個案總覽

The case recounts the experience of the Dubai government-owned marine terminal operator, Dubai Ports World, when it tried to take over the American operations of P&O in 2005-2006. It describes how, in the political environment following the 9/11 attacks, the prospect of a Middle-Eastern-owned firm taking over and operating terminal services in some 20 US ports generated such strong political opposition (notably in Congress) that, despite strong support from President George W. Bush, the firm ultimately withdrew its takeover bid.

The case recounts the experience of the Dubai government-owned marine terminal operator, Dubai Ports World, when it tried to take over the American operations of P&O in 2005-2006. It describes how, in the political environment following the 9/11 attacks, the prospect of a Middle-Eastern-owned firm taking over and operating terminal services in some 20 US ports generated such strong political opposition (notably in Congress) that, despite strong support from President George W. Bush, the firm ultimately withdrew its takeover bid.

The case offers a role-play simulation in which a team of up to 13 participants acts as a board of directors of a privately-owned national energy company. The board has to make decisions about 1) a foreign-country acquisition proposed by management, 2) a change in executive compensation. It consists of 3 types of directors - affiliated directors representing the mother company, executive directors, and independent directors. Four sub-committees convene before the board meeting to discuss the issues on the agenda and make their recommendations.

This case is designed as the second part of a two-part case study on Cathay Pacific's cargo operations, but it can be used separately on a stand-alone basis. The objective of this case is to demonstrate the implementation process of e-freight solution at Cathay Pacific, which involved multiple stakeholders along the air cargo supply chain in multiple countries. Students are expected to step into the role of the cargo service manager in charge of the implementation project, and come up with a detailed plan to resolve the issue.

Part B of a four-part series, which also includes 9B13M004, 9B13M006 and 9B13M007.

Supplement for W13122

Supplement for W13122

<p style="color: rgb(197, 183, 131);"><strong> AWARD WINNER - Indian Management Issues and Opportunities Award, European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) Case Writing Competition</strong></p><br>Part B of a four-part series, which also includes 9B13M004, 9B13M006 and 9B13M007.

<p style="color: rgb(197, 183, 131);"><strong> AWARD WINNER - Indian Management Issues and Opportunities Award, European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) Case Writing Competition</strong></p><br>Part C of a four-part series, which also includes 9B13M004, 9B13M005 and 9B13M007.

<p style="color: rgb(197, 183, 131);"><strong> AWARD WINNER - Indian Management Issues and Opportunities Award, European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) Case Writing Competition</strong></p><br>Part D of a four-part series, which also includes 9B13M004, 9B13M005 and 9B13M006.

Part B of a three-part series. See 9B13M044 and 9B13M046.

Part C of a three-part series. See 9B13M044 and 9B13M045.

This sequel accompanies case number 1985.0, "Cracking Oyster: Shashi Verma & Transport for London Confront a Tough Contract (B)." "Cracking Oyster (B)" is the second part of a two-part case set, intended for use in a two-class sequence. The (B) case may also be taught on its own, but students will need to read (or at least skim) the (A) case in order to understand (B). "Cracking Oyster (B)" is accompanied by a six-and-a-half minute video companion piece. The (B) case describes how Shashi Verma (MPP '97), Director of Fares and Ticketing for London's super agency, Transport for London, copes with a frustrating contract at the heart of the agency's ticketing operation-the Prestige Contract, which is, when he assumes his position in 2006, at the midpoint of a 17-year contract term. While the (A) case lays out the nature of Verma's frustrations with Prestige (a cumbersome process for negotiating variations, excessive costs, inadequate performance requirements, and poor incentives for the contractor to col-laborate with TfL on new innovations), the more provocative (B) case describes how Verma-using techniques of "game theory" and taking some political and legal risks-tries to negotiate much more favorable contract terms for TfL. The case ends with Verma, TfL, and the TfL board on the horns of a dilemma-whether to go forward or re-treat after a high court grants one of the contractors an injunction that will require TfL to defend its actions in a court trial (or, more likely, settle out of court) if it goes forward with its plans. This one-page sequel describes what happens: TfL does decide to go forward, does settle the legal matter out of court, and ultimately obtains a contract on much more favorable terms than the original Prestige. The video companion piece shows Verma in conversation with HKS Professor Richard Zeckhauser, as the two reflect on Verma's use of game theory, a subject taught by Zeckhauser. Case number 1985.1

Supplement for W13133

""Cracking Oyster (B)" is the second part of a two-part case set, "Cracking Oyster (A) and (B)," intended for use in a two-class sequence. The (B) case may also be taught on its own, but students will need to read (or at least skim) the (A) case in order to understand (B). "Cracking Oyster (B)" is accompanied by a six-and-a-half minute video companion piece. The (B) case describes how Shashi Verma (MPP '97), Director of Fares and Ticketing for London's super agency, Transport for London, copes with a frustrating contract at the heart of the agency's ticketing operation-the Prestige Contract, which is, when he assumes his position in 2006, at the midpoint of a 17-year contract term. While the (A) case lays out the nature of Verma's frustrations with Prestige (a cumbersome process for negotiating variations, excessive costs, inadequate performance requirements, and poor incentives for the contractor to col-laborate with TfL on new innovations), the more provocative (B) case describes how Verma-using techniques of "game theory" and taking some political and legal risks-tries to negotiate much more favorable contract terms for TfL. The case ends with Verma, TfL, and the TfL board on the horns of a dilemma-whether to go forward or re-treat after a high court grants one of the contractors an injunction that will require TfL to defend its actions in a court trial (or, more likely, settle out of court) if it goes forward with its plans. A one-page sequel describes what happens: TfL does decide to go forward, does settle the legal matter out of court, and ultimately obtains a contract on much more favorable terms than the original Prestige. The video companion piece shows Verma in conversation with HKS Professor Richard Zeckhauser, as the two reflect on Verma's use of game theory, a subject taught by Zeckhauser. Case number 1985.0 "

Supplement for case 113124

Supplement for case 510104

This B case is a supplement to Newmont Mining Corp. and a Mercury Spill in Peru (A) 9B13M002. Since the spill, Newmont spent more than US$100 million on compensation and improvements to the mine to reduce its environmental impact and prevent further spills.<br><br>An internal audit concluded environmental standards at the mine were seriously lacking. In-house counsel warned other executives about the possibility of criminal liability.<br><br>Despite improvements at the mine, a large local protest prevented Newmont from expanding its operations in the area. Lack of trust by the locals contributed to the protest. The new CEO is trying to decide what else Newmont is morally required to implement before continuing to operate Yanacocha, and Newmont’s other mines, successfully.

The three part case discusses managing the dilemma of compliance versus entrepreneurial decisions ("intrapreneurship") in a large corporation and decision-making processes in mature markets (here: US HQ) vs. emerging markets (here: Russia). The case concerns a medical devices company and the life sciences industry; however, market mechanisms are applicable to other industries as well. In Case A, two experienced Russian managers face a tempting business opportunity: founding a professional education center for healthcare personnel in one of the most prosperous regions of Central Asia seems to offer win-win situations for all stakeholders involved. Case B aims at strengthening the student's capabilities for thinking about alternatives and developing the tenacity to pursue entrepreneurial ideas. The case closes in the third section by asking "Was it worth it?"

The three part case discusses managing the dilemma of compliance versus entrepreneurial decisions ("intrapreneurship") in a large corporation and decision-making processes in mature markets (here: US HQ) vs. emerging markets (here: Russia). The case concerns a medical devices company and the life sciences industry; however, market mechanisms are applicable to other industries as well. In Case A, two experienced Russian managers face a tempting business opportunity: founding a professional education center for healthcare personnel in one of the most prosperous regions of Central Asia seems to offer win-win situations for all stakeholders involved. Case B aims at strengthening the student's capabilities for thinking about alternatives and developing the tenacity to pursue entrepreneurial ideas. The case closes in the third section by asking "Was it worth it?"