個案總覽

Supplements the (A) case.

Supplements the (A) case.

Chip Wilson, the founder of lululemon athletica, is thinking of wholesaling garments to achieve economies of scale. Deciding to wholesale is not an easy decision for Wilson because he has had difficulties collecting receivables in the past. To help him make his decision, he turns to real options-analysis. This case is the second in a series of lululemon athletica cases that focus on decision-making using real-options analysis. Other cases in the series are: 9B06M036, 9B06M038, 9B06M039, 9B06M040, 9B06M041 and 9B06M042.

With women's athletic wear doing extremely well, Chip Wilson, founder of lululemon athletica, is thinking about launching a menswear line to capitalize on the popularity of the lululemon brand. However, he has to weigh the costs of being distracted from his company's main concern - athletic yoga wear for women. This case is the third in a series of seven lululemon athletica cases that focus on decision-making using real-options analysis. Other products in the series are: 9B06M036, 9B06M037, 9B06M039, 9B06M040, 9B06M041 and 9B06M042.

lululemon athletica is on track to exceed $2 million in sales for 2001, a remarkable achievement considering it was founded in 1999. To achieve his targets of rapid growth, Chip Wilson, founder of lululemon athletica, is considering franchising his concept. But concerns remain, including control over branding and store-level operations. On the other hand, franchising would allow Wilson to rapidly expand and capture market share, as competitors are starting to take notice. This case is the fourth in a series of seven lululemon athletica cases that focus on decision-making using real-options analysis. Other cases in the series are: 9B06M036, 9B06M037, 9B06M038, 9B06M040, 9B06M041 and 9B06M042.

In July 2004, Shiv, Nand, and Uday Khemka are discussing their holdings in SUN Interbrew, a leading Russian beer producer that is part of the family's global portfolio of businesses. SUN Interbrew has been operating as a joint venture since 1998, when the Khemka family, who founded its predecessor company SUN Brewing in the early 1990s, decided to partner with Belgian beer giant Interbrew to survive the Russian financial and economic crises. Since then, the family has used Interbrew's capital and beer industry know-how to successfully grow the business. Now several developments prompt the Khemka family to consider a liquidity event. The family's five-year lock-up arrangement with Interbrew has just expired. In March 2004, Interbrew has announced its plans to take a controlling stake in Brazilian giant AmBev, a deal that will create the world's largest brewer. In addition, the Alfa Group, a Russian conglomerate that has become the third largest shareholder in SUN Interbrew, has announced its intention to take part in the company's management and attain a leading position in the Russian beer market. Is there a role for the Khemka family in the future of this company? Should they maintain some stake in the company and continue to participate in its management? Should they auction off their shares to the highest bidder and exit? Or should they play a role in the global beer industry through a stock-for-stock sale to InBev, and if so, at what price?

The case describes an attempt by Steve Gundrum, the CEO and President of Mattson, to improve the company's innovativeness. Mattson, located in Silicon Valley, California, is an independent developer of new products for the food and beverage industry. Mattson creates, develops, and brings to market new beverages, snacks, frozen meals, and many other food and beverage products as a contractor to the large producers in the industry. Gundrum believes there's an opportunity to improve his innovation system by borrowing from the leading-edge software firms that surround him. To test new methods of developing products, Gundrum creates a contest - to develop a better cookie - and commissions three teams: one using Mattson's traditional hierarchical team structure, one using open source (OS) development, and a third using extreme programming (XP). The Mattson Project Delta (A), (B), and (C) cases explain what happened. Learning objectives: The study and discussion of this case can help students understand more deeply the importance of team composition and structure in the innovation process. It also shows the power of reaching across industry boundaries to find new ideas, not just for products but for business process and structure as well. The key lessons in this case are that: 1) Team structure and management can make a big difference in both creativity and productivity. 2) Problem solving (internal generation of new answers to problems) and solution finding (external exploration for existing solutions to problems) can each be valuable in different situations and at different stages in the innovation life cycle. 3) Managers have many options when choosing a team structure. Further, the case provides a nice language for talking about team structure. 4) Prototyping can be applied not just for new products, but new structures and processes for innovation.

The case describes an attempt by Steve Gundrum, the CEO and President of Mattson, to improve the company's innovativeness. Mattson, located in Silicon Valley, California, is an independent developer of new products for the food and beverage industry. Mattson creates, develops, and brings to market new beverages, snacks, frozen meals, and many other food and beverage products as a contractor to the large producers in the industry. Gundrum believes there's an opportunity to improve his innovation system by borrowing from the leading-edge software firms that surround him. To test new methods of developing products, Gundrum creates a contest - to develop a better cookie - and commissions three teams: one using Mattson's traditional hierarchical team structure, one using open source (OS) development, and a third using extreme programming (XP). The Mattson Project Delta (A), (B), and (C) cases explain what happened. Learning objectives: The study and discussion of this case can help students understand more deeply the importance of team composition and structure in the innovation process. It also shows the power of reaching across industry boundaries to find new ideas, not just for products but for business process and structure as well. The key lessons in this case are that: 1) Team structure and management can make a big difference in both creativity and productivity. 2) Problem solving (internal generation of new answers to problems) and solution finding (external exploration for existing solutions to problems) can each be valuable in different situations and at different stages in the innovation life cycle. 3) Managers have many options when choosing a team structure. Further, the case provides a nice language for talking about team structure. 4) Prototyping can be applied not just for new products, but new structures and processes for innovation.

An abstract is not available for this product.

The Mountain Hardwear A, B, and C cases cover the founding and rise of the premium outdoor apparel and equipment manufacturer. The A case (set between late 1993 and 1999) addresses the company's founding, early brand development, and the particular characteristics of the outdoor apparel and equipment industry. The B case is set in 2003 and examines trends within that industry as well as the company's opportunity to be acquired by a larger, more diversified apparel company. The C case is set in 2006, and it examines Mountain Hardwear's athlete sponsorship program.

Supplements the (A) case.

An abstract is not available for this product.

An abstract is not available for this product.

An abstract is not available for this product.

Late in October 2006, China Resources (Holdings) Co., Ltd. (CRC) CEO Charlie Song Lin, CFO Jiang Wel, and Information Center GM Derek Cheng were traveling from Hong Kong to Wuxi, China to attend the first ever meeting of China Resources Microelectronic's (CRM) newly established Office of Strategy Management (OSM). The team had high hopes for this meeting as CRM was not only one of CRC's most strategically important profit centers but also a potential model for the implementation of the CRC 6S management system in all of CRC's 19 profit centers.

This supplement to Organizing From Scratch: The Learning Lab Denmark Experience (A), product 9B06C006, identifies several of the consortia's achievements, notes some findings from LLD's self-evaluation report and discusses significant organizational changes.

It was long believed that entrepreneurship in Russia is close to impossible without government or mafia connections. This case study argues that, on the contrary, garage-type entrepreneurship is possible in Russia. For the Russians at Frontstep, the company in this case study, however, there were no how-to manuals to turn to. When the employees started making demands for Western-level salaries and benefits, matters came to a head. The problem was solved as the founders developed a hybrid organization, with Western incentives and structures, and Russian corporate culture.

An abstract is not available for this product.

Supplements the (A) case.

An abstract is not available for this product.