個案總覽

EnactusOC is a student-led group that had attracted and retained students successfully for over 15 years. In the late spring of 2020, amid the global pandemic, Nicole Sapieha, the current President, found herself at the helm of an organization of students separated by space and time and lacking opportunities for connection. Through the summer of 2020, Sapieha and her team built online and limited face-to-face interaction (when and where permitted) with students from four campuses in separate cities. Early in the fall, it becomes apparent to Sapieha and her team that interactions will need to be virtual for the foreseeable future, and certainly for the 2020/21 academic year. In addition, the much anticipated and highly rewarding regional and national competitions were moving online. As the fall semester winds down and the Christmas holiday break nears, Sapieha recognizes that team morale is at an all-time low, there is little excitement for competitions, and motivation for leading community projects is waning. How could she engage students to participate when none of the usual perks of Enactus existed? This case deals with the challenges involved in motivating and organizing a geographically separated team of students to create meaningful and impactful projects without the usual social and emotional benefits of face-to-face connection. It also explores the difficulties that leaders experience when generating enthusiasm and buy-in when rewards have changed.

On October 28, 2021, Mark Zuckerberg, founder, chief executive officer, and chair of Facebook Inc. (Facebook), announced Facebook's name change to Meta Platforms Inc., reflecting his vision for the company's transition to metaverse technology. At the same time, Facebook was plagued by multiple scandals related to a data privacy breach, the spread of misinformation on the social media platform, employee whistle-blowing, and surveillance-style marketing and advertising. Trust in Zuckerberg's leadership was diminishing. Zuckerberg controlled 58 per cent of Facebook's voting shares, and stakeholders, critics, and regulators were calling for distributed leadership. How could Zuckerberg restore trust in his company and his leadership? What did he need to change to become a more effective leader?

Cameron (Cam) Barker, CEO and Founder of Blake Sports Apparel, sat in his office at his company's headquarters in Birmingham, England, feeling stunned and disappointed. Only a few minutes prior, he had wrapped up a meeting with CFO James Ryan, a highly-respected star executive who had just abruptly given Barker his notice of resignation. When Barker hired Ryan in November 2020, he had asked Ryan not to take the position unless he intended to stay for at least five years, which Ryan agreed was his plan. Yet, here Barker was just eighteen months later and Ryan was ready to walk out the door, citing Barker's leadership style as one factor in his decision to leave. After years of struggling to find the right executive team structure and size and to fill the positions with the right people, Barker thought he had finally gotten it right. The executive team had proved that they were capable of communicating, collaborating and making smart decisions in ways that put the organization's priorities ahead of their own. Furthermore, Ryan had proven himself to be just the kind of CFO the growing company needed. Baker knew his departure was a loss. Why did Ryan resign? What issues had he taken with Barker's leadership? Should Barker take Ryan's feedback to heart, or was it simply a case of conflicting styles? After years of managing dysfunctional executive teams, did Barker need to change the way he managed his reports now that his executive team was collaborative and high-performing? If so, how?

We live in an age of massive global disruption. Technological advancements threaten century-old business models, globalization is reordering supply chains, and people need to work with colleagues and customers who have vastly different backgrounds. On top of that, we have been in the midst of a global pandemic, and customers, employers, and investors are demanding more than just a Black Lives Matter social media post from organizations that purport to take social justice seriously. Organizations with high cultural intelligence (CQ) are able to navigate this volatility and complexity effectively. Over the last two decades, scholars from across the world have published hundreds of articles on CQ, the capability to relate and work effectively in complex, culturally diverse situations. Most of the work has examined CQ at the individual level. But what about organizations? Can organizations be culturally intelligent? The emerging research on CQ at the organizational level offers leaders and organizations critical insights for navigating today's diverse, digital world. Organizational CQ is a firm's capability to function effectively in a complex and unpredictable multicultural world. This article stresses the importance of the culturally intelligent organization and explains how to develop organizational CQ.

This case provides brief descriptions of 18 examples of corporate leaders confronting questions of whether and how to engage with societal issues, including social, political, and environmental issues. Social issues include COVID-19; social and racial justice; discrimination and prejudice; gender, sex, and sexual orientation; and humanitarian crises. Political issues included voting rights, abortion rights, and geopolitical conflict and rivalry. Environmental issues included climate change. The examples took place between 2014 and 2022. The examples are: 1. Delta Airlines/Ed Bastian: Vaccine Mandates (2021) 2. Racial Justice: Starbucks/Howard Schultz: "Race Together" (2015) 3. Merck/Ken Frazier: Charlottesville, President Trump, and Race (2017) 4. Starbucks/Kevin Johnson: Philadelphia Incident (2018) 5. OneTen Initiative: Living Wage Jobs for Black Americans (2020) 6. Tech Leaders: Oppose the Trump Travel Ban (2017) 7. Delta Airlines/Ed Bastian: Rescinding NRA Discounts after the Parkland Shooting (2018) 8. Corporate Leaders: Responding to Anti-Asian Hate (2021) 9. Salesforce.com/Marc Benioff: Indiana Boycott for Religious Freedom Restoration Act (2015) 10. Target/Brian Cornell: North Carolina "Bathroom Bill" (2016) 11. Disney/Bob Chapek: The Florida "Don't Say Gay" Bill (2022) 12. H&M/Helena Helmersson: China, Uighurs, and Human Rights (2020) 13. Corporate Leaders: Voting Rights and Election Bills (2021) 14. Corporate Leaders: Texas Abortion Ban (2021) 15. Unilever/Alan Jope: Ben & Jerry's, Israel, and Occupied Palestinian Territory (2021) 16. Google: Ceasing Search in China (2018) 17. Apple/Tim Cook: Data Privacy in China (2021) 18. Amazon/Jeff Bezos: Co-Founding Climate Pledge (2019)

Singapore-based bank DBS went through three waves of purpose-driven transformation, overhauling the bank's systems, upgrading employee skills, and re-centering its customer focus, with the bank's purpose growing bolder with each key milestone achieved. Find out how the board, CEO Piyush Gupta and his management committee steered the bank through the waves of change, and the challenges they had to overcome along the way.

Dr. Pramita Balakrishnan was a strong advocate for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and was one of Canada's most renowned business professors in management communications. Over the past three years, more than 500 students had completed a virtual, cross-cultural, experiential exercise as part of Balakrishnan's management communications course. However, this year, a number of students expressed discomfort in working with a partnering school, Mission University in Louisiana, due to its anti-LGBT2Q+ stance. For example, the Mission University administration required students to sign a values statement that prohibited "sexually impure relationships" such as homosexual activities. Other students in the course wanted to proceed with the exercise. Should she cancel the exercise? What message would her decision send to students, faculty, and administrators at both schools? What would be the potential consequences of her decision and what was the best approach moving forward? Balakrishnan had less than 24 hours to figure out what to do before the exercise was set to launch. The case uses fictional people and institutions to illustrate a pressing and important set of issues in education, with high relevance to business and other organizations.

Pete Anderson, the general manager of Mumbai Dairy Company, is facing several difficult but related challenges. Revenues and profits at the Mumbai, India-based joint venture are in decline. At the same time, worker strikes and disruptions across India have become a major issue. Internally, employees seem to be unmotivated and many-particularly Anderson's direct reports-appear to be taking him for granted. Employees blame seasonal conditions as the cause of waning performance. Others are complaining that their compensation is too little given the contributions they are making. Anderson needs a plan of action for his upcoming meeting with his Singapore-based boss.

As the pandemic recedes, we face a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create a future where we are not only more productive in our work, but more fulfilled as human beings. That according to one of the world's foremost authorities on the future of work. In a wide-ranging interview, she describes how COVID-19 has changed the workplace forever, and now that working norms have been 'unfrozen,' it is time to reimagine traditional working models. She presents a four-stage framework for redesigning work, which begins with 'Understanding what matters' for each particular role and to each individual. In the end, she shows that increasing flexibility around time and place and having more time for ourselves, our families and our communities is really about one thing: getting back to being more human.

The pandemic blew up everything we thought we knew about work, and the author encourages readers to use it as a catalyst to evolve their leadership mindset. He says many people still treat leadership like a thermostat: They believe the leader must carefully monitor everything their subordinates do, and when there is a deviation, take corrective action. The problem is, this approach to leadership creates an illusion of control - the idea that we can control our subordinates' every action while they're at work. The truth: We can't. The author provides three principles for building a culture of trust between workers and managers-and provides tips for giving employees more meaning, autonomy and freedom at work, which will improve productivity across the board.

Some company cultures are marked by mistrust and paranoia, which leads to a slew of negative outcomes: poor performance, burnout, turnover, and cheating. People who worry about the behavior of others spread gossip and are prone to backstabbing. That brings out the worst in their colleagues, leading cynics' suspicion and distrust to become self-fulfilling prophecies. The good news is that cynicism has antidotes, according to the author, who shares research findings--his and those of others--to help leaders understand how people fall into a "cynicism trap," how their organizations' policies and practices may be pushing them into it, and what they can do to escape it. Tactics include redirecting the organizational culture toward collaboration and trust and making sure that all managers--not just those at the top--are modeling trusting behaviors and combating cynicism in their interactions.

#MeToo and Black Lives Matter have inspired many companies to announce commitments to combating discrimination and racism. Commitments alone won't dismantle systemic inequities, however. In this article two professors who have studied that problem present their solution: the Shared Sisterhood framework. It's based on a set of practices they call Dig, Bridge, and Collectively Act, and though it initially was designed to help Black and white women connect and overcome their mutual challenges by working together, it can help strengthen relationships between other identity groups as well. The first practice, dig, entails identifying your social identities (which might include, say, "woman" or "man" or "nonbinary" and "Hispanic" or "Black" or "Chinese") and researching the power dynamics associated with each one. Some identities are imbued with social power; some have been historically marginalized. You need to recognize your blind spots about those dynamics in order to succeed at the second practice: bridging, or building authentic, trusting connections with others across your differences. In the third practice, collectively act, you and the people who share your values turn those bridges into channels for positive change, mobilizing to make organizations more welcoming and equitable.

This case set is part of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) curriculum. To see other material in the GVV curriculum, please visit http://store.darden.virginia.edu/giving-voice-to-values. Isabel is a young, recently graduated finance professional who works for ABC Group, a small investment bank. Due in part to high staff turnover, she has recently been promoted to senior financial analyst, and her first important independent project is a business valuation for a five-star hotel out of town; ABC Group would intermediate the hotel's sale. At a business trip where she gets to know the hotel and gathers all the data necessary to do the valuation, she also discovers that the hotel sale might be connected to money-laundering activities. Back in her office, right after finishing the valuation, she receives a call from her boss asking her to manipulate the figures to obtain a much higher offer price. This request goes against Isabel's personal and professional values of honesty, truthfulness, and fairness, and it seems to confirm her suspicions of money laundering. This A case asks students to step into Isabel's shoes and figure out a feasible action plan that is consistent with her values. This case set is targeted at undergraduate students taking finance, leadership, or ethics courses.

Organizations and top teams downplay or ignore how hard it is to be a good manager to skillfully hire, engage, develop, coach, supervise, evaluate, and promote people. Most managers aren't held accountable for building and exercising these critical skills. Instead, they've internalized the strong message that qualities like strategic vision and executive presence matter much more, leaving them and their organizations poorly equipped to deal with reality. Here are the skills that can turn the tide.

Investors and regulators are increasingly pushing for greater diversity on boards, but many companies' efforts to do so, known as board refreshment, are falling flat. Vague terms, loose requirements, and CEO influence work against change and favor the status quo. Meaningful refreshment requires organizations to articulate specific intentions and guard against too much CEO input.

This case set is part of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) curriculum. To see other material in the GVV curriculum, please visit http://store.darden.virginia.edu/giving-voice-to-values. Taylor is a senior product manager at Catalise, a start-up that develops artificial intelligence (AI) diagnostic technology for mental health disorders. When Taylor is promoted to this position, her first project is to manage the launch of Catalisten, an AI-based software that diagnoses major depressive disorder by analyzing patients' speech patterns. Company leaders expect Catalisten to be the company's new blockbuster product and expedite its launch to ensure a competitive advantage. As Taylor onboards onto the Catalisten team, she learns that the product, which is nearly complete, misdiagnoses female patients at significantly higher rates than male patients. When Taylor raises the concern to a team member, she is pushed to "bury" the algorithm's discrepancy in order to protect the product launch time line. In this A case, Taylor's challenge is to convince Catalise's chief product officer to delay Catalisten's launch to address the AI software's gender bias. This case set is intended for use at the MBA level in courses in business innovation, entrepreneurship, engineering, technology product development, tech ethics, and leadership and ethics. It could be taught to advanced undergraduates who have developed a foundation in GVV, ethical decision-making, or computer science.

This case set is part of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) curriculum. To see other material in the GVV curriculum, please visit http://store.darden.virginia.edu/giving-voice-to-values. Taylor is a senior product manager at Catalise, a start-up that develops artificial intelligence (AI) diagnostic technology for mental health disorders. When Taylor is promoted to this position, her first project is to manage the launch of Catalisten, an AI-based software that diagnoses major depressive disorder by analyzing patients' speech patterns. Company leaders expect Catalisten to be the company's new blockbuster product and expedite its launch to ensure a competitive advantage. As Taylor onboards onto the Catalisten team, she learns that the product, which is nearly complete, misdiagnoses female patients at significantly higher rates than male patients. When Taylor raises the concern to a team member, she is pushed to "bury" the algorithm's discrepancy in order to protect the product launch time line. In the A case, Taylor's challenge is to convince Catalise's chief product officer to delay Catalisten's launch to address the AI software's gender bias. In this B case, students follow Taylor as she approaches her chief product officer about delaying Catalisten's launch and addressing the product's bias. This case set is intended for use at the MBA level in courses in business innovation, entrepreneurship, engineering, technology product development, tech ethics, and leadership and ethics. It could be taught to advanced undergraduates who have developed a foundation in GVV, ethical decision-making, or computer science.

In this case, students take on the role of the president of Kansas State University (K-State), a public university located in Manhattan, Kansas. In response to an offensive tweet from a university student, many Black athletes at K-State are demanding action be taken against the student, saying they will not participate in any sporting events until something is done. Other stakeholders at the school are opposed to the athletes' actions, arguing in defense of free speech. A public response cannot be delayed any longer. Acting as the president of the university, students must decide what to do. Students are therefore asked to read the case in class and immediately write down their answers to questions about how they view the students' demands, about what the university president should decide and do, and about how best to communicate with the various key stakeholders. Ultimately, whatever is done next will be highly scrutinized and will likely have long-lasting consequences for the athletics department, the university as a whole, and the president's and potentially others' individual reputations. This makes the case useful for helping students simulate real-time, concrete decision-making about difficult situations with major implications.

This case set is part of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) curriculum. To see other material in the GVV curriculum, please visit http://store.darden.virginia.edu/giving-voice-to-values. Simon is a data scientist in the advanced analytics team of a large German corporation. In its hiring process, the company uses artificial intelligence (AI) that analyzes video interviews to create personality profiles of applicants. It is Simon's job to further develop the AI software according to the needs of the HR department. In this A case, Simon is asked by his HR counterpart, Luke, to program the AI to display not only an applicant's personality profile but also the likelihood that they will soon become pregnant. Luke justifies the request by saying that it is important that applicants be physically fit and resilient, as they must be able to operate large machines, and he does not want to put pregnant workers at risk. Although Simon has the data points and capabilities to program the software as desired, he feels uncomfortable and wants to find a way to effectively enact his values. This case is intended for use at the graduate/MBA level in courses on information technology management, technology development, data ethics, organizational behavior, and leadership and ethics; it would also be suitable for advanced undergraduates in these fields.

This case set is part of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) curriculum. To see other material in the GVV curriculum, please visit http://store.darden.virginia.edu/giving-voice-to-values. Simon is a data scientist in the advanced analytics team of a large German corporation. In its hiring process, the company uses artificial intelligence (AI) that analyzes video interviews to create personality profiles of applicants. It is Simon's job to further develop the AI software according to the needs of the HR department. In the A case, Simon is asked by his HR counterpart, Luke, to program the AI to display not only an applicant's personality profile, but also the likelihood that they will soon become pregnant. Luke justifies the request by saying that it is important that applicants be physically fit and resilient, as they must be able to operate large machines, and he does not want to put pregnant workers at risk. Although Simon has the data points and capabilities to program the software as desired, he feels uncomfortable and wants to find a way to effectively enact his values. In this B case, Simon shares his concerns with Luke. This case is intended for use at the graduate/MBA level in courses on information technology management, technology development, data ethics, organizational behavior, and leadership and ethics; it would also be suitable for advanced undergraduates in these fields.