Search results

The case describes the fall of Eskom, which in 2001 was named the Financial Times’ Power Company of the Year, but by 2019 was suffering from “systemic corruption, malfeasance, fraud and state capture” that had “compromised the credibility of the organisation and eroded investor confidence”. Eskom’s incompetent management lays the ground for reasonable doubt as to whether the force majeure notice was indeed irresistible. The case suggests several methods available in financial markets to hedge risk – but to what extent are these relevant and appropriate? The main objective of the case, however, is to examine and assess the criteria required to claim force majeure. Two aspects are questionable: Was the virus unforeseeable and was it irresistible? Eskom is “bleeding” R².5m per month because of significantly reduced electricity demand, and while it clearly benefits Eskom to break their supply contract, the consequences for Exxaro are far more dire. And, if carried to conclusion, how would such actions impact the entire economy?

In April 2020 South Africa’s stated-owned electricity utility Eskom sent a pre-cautionary force-majeure notification to Exxaro Limited’s Grootegeluk Coal Mine. The notification, citing COVID-19 as an unforeseeable, external and irresistible event, would have disastrous consequences for the mine’s 25 m tonnes pa coal contract to supply Eskom’s Medupi power station. Not only was the legality of the force-majeure questionable, it was unethical, and not in the spirit of President Ramaposa’s call to businesses to continue paying contractors. The case briefly describes Eskom’s troubled history following South Africa’s 1994 democratic election. It examines the force majeure clause common in contracts, and questions whether COVID-19 meets the criteria of an “unforeseeable, external and irresistible” event.

MBA and Executive Education

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS 7: Management Science.

The theoretical basis of the teaching note is grounded in theory associated with macroeconomics and foreign direct investment (FDI); in particular why FDI is important to a developing country.

A secondary research methodology was used for the research and writing of this case study. Data (news articles and relevant readings) was obtained via the internet.

The case highlights the interrelated factors (civil society infrastructure, local and political unrest and community instability) that led to global mining company Rio Tinto announcing the halt of its operations and force majeure at its only South African business, Richards Bay Minerals (RBM). RBM was the largest business and employer in the province. Following the destruction of some of its equipment, civil unrest such as blocking of roads and intimidation of staff and the murder of one of their executives, Nico Swart, RBM management consequently announced all supplier contracts and operations would be halted until it was safe for work to be resumed.The case allows students to consider the interrelated factors that multinationals operating in developing countries are subject to in terms of different sub-national institutions and the potential impact of a large multinational ceasing operations in a local economy, both directly and indirectly. It concludes with considerations of what needs to be in place for RBM to continue operations.

This case can be used in undergraduate- and graduate-level courses, in management development programs or in short executive education courses focusing on the environment of business, macroeconomics and FDI.

The Tata owned Coastal Gujarat Power Limited is seeking to reopen Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with state owned distribution utilities because of increase in imported coal prices resulting from a change in Indonesian laws. The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has decided to provide relief through a “compensatory tariff”. This is opposed by the power purchasers. Simultaneously, another Reliance Energy owned power project is seeking relief from unprecedented change in exchange rates using the CGPL decision as a precedent. The CERC and the power purchasers have to decide what to do next.

Adani Power Limited (A) is the first case in a series of cases on the attempts by the firm to wriggle out of negative consequences of long-term fixed price power purchase agreements it had entered into. The firm wanted to terminate the agreement on the ground that its bid was based on coal allocation by another Government owned entity. This case describes as to how the firm was unable to get the contract terminated due to regulatory interventions. The case also raises public policy issues including the robustness of guidelines for procurement of power.

Growth strategies, marketing strategy, resources-based value theory, alliance network model, logistic and supply chain.

This case can be used in undergraduate and graduate classes as well as development programmes for managers in small to medium-size enterprises. The case suits courses in business, strategy, marketing and freight forwarding.

Union National Air, Land and Sea Shipping Co (LLC) (UNASCO) is a small to medium-sized freight forwarding company based in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It has three offices, two in Dubai and one in Abu Dhabi. UNASCO handles commercial imports/exports from/to many destinations, including Europe, Asia, the USA, India, the Far East, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the Middle East (ME) and Africa. UNASCO has been in business for more than 35 years and has run the business smoothly. Recently, the company has faced several internal and external challenges that impact business performance. These challenges are high operating expenses, stiff competition and low market demand. Due to these challenges, the sales staff is being pressured to generate more income to ensure that the company is not experiencing a loss. Now, UNASCO is uncertain how to sustain the business.

The learning outcomes are as follows: to learn about the freight forwarding industry, the competitive landscape and the challenges surrounding it; to enable the participant to generate a list of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) for UNASCO and to gain skill at using SWOT analysis; to increase the participant’s ability to evaluate a situation and effectively communicate remedies about it both in writing and verbally; to enable the participant to analyse a problem using the Fishbone Diagram cause and effect tool; to enable the participant to use the Six Thinking Hats technique to make more reliable and sounder decisions; to gain skill at using Porters Five Forces tool, understand the competitiveness of UNASCO’s business environment, and identify the potential for business growth; and to gain skills at developing a marketing strategy using the 4Ps model.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 11: Strategy.

Deutsche Bahn AG (Deutsche Bahn hereafter) was the former German railroad monopolist until deregulation in 1996. It was a well-known company that operated in worldwide markets for transport and logistics at the time of the case (late 2013). The case “Deutsche Bahn AG: a former monopoly off track?” focuses on the opportunities and challenges faced by Deutsche Bahn with regard to its position in the German individual transportation market. On the one hand, Deutsche Bahn is facing external problems. Increasing competition in short- and long-distance traffic threatens its strong business position. The competition emerged from a growing long-distance bus market and the increase in private railway companies. During the last few years before 2013, Deutsche Bahn has lost several public tenders for individual passenger travel in Germany. On the other hand, Deutsche Bahn has internal problems that endanger its image as a service company. A lack of service quality and the technical condition of its trains has led to rising numbers of customer complaints. In addition, staffing and punctuality problems have exacerbated the situation. One of the main technical issues the company faces is that ordered trains have not been delivered on time. Given the focus on Deutsche Bahn’s domestic challenges, its international business activities are tackled only briefly. While regulatory and political events have an impact on Deutsche Bahn, these are not the main subjects of the case.

This case has been written from public sources. Consequently, no company release is provided. None of the information has been disguised in any way.

The case is intended for use in a 90-minute strategic management class attended by students at the end of their undergraduate studies or in postgraduate study. Although the case relates to issues in strategic management, the special regulatory environment and some of the issues covered could make the case a useful complement in other classes as well, such as classes in supply chain management (procurement) or the management of public companies. Therefore, students should have basic knowledge in developing strategies, management, marketing, human resource management, and finance.

Strategic Analysis and Strategic Management, Railroad Logistics, Deregulation of a former Monopoly, Stakeholder Theory.

GMR Infrastructure Limited (GMRIL) had to make a decision on its continued role in the 555.48 km Kishangarh Udaipur Ahmedabad (KUA) Expressway Project, India's then longest road public-private partnership (PPP) project. GMR had terminated the contract citing NHAI's failure in fulfilling Conditions Precedent (CP) of providing (i) environment clearance (EC), (ii) revised toll free notification and (iii) 80% of required land. The case intends to educate the reader on the concessionaire-authority dynamics in typical Indian infrastructure PPPs. Taking into account its internal strategy, the extant unfavourable investment climate, the Central Government's steps to revive private interest in the highways sector and NHAI's quick turnaround in fulfilling CP, GMR had to decide how to respond.

The case describes the structure of Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs) created and launched in Indian markets in 2017. Besides introducing InvITs and their potential role in relaxing the financing constraint created by the lack of an active corporate debt market in India, the case can help in analysing why the market is discounting the IndiGrid unit price relative to its issue price. It also offers an opportunity to value IndiGrid's Patran acquisition.

Delhi Jal Board (DJB) is about to launch the first of three pilot Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects to improve water supply in Delhi. The case describes the past history of such projects and the design of new pilot projects, especially the terms of the concession agreements. This provides an opportunity for assessing the PPP Concession agreement in terms of incentivizing performance and simultaneously maintaining flexibility given project uncertainties.

This case is based on the IPO of the first Infrastructure Investment Trust (InvIT) in India that was based on a portfolio of operating toll roads. InvIT enabled the construction company, which was also the sole equity investor, to release part of its equity to future toll road investments. The case describes the structure and functioning of the InvIT. It requires participants to assess its future potential for providing long term financing to not only toll roads but also other infrastructure projects.