個案總覽

Student spreadsheet to case W19731

In May 2017, the recently appointed chief executive officer of Sobeys, the second-largest grocer in Canada, was considering the company's financial difficulties. He was tasked with saving Sobeys from near insolvency and planning strategically for the company's core grocery business. Sobeys had posted a loss of CA$2.1 billion for the fiscal year ending May 2016, compared to a profit of $419 million just a year earlier, partially due to a high-profile acquisition that had gone sour. In addition, a ratings agency had downgraded Sobeys's debt to junk level, citing underperformance and lost market share as the reasons. The new chief executive officer devised an interim three-year growth plan called Project Sunrise, which had two main objectives: quickly relieve Sobeys of its troubled financial situation, and prepare for the long-term industry disruption that was becoming prevalent, both locally and globally.

In 2019, Netflix had 167 million subscribers globally and offered thousands of television shows and movies on its streaming application, a growing proportion of which it produced itself. Media giants, who for years had valued the relationship with Netflix because it provided an additional outlet, began to re-evaluate their own (make) versus contract (buy) distribution decision. Leveraging acquisitions, technology investments, and vast content libraries, they entered the streaming wars by going direct to consumers. Was Netflix vulnerable in head-to-head competition in an increasingly fragmented market? How should it respond to entry by its former partners?

This case is set in 2018 in China and follows Daimler's efforts to compete in the Chinese automotive market amidst fast paced changes which are underpinned by state driven efforts at fostering innovation. Testing its leverage as the world's largest and most profitable auto market, China is aggressively pushing foreign and domestic auto manufacturers towards new and ambitious targets for electrification. At the same time, Daimler has to be responsive to the particular tastes of auto consumers in China, especially their preferences for on-line connectivity which are creating space for players like Tencent, Alibaba, and Baidu to become real competition, threatening traditional car companies' ability to control the car interface.

ZÅ«m Services, Inc., a children-focused transportation company, was looking to expand into Coronado, an island community near San Diego. The company's initial model in the San Francisco Bay area was to offer families trusted transportation options for their children, but ZÅ«m had since expanded in several U.S. markets by contracting directly with school districts to provide supplemental or alternative transportation for students. By 2019, ZÅ«m operated in more than 140 school districts, and had transported more than 750,000 students. Bidding for a contract with the Coronado Unified School District, ZÅ«m found itself in competition with Care A Van, which had been the district's sole transport provider for special needs students. The next step was to convince the School Board to sign a contract with ZÅ«m. The case invites in-depth discussion of strategies to convince local officials, and asks business students to consider the strategy ZÅ«m and Care A Van should pursue in dealing with the local school board, which will make a determination.

Bill Riddick employs the charrette process to help black and white community leaders overcome differences and desegregate local schools in Durham, NC.

On January 13, 2019, the Gillette Company aired the advertisement “We Believe: The Best Men Can Be.” After the airing, both the company and its chief executive officer were subjected to backlash. The advertisement, launched amid the Gillette brand’s declining market share, addressed the #MeToo movement, sexism in the boardroom, and bullying, and asked viewers, “Is this the best a man can get?” Although the advertisement was intended to challenge men to end toxic masculinity and abuse, it became both the most liked and the most disliked advertisement in YouTube’s history. Six months after the airing, The Procter & Gamble Company, reported a US$8.3 million writedown in its Shave Care business, represented by the Gillette brand, leading some observers to wonder whether the polarizing reactions to the advertisement had led to the writedown. What was The Gillette Company’s fiduciary responsibility in the era of the #MeTooMovement? Should its chief executive officer and visionary of the controversial advertisement be fired? Should he be promoted for confronting such a serious societal issue? Or should no change be made in the corporate structure?

In August 2018, the founder and chief executive officer of JD.com, one of China's largest e-commerce sites, was accused of sexual assault and was arrested. He denied wrongdoing and was released less than a day later. One week after his return to China, JD.com's share value hit a 19-month low. In November 2018, the company announced that its customer base had shrunk for the first time since 2014. The impact from the investigation into the alleged assault was unclear. However, the incident took place against the backdrop of the Me Too movement, a time when both traditional and social media were used to publicly launch accusations of sexual harassment and abuse, often against powerful celebrities. The sexual assault accusation complicated the almost singular level of power the founder had over his organization. According to JD.com's corporate bylaws, no board meetings could take place without his presence. What options did the company have to regain market confidence? What strategies could JD.com adopt to minimize impact from the incident? With the founder at the centre of an international scandal, who was responsible to oversee crisis management at JD.com?

By 2019, Facebook Inc.’s (Facebook’s), popular social media and social networking service (known as Facebook) that launched in 2004, had emerged as one of the world’s largest market capitalizations. Over its 15 years, the company had experienced public relation incidents that led to controversies regarding its social media business model. Most criticism related to the unethical ways the company had handled its users’ personal data. By 2019, the level of mistrust from users had skyrocketed alarmingly. Many analysts questioned the company's willingness to deal with data privacy concerns, with some alleging that its business model was fundamentally unethical by design. Clearly Facebook's chief executive officer and his team needed to step back and reflect on the company’s next steps.

Taikang Insurance Group was a leading Chinese insurance and financial services institution. It operated in the insurance, asset management, and health and senior care industries. Due to China's underdeveloped social welfare state, Taikang saw an opportunity for the private sector to offer a suite of lifelong services that would care for clients "From Cradle to Heaven." However, as Taikang broadened its brand from life insurance to lifestyle, the potential pitfalls facing the firm would proliferate, too. How could Taikang leverage its scale to ward off competitors? And, crucially, how could Taikang sustain strong relations with the state and regulatory bodies as the company moved into markets with great political sensitivities, such as health services and senior care?

In December 2018, Boom Technology Inc., a start-up based in Colorado, United States, was hoping to enter the aviation market with a supersonic aircraft. The company’s founder and chief executive officer believed that customers would pay a premium for a flight that could get them to their destination in less than half the time compared to current options.<br><br>Developing meaningful relationships within this complex web of stakeholders, including large and powerful traditional aircraft makers, regulators, airlines, and end customers, was one of the biggest challenges. In addition, two other start-ups had similar aims and were also developing relationships and alliances with different businesses in the sector.<br><br>The company’s founder was contemplating several key business decisions. Was supersonic flight a technologically possible and economically viable form of transport? How could the company convince airlines to buy the supersonic aircraft? Was building a supersonic private business jet a safer bet?

The five commissioners of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) listened intently at a public forum in April 2019 as PG&E Corporation's out-going chairman Richard Kelly described the company's proposed new board. PG&E, which provided electricity and natural gas to millions of Californians, had once been recognized for its vision in foreseeing energy's potential to reshape the state and power its economy. But PG&E was now in the crosshairs of investors, regulators, and the public for something else entirely: its role in a series of deadly and destructive wildfires that had ravaged the region and precipitated PG&E's bankruptcy months earlier. Called "the first climate-change bankruptcy," it was the largest utility bankruptcy in U.S. history. The commissioners at the CPUC, PG&E's primary regulator, were particularly concerned about PG&E's governance and had convened the forum to solicit opinions from experts and the public and to hear for themselves what steps the company was taking to improve it. The Commissioners are considering whether to make specific recommendations regarding the board's composition and functioning, including how the board assesses and compensates PG&E's CEO. A principal issue is the use of non-financial metrics to evaluate and reward CEO performance.

Boston-based Project Have Hope was a non-profit social enterprise promoting financial stability for 100 women in Kampala, Uganda, who had been displaced as a result of Uganda’s civil war. Established in 2006, Project Have Hope used revenue from the sale of paper bead jewellery and other products made by the women to provide training, loans, and children’s tuition. The project faced many challenges over the years, including an unplanned expansion of its beneficiaries, staffing challenges, an oversaturated bead jewellery market, rising costs, and the founder’s unsustainable workload. In 2019, Project Have Hope was at a nexus: how could the founder sustain Project Have Hope into the future?

Blake Vince is a fifth-generation farmer who adheres to seemingly unconventional farming techniques. Most farmers in southwestern Ontario use conventional industrial farming methods such as tilling their fields, relying on pesticides and fertilizers, and monocropping (i.e., planting the same crops on the same plot of land year after year). Vince, however, embraces more regenerative agricultural practices (such as no-till farming, wherein the top layer of soil is left undisturbed), planting cover crops, and reducing his application of chemical inputs. He uses a variety of cover crops between seasons of soybean crops to help enhance soil quality. This method of farming has been demonstrated to be more ecologically aligned, sustainable, and less costly in the long run, both economically and environmentally. However, Vince estimates that the savings come at the expense of crop yields during the first four to five years. Debates over farming practices (e.g., till versus no-till) were strong in Ontario. Farmers cared passionately about their land, and they often held strong opinions of their preferred approach, passed down through generations. Vince faces the challenge of spreading the word about regenerative agricultural practices and convincing farmers of the importance of operating as long-term stewards to preserve the land for future generations. Vince wondered whether the arguments for regenerative agricultural practices would be strong enough to persuade (a) farmers to shift their practices, (b) consumers to shift their purchasing, and (c) political leaders to introduce policies to accelerate its adoption.

Boston-based Project Have Hope was a non-profit social enterprise promoting financial stability for 100 women in Kampala, Uganda, who had been displaced as a result of Uganda's civil war. Established in 2006, Project Have Hope used revenue from the sale of paper bead jewellery and other products made by the women to provide training, loans, and children's tuition. The project faced many challenges over the years, including an unplanned expansion of its beneficiaries, staffing challenges, an oversaturated bead jewellery market, rising costs, and the founder's unsustainable workload. In 2019, Project Have Hope was at a nexus: how could the founder sustain Project Have Hope into the future?

It is July 2019, and the business of esports and gaming is booming. Tyler Blevins-better known as Ninja-has risen to stardom playing the immensely popular shooter game Fortnite. He has become the most followed streamer in the world and, helped by his management company Loaded (a division of esports technology and services company Popdog), has become the first esports player to cross over into the mainstream. So far, Ninja has worked with Twitch, owned by Amazon, as his exclusive partner for live streams. However, with that contract coming up for renewal in the next month, other platforms were hoping to lure Ninja away. Mixer, a much smaller service owned by Microsoft, was leading the charge. Leaving Twitch would come at a significant risk: the few star gamers who had attempted to switch platforms in the past had failed to convince most of their followers to come along, and had quickly seen their hold on the market disappear. But Mixer was a promising alternative. How should Ninja approach the choice between platforms? Was it time to leave Twitch and jump to a different platform? And how could Ninja best position himself for long-term success?

The case describes Angela Merkel's background, her education, her ascent to power in Germany, and the development of her leadership style.

P. N. Gadgil Jewellers Private Limited, based in India, was formed from the most recent separation of the original Gadgil family business, whose origins dated back to the 18th century. The company's gold, silver, and diamond jewellery were all sold under the P. N. Gadgil (PNG) brand. The company expanded from six stores and revenue of ₹13 billion in 2012 to 26 stores and revenue of ₹21 billion in 2016. Although the company focused on professionalizing the business operations by recruiting professionals and adopting new systems and processes, more work was needed to fully achieve a separate identity. Repeated instances of unsatisfactory customer experiences, which had occurred at the other Gadgil family businesses, were having a negative impact on the company's brand image. What strategy could the company follow to differentiate its own PNG brand from the other Gadgil businesses? Should it pursue an expensive brand valuation and hold the other family business to a contractual agreement that disallowed the use of the PNG brand name? Would the other businesses consent to such an agreement?

P. N. Gadgil Jewellers Private Limited, based in India, was formed from the most recent separation of the original Gadgil family business, whose origins dated back to the 18th century. The company's gold, silver, and diamond jewellery were all sold under the P. N. Gadgil (PNG) brand. The company expanded from six stores and revenue of ₹13 billion in 2012 to 26 stores and revenue of ₹21 billion in 2016. Although the company focused on professionalizing the business operations by recruiting professionals and adopting new systems and processes, more work was needed to fully achieve a separate identity. Repeated instances of unsatisfactory customer experiences, which had occurred at the other Gadgil family businesses, were having a negative impact on the company's brand image. What strategy could the company follow to differentiate its own PNG brand from the other Gadgil businesses? Should it pursue an expensive brand valuation and hold the other family business to a contractual agreement that disallowed the use of the PNG brand name? Would the other businesses consent to such an agreement?

In May 2016, three scientists from Germany's Karlsruhe Institute of Technology were preparing for a meeting with several managers from the institute's technology transfer department. The three scientists were planning to commercialize a new technology they had created, and hoped to use their invention to launch a new company as a spinoff from their work at the institute. However, because the scientists had created the technology while working at the institute, the technology was legally owned by the institute. The focus of their meeting with the institute's management was (1) to plan for the protection of their invention by registering relevant patents and (2) to discuss the terms for a suitable agreement between both parties. The scientists wanted to clarify how they might be able to use the technology to launch their spinoff company. Specifically, they were eager to determine their rights to the patents that would be registered for their intellectual property. They hoped the meeting would clarify any conflicts between the interests of the scientists and those of the university, and would determine the party responsible for costs related to protecting the intellectual property.