個案總覽

Based in Mwanza, Tanzania, family-owned and operated Exotic Expeditions Tanzania Ltd. was a leading tour operator in East Africa. The company was purchased in December 2014 and experienced considerable success the following year. The owners felt that there was an opportunity for growth within the company and believed that the best way to realize this growth was to improve their marketing efforts and service offerings. The family wanted to remain profitable and reach the company’s goal of offering the best service in the industry while increasing revenue by 25 per cent within the next three years. To do this, the owners had to reach a consensus on the best marketing plan to help them differentiate against numerous competitors and continue to deliver optimal service offerings.

In December 2016, two years after the founding of Medicloud, a Singapore-based start-up that offered a medical appointment-booking application, the founder and chief executive officer recognized that the start-up had yet to monetize. A decision regarding a pivot was imminent. He also recognized that there were new opportunities in the areas of employee benefits and insurance for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). He needed to answer two pressing questions before the company’s initial funding ran out: Should the start-up pivot to serve SMEs? If so, what kind of products and services should it offer to the SMEs?

In December 2016, two years after the founding of Medicloud, a Singapore-based start-up that offered a medical appointment-booking application, the founder and chief executive officer recognized that the start-up had yet to monetize. A decision regarding a pivot was imminent. He also recognized that there were new opportunities in the areas of employee benefits and insurance for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). He needed to answer two pressing questions before the company's initial funding ran out: Should the start-up pivot to serve SMEs? If so, what kind of products and services should it offer to the SMEs?

Swadhaar FinServe Private Limited (Swadhaar), a non-banking financial company–microfinance institution (NBFC-MFI), was set up in Mumbai, India in 2008 with the objective of providing the urban poor with increased access to financial services. Swadhaar was a leading provider of financial services to clients in several major states of India. Between 2009 and 2013, there were major changes in the regulatory environment; some of these restricted the scope of MFIs and others opened new business opportunities. Although Swadhaar was able to reach financial sustainability with its existing business model, its founder was always looking at growth strategies to achieve her mission. In late 2014, RBL Bank Ltd. offered to become a strategic investor in Swadhaar. In early 2015, Swadhaar’s founder needed to decide whether or not to accept RBL Bank Ltd.’s proposal.

In January 2019, the sole proprietor and the general manager of Farm Electronics met to discuss critical options for the possible growth path of their company. Farm Electronics was a 42-year-old, small-scale electrical and electronic industrial equipment manufacturer based in Indore, India. The company’s product portfolio consisted of various transformers, relay coils, power supplies, and direct-current motors, which were designed according to its customers’ specifications. Farm Electronics’ customers consisted of small-, medium-, and large-scale businesses from both the organized and unorganized sectors. Significant aspects of the company’s value proposition included quality, timely delivery, and after-sales service. However, most of Farm Electronics’ revenue came from only a few big accounts. The proprietor and the general manager wanted to expand their company’s reach and were thus contemplating targeting a new set of customers.

Tetra Bio-Pharma (Tetra) was a new firm operating in a murky but promising industry—cannabinoid-derived pharmaceutical products. But, the firm had been so involved in navigating drug development and approval processes that it had lost track of its identity. The firm did not define itself initially, and with its rapid growth, shifting strategies, evolving competencies, and plethora of alliances, Tetra needed a stronger focus. Adding to the turmoil, the firm was operating within the rapidly changing global marijuana industry—essentially, uncharted waters. Given that the firm’s new drugs were about to receive government approval, the firm had to determine how to build its brand.

By late 2018, a Singapore-based non-profit organization, billionBricks, had completed seven projects, rehabilitating more than a thousand homeless and disaster-stricken people in Asia. Its tent product was widely accepted and could, it was projected, meet the needs of millions of homeless people. Despite these achievements, the co-founder and chief executive officer felt that the company’s performance had not met his expectations. A key challenge was communicating with those who needed homes: the company’s traditional methods of communication were ineffective in reaching out to a marginalized population challenged by illiteracy and access to information. However, the prime minister of India had just announced his ambitious plan to end India’s homelessness and sought entrepreneurs for idea generation and execution. Should billionBricks participate in the government housing project to grow its Indian customer base, even if doing so included the risk of potential failure? Or should the company focus instead on other projects and risk being locked out of future housing projects in India?

Saankhya Labs Private Limited (Saankhya), was a fabless semiconductor company formed in 2006 in Bengaluru, India. It provided innovative products and solutions used in consumer electronics, wireless communication, and broadcasting applications. Similar to other domestic telecommunications manufacturing companies in India, Saankhya found it difficult to penetrate the domestic equipment market. While its fluctuating fortunes had stabilized to some degree after 2016, the company continued to struggle in the face of regulatory uncertainty and competition from multinational giants, and the expected advantages of government initiatives intended to support the domestic industry had not yet materialized. In 2018, Saankhya's chief executive officer and co-founder wondered how long the company could survive under such competitive circumstances. Should it compete or collaborate with other stakeholders in the industry?

Today's disruptive innovations are driving the creation of numerous billion-dollar startups. Venture capitalists focus on these potentially disruptive technology startups and fund them furiously, advancing their speed of growth. The idea is to scale fast and seek huge returns for investors. Terms that define this type of aggressive scaling have recently developed in Silicon Valley. Unicorn is defined as a venture with a value of $1 billion while a decacorn describes startups with a value of $10 billion. Another recent term is blitzscaling: funding a venture for extremely fast growth and prioritizing speed over efficiency in an environment of uncertainty. While blitzscaling is being used heavily by investors in Silicon Valley, we look at exactly what comprises this new phenomenon and how it is used in practice. We examine the concept, its stages, and its prevalence before reviewing the different examples of how the strategy has been implemented for success (the good), cases of its failure in practice (the bad), and the extreme cases of ethical compromise by ventures (the ugly). From these cases, we draw specific lessons that if understood and appropriately addressed would help new ventures effectively implement the strategy.

This case considers the state of telehealth, or the remote delivery of healthcare services via telecommunications technology, in 2019. Doctor On Demand, a promising start-up in the space, sought to solve the four main challenges that the telehealth industry had faced historically. First, although most Americans who had health insurance coverage through their employers also received telehealth benefits, very few knew about these services, and an even smaller number had tried them. Second, the right incentives for payors, such as health plans and large self-insured enterprises, were not in place, a situation that kept utilization rates for telehealth services at stubbornly low levels. Third, Doctor On Demand and its peers needed to add more providers and offer a broader range of healthcare services to patients if they hoped to drive the next leg of growth for their platforms. And fourth, the regulatory environment in which the platforms operated was incredibly complex, and if history were any indicator, other stakeholders in the U.S. healthcare system who felt threatened by telehealth would do whatever they could to impede its rise. The stakes were high, and not just for Doctor On Demand. If CEO Hill Ferguson and his team could address the industry's four major issues, they could unlock the potential of telehealth to deliver better medical care for more people at lower cost.

Kanopy LLC (Kanopy) was a video streaming platform that hosted independent and documentary films for educative purposes. Founded in 2008, Kanopy had rapidly expanded to several countries. By 2017, it had more than 3,000 college libraries and several public libraries as subscribers. Although Kanopy’s services were received with much enthusiasm, under Kanopy’s pay-per-view pricing model, libraries soon incurred subscription fees that exceeded their budgets. Kanopy’s popularity became an impediment to growth as libraries cancelled subscriptions or switched to more restrictive models. By December 2019, even though Kanopy’s revenues were increasing, the company’s founder needed to consider how to ensure the company’s continued growth. Given libraries’ constrained budgets, what changes did Kanopy need to make to sell its streaming services to libraries?

In 2016, the general manager of Stone Rock Golf & Country Club (SRGCC) in Ainslie, Ontario, was considering an opportunity to grow the club’s weddings and special events business. SRGCC, a popular 18-hole golf course in a small town, was owned and operated by four local families, who ran the business according to their family values and their sense of loyalty and pride in their community. Since the golf industry had recently experienced a significant decline, the manager believed that increased investment in the weddings and special events business would help to strengthen and diversify SRGCC’s revenues. He was considering three different options, from modest to quite substantial: (1) focus on the immediate capital need of renovating the outdated maintenance facility; (2) make a large investment that included adding a new space for weddings and special events, expanded parking, and a new maintenance facility; or (3) do nothing and maintain the status quo. To complete the entire renovation, the club would require an investment of close to $1 million as well as approval from the four families. How could he build a case to increase SRGCC’s revenues and convince both his banker and the board of directors to accept his choice?

The sole owner of the Gusto 54 Restaurant Group (Gusto 54), which owned and operated nine restaurant concepts in Toronto and Los Angeles, had grown the restaurant group into a huge success story. In a competitive, low-margin industry, Gusto 54 outperformed its peers and consistently achieved its desired profit margins. Gusto 54's strategy was grounded in innovative growth, the use of technology, and empowerment of all employees to take an entrepreneurial approach to their roles. The owner had grown the company strategically, making business decisions based on her belief that her most valuable resource was having the right employees. She focused on building culture, hiring employees who fit the culture, and investing in the employee experience to retain them. She also made efforts to keep the leadership team lean and to include all members in decision-making. While Gusto 54's strategy had fuelled its present growth, in 2020, the owner was concerned about the impacts of rapid expansion. She wondered how to balance growth plans with the need to hire and retain top talent and maintain an engaged, motivated workforce. How could she scale up without losing the family-style culture her employees valued?

This case provides a cautionary tale of the one-size-fits-all approach to organizational culture. Despite the success of Zappos.com and Southwest Airlines, not all companies' culture achieves its intended outcomes for employers and employees. Through the eyes of fictional protagonist Roxie Steele, founder of StyleForYou.com and StreetFashion.com, students learn about issues that entrepreneurs face when they scale a business from startup to full-fledged enterprise. Although Steele launched a new fashion e-commerce site in 2019, StreetFashion.com, the case is largely based on Steele's past experience as StyleForYou's CEO from 2000 to 2015. Students gain insights into the entrepreneurial challenges StyleForYou.com faced within the competitive and fast-paced fashion industry. Students apply a framework (i.e., leadership congruence model) to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of StyleForYou's management practices, with a focus on organizational culture and structure. Students also develop solutions for Steele regarding how to establish StreetFashion.com as a sustainable enterprise in the future.

Founded in 2008, Khan Academy was a global educational nonprofit with a mission to provide a free, world-class education for anyone anywhere in the world. By 2018, the organization had expanded into numerous content areas, product areas, and geographic markets. However, a newly minted 3-year strategic plan called for greater focus and prioritization to enable the young organization to maximize its impact. It also called for increased fundraising efforts to ensure long-term sustainability. The case poses several questions: how to balance Khan Academy's far-reaching aspirational vision for transforming education globally with the short term need for greater focus? Would the priorities set in the strategic plan enable Khan Academy to create systemic global change? How should donors evaluate the attractiveness and impact of a potential investment in Khan Academy relative to other organizations in the educational market? Was Khan Academy on the right path to ensuring long-term sustainability?