Search results

After completion of the case study, the students will be able to appreciate and understand why brands are an essential asset to the company and how they can enhance business value, understand the factors needed to grow brands in the growth stages and evaluate the choices that start-up companies have to grow their brand in competitive and growing markets.

Mamaearth was born as a direct-to-consumer brand in 2016 by a couple who could not find chemical-free, safe products for their child. The company that introduced as a baby-care brand soon consolidated itself to play in the space of personal care category (targeting millennials), and by 2020, it was earning majority of its revenue from skincare. It started by leveraging the power of social media space and online commerce and slowly moved to be a national brand with offline footprint and mass-media communication. In its growth journey, it acquired many brands and launched a few to cater to the specialized needs of its target audience. As the company grew, attracted impressive investors and started clocking profits, it aspired for an initial public offering (IPO). Varun and Ghazal Alagh, the founders of Mamaearth, knew that to refloat an IPO and to grow the company further, they needed to redefine their portfolio and marketing strategy. They had a choice to either invest in building a broader portfolio – organically or inorganically – or expand across geographies. Both were an option, albeit expensive, which could cost Mamaearth its profitability.

This case is intended for discussion in undergraduate and graduate management courses.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 8: Marketing.

In early 2014, recent Stanford University graduate Tyler Shultz was in a quandary. He had been working at Theranos, a blood-diagnostic company founded by Elizabeth Holmes, a Stanford-dropout wunderkind, for almost a year. Shultz had learned enough about the company to realize that its practices and the efficacy of its much-touted finger-prick blood-testing technology were questionable and that the company was going to great lengths to hide this fact from the public and from regulators.

Theranos and Holmes were Silicon Valley darlings, enjoying positive press and lavish attention from potential investors and technology titans alike. Just as companies like PayPal had revolutionized the stagnant payments industry and Uber had upended the for-hire transportation sector, Theranos had been positioned as the latest technology firm to substantially disrupt yet another mature sector: the medical laboratory business. By the start of 2014, the company had raised more than $400 million in funding, and had an estimated market valuation of $9 billion.

Shultz's situation was exacerbated by the fact that his grandfather, the highly respected former US Secretary of State George Shultz, was on the Theranos board and was one of Elizabeth Holmes's biggest supporters.

But Tyler Shultz worried about the customers he was convinced were receiving highly unreliable and often inaccurate blood-test results. With so much at stake, Shultz wondered how he should proceed. Should he raise his concerns with the firm's investors? Blow the whistle externally? Report to industry regulators? Go away quietly?

This case and its subsequent four brief follow-up cases are based largely on interviews with Tyler Shultz, and outline the dilemma he faced and the various steps he would take both to extricate himself from his unsavory position and let the public know the full extent of the deception at Theranos.

Five optional handouts are available to instructors to further discussion after the case has been debriefed. The handouts serve as additional decision points for the students if your class time permits.