Search results

This case requires students to evaluate alternative dual-share-class corporate structures that allow companies and entrepreneurs to pursue profit with purpose. The case explores Impact Makers, an IT consulting company based in Richmond, Virginia. While original founders of the firm hold all voting rights, the cash flow rights belong to two nonprofits setting the stage for a Newman's Own model of management consulting. The case discusses whether and how the alternative corporate structure aids the firm's overall strategy to attract top-quality employees, pay them competitive salaries, and provide superior service to its clients while donating 100% of its lifetime value to charitable causes, largely through partnerships with various nonprofit organizations. More importantly, the case asks students to evaluate how such a dual-share-class and dual-purpose company can raise capital to fund continued growth.

The case opens with CEO Michael Pirron reminding himself of all the questions he had run through to execute a strategy to further grow Impact Makers' consulting business both through expanding a menu of services and through conquering new geographical markets. To do either, or both, the company needed a cash infusion. Internal cash was limited, as up to 40% of it flowed to charitable partners, demonstrating Impact Makers' commitment to its mission. Raising debt for a company without fixed assets was challenging and time consuming. Complicating it all was that being structured as a nonstock corporation rendered equity raising difficult. Could Impact Makers raise money to grow and stay true to community values at the same time?

The case was developed from secondary sources and interviews with a security analyst. The secondary sources include company annual reports, news reports, analyst reports, industry reports, company websites, stock exchange websites and databases such as Bloomberg and CMIE Prowess.

Increasing competition in product and capital markets has put tremendous pressure on managers to become more cost competitive. To address their firms' uncompetitive cost structures, managers may have to consider dramatic restructuring of their businesses. During 2014–2017, Tata Steel Ltd (TSL) UK considered a series of divestitures and a merger plan to nurse the company back to health. The case considers the economics of the restructuring plan. The case is designed to help students analyze a corporate downsizing program undertaken by a large Indian company in the UK and to highlight the dynamic role of the CFO and governance issues in family firms. It introduces students to issues surrounding a typical restructuring and provides students a platform to practice the estimation of value creation in a restructuring exercise. While some cases on corporate restructuring in the context of developed economies are available, there are very few cases written in an emerging market context. This case bridges that gap. TSL presents a unique opportunity to study corporate restructuring necessitated by a failed cross-border acquisition. It illustrates the potential for value loss in large, cross-border acquisitions. It shows how managerial hubris can prompt family firm owners to overbid in acquisitions and create legacy hot spots. In addition, the case can be used to discuss the causes of governance failures such as weak institutional monitoring and poor legal enforcement in emerging markets that could potentially harm minority shareholders.

The case was developed from secondary sources and interviews with a security analyst. The secondary sources include company annual reports, news reports, analyst reports, industry reports, company websites, stock exchange websites and databases such as Bloomberg and CMIE Prowess.

The case is based on data collected from in-depth interviews, and from company, third-party and regulatory–agency documents. In addition to prior conversations over several years between the company founders and the lead case writer, there were several rounds of interviews in 2023 with the surviving founder and in-depth interviews with eight of the company’s key managers. Company documents reviewed included bylaws, organization charts, profit and loss statements and staffing statistics, all from founding to sale. Also reviewed were documents and evaluations of company operations and performance produced by the merger & acquisition firm that handled the company’s eventual sale. The company owner insisted on complete disguise of the company and all its members and prohibited disclosure of detailed proprietary financial data.

At the strategic level, this case is about how the unique, complex and changing healthcare environment created opportunities and threats to which a women-owned and run start-up company, Aloe Health (AH), had to respond to become and remain successful. At the personal level, the case illustrates what it takes for an entrepreneur and leader having clinical but no real business acumen to start, expand and turn around a company and ultimately position it for a successful acquisition, continually learning and adapting along the way.

The case describes how two women who were friends for many years started up a home healthcare company later in their lives and grew it into the largest women-owned business of its kind in the USA. Based in the Southwest USA, an area with many factors conducive to success, they navigated the many complexities of US Medicare regulations to create a fully-integrated home healthcare company providing unskilled personal care, medically skilled homecare and end-of-life hospice services to thousands of clients. The case provides background on the founders and the home healthcare industry context, and details the steps taken to start up and build the company into a fairly successful enterprise; one of the largest of its kind in the region. The (A) case ends with one of the founders facing a crisis brought on by the death of her co-founder and the revelation of some significant organization dysfunctions, leaving her unable to profitably exit the company and unsure of whether she would be able to turn things around. The students are tasked with making recommendations for what she should do next.

The (B) case brings events up to fall 2023, describing the steps the surviving founder took to transform her leadership style and the company’s systems and culture, and to navigate the due diligence process associated with preparing for an (ultimately very successful) acquisition. It also shares the owner’s “lessons learned,” and briefly notes the current state of the acquired company and the many AH employees that it continues to employ.

The case provides ample information for students to appreciate the company’s strategy and the challenges of operating in the highly regulated health care industry. However, it is probably even better suited to illustrating the “soft” issues of new-venture management, such as the tendencies of founders to overload themselves by micro-managing their growing venture and not adapting to expansion, and for those with clinical backgrounds to focus on caring for patients and employees while overlooking business essentials and organization systems. It also illustrates how business partnerships among strong-willed individuals can produce dynamics in the founding team similar to a “marriage,” with affection and complementary talents, yet also tensions. It further illustrates the process of a successful turnaround strategy, and the “due-diligence” challenges of preparing for an acquisition.

This case has a range of course applications at multiple education levels. Although it is probably best suited for graduate and executive-level programs, it can also be selectively used in undergraduate classes, particularly if populated by upperclassman. It is ideally suited to courses on entrepreneurship and on healthcare management. For an entrepreneurship course, it could be positioned mid-way through the semester, after covering topics relating to the entrepreneurial mindset, founding teams and business models. It can be used to get the class focusing on competitive issues and the challenges of starting up a company in a highly regulated environment, on entrepreneurial founding-team characteristics and management tendencies (e.g. micro-management control tendencies), on transition issues from start up to growth stages and on exit strategies.

We believe this case is also well suited as a teaching exercise for students pursuing healthcare management studies in baccalaureate and graduate programs (MBA, MHA, MHS) in which instructors wish to broaden student exposure to a real-world scenario that focuses on entrepreneurial behavior in a healthcare setting (a topic of increasing interest to healthcare practitioners and managers given the current trend toward provider formation and ownership of health facilities). Here, the case may be used to focus on the complexities of the healthcare industry, the key differences between various healthcare service business models and on the challenges that technically (clinically) trained professionals often face when trying to manage a healthcare business. Ideal placement of the case would be in a capstone course, after students have been introduced to their functional coursework in topics such as introduction to management, organizational behavior and leadership, financial management and strategic thinking. The case also challenges students to apply knowledge obtained in specialized coursework in healthcare systems and policy, industry regulation, as well as healthcare reimbursement methods.

The case also may be used in organization behavior courses to focus on team, cultural and leadership issues and in strategic management courses to focus on strategy implementation. In addition, there are enough family business themes in the case (even though Aloe is not actually a family business) to use it in a course on managing family businesses.

The research consisted of a questionnaire and in-depth interview with the CEO. Secondary research was conducted to read through various articles and literature available on the organization. Relevant courses are organizational behavior/organization development/strategic management.

In a landscape traditionally dominated by male leadership, this case study highlights the compelling narrative of a new leader with an unconventional leadership style. This purpose of this case study aims to explore the change management challenges faced by Molade, CEO of WAVE, a leading vocational education social enterprise based in Lagos, Nigeria, as she grapples with the issue of organizational culture and gender bias and their impact on team dynamics while implementing a new strategy. Her leadership journey reflects not only personal triumphs but also the broader impact of diverse perspectives at the helm of organizational decision-making. Despite having over a decade of industry experience and being well-respected in her field, Molade is met with resistance and patronizing behavior from some of the existing team members who question her authority and decision-making abilities. The case discusses leadership challenges faced by Molade, a female leader, its negative implications on her performance and her ability to implement change within the organization. Ultimately, Molade’s perseverance and strategic thinking enabled her to successfully navigate her dilemma.

Undergraduate business course(s) which include organizational behavior, organization development and strategic management.

This case aims to study the growth, evolution, and social innovation of iThrive Games, a socially minded initiative that aims to create meaningful opportunities using technology for teens to enhance the knowledge, mindsets, and skills they need to thrive through development and across the continuum of mental disorder to wellness. iThrive's focus has been on creating “meaningful games”—that is, games that promote health and well-being of teen players. Founded in 2014 by Dorothy Batten, President of DN Batten Foundation, the organization's mission was to collaborate with game developers, partner with teens across the game development cycle (ideation to testing), and provide resources to foster teen thriving through gameplay. To do so, the organization took a unique social entrepreneurial approach. Drawing on a positive psychology framework and building the brand among key stakeholders including game developers, researchers, funders, youth, educators, and parents, the organization orchestrated a community dedicated to advancing the meaningful games field, and in doing so, have widespread impact.

After completion of the case study, students will be able to understand key stakeholders’ current and future role in a family business using techniques like Gersick 3 Axes Model, understand the power dynamics in a family business, understand the power struggles seen in the family business and understand the challenges in the implementation of a deed of family settlement (DFS) with multiple stakeholders.

Kirloskar group was established in 1888 by Laxmanrao Kirloskar. He started with farm manufacturing equipment and later diversified into various kinds of engine manufacturing units. Kirloskar Group today is an Indian conglomerate multinational company with its headquarters in Pune, Maharashtra; India exports to more than 70 countries, most of which are from Africa, Southeast Asia and Europe. The group was managed as a cohesive unit until Chandrakant Kirloskar was at the helm as the chairman. Each brother’s family was managing a business and companies in the fold in which they started. The Kirloskar Group had first split in 2000 when Bengaluru-based Vijay Kirloskar (Ravindra Kirloskar’s son, fourth son of Laxmanrao Kirloskar) moved out of the group with Kirloskar Electrical while the Pune-based Kirloskar brothers moved out with Kirloskar Oil Engine Engines, Kirloskar Brothers, Kirloskar Pneumatics and related subsidiaries. In 2009, a DFS was signed among the family members, including a noncompete clause against each other regarding the usage of the Kirloskar brand name and the tagline “Kirloskar Enriching Lives.” The current dispute started in 2020 when first Vijay filed a suit against his nephews regarding illegal usage of the Kirloskar brand name for the companies not eligible to use it and second when Sanjay Kirloskar also filed a similar lawsuit against his brothers for illegally using the brand name and violating the noncompete clause. The high court, in its judgment, sent the case for arbitration, but Sanjay approached the Supreme Court of India regarding the stipulated arbitration process. With both sides taking a hard stance, there did not seem to be a quick resolution to this dispute.

This case study is suitable for both undergraduate and postgraduate level in entrepreneurship course and family business course.

CSS 3: Entrepreneurship

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

Case information was mainly acquired through interviews with Richard Gammans, chief operating officer. Dr Gammans was a visiting professor at Fayetteville State University for a year, and two of the case authors developed personal friendships with Richard. Interviews were conducted over a two-year period as the accelerator got started. In addition, one author conducted a team-building session with the management team and one of the bio-startup researchers. An interview was also conducted with Clayton Duncan, chief executive officer, to gain his agreement with developing the case.

The Accele website included a write-up on each of the pharmaceutical startup companies. The write-up included a company summary, description of the science (disease and cure), the size of the market, results from testing, regulatory considerations and intellectual property. A literature review was conducted as the basis for the information on the pharmaceutical industry.

This case is about a biopharmaceutical accelerator founded in 2011 by two senior executives with experience in both large pharmaceutical companies and running biotech startup companies. The founders were successful in raising capital to start their first venture capital fund which they used to invest in four biotech startups. All four startups were working in very different disease areas. For example, one developed a drug to help with hearing loss that the department of defense was funding. Another of the startups discovered drug candidates that attack antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Biopharmaceutical accelerators were relatively new. They differed from business incubators because they invest in the startups and provide operational support, but the degree of support provided varies across accelerators. The Accele BioPharma accelerator operated in virtual, network type of organization, and Accele BioPharma provided primary strategic and operational management for the startups. The challenge in this case is to identify how the leaders managed the virtual network, and what additional resources were needed so that the management team could expand their ability to assist startups to get drugs approved by the food and drug administration.

This case is suitable recommended for undergraduate/graduate strategy, undergraduate/graduate organizational behavior, entrepreneurship and health-care management courses.

The case describes a hypothetical hedge fund manager who is examining whether to invest in bitcoin. The case discusses potential risks and rewards of investing in bitcoin, the role of bitcoin and digital currencies more broadly, and financial innovation in the space, such as ICOs. It can be taught as part of a second-year MBA elective course in investments, financial institutions/capital markets, or fintech.