個案總覽

In 2003, Unilever and Oxfam embarked on a groundbreaking "learning project" designed to better understand the impacts of business on poverty. Developing countries were seen as an essential component of Unilever's corporate strategy, with developing and emerging markets forecast to account for 90% of the world's population by 2010. Unilever had long been present in many of these markets and was increasingly aware that its future growth would depend upon its ability to address issues of social and economic development in developing countries, including poverty. Oxfam, one of the world's most prominent nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), was focused in its campaigning and other activities on the alleviation of poverty. Thus, despite the often adversarial relationship between corporations and NGOs, the two organisations shared a common interest which formed the basis for their collaboration. The goal was to examine the role of business in poverty reduction, specifically by studying Unilever's operations in Indonesia. Case A describes how this collaboration came about and provides background on Unilever, Unilever Indonesia (UI), and Oxfam, including its campaigns against the pharmaceutical and coffee industries. It also examines the role of NGOs, the challenge of tackling poverty in developing countries, the Millennium Development Goals, and the UN Global Compact. The case ithe difficulties inherent in better understanding the role of MNCs in poverty alleviation as well as in forging effective collaboration between corporations and NGOs.

Through stalled joint venture talks between Pennsylvania-based Wyoff Corp. and Jinan-based China-LuQuan, strategic and cross-cultural negotiation challenges are explored both from American and Chinese perspectives. Wyoff, a leading US chemical company, has been seeking ways to secure the company's foothold in China's emerging market since the late 90s. When approached by China-LuQuan in 2000, a major Chinese state-owned chemical producer, for a joint-venture opportunity to make a popular chemical catalyst in China, Wyoff, leveraging its superior technology, demanded one-sided terms and played hardball, ruining both the deal and the relationship with China-LuQuan. Seven years later in 2007, Wyoff faced market pressure to again seek a joint venture with China-LuQuan on two other types of products. Both parties had to overcome past distrust to work things out on a series of strategic issues: investment, product slate, marketing, technology, management organization, staffing, etc. In the negotiations, cross-cultural themes (e.g., trust, relationships, communication, time, face, etc.) and different negotiation styles created challenges along with the business and strategic issues. The (A) case sets up the negotiations, highlights issue impasses, explores cross-cultural frictions, and poses tactical challenges. The (B) case describes the strategies, tactics, and results of these negotiations.

Rick Drumm (his real name), once a teen-age drumming contest winner, is facing the most promising, but also the most challenging, career transition in his career as a manager and a leader. While a second-year MBA student in a fast-track program, and working as President of Vic Firth Inc, a $20 million-sales drumstick manufacturer, he is being recruited to become president of J. D'Addario & Co., the largest manufacturer of musical accessories in the US. Having survived a series of interviews - by the headhunter, various Board members, and the Chairman of D'Addario - he is informed that he has to be interviewed by Jack Welch, the legendary CEO of General Electric, as the final step in his selection process. Rick has to decide how to prepare for this interview, how to approach this final test of his qualifications to assume the leadership of a much larger and more complex organization. The (A) case describes his concerns and questions about the up-coming interview. It also paints the scenario of Ricks personal history, and the sometimes colorful career transitions he has gone through up to this latest opportunity. Critical themes are highlighted, tracing the central threads of his development as a manager. The (A) case ends with Rick ringing the bell at Welch's Boston residence on a cold afternoon in December.

Rick Drumm (his real name), once a teen-age drumming contest winner, is facing the most promising, but also the most challenging, career transition in his career as a manager and a leader. While a second-year MBA student in a fast-track program, and working as President of Vic Firth Inc, a $20 million-sales drumstick manufacturer, he is being recruited to become president of J. D'Addario & Co., the largest manufacturer of musical accessories in the US. Having survived a series of interviews - by the headhunter, various Board members, and the Chairman of D'Addario - he is informed that he has to be interviewed by Jack Welch, the legendary CEO of General Electric, as the final step in his selection process. Rick has to decide how to prepare for this interview, how to approach this final test of his qualifications to assume the leadership of a much larger and more complex organization. The (B) case describes the actual interview process, and provides Rick's reflections on this interview, the surprises he encountered, as well as the affirmations that he found in Welch's observations about managing a family-owned business.

Rick Drumm (his real name), once a teen-age drumming contest winner, is facing the most promising, but also the most challenging, career transition in his career as a manager and a leader. While a second-year MBA student in a fast-track program, and working as President of Vic Firth Inc, a $20 million-sales drumstick manufacturer, he is being recruited to become president of J. D'Addario & Co., the largest manufacturer of musical accessories in the US. Having survived a series of interviews - by the headhunter, various Board members, and the Chairman of D'Addario - he is informed that he has to be interviewed by Jack Welch, the legendary CEO of General Electric, as the final step in his selection process. Rick has to decide how to prepare for this interview, how to approach this final test of his qualifications to assume the leadership of a much larger and more complex organization. The (C) case focuses on Jim D'Addario (the scion of the D'Addario clan, and Chairman and CEO of the company), and his views about the growing needs for executive leadership at this historically venerable musical accessories company. The case provides the history of this enterprise through various transitions in business focus and leadership, and of how Jim came to ask Welch to interview his "best candidate". The case also describes Jim's views on what the company needed at this point in time, and his perspective on Rick Drumm's key attributes. The case closes with Rick describing his initial steps to diagnose the most pressing problems at D'Addario, and the actions he took to take charge of the situation.

In 2007, Loews Inc., under the leadership of James Tisch, was considering whether to buy natural gas properties from Dominion Resources. The question is whether the acquisition fits the corporate strategy. In exploring the questions, students will have the chance to consider what is in fact a corporate strategy, how Loews' corporate strategy adds value, and how the way Loews is managed contributes to the results-a tripling of market value in 5 years.

In August 2005, the leadership of Turkey's Dogus Group considered opportunities for its flagship enterprise, Garanti Bank, to partner with a foreign financial institution. The case describes the Turkish banking industry and Garanti Bank's position within it, and asks students to consider whether partnership makes sense for Garanti and, if so, which bidder it should select.

Discussions about transfer pricing normally presume the firm's objective is to maximize profit while making the best use of existing capacity. This article differs by exploring the impact of transfer pricing on capital budget decisions. In decentralized firms, decision authority for investment is assigned to division managers whose capital budgets include revenues from internal transfers. When a selling division is under capacity, economic theory recommends a transfer price based on differential cost. Here the seller generates sufficient revenues to recoup operating costs, but not enough to recover capital costs. Consequently, division managers will reject some investments that otherwise would have increased corporate shareholder value. Market-based transfer pricing overcomes this conflict by allocating savings on inter-company transactions to the selling division. However, market transfer pricing may result in shortfalls to corporate profit. Nonetheless, we argue in favor of the use of transfer pricing on the presumption that long-term value creation takes precedence over short-term profit.

On March 12, 2005, the founder and chief executive officer (CEO) of Chartwell Technologies (Chartwell), a company that specialized in Internet gaming development, noticed something interesting. The CNN headline news ticker on his television read: Online Poker Industry Expected to Grow by Billions within the Year. The CEO and his partner, the vice-president of business development, were about to decide whether to acquire MicroPower Inc. (MicroPower), an online poker company, for US$2.6 million in cash. The industry certainly had the potential for explosive growth. The CEO had to decide whether Chartwell should upgrade its current technology or purchase MicroPower to gain instant access to its C++ platform to take advantage of the growth on the online poker industry.

The goal of the Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria Stakeholder Simulation is to illustrate the challenges in anticipating points of common interest, and the difficulties of overcoming initial antagonistic conditions in order to work together to develop better positions. The simulation illustrates the tensions, trade-offs, and challenges involved in mapping and addressing competing stakeholder demands in a long-standing conflict where players' positions are highly polarized. The students are organized in six teams and are asked to take on the position of six different organizations, map the interactions between these six players by taking a specific point of view, and publicly state their position before they begin the engagement exercise. The engagement exercise asks students to develop and execute a stakeholder engagement strategy by stepping into one of the six roles. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by each of the key players, students are asked to highlight their key strategic priorities, map stakeholders' interests, and anticipate their changes in position. They are asked to revive or break specific relationships as their own interests evolve in ways that best further their own engagement priorities and short- or long-term goals. The simulation also opens up a broader platform for exploring the complex dynamics of stakeholder engagement; the delicate balance of stakeholders' power, urgency, and legitimacy; the influence chains that help alter the positions of specific groups; and the logics that enable or hinder constructive collaboration with diverse and/or emerging stakeholders.

The goal of the Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria Stakeholder Simulation is to illustrate the challenges in anticipating points of common interest, and the difficulties of overcoming initial antagonistic conditions in order to work together to develop better positions. The simulation illustrates the tensions, trade-offs, and challenges involved in mapping and addressing competing stakeholder demands in a long-standing conflict where players' positions are highly polarized. The students are organized in six teams and are asked to take on the position of six different organizations, map the interactions between these six players by taking a specific point of view, and publicly state their position before they begin the engagement exercise. The engagement exercise asks students to develop and execute a stakeholder engagement strategy by stepping into one of the six roles. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by each of the key players, students are asked to highlight their key strategic priorities, map stakeholders' interests, and anticipate their changes in position. They are asked to revive or break specific relationships as their own interests evolve in ways that best further their own engagement priorities and short- or long-term goals. The simulation also opens up a broader platform for exploring the complex dynamics of stakeholder engagement; the delicate balance of stakeholders' power, urgency, and legitimacy; the influence chains that help alter the positions of specific groups; and the logics that enable or hinder constructive collaboration with diverse and/or emerging stakeholders.

The goal of the Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria Stakeholder Simulation is to illustrate the challenges in anticipating points of common interest, and the difficulties of overcoming initial antagonistic conditions in order to work together to develop better positions. The simulation illustrates the tensions, trade-offs, and challenges involved in mapping and addressing competing stakeholder demands in a long-standing conflict where players’ positions are highly polarized. The students are organized in six teams and are asked to take on the position of six different organizations, map the interactions between these six players by taking a specific point of view, and publicly state their position before they begin the engagement exercise. The engagement exercise asks students to develop and execute a stakeholder engagement strategy by stepping into one of the six roles. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by each of the key players, students are asked to highlight their key strategic priorities, map stakeholders’ interests, and anticipate their changes in position. They are asked to revive or break specific relationships as their own interests evolve in ways that best further their own engagement priorities and short- or long-term goals. The simulation also opens up a broader platform for exploring the complex dynamics of stakeholder engagement; the delicate balance of stakeholders’ power, urgency, and legitimacy; the influence chains that help alter the positions of specific groups; and the logics that enable or hinder constructive collaboration with diverse and/or emerging stakeholders.

The goal of the Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria Stakeholder Simulation is to illustrate the challenges in anticipating points of common interest, and the difficulties of overcoming initial antagonistic conditions in order to work together to develop better positions. The simulation illustrates the tensions, trade-offs, and challenges involved in mapping and addressing competing stakeholder demands in a long-standing conflict where players' positions are highly polarized. The students are organized in six teams and are asked to take on the position of six different organizations, map the interactions between these six players by taking a specific point of view, and publicly state their position before they begin the engagement exercise. The engagement exercise asks students to develop and execute a stakeholder engagement strategy by stepping into one of the six roles. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by each of the key players, students are asked to highlight their key strategic priorities, map stakeholders' interests, and anticipate their changes in position. They are asked to revive or break specific relationships as their own interests evolve in ways that best further their own engagement priorities and short- or long-term goals. The simulation also opens up a broader platform for exploring the complex dynamics of stakeholder engagement; the delicate balance of stakeholders' power, urgency, and legitimacy; the influence chains that help alter the positions of specific groups; and the logics that enable or hinder constructive collaboration with diverse and/or emerging stakeholders.

The goal of the Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria Stakeholder Simulation is to illustrate the challenges in anticipating points of common interest, and the difficulties of overcoming initial antagonistic conditions in order to work together to develop better positions. The simulation illustrates the tensions, trade-offs, and challenges involved in mapping and addressing competing stakeholder demands in a long-standing conflict where players' positions are highly polarized. The students are organized in six teams and are asked to take on the position of six different organizations, map the interactions between these six players by taking a specific point of view, and publicly state their position before they begin the engagement exercise. The engagement exercise asks students to develop and execute a stakeholder engagement strategy by stepping into one of the six roles. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by each of the key players, students are asked to highlight their key strategic priorities, map stakeholders' interests, and anticipate their changes in position. They are asked to revive or break specific relationships as their own interests evolve in ways that best further their own engagement priorities and short- or long-term goals. The simulation also opens up a broader platform for exploring the complex dynamics of stakeholder engagement; the delicate balance of stakeholders' power, urgency, and legitimacy; the influence chains that help alter the positions of specific groups; and the logics that enable or hinder constructive collaboration with diverse and/or emerging stakeholders.

The goal of the Royal Dutch/Shell in Nigeria Stakeholder Simulation is to illustrate the challenges in anticipating points of common interest, and the difficulties of overcoming initial antagonistic conditions in order to work together to develop better positions. The simulation illustrates the tensions, trade-offs, and challenges involved in mapping and addressing competing stakeholder demands in a long-standing conflict where players' positions are highly polarized. The students are organized in six teams and are asked to take on the position of six different organizations, map the interactions between these six players by taking a specific point of view, and publicly state their position before they begin the engagement exercise. The engagement exercise asks students to develop and execute a stakeholder engagement strategy by stepping into one of the six roles. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by each of the key players, students are asked to highlight their key strategic priorities, map stakeholders' interests, and anticipate their changes in position. They are asked to revive or break specific relationships as their own interests evolve in ways that best further their own engagement priorities and short- or long-term goals. The simulation also opens up a broader platform for exploring the complex dynamics of stakeholder engagement; the delicate balance of stakeholders' power, urgency, and legitimacy; the influence chains that help alter the positions of specific groups; and the logics that enable or hinder constructive collaboration with diverse and/or emerging stakeholders.

The case illustrates the tensions, trade-offs and adaptation challenges involved in designing a clean technology venture in a changing regulatory, funding and competitive context (Ontario, Canada, 2006-2008). The multiple decision points in the case have the students critically and iteratively assess the prospects of clean technology ventures and the evolving interface between technology and strategy in Canada's emerging clean energy sector. Beyond understanding the specific challenges faced by the venturing team, students are asked to grapple with the controversies and priorities for Canada's environmental policies in the energy sector, discuss competitive tension or symbiotic relationships between incumbents and disruptors, and actively align new venture design and strategy with a rapidly morphing regulatory, technological and competitive environment. The case discussion also opens up a broader platform for exploring the role of incumbents and disruptive business models in informing provincial and national responses to climate change, and, more generally, the role of cleantech venturing and venture capital in fostering climate change readiness and greener energy solutions. The A case asks students to compare and contrast the clean technologies available, discuss their pros and cons, and articulate a compelling business proposition.

In this supplement to StormFisher (A): Power with Purpose, students are presented with an abbreviated version of the business plan, and challenged to enlist and respond to funding alternatives.

Pat Fili-Krushel, CEO and president of WebMD and past president of ABC Network, contemplates accepting Richard Parson's offer to become the first executive vice president of administration at AOL Time Warner. Accepting this position would be a move back into mainstream media but also a career shift from line positions to a corporate staff role. The case profiles Fili-Krushel's media experiences, and her use of interpersonal influence and negotiation, leading up to the critical decision point. After consulting with colleagues throughout the media industry, Fili-Krushel's decision rests on her own career aspirations and her expectations about the future of AOL Time Warner.

Pat Fili-Krushel has agreed to take on the job of first executive vice president of administration for AOL Time Warner, leading corporate human resources, internal communications, real estate and facilities, and other administrative roles for the combined company. She must figure out how to structure the job, and how to start her relationship with her new boss, CEO Richard Parsons. Two factors complicate this decision. First, AOL Time Warner is experiencing significant internal conflict and Fili-Krushel is stepping into the middle of it. Second, Fili-Krushel has built her career on increasingly large line leadership positions, such as the president of ABC Network, and has no experience in getting things done without line authority. The case lays out the steps she takes to build authority and respect within the firm, and outlines the process of moving the firm's leaders from conflict to collaboration.

Carrefour, the second largest retailer in the world, had just announced that it would open its first Green Store in Beijing before the 2008 Olympic Games. David Monaco, asset and construction director of Carrefour China, had little experience with green building, and was struggling with how to translate that announcement into specifications for store design and operations. Monaco has to evaluate the situation carefully both from ecological and economic perspectives. In addition, he must take the regulatory and infrastructure situation in China into account, where no official green building standard exists and only few suppliers of energy saving equipment operate. He had already collected energy and cost data from several suppliers, and wondered how this could be used to decide among environmental technology options. Given that at least 150 additional company stores were scheduled for opening or renovation during the next three years in China, the project would have long term implications for Carrefour.