個案總覽

This article presents an integrated, contingency perspective on family firm innovation called Family-Driven Innovation (FDI). The framework highlights the need for consistency between a family firm's strategic innovation decisions and its idiosyncrasies to achieve and sustain competitive advantage through innovation. This article also offers some directions for future research on FDI and serves as an introduction to this special section on family firms.

Family business socio-emotional preferences are often Janus-faced. Some strive to create a strong business they can pass on to offspring by building innovation-promoting resources such as human, relational, and financial capital. Other family firms cater to family desires for unqualified nepotism, altruism towards undeserving kin, and appropriation of firm assets to fulfill parochial desires that erode these resources. This article explores how such preferences, together with their impact on resources and the innovation demands of their markets, shape the approach to innovation.

Innovation in family firms is often driven by family assets, valuable resources that are particularly prevalent in family firms. For example, they have particularly strong networks that can be deployed in an innovation context. These family assets can over time atrophy and stifle rather than stimulate innovation performance. However, family firms can fight this process by institutionalizing innovation within the family and the firm by means of family and corporate governance and through incentivizing key individuals in the innovation process.

This case examines a critical decision faced by the partners of a venture capital firm, Adara Venture Partners, in June 2013. In the course of raising their second fund, the partners face the prospect of an anchor investor pulling out because Adara had not yet assembled sufficient capital to meet the end-of-month deadline to complete the fund's first closing. As a consequence, the partners are evaluating the possibility of the GP itself underwriting a portion of the gap in the fund's total capital commitment-which involves weighing a host of critical issues at the heart of venture capital fund management: GP economics, fundraising strategy, investor relations and the fund's investment strategy.

The managing partner of Proto3000, a 10-year-old 3D Printing services and supply firm, was both gratified by the recent explosion of popular media coverage of 3D Printing that was certain to bring his firm additional opportunities, and concerned as to how his company could maintain their broad leadership position as new competitors began to join the fray. As the managing partner began thinking about what to do next, he wondered whether he should stick with his biggest market segments or diversify into new markets that seemed to hold a lot of promise. In addition, he wondered which challenges associated with the disruptive technology that his industry revolved around he needed to consider as he plotted a course forward for Proto3000.

In April 2013, Kassatly Chtaura, a family-owned producer of both alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages headquartered in Chtaura, Lebanon, faces a dilemma. It is doing very well in terms of revenues and market share and has succeeded in building a strong cash flow. However, the past year’s figures show little growth, and the family is concerned that sales of its syrups, juices, ready-to-drink beverages and wines have reached a plateau. Should the company expand its distribution network or build a new factory and move some operations to Saudi Arabia or Angola? These are promising markets, but they are in distant locations with different cultures. Or should it stay put and expand its operations by introducing a new product, beer? Adding to its successful portfolio will complement its business strengths in Lebanon, especially when bolstered by one of its highly successful advertising campaigns, and accomplish a family dream. Given the uncertain political situation in Lebanon, is it time to invest in international markets?

To accelerate Bigbelly's sales growth and its "smart cities" positioning, its CEO planned to shift his company from equipment sales to a subscription service. Jack Kutner hoped to re-position Bigbelly's solar-powered trash compacting stations beyond trash and recycling and use them also to provide public space Wi-Fi, advertising, and urban intelligence sensors. "One year from now we will no longer sell any machines," Kutner planned to tell the company's board of directors. Would they buy his subscription-only pitch? And if they did, would Bigbelly's still-reluctant purchasers?

In 2015, Renault-Nissan Alliance (RNA) launched four convergence projects in four key functions (research and development, manufacturing and logistics, purchasing, and human resources). The projects required the two independent entities, Renault and Nissan, to increase collaboration and integration to strengthen economies of scale, and thus reduce costs in order to better compete globally in both developed and emerging markets. However, as the alliance increased the level of integration and opened possibilities for inviting new partners, it also increased the time and resources needed to reach joint strategic decisions between the two companies. RNA had many difficult decisions to make with respect to moving forward — not least of which involved finding an eventual replacement for the alliance’s 61-year-old chief executive officer.

The investment manager for Norfund, a Norwegian development finance institution, is seeking additional investors for a private equity fund focused on the African nation of Angola. After several large development banks reject the investment opportunity, the European Investment Bank agrees to conduct due diligence before making a potentially significant investment in the fund. The investment manager sees Angola as an investment area with high potential, but faces skepticism by investors who worry about potential risks after previous failed attempts to invest in the country.

More than a decade after its launch, DonorsChoose.org is a successful, well-known and well-regarded charitable organization that supports U.S. public schools. Yet in the years since the organization’s inception, the charity environment has changed, leading the organization’s chief marketing officer to investigate how to further clarify the brand in a shifting space. The case centres on findings delivered by a branding agency regarding a possible change to the organization’s tagline. Faced with a lengthy report on the branding agency’s findings, the chief marketing officer needs to decide on the organization’s next steps.

More than a decade after its launch, DonorsChoose.org is a successful, well-known and well-regarded charitable organization that supports U.S. public schools. Yet in the years since the organization's inception, the charity environment has changed, leading the organization's chief marketing officer to investigate how to further clarify the brand in a shifting space. The case centres on findings delivered by a branding agency regarding a possible change to the organization's tagline. Faced with a lengthy report on the branding agency's findings, the chief marketing officer needs to decide on the organization's next steps.

<p style="color: rgb(197, 183, 131);"><strong> AWARD WINNER -Bringing Technology to Market Award, European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) Case Writing Competition</strong></p><br>This case describes how General Electric has developed its China Technology Center over the past decade. The case also elaborates on the changing role of the China Technology Center in General Electric’s global research and development strategy. In 2000, General Electric set up its China Technology Center in Shanghai after bringing its technologies and products to China. In the first few years, the focus of the China Technology Center was to build local engineering teams, learn about customer needs, determine successful marketing strategies, and to develop relationships with local suppliers in order to reduce costs. Over time, the China Technology Center developed its “In China for China” strategy by adjusting its own products and designs to adapt to the local market, while still developing innovative technologies and products to address China’s toughest challenges — such as those encountered in the healthcare industry. This strategy was very successful; some innovations from the China Technology Center were used in other emerging markets as well as in U.S. and European markets — a process that is known as reverse innovation.

A burgeoning mobile application entrepreneur has developed an interesting potential product with her friends. However, when she encounters an investment opportunity, she decides to seek legal advice for the first time in her business life. As a result of her initial meeting with a lawyer, she realizes how unprepared she is and some of the tough questions that she will need to answer.

Elon Musk, the CEO of the U.S.-headquartered Tesla Motors (Tesla), was considering how the company should enter the Chinese market. Less than a year earlier, Tesla had exited Singapore after disappointing results only six months after entering that promising market. There were several questions that the company would have to answer in order to formulate an appropriate entry strategy for China. First, could the company learn from its experiences in the United States and Singapore and apply this learning to China? Second, was it the right time to enter the Chinese market? Finally, how could Tesla prevent a repeat of the Singapore experience in China? There were several questions that the company would have to answer in order to formulate an appropriate entry strategy for China.

In 2014, Shooting & Outdoor Distributor (SOD) was a Puerto Rican family-owned wholesale business selling sporting goods for hunting and fishing. After a year of working for the company, the operations manager was confronted with the arrival of a U.S. retail chain, Sports Authority (SA), to the Puerto Rican market. SA carried many sporting goods sold by SOD, as well as a number of brands under exclusive distribution agreements between SOD and its U.S. manufacturers. Even though SA was a retailer, due to its size, it had the power to negotiate better prices with manufacturers than SOD and pass those deals on to the final customer. SOD’s operations manager was considering three options for combating this competition: 1) Develop private branding for a new rifle product; 2) Open SOD retail stores not operating close to SA or to its retail clients; and/or 3) Expand SOD to other Latin American and Caribbean markets where no competition was present.

Jim Coke had been a jack of all trades since his student days. A big dreamer, Coke knew that he was on the cusp of something big. A Hong Kong resident since 2010, he wanted to dominate the coffee distribution market in Hong Kong and mainland China. After only one year, he had managed to secure the unthinkable: a coffee distribution deal with Hong Kong's leading supermarket chain, ParknShop. More importantly, he was now Jamaica Blue Mountain ® coffee's official licensee in 67 countries, including China and Hong Kong. Should he continue to obtain exclusive or non-exclusive Hong Kong distribution rights for specialty food commodities or was it time to take on China, with its population of 1.35 billion people?

The UPower founders, Jake DeWitte and Caroline Cochran, were recent graduates from MIT's Nuclear Science and Engineering Department. They chose to attend Palo Alto-based Y Combinator's accelerator program to focus on building a "mini" nuclear reactor that would produce up to ten MW of power and could fit in two 40-foot intermodal shipping containers. The UPower reactor was designed to serve the need for "off-grid" electric power. These off-grid customers were in remote locations such as mining operations, military bases, Arctic townships or even island nations. While DeWitte and Cochran were ecstatic about the progress they had made and the enthusiastic open-mindedness of Bay Area investors to backing groundbreaking and even potentially contentious "big ideas," they wondered if their investors would have the patience to finance UPower over the long term.

In July 2014, nine months after they had developed a collaborative workplace for independent video game developers in Phoenix, Arizona, the two founders of the Game CoLab were discussing how to move the business forward. Using the Lean Startup method, they had designed their business model and opened a coworking space where they could also hold meetings, competitions and games showcases. However, they now face two challenges — declining membership and the need to move to new premises — and an exciting opportunity to work with corporate and educational organizations who are looking to “gamify” their digital offerings. The founders have four choices: (1) continue to maintain the coworking space concept, which has generated limited revenues so far; (2) pivot their business model to focus more on building the local and virtual community with events and cheaper, more flexible memberships; (3) pursue corporate business for customized game development while either continuing or abandoning the coworking space business; and (4) pursue a more major pivot whereby the company would become a start-up incubator.