個案總覽

Facebook’s director of policy communications was faced with a situation caused by a YouTube video posted by the non-governmental organization (NGO) Greenpeace. This video publicly critiqued the environmental sustainability of Facebook’s decision to build a new data centre, its main objection being that the new facility would be connected to a local utility provider that supplied electricity mainly from the burning of coal, one of the largest sources of global warming. This video was only the latest of a series of actions, commenced by Greenpeace eight months earlier, immediately following Facebook’s decision to build the new facility. Greenpeace had dubbed these actions the “Unfriend Coal Campaign,” which now had 500,000 followers and had generated numerous media stories. Greenpeace’s goal was to pressure Facebook into adopting cleaner energy policies by leveraging Facebook’s own social media against the company. As Facebook had no plans to stop building the facility, its director needed to figure out the best course of action to take in response to the mounting pressure from Greenpeace, in order to alleviate the increasingly negative attention from media and consumers.

Souk el Tayeb, Lebanon’s first weekly farmers’ market, and Tawlet, a farmers’ restaurant — the former adopting the legal structure of an NGO and the latter being an income-generating company — were joined by one vision to “celebrate food and traditions that unite communities and support small-scale farmers and producers and a culture of sustainable agriculture.” Souk el Tayeb’s founder, Kamal Mouzawak, first launched Souk el Tayeb in May 2004 in Beirut, Lebanon. The idea was to create a communal space for farmers across the country to sell their organic produce and products. The overarching vision was to create a platform that joined different people celebrating food, culture, and traditions and promoted and supported the agricultural sector in Lebanon. Mouzawak and his business partner were in the process of brainstorming ways to grow the impact of their business without compromising quality standards, all while meeting the ever-looming challenge of financial sustainability.

This is one exercise in a 4-part series entitled Job Offer Negotiation Exercises. This exercise gives participants the opportunity to act as the Maximum Motivation candidate in a job offer negotiation.<br><br>The purpose of this role-play case series is to give participants the opportunity to experience a job offer negotiation as both the job candidate and the employer. The exercise involves two distinct negotiation scenarios, allowing participants the opportunity to play both roles and to practice and apply concepts and skills learned in the first negotiation session. If desired, only one of the two scenarios can be negotiated if only one hour is available for the activity. One negotiation occurs for a job with a company called Maximum Motivation (A and B cases) and the other is for a job with a company called People Power (C and D cases). Participants work in pairs, with one playing the role of the job candidate and the other playing the role of the company representative. In both scenarios, the company considers the candidate to be the top applicant and would like to finalize the hire. Also in both scenarios, the job candidate has an acceptable alternative — another job offer from a rival company called PerformanceMax — and needs to accept or decline the PerformanceMax offer the next day. Thus, it is important that both sides reach an acceptable employment arrangement during this negotiation, or the candidate will not be hired. When both sides have negotiated an acceptable agreement, or when either partner decides to end the negotiation, the negotiation is over. After group discussion, participants find a different partner who last played the opposite role, switch roles, and complete the second negotiation scenario.

This is one exercise in a 4-part series entitled Job Offer Negotiation Exercises. This exercise gives participants the opportunity to act as the Maximum Motivation representative in a job offer negotiation.

This is one exercise in a 4-part series entitled Job Offer Negotiation Exercises. This exercise gives participants the opportunity to act as the candidate in a job offer negotiation with People Power.

This is one exercise in a 4-part series entitled Job Offer Negotiation Exercises. This exercise gives participants the opportunity to act as the People Power representative in a job offer negotiation.

The case presents a change initiative at a large health care facility that aims to maximize shareholder value by introducing lean health care. While change management performance can be measured in financial terms, what happens when a mishandled change initiative starts to endanger the lives of patients?

Michelle Morris, a partner at Kelman & Beaton, Partners at Law (K&B), was upset after a conversation she had just had with her two partners, Jack Beaton and Josh Kelman. Over the past few months, Morris and Kelman had become frustrated with Beaton’s performance. Beaton appeared to have been dedicating increasing amounts of his time to a second business and less to the progress of the firm. Beaton had also taken a rigid stance against the firm’s strategic direction. To make matters even more complicated, Morris and Kelman both had personal relationships with Beaton — Kelman and Beaton had been close friends since childhood, and Morris was Beaton’s cousin. Morris wondered how she should handle this difficult situation.

This is a supplement to Kelman & Beaton, Partners at Law (A).

Enerplus Corporation was a company transitioning from being a buy-and-sell energy trust to one engaged in exploration and exploitation. The company required two new board members and Sue MacKenzie’s name was proposed to the CEO by the Enerplus vice president of corporate services. While MacKenzie was intrigued with the idea, she had never actively considered board service as a career step and she now had a new career direction at the Banff Centre. She undertook a thorough assessment of this board opportunity with attention to the career benefits, personal benefits, potential risks, impact on her personal life, and “match” with her new career. Following a series of meetings, MacKenzie was invited to serve on the board and she now had to make a decision: should she accept or decline the invitation?

On February 2011, a large earthquake hit Christchurch, New Zealand, causing loss of life. The Crusaders, a major sports franchise headquartered in Christchurch, must plan for the season, given that its facility has been extensively damaged and the season has already commenced. The franchisee board, managers, coaches and players have to deal with this catastrophe and build morale in the community by deciding what to do. The case examines the processes of decision-making and the participative nature of decisions involving players as well as management. The case examines the key role that leadership and character play in contingency and scenario planning.

This case is a supplement to The Christchurch Earthquake and Crusaders Rugby (A).

Smart grid companies such as Viridity Energy are finding profitable opportunities to help their customers cut energy bills and simultaneously get credit for greater environmental responsibility. But will consuming fewer dirty watts from fuel sources such as coal and natural gas be a sufficient objective for customers in the future? What will rising societal expectations, tougher environment regulations, and new distributed clean energy technologies mean for the ability of smart grid companies to engage new customers and differentiate themselves in an increasingly crowded field?

Olympic Group (OG) was an Egyptian white goods giant that made products such as water heaters, fans, and cookers. In 1997, OG decided to buy IDEAL, a large state-owned white goods firm. Being a monopoly in its markets, IDEAL had a strong brand name and market share, which made it very attractive for OG. Also, the products that IDEAL produced — refrigerators and washing machines — complemented OG’s products. A year after the acquisition, OG had to deal with several issues such as integrating the employees of the two companies, boosting employees’ productivity, changing IDEAL’s brand image, and improving IDEAL’s products. Accordingly, within the next month, the CEO had to decide whether to start by changing IDEAL’s brand image or integrating the employees of the two companies. He also had to consider how and when to integrate the employees of the two companies without affecting overall performance. What methods should he use to boost the employees’ productivity, especially at IDEAL? What areas needed to be worked on in order to improve the IDEAL brand image without affecting its market share? What changes in IDEAL’s products were required to sustain its competitiveness and market share?

The El Coyote Mexican Café, more commonly known as El Coyote, is a family-owned restaurant located in Los Angeles, California. The restaurant faced criticism from pro-gay rights activists after the manager (the daughter of the owner) made a personal donation to support California Ballot Proposition 8, which activists associated with the restaurant rather than the individual. The case transpires over an eight-day period from November 4, 2008, which was the election day when the ballot proposition passed, to November 12, 2008, which was when the manager held an open breakfast at El Coyote to publicly discuss the issue. The central tension in the case revolves around how the manager’s donation to support a measure that legally defines marriage as “between a man and a woman” has gained the restaurant unwanted attention despite being a personal contribution separate from and not endorsed by the business. The goal of the case is to challenge students to think about tensions firms face in managing the external environment of their businesses in the face of both: 1) campaign finance and election issues; and (2) activists who may not understand all of the underlying facts.

A consultant had been asked by multiple clients for advice on how to manage generational differences in the workplace. According to experts in the area of generational differences, generations are defined by the watershed events and conditions that individuals are exposed to in their formative years. These experts believed that these common events and conditions shape individuals’ attitudes, which in turn influence their core beliefs and work values. The consultant, like many others, felt that generational differences were overhyped in the literature. Nevertheless, her client wanted answers and she set out to find them by collecting a dataset on work values.<br><br>The dataset contained over 1,000 responses across the four generations (Veterans, Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y). It also contained enough responses to deal with the question of whether there were three sub-generations of Boomers.

In 2011, a fourth-year science student at The University of Western Ontario must provide the manager of Infection and Prevention Control her recommendations to improve staff compliance with the hand hygiene requirements of the medical and support staff at London Health Sciences Centre and the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. The Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care had implemented an initiative called Just Clean Your Hands to improve hand-cleaning rates that would directly affect the number of infections acquired by patients while in hospital. The task is complicated by the large number of employees working at LHSC and the many different employee groups, ranging from physicians to cleaning staff. Hand-cleaning procedures must also be followed by the patients' families and friends who visit. In addition, workplace sub-cultures have historically not enforced compliance with discipline. Essentially, the challenge is to change the behaviour of a large group of people in diverse roles. Students should realize that because health care is publicly funded in Ontario, any plan of action to improve hand-cleaning compliance will need to be justified financially and implemented at a reasonable cost.

Snehalaya is a non-governmental organization giving care to HIV-positive individuals in Maharashtra, India. The case provides a background of the sex trade in India before discussing the founder’s upbringing and how it influenced him to serve society through working towards inclusion and rehabilitation for HIV-positive individuals and former prostitutes. The case then outlines various problems that the founder faced in securing resources and cooperation from commercial sex workers. It emphasizes his motivations in forming a dedicated team for Snehalaya, then explains various initiatives taken up by Snehalaya over the span of 21 years and how it expanded to create a bigger impact on society. It also discusses various challenges that Snehalaya faced involving quality, funding, and societal involvement, touching upon aspects of team-building and succession-planning. Finally, it summarizes evaluation parameters being used by Snehalaya to gauge its performance.

This case details Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra's (RLEK) transformation from a small movement to a well-established organization of more than 150 people. The focus of the case is on identifying the main features of the hill community advocacy group's seemingly perfect setup and recommending solutions to help RLEK move to the next level. The case briefs the reader on RLEK's background as a non-governmental organization (NGO), the reason for its inception, and its current methodology and strategy. Sections on finance, operations, projects, awards, organizational structure, and culture provide insight into the functioning of the NGO. The case also discusses the various problems faced by RLEK in its day-to-day operations, including intense competition, employee attrition, non-streamlined operations, and challenges to its operating principle of the real bottom line (i.e., the development of marginalized and underprivileged societies). The protagonist in the case faces a host of unanswered questions.

FIS Consulting Services was a business process outsourcing company specializing in consulting and financial advisory for global clients. This case deals with an offshore project team in the United States that was characterized by intra-group competitiveness, poor leadership and resource sharing, poor coordination, and limited cooperation. At the outset, the team developed a one-sided focus on achieving a high performance appraisal rating rather than completing the project as a team. The team underwent an inadequate group development process, which was manifested in the team’s immaturity. Poor leadership and lack of behavioural norms led the team to move forward with conflicting beliefs, structural inadequacy, lack of guidance, and low cohesiveness. These factors led to a decline in the team’s performance and stood as obstacles to the project’s progress. Furthermore, these events damaged the reputation of the firm. The human resources manager needed to take urgent measures to save the project team.