In September 2019, the newly appointed manager of the procurement department at Jiangxi Hengda High-Tech Company Ltd., located in China, was wondering how to make his department more efficient. He took some time to understand the working relationships of his department with other internal departments and with external suppliers. During his research, he uncovered sources of conflict between the procurement department and other functional departments, including the marketing, manufacturing, warehousing, and finance departments, as well as the company’s suppliers. The manager took his findings to the company’s chairman and reported that the low efficiency of the procurement department was caused by the company’s lack of synergy across departments. The chairman acknowledged the issue and agreed that some reform of the company’s departments was necessary. However, he also pointed out that this would be a complex, costly, and difficult task. The manager of the procurement department was adamant that the company would have to resolve this systemic issue at some point and decided to prepare a proposal for his next meeting with the chairman.
Jia Yuan Company was a small Chinese business founded by two brothers in 2005. The more ambitious of the brothers worked at the front of the business, successfully transforming it from a local sales agent for foreign branded products to a contractor for government-financed construction projects. He saw new opportunities for the business and wanted to make further investment in a related company that his friend worked at. However, the conservative brother, in charge of internal management, was not convinced of the project’s potential and did not approve of making drastic changes to their company’s overall strategy. The brothers had a history of disagreement and suppressing resolution of the problems. Can the brothers manage their conflict, or should they go their separate ways?
In 2012, JD.com had emerged as the biggest business-to-consumer e-commerce retailer in China. The company’s founder and chief executive officer, Qiangdong Liu, realized that he had to strengthen the company’s internal management in order to sustain rapid growth. In 2011 and 2012, he recruited several chief officers, including Yu Long, who became JD.com’s chief human resources officer and general counsel. Case A describes the challenges Long faced when joining the company in August 2012 and invites students to think about what her priorities should be when tackling these challenges.
Case B describes what Long decided to do and how, in the first year, she executed her priorities, which primarily consisted of two improvement projects: culture consolidation and talent review. Case B asks students to set priorities on tackling the remaining HR problems in the coming few years.
In July 2018, several employees of Yonghui Superstores stood outside the company’s headquarters in Chongqing, China to protest a pay cut that had been imposed on them. In 2012, the national supermarket chain had rolled out a performance monitoring system that periodically identified employees with inferior results. A broad-range profit-sharing plan was linked to the new performance system and calculated results based on team performance. Yonghui Superstores also applied organizational reforms to support the new system. All measures were intended to stimulate overall performance and increase labour efficiency. After the implementation of these measures, Yonghui Superstores saw favourable financial results and improved performance. Its new policies also helped increase personal income for many of its employees. However, the system also sparked anger among some workers who failed to meet predetermined performance expectations. Incidents such as employee protests had to be avoided because they could tarnish the company’s brand image. From an organizational perspective, the company also had to balance the interests of the various business divisions, which faced completely different competitive environments. Yonghui Superstores needed a systematic solution for its performance initiative.
Midea Group Co., Ltd. was a white goods empire built by its Chinese founder over several decades; consequently, the Midea brand led the home appliance industry in China. In August 2012, the 70-year-old founder and chairman retired as board chairman. The founder’s chosen successor was a 45-year-old professional manager and the former chairman and chief executive officer of one of Midea Group’s firms. This manager faced a grim situation as he took over the position: business performance was plummeting, Midea Group was urgently in need of a strategic transformation, senior management would likely resist taking orders from him, and, at a basic level, the organization was overstaffed and ineffective. In addition, many senior managers felt that the founder’s son would have been a better choice as successor to his father, following Chinese cultural traditions. The manager knew that changes would be necessary to help Midea Group thrive, but such changes were complicated by complex organizational structures and the countless subcultures caused by Midea Group’s former growth-oriented focus. How could the company successfully navigate this succession process?
In 2013, Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd. (STP) was facing the threat of bankruptcy. The chief executive officer (CEO), who had founded the company in China in 2001, was aware of the complexity and challenges of an emerging global industry (solar energy) and economy (China). Fears of energy shortages had fuelled the growth rate for the global solar energy industry, and governments in many countries had introduced subsidies for solar energy initiatives. Consequently, the company had grown from a technology start-up to the leading global producer of photovoltaic solar cells and modules in 2011. However, by 2013, the company was facing financial distress and the threat of bankruptcy. Many factors, including the fluctuating cost of silicon, difficulty finding a stable silicon supplier, the 2008 economic downturn, an uncooperative management team, and the subsequent decline in the solar energy market had caused major problems for STP. How could the CEO turn this company around and avoid bankruptcy?
In 2014, Alibaba Group (Alibaba), the largest e-commerce platform operator in China, boasted in its New York Stock Exchange prospectus about its e-commerce ecosystem, which was being built over time. Alibaba’s chairman and chief executive officer declared that the company’s mission was to “make it easy to do business anywhere.” However, the ecosystem, which was well suited for people’s Internet habits of the past, would not likely be up-to-date in the mobile age, when browsing for information no longer posed a problem and people became fascinated by mobile apps that provided practical and entertaining services. Internet traffic, representing people’s attention, started to take on a new pattern. Having thrived on pooling Internet traffic by displaying a huge variety of merchandise on its platform, Alibaba could not afford to now lose Internet traffic to countless customized small apps.
Lenovo, China’s largest personal computer manufacturer, had just replaced its American chief executive officer (CEO), the third replacement since the company’s 2005 acquisition of IBM’s personal computer business. The leadership shakeup was seemingly caused by the worsening conditions in Lenovo’s key target market and the company’s subsequent disastrous financial loss, but, in reality, the reasons were more complicated. Lenovo was dealing with the most challenging internal issues that a globalizing Chinese company could experience: retaining international executives under severe distress, integrating two companies with distinct cultural roots, and dealing with changed power relations on the board, including the awkward relationship between a Chinese executive chairperson and a foreign CEO.
In 2012, Li-Ning Co. Ltd. (LNCL) was the third-largest sportswear company in China in terms of revenue, after international brands Nike and Adidas. Following its highly successful founding in 1990 by China’s Olympic champion and company namesake, Li Ning, the firm attempted to formalize its organizational structure and establish a professionally managed organization, while dealing with the rise of well-established international sportswear brands in China like Nike and Adidas. By 2013, however, the company’s performance had started to decline. LNCL found itself caught in a tough spot, with profit margins falling as the company was squeezed between international and local sportswear brands. Furthermore, its aggressive past expansion had resulted in heavy expenditures in market promotion, large unsold inventories, and low operational efficiency. What should the new leadership team do to turn around the company’s performance?