Search results

Josh Brochhausen and Adam Podrat, as partners in The Resource, wrote commercial music for the ads of several companies. They were innovators in the recording studio, and their music appealed to young consumers.

Josh and Adam also had become involved in producing records for hip hop artists. They undertook a project called Deaf in the Family, which was a full length album featuring artists from the hip hop underground. The record was well received among music critics from the underground press, but the project made no money because Josh and Adam did not have the financing to secure the appropriate clearances for the right to use samples from existing songs.

Their problem centered on the uncertainty of financial success in producing hip hop records, which was their passion, and deciding whether to devote energy and resources toward it, and away from making commercial music, which was their livelihood.

In 2011, Sherry Hunt was a vice president and chief underwriter at CitiMortgage headquarters in the United States. For years she had been witnessing fraud, as the company bought billions of dollars in mortgage loans from external lenders that did not meet Citi credit policy and sold them to government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). This resulted in Citi selling to GSEs such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pools of loans that were considerably defective and thus likely to default. Citi had also approved hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of defective mortgage files for U.S. Federal Housing Administration insurance. After reporting the mortgage defects in regular reports, notifying and working closely with her direct supervisor (who was subsequently asked to leave Citi after alerting the chairman of the board to these issues) to stop the purchase of defective loans, leaving anonymous tips on the FBI's and the Department of Housing and Urban Development's websites, and receiving threats from two of her superiors who demanded that she change the results of her quality control unit's reports, the shy and conflict-avoidant Hunt had to decide who she should tell about the fraud, and how.

The case gives students the opportunity to recommend how Hunt should proceed based on their analysis of the stakeholders involved. To aid instructors, the case includes Kellogg-produced videos of Hunt—the only on-camera interviews she has ever given—explaining what happened after she reported the fraud to Citi HR and, later, the U.S. Department of Justice. Within the case, students are also briefly exposed to legislation and bodies pertinent to whistle-blowing in the United States, including the Dodd-Frank Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the SEC Office of the Whistleblower.

This case won the 2014 competition for Outstanding Case on Anti-Corruption, supported by the Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME), an initiative of the UN Global Compact.

• Analyze stakeholders' motivations to prepare counter-arguments to the resistance one might encounter when reporting unethical behavior

• Write a script for who to tell, how, and why

• Discuss how incentive structures, management, and culture play roles in promoting or hindering ethical behavior in organizations

• Identify behaviors that help a whistle-blower be effective

• Gain experience resolving ethical dilemmas in which two values may conflict, such as professional duty and personal ethics

Analyze stakeholders' motivations to prepare counter-arguments to the resistance one might encounter when reporting unethical behavior

Write a script for who to tell, how, and why

Discuss how incentive structures, management, and culture play roles in promoting or hindering ethical behavior in organizations

Identify behaviors that help a whistle-blower be effective

Gain experience resolving ethical dilemmas in which two values may conflict, such as professional duty and personal ethics

Dove and Axe were two highly successful brands owned by Unilever, a portfolio company. Dove was a female-oriented beauty product brand that exhorted “real beauty” and not the unachievable standards that the media portrayed. In contrast, Axe was a brand that purportedly “gives men the edge in the mating game.”□ Their risqué commercials always portrayed the supermodel-type beauty ideal that Dove was trying to change. Unilever had always been a company of brands where the consumer knew the brands but not the company, but recently there had been the idea to unify the company with an umbrella mission for all of its brands. This would turn Unilever into a company with brands, potentially increasing consumer awareness and encourage cross-purchases between the different brands. However, this raised questions about the conflicting messages between the brands' marketing campaigns, most notably between Unilever's two powerhouse brands, Dove and Axe. The case begins with COO Alan Jope anticipating an upcoming press meeting in New York City to discuss Unilever's current (i.e., 2005) performance and announce Unilever's decision to create an umbrella mission statement for the company. This case focuses on the central question of whether or not consistency between brand messages is necessary or inherently problematic.

The Unilever's Mission for Vitality case was created to help students and managers develop an appreciation for how the values underlying a marketing campaign can affect and alter an organization's culture. The case focuses on how two products and marketing campaigns that express conflicting underlying values (as reflected in the Dove Real Beauty and the Axe Effect campaigns) within the same corporation can give rise to a number of unintended organizational and marketing complications.

“Jessica’s dilemma: honesty or loyalty” is the true story of a Staff Accountant, Jessica, who discovered embezzlement by the controller, Michael. Jessica worked at a US subsidiary of a multinational organization. One of the company’s vendors contacted Jessica regarding unpaid invoices. Following up on the inquiry, Jessica found suspicious manual journal entries in the general ledger. When she questioned her boss, Michael, about her findings, he first denied the situation, then blamed another employee, and ultimately tried to intimidate Jessica so that she would not press the issue. Jessica’s investigation led to the discovery that Michael had been embezzling money from the company. To complicate matters, Jessica and her husband had a close relationship with Michael and his wife outside the office. Jessica had to make a choice between being loyal to a family friend and being honest and loyal toward her employer.

The authors obtained the information for this case from the staff accountant and her husband via a series of interviews. The information was verified via publicly available news articles on the presented case. Additionally, legal documents, which were publicly available, were also used for information. The name of the company and the names of the individuals in the case were changed to protect the identities and privacy of the involved parties.

An instructor can use this case in business ethics, introductory management, human resource law or accounting courses targeting undergraduate or introductory MBA students. This case is best used in the beginning of the suggested courses, as the instructor introduces ethical dilemmas, ethical frameworks, and stakeholder theory. The case is designed so that students do not need a background in business or business ethics to be able to successfully complete the case analysis. Additionally, the case provides a platform to discuss the differences in an ethical vs an unethical manager and how to respond to such a situation.

Many employees are afraid to report ethical wrongdoing to upper management, or to engage in ethical dissent. When upper management is receptive to reports of wrongdoing, ethical dissent within the organization to upper-level management has more organizational benefits than when the issue is shared with coworkers or external agencies. This is because upper management has the power to make a difference in the situation and may be able to keep the situation within the organization to eliminate possible reputation problems for the organization. The presented case can be utilized to discuss the importance of feeling safe in an organization as it pertains to reporting wrongdoing within the organization and how organizational culture and leadership can enhance or diminish that feeling.

Later in the discussion, the options for long run strategy in dealing with a possible takeover offer and other strategic options can be discussed by the class. Lack of familiarity by students with the role of the outside potential acquirer of the camp (in this case, a hotel chain) and the lack of familiarity with the role of an investor who is a family investor, who may wish to sell stock and use the proceeds for another purpose, or a small investor who invests because he or she uses the camp and takes advantage of the stockholder’s discount will probably preclude role playing, except in executive MBA classes where students have sufficient experience in possible takeover situations or in investment management, Emphasis should probably be placed on discussing the major issues, such as social and cultural issues and on marketing and public relations issues and on financial issues, including the options available in the event of a possible takeover effort. All of these issues are impacted fully by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Instructors will need to play an active role in teaching this case. It is recommended that the instructor give a short lecture or discussion at the beginning as to how a camp such as Camp Teddy functions. The authors recommend that the instructor then begin the case discussion by asking students questions about such issues as social and cultural issues and marketing and public relations issues.

Camp Teddy is a seasonal camp for families in rural Connecticut adjacent to New York City and suburbs in New York and Connecticut. It is technically a for-profit organization but operates more like a nonprofit organization because many of the campers own shares and have used the camp sometimes for several generations. The camp has traditions that are liked by many of the shareholders and campers. Although net income has increased in the past year, there does not seem to be enough funds to support necessary capital expenditures to improve facilities for the future. The largest stockholder has recently died. His immediate heirs’ control 300 of the 1,000 shares and other family members control 400 shares with the remaining 300 shares in the hands of small shareholders, many of whom use the camp each summer. A large hotel chain is interested in possibly acquiring the camp through a buyout or perhaps a hostile takeover, with a potential large gain to shareholders. The board of directors must consider a number of issues to insure good occupancy of the camp in the future and must decide what to do about a potential takeover attempt.

This case can be used in several courses, including investment management, hospitality management, corporate finance and business strategy. There are ethical and societal issues in the case, so that the case might also be used in courses looking at business, environment or business ethics. The case is best used at the graduate level, but it might be suitable for some advanced undergraduate courses.

The paper employs ethnographic interviews, a quantitative and qualitative data analysis of publicly accessible data and literature review.

With drought conditions expected to worsen in at-risk areas thus amplifying wildfire likelihood, this case explores the organizational and natural dynamics involved with wildfire management. The case engages students to explore the interactions between wildfire, wildland firefighters and agency organizations drawing from the natural resource dependence theory within a sustainability context. When completing the discussion questions, students are challenged to explore how organizations can use discursive closures to eliminate conflict and control meaning surrounding potentially controversial and politicized topics such as wildfire management.

This interdisciplinary case would be appropriate for undergraduate and graduate students in business and STEM classes. Optimal classes include organizational behavior, organizational communication and sustainability. Other appropriate classes include strategic management, applied business decisions, public relations, public policy, crisis management and for corporate training purposes.

In the fall of 2014, Chad Kartchner, senior manager of marketing and product management at Honeywell Aerospace (HA), pondered how technology could transform the way aircraft were maintained. He had heard a lot of buzz about cognitive analytics, an artificial intelligence term referring to the use of computer models and algorithms to simulate human thought through self-learning systems, data mining, pattern recognition, and natural language processing. The sheer volume of parts and the time-sensitive nature of repairs in the aviation industry made it complicated to identify problems and address them quickly.

Kartchner contemplated the options for updating HA's ground-based maintenance system. Should he emulate HA's state-of-the-art on-board system for an entire aircraft or try something new? Emulating the on-board system, which HA developed internally, would be an easy sell to leadership given internal buy-in and satisfaction with the on-board system, but he contemplated new approaches because he did not want to overlook rapidly emerging technologies. The latter could include crowdsourced features that leveraged the abundance of knowledge among HA's customers' technicians or a cognitive analytics approach. Even if he could persuade leadership to try a new cognitive analytics approach, should HA partner with an established entity or work with a relatively unproven startup who promised lower cost, better features, and quicker turnaround to develop a new system?

Students will step into the shoes of Kartchner as he leads the internal discussion on whether and how to tap into the benefits of cognitive analytic solutions for Honeywell Aerospace and its customers.

This secondary source case is based mainly on legislative documents (that tracked the initiation and progress of the Parental Rights in Education bill that later became an Act), corporate documents (published by The Walt Disney Company) and news articles from publications such as The New York Times and Bloomberg. All sources are cited in the case narrative and as end notes.

In April 2022, The Walt Disney Company and its CEO, Robert Chapek, were at the center of a controversy over the company’s opposition to the State of Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill. The bill, dubbed “Don’t Say Gay” by its critics, prohibited instruction on sexual identity and gender orientation in the state’s elementary schools. The controversy stemmed from Disney’s initial non-reaction to the bill and its later strident opposition and call for its repeal. Chapek was pressured by negative media publicity and employee disgruntlement on the one hand and adverse economic consequences for opposing the bill by the state’s Governor, Ron DeSantis. Chapek and the Board had to respond to the political threats to Disney’s economic well-being while appeasing its employees and other stakeholders who wanted the company to be a corporate champion in diversity, equity and inclusion.

The case is best suited for advanced undergraduate or graduate leadership, strategic management and marketing courses. From a leadership and strategic management perspective, the case is well-suited for demonstrating the evolving expectations of leaders and corporate social responsibility, as well as the concepts of issue framing and nonmarket management. Instructors may also leverage the case in marketing courses (e.g. brand management), as CEO activism (i.e. messaging and practice) is one characteristic of brand activism (Animation Guild, 2022).

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how a business idea can be successful in the long run in a rapidly changing environment. Students could learn about the carsharing market and the world of start-ups. During the lesson, students could practice business modelling based on “Value proposition Canvas”. With this model, they can understand the real needs of the customers and the services, with which companies can provide gains for the clients and decrease users’ pain. Beside business modelling, the case provides the opportunity to learn about the concept of First Mover Advantage, which describes the possible advantages of being first on a market. Three different sources can provide first mover advantage: technological leadership; pre-emption of scarce assets; and customer loyalty. Start-ups should systematically think about acquiring some of the above to sustain their advantage.

This case is about a carsharing start-up GreenGo, which was the first company introducing the concept of carsharing in Hungary. GreenGo was founded in November 2016 in Budapest. Until today, it has approximately 170 cars and could establish a solid customer base with 6,000 subscribers. After one year of monopoly, GreenGo got a competitor, when MOL (one of the largest companies of the Central European region) entered the market with its new carsharing service: MOL Limo (Limitless Mobility). MOL Limo is using the same business model and marketing mix as GreenGo and started to operate with 300 cars. The case describes the urban transportation of Budapest, the business model and value proposition of GreenGo and MOL Limo in depth. It also presents some possible options for GreenGo to react to the new market situation.

Master in management, MBA.

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: Strategy, Case study organisation: GreenGo.

The case illustrates how environmental forces affect an industry’s profitability. PESTEL and five forces analyses can be used to examine the retail agricultural equipment industry.

Single case study.

Jonathan Sullivan has a decision to make. His company is struggling due to difficult industry conditions. He is questioning if the company can continue to survive. MEC is an agricultural equipment dealer. The industry has experienced boom-and-bust periods since the company was founded. But the current downturn seems different. The past five years have been difficult as manufacturers have changed their dealership practices. Jonathan has struggled with some of the new practices the manufacturers have implemented. These new practices could negatively impact the company’s ability to survive. Jonathan wonders, “What is the best path forward for the business?”

The case is designed to be used in an undergraduate strategic management course.