Search results

The case begins in mid-2014 and provides an opportunity for students at the undergraduate and graduate level to complete several strategic assessments of an entrepreneurial department within a post-secondary institution. The continuing education department of a university in Canada has been transferred to the dean of an academic faculty. The department has had a history of budget deficits and the new dean and executive director (ED) were tasked to develop and implement a turnaround strategy.

The case is written by the dean who had firsthand experience with the turnaround strategy. The written case was reviewed for accuracy by two principal actors: the ED responsible for implementing the plan, and the vice-president academic who is the dean’s supervisor and was kept apprised of all developments throughout the turnaround. Some of the data were produced by staff within the operation of Professional, Applied, and Continuing Education and acknowledged in the case.

This case is suitable for courses in business strategy, operations management, and includes various implications for human resource management, organizational behavior, and entrepreneurship suitable for undergraduate and graduate courses. It has a focus on turnaround strategies and strategy implementation.

Theoretical underpinnings for this case include strategic visioning and communication: portfolio management and innovation; internal environment analysis and positioning; structuring and resource management; and monitoring and control systems.

Most talented executives can recognize when an acquisition has strategic or financial benefits, and in this case, the decision to be acquired was an appropriate exit strategy for a successful start-up. Peter Street’s start-up had been growing quickly and was building a reputation for reliability in a booming industry when a Japanese firm offered to pay a premium for the U.S. firm. Having done business in Japan (and extensively with the acquiring company) before the sale of his company, Street entered the acquisition with enthusiasm. As part of the deal, Street’s former company would continue to operate in the United States as a division of its parent company and Street would remain as CEO. A few months into the transition, however, Street discovered a huge difference between working with and working for the Japanese firm. Cultural norms for confronting seemingly small problems quickly became bigger operational issues, and Street experienced a growing dichotomy between corporate (in Japan) and his division (in the United States). This case focuses on the challenges of implementing a cross-border acquisition.

The Global Networks Company (GNC), headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts, made its global footprint in India in 1994 by establishing a presence in Bangalore. Although mainly a sales support office, GNC grew name recognition from its contracts with India’s government to help build nationwide networks. Not quite 20 years later, GNC decided to further invest in India and tapped a manager from the Boston office, Jim Notrika, to establish and then manage GNC’s first global software center in Mumbai. Split between Mumbai and Boston, the project team successfully completed several minor projects, but only months into its first major project, the team was struggling to meet deadlines. Blame was being passed in both directions, and when three talented engineers in Mumbai quit, Notrika makes an emergency trip to Mumbai to better understand the problem.

This case describes three common cross-cultural communication obstacles in teams: a preference for direct versus indirect confrontation of problems; a clash of collectivist versus individualistic cultural values related to reporting bad news or giving negative feedback; and different expectations of team leaders based on power-distance values.