個案總覽

For over forty years, Daktronics, Inc. had been one of the world's leading suppliers of electronic scoreboards, large electronic display systems, digital messaging solutions, software and services for sports venues, commercial and transportation applications. After decades of producing its products using a batch system, the multi-million dollar company made a formal decision to pursue lean manufacturing in February, 2006. The lean initiative took on even greater importance due to sluggishness in the U.S. economy and slowed sales in 2009. Now in 2010, four years after the lean project's initial launch, readers are asked, how successful has the lean conversion been, including the transition from a batch system to a high mix, flow line system? Is the firm poised and ready to extend its lean initiative to nonmanufacturing areas? By using clues within the case and detailed exhibits, the case provides a rich opportunity for readers to trace and evaluate an original equipment manufacturer's (OEM) lean journey. Ultimately, they should be able to answer questions, such as: What kinds of things did Daktronics appear to do correctly? What kinds of things could Daktronics have done differently... or better? What recommendations might follow from their experience for other OEMs that seek to implement lean manufacturing? What are the pros and cons of implementing lean techniques in nonmanufacturing areas?

In early March 2010, Bill Ritterath, Chief Financial Officer of Daktronics, Inc., was meeting in his office with Jim Morgan, CEO, and Alered (Al) Kurtenbach, Chairman of the Board, about increasing dividend payments to shareholders. Daktronics was the world's leading supplier of electronic scoreboards, large electronic display systems, and digital messaging solutions for use in sports, transportation and communications. The company had been going through a difficult period the past three years with the downturn in the national economy and the sudden reversal in the company's operating and financial performance. Sales were projected by security analysts to fall from a high of approximately $581 million in 2009 to an estimated value of $424 million for fiscal year 2010 ending in May [1]. Stock price had also fallen from a high of $38.66 per share on December 1, 2006 to $7.72 per share on March 3, 2010. But with the economy showing some signs of recovering from the recession, Dr. Kurtenbach thought it was time to review Daktronics' current dividend policy: "We can afford to return some additional cash to shareholders given our confidence that the company is turning around and business is improving." Cash balances were growing rapidly and the outlook for future cash flows was positive. In making the decision, Dr. Kurtenbach wanted it to be based on an assessment of the company's current cash position and future cash flow projections: "I don't want this dividend to reward short- term holders at the expense of our long-term shareholders" Dr. Kurtenbach asked Mr. Ritterath to make a recommendation at the next Board meeting (in four weeks) on a new dividend distribution, including both the amount and form of the distribution.

The Daktronics ("Dak") case draws attention to what a company can do in the midst of recessionary forces when sales have declined significantly and the company's leadership position may be headed for additional erosion. The case is as of FYE 2010 (May) and examines this B2B firm which is the leading score board design and manufacturing firm. Dak has significant opportunity in various countries abroad, but when and where the company should undertake additional strategic action is not clear. The company's executive team and board confront increasing competition and press pressure. Should the firm wait out the recession or undertake a bold strategic move? Founded in South Dakota by two South Dakota State University engineering professors. Dak produces videographic displays plus related products and services that lead in the sports arena market installations and have applications across a variety of institutional and commercial markets. Among the commercial markets that offer opportunities are digital business advertising venues. To date, the firm has pursued a conservative, but path-breaking technology leadership position in its market. Dak is a B2B case that provides examples of applications which will be of interest to and useful with both graduate and undergraduate level students.

This is a supplement to Charles Chocolates (A).

This is a supplement to Charles Chocolates (A).

This is a supplement to Charles Chocolates (A).

This is a supplement to Charles Chocolates (A).

After leading a management buy-out, Harold Mills transformed ZeroChaos into a global staffing enterprise. Poised to raise additional capital to fund the company's next phase of growth, he was also confronting the liquidity demands of his early-stage investors and relationships were becoming strained.

Supplement for E408A

The beer industry comprises elements of sub-national, national and global competition. To expand, the industry players use various strategic approaches as illustrated by five major beer companies: Anheuser-Busch InBev (9B11M124), Groupo Modelo (9B11M125), Tsingtao Brewery (9B11M126), San Miguel (9B09M074) and Thai Bev. Observations about the beer industry - a fairly easy product and industry to understand - can be extrapolated to other industries. Lessons can be drawn regarding the influence of industry pressures on the four key components of an international expansion strategy: product choice for expansion, market choice for geographic expansion, timing of entry and mode of entry.

This case explores the very different paths taken by the Ford Motor Company and the General Motors Corporation in the first three decades of the twentieth century. Henry Ford's Model T was a car for the masses. After considerable experimentation, Ford Motor perfected a mass production system that converted the vast majority of jobs in the factory into routine tasks. It pioneered the moving assembly line, and it pursued processes that became increasingly integrated and mechanized. While it's single-minded focus on cost minimization led to spectacular market success for a time, the resulting inflexibility made it difficult for the company to respond to market changes. This created an opportunity for General Motors and others, particularly in the face of technological shifts to closed-body designs and metal stamping technology, as well as the marketing-led idea of the annual model change. The case offers a setting to examine several frameworks: exploration versus exploitation, the emergence of dominant designs, and vertical integration versus transaction costs and supplier hold-up. The (A) case closes with the question of what GM should do about supplier Fisher Body. The (B) case summarizes the shift to all-steel body stamping and engine manufacturing as the core technologies for automobile production, and how these changes made it difficult for Ford to maintain its first-mover advantage.

In case (B) of this two-part case series, the Chairman of Amway (China), Eva Cheng, encounters many situations where her negotiation and leadership skills are tested with challenges from government bodies, illegal sellers, competitors, and the company's own distributors. How can Amway overcome these hurdles and thrive in China's opaque and volatile environment?

In late 2008, government officials in Summit County, Ohio began to discuss the possibility of combining the county's three public health districts. These early discussions set the stage for more than two years of negotiations that eventually led to the consolidation of the health departments in late 2010 and early 2011. This case tells the story of why and how officials in Summit County combined their public health districts and includes an epilogue that describes the consolidated agency's first year of operations. Case number 1987.1

Supplement for W13289

This is a supplement to Smith Family Financial Plan (A), product 9B13N005.

In April 2012, Jenne Britell, the Chairman of the board of directors of United Rentals, Inc. (NYSE: URI) was preparing her notes for an upcoming stockholders' meeting. It was a meeting unlike most other meetings she had chaired. Stockholders were about to vote on a transaction that was perhaps the ultimate fulfillment of the founders' original vision. She was reminded of the company's founding just 15 years earlier and its meteoric growth. With a considerable sense of achievement and satisfaction, she reflected on her tenure as board chair commencing five years ago. Elected to the board in 2006 and then unanimously selected by her peers as Chairman in June 2008, Britell led the board through the aftermath of a tumultuous period that included senior management and board changes, a SEC investigation, financial restatements, the jilting of the company by Cerberus Capital Management in a transaction to acquire URI, and the deepest recession to hit the global economy since the Great Depression. At the meeting, stockholders would be asked to consider approval of a merger agreement between URI, the largest equipment rental company in the world, with RSC, the second largest equipment rental company in the world and URI's largest competitor. The meeting would mark the triumph of a new governance model and company strategy whose development and implementation Britell and CEO Michael Kneeland had led. As Britell reflected on the hard won gains, she also looked forward to the challenges and opportunities that lay ahead as the company managed the integration of RSC's operations with URI and the integration of three new board members from the acquired company. She also reflected on how governance and strategy could continue to evolve as the company planned for the next five years.