieved over time, and HLL's vision for the future. Within less than a decade, HLL hopes to build a pool of 100,000 self-employed women covering 500,000 villages, and reaching 500 million people, thus creating opportunities for rural women and their families to live in improved conditions and raise their overall standard of living.

The board and management of Swissair were challenged in a new way after the country decided in 1992 against joining the European Economic Area. Swissair had to remain globally competitive or run the risk of becoming an insignificant regional airline given that it no longer operated under the same conditions as airlines in the European aviation market. Describes the strategic decisions and developments until the collapse of the airline in 2001, with a focus on corporate governance issues.

Monsanto, an American company founded in 1901, originally specialized in chemicals. In 1995, the firm reoriented its strategy around more lucrative, but unproven, fields such as agricultural biotechnology. Describes how, in the space of a few years, Monsanto became market leader of bioengineered cereal crops--commonly known as genetically modified organisms--but is accused of applying an unsafe gene technology and trying to dominate world food supplies. The firm is caught up in a worldwide controversy. Documents how Monsanto was implicated in a trade dispute and reacted poorly to public criticism, particularly in its lack of dialogue with stakeholders. Illustrates how public pressure obliged Monsanto to stop following a promising strategy.

Deals with the depletion of fish stocks in the late 1990s. Unilever, one of the biggest fish producers in the world, had a strong interest in finding a solution for this dilemma. Unilever decided to found the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). This council is run as a joint venture with the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF). Provides detailed background of both Unilever and the WWF to understand their intentions. Describes the process of setting up the MSC and deals with the issues of stakeholder management. Interestingly, other environmental groups heavily criticized the WWF for joining forces with Unilever.

Provides an overview of current trends in the global automotive industry and a description of Daimler-Benz AG and Chrysler Corp. prior to the merger. Describes this first transatlantic merger, raising the issues of strategic positioning, potential tradeoffs, and competitive moves.

Describes the organization of the post-merger integration, cultural issues, and the attempts to align the merged company through a mission/vision statement. Explains the complexity of this merger by highlighting implementation issues (e.g., corporate governance, brand separation, etc.).

In April 1995, Greenpeace boarded a Shell oil platform named Brent Spar in the North Sea to protest its scheduled disposal in the Atlantic. This action took the operator Shell Expro (a joint venture between Shell and Esso) totally by surprise, as this was the first protest of any kind that Shell management had encountered. Describes the circumstances why Shell wants the Brent Spar platform's disposal in the deep sea and why Greenpeace rejects these plans.

The protest of Greenpeace against the deep sea disposal of the Brent Spar led to a major consumer boycott against Shell. Within weeks, Shell suffered a significant loss of market share in Central Europe and faced protests from the highest political leaders across Europe. Despite all this, Shell continues to tow the platform to its planned disposal site in the Atlantic. Meanwhile, strong fights are taking place at sea between Shell and Greenpeace.

The board of directors of the Shell/Royal Dutch Corp. decided to discontinue the Brent Spar sea disposal. Nevertheless, the scientific debate about Shell's plans and Greenpeace's protests isn't over yet.