The case follows Ashraf Abu Issa, CEO and chairman of Abu Issa Holding (AIH), as he contemplated the fate of his company's regional expansion. AIH was a Qatari diversified holding company, whose primary business was luxury retailing and distribution. Abu Issa had set his company on a path of aggressive regional expansion since 2012, rapidly opening new stores in neighboring countries, most notably Saudi Arabia and the UAE. In July 2017, he woke up to the news that Saudi Arabia along with the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt had imposed a blockade on Qatar, cutting diplomatic relations with the country as well as closing all movements of people, goods and money between their countries and Qatar. A year into the blockade the situation was rapidly deteriorating, Abu Issa was at a crossroads: Should he wait for the blockade to end? Or was now the right time to exit and focus on the Qatari market at home? If he chose to exit, could he find a new investor to buy the business at a discount? Or should he close his shops and move as much as their inventory and staff as possible to Qatar? If he chose to exit, what would be the best way to do so?

The case follows the Children Cancer Hospital in Egypt, also known as Hospital 57357, as it goes through the roll-out of a new performance management system, which Dr. Sherif Abouel Naga, founder and CEO of the hospital, had championed. This was a critical juncture as the largest pediatric cancer hospital in the world was transitioning from a traditional, relatively informal operating style to a performance management system that was tightly structured and data driven. Dr. Abouel Naga had tasked a newly assembled management team with defining a strategy to ensure that 57357 remained a world leader in quality healthcare for children with cancer in an evolving and uncertain market landscape. While Dr. Abouel Naga was confident that a system that measured each individual's contribution to the strategy would make a difference in the overall performance of the organization, critics worried about how employees might respond to the tight structure that came with this system. How could they ensure there would still be plenty of room for creativity and innovation, which were so important in the delivery of care? Would the new system allow to adapt quickly to evolving market conditions without generating confusion among the staff?

Intenseye was a Turkey-based technology startup that deployed machine learning algorithms to workplace camera feeds in order to identify unsafe worker actions and unsafe working conditions, in order to help improve worker safety. The case describes how Intenseye's technology solution was developed, how it works, and their target clients. The case highlights the tradeoffs associated with facial recognition and privacy, and the challenges measuring the value created by Intenseye and how the firm can capture more of the value it was creating.

The case follows Ziad Abi Chaker, founder and CEO of Cedar Environmental, as he weighs options for how to grow the company in the face of growing economic and political instability in Lebanon in 2019. Founded after the Lebanese civil war, Cedar Environmental was an engineering company whose primary business was designing, building and operating small-scale sorting and composting plants to recycle household waste. Refusing to participate in the political patronage and cronyism that were widespread in the industry (and had precipitated the garbage crisis in 2015), Abi Chaker found it difficult to expand his business. Following the garbage crisis, he had developed a new partnership model with a municipality to design, build and operate a recycling plant, but after a successful pilot project, he struggled to find another suitable partner. One option was to take the technology abroad in response to new opportunities that presented themselves, but Abi Chaker did not want to live outside Lebanon. Another option was to shift more into innovating new products, as he had with Eco-boards, a multipurpose building material made out of recycled plastics. Or should he be more flexible about dealing with corruption for the sake of realizing the dream of a zero-waste Lebanon?

The case is set in December 2018, when Ziad Oueslati, co-managing director and co-founder of AfricInvest, a leading pan-African private equity firm headquartered in Tunisia, was reflecting on the future direction of his firm. AfricInvest started as a traditional small and mid-cap private equity fund, but over the years had expanded into multiple adjoined investment strategies. At the end of 2018, the team saw an opportunity in the venture capital (VC) space, but while some were adamant about the need to raise a VC fund, others were reluctant to add yet another strategy to AfricInvest's diverse investment strategies. The case presents a detailed insight into AfricInvest's journey from a $10 million Tunisian fund, to becoming a prominent regional player operating throughout the African continent with $1.5 billion of assets under management. Among other issues related to the firm's growth, the case provides insights into the challenges of operating in such a wide and varied geography as the African continent. The case also offers details on their multiple investment strategies, ranging from small-cap SME focused funds, to sector-specific funds, cross-border funds, and private credit. The case explores the synergies and challenges associated with such a wide-reaching investment platform. This is described against the backdrop of the collapse of Abraaj, a leading emerging market private equity firm, in a scandal that shook the investment community in the region. The case also touches upon the role of development finance institutions (DFIs) as investors in emerging markets and the challenges of defining and measuring impact investing. The opportunity of launching a pan-African VC fund in the context of the recent collapse of Abraaj brings to the forefront several strategic questions for AfricInvest's co-founders: Should they keep expanding into new strategies, or would it be better to roll back their existing ones to focus only on their flagship private equity funds?

The case opens in 2017 as Tim Murray, CEO of Aluminum Bahrain (Alba), the largest single-site aluminum smelter in the world outside China and a major contributor to the Bahraini economy, was contemplating the recovery options as the company was facing the most severe crisis in its history. The case provides background on Alba and chronicles a transformation process implemented by Murray. The company had historically underperformed expectations. It developed a hierarchical, engineering oriented culture. The large workforce, made up of multiple nationalities, exhibited uneven levels of process compliance and personal accountability. Those deficiencies manifested themselves in many ways. Most damaging was a consistently poor record of workplace safety. Alba suffered from a high rate of on-the-job injuries and fatalities. Murray undertook to change the company culture, using safety as the linchpin of a campaign to instill a greater sense of discipline and personal responsibility across all levels of the organization. The case occurs against the backdrop of Alba's largest expansion project to date, which was planned to increase its production capacity by 50%. Just as Alba was reaping the benefits of Murray's campaign, a total blackout at Alba's facilities leads to an explosion that severely damaged its largest production line while Murray is on home leave. As the extent of the damage becomes apparent, the management team begins reverting to old behaviors. The case follows the subsequent series of events as Murray seeks to get control of the situation. Murray has to choose between two options for restoring production: outsourcing the recovery efforts to a credible third party at a very high cost or letting his team take on the task. As he contemplated his options, he dwelled on an overarching question-what was the best mechanism for restoring the damaged production line without undermining the culture he had invested so much in trying to create at Alba?

The case opens in 2017 as Tim Murray, CEO of Aluminum Bahrain (Alba), the largest single-site aluminum smelter in the world outside China and a major contributor to the Bahraini economy, was contemplating the recovery options as the company was facing the most severe crisis in its history. The case provides background on Alba and chronicles a transformation process implemented by Murray. The company had historically underperformed expectations. It developed a hierarchical, engineering oriented culture. The large workforce, made up of multiple nationalities, exhibited uneven levels of process compliance and personal accountability. Those deficiencies manifested themselves in many ways. Most damaging was a consistently poor record of workplace safety. Alba suffered from a high rate of on-the-job injuries and fatalities. Murray undertook to change the company culture, using safety as the linchpin of a campaign to instill a greater sense of discipline and personal responsibility across all levels of the organization. The case occurs against the backdrop of Alba's largest expansion project to date, which was planned to increase its production capacity by 50%. Just as Alba was reaping the benefits of Murray's campaign, a total blackout at Alba's facilities leads to an explosion that severely damaged its largest production line while Murray is on home leave. As the extent of the damage becomes apparent, the management team begins reverting to old behaviors. The case follows the subsequent series of events as Murray seeks to get control of the situation. Murray has to choose between two options for restoring production: outsourcing the recovery efforts to a credible third party at a very high cost or letting his team take on the task. As he contemplated his options, he dwelled on an overarching question-what was the best mechanism for restoring the damaged production line without undermining the culture he had invested so much in trying to create at Alba?

After 15 years of steady growth and expansion, Edita, a leading Egyptian snack producer, faced a series of challenges in the wake of the Arab Spring. In January 2011, the Egyptian Revolution sparked political and economic turmoil that reflected the waves of protest and violence already spreading throughout North Africa and parts of the Middle East. Hani Berzi, CEO of Edita, managed to navigate the company through this period, though the severe devaluation of the Egyptian pound in November 2016 meant yet another period of crisis for the country's economy and, with it, the snack food industry. Hani was faced with a series of hard decisions that would determine Edita's future. He held a crisis management meeting with his executive team and on the agenda were two key decisions. Should they increase their prices as a short-term strategy to survive the turbulent period at the risk of losing market share? Should Edita aim to diversify risk by tapping into underserved rural areas in Egypt or rather by expanding its presence in regional markets? Or, should the company adopt some combination of both strategies, or neither, and instead devise another course for addressing the crisis?