Search results

This case traces Under Armour from its founding in 1996 through 2008 when the company entered the hyper-competitive non-cleated athletic footwear market. In 1996, with an innovative product and locker room access to college and pro players, Kevin Plank started Under Armour. He turned a struggling t-shirt company into a dominant player capturing 75% of the performance apparel market. In 2006, Under Armour successfully entered the athletic footwear market with a line of football cleats. Under Armour was the first company to disrupt Nike's dominance of the football cleat market by gaining 25% of the market within a year of introduction. In 2008, Under Armour entered the non-cleated athletic footwear market with a cross-trainer sneaker line and a $4.4 million Super Bowl ad. Unlike prior introductions, Nike responded aggressively to Under Armour's move into sneakers. Despite increased sales, Under Armour's costs increased, and profits and stock price decreased. The case concludes by asking students to evaluate Under Armour's next move. An extensive exhibit provides an overview of the athletic footwear industry in 2008.

Over the last two decades, Under Armour (UA) has emerged from being the “underdog” in the sports apparel and footwear industry to being a leader in the industry, with a fierce attention to performance and great skill at picking up-and-coming athletes who emerge as superstars. This case underscores its administrative heritage, competitive strategy, and growth potential as a global player in a highly competitive industry. It addresses the tension between being a performance brand while launching lines for women vs technology applications and conflicts between its growth strategy and macro-economic forces. It highlights areas in which it has succeeded against macro-economic forces and where it has not.

The research relies primarily on secondary sources and countless studies of UA and its major competitors. Primary research is based on databases, videos of UA’s Chief Executive Officer, Kevin Plank, and articles from Bloomberg to The Baltimore Sun (UA’s headquarters) on the history, growth and future of UA. It also includes observations and site visits to one of its signature brand house stores as well as intensive research and directed studies with students in the USA and China.

The case can be applied to undergraduate, graduate or executive business classes in: business policy and strategy; general management; (sports) marketing; leadership or organisational behaviour classes.

Armstrong, a world famous cyclist, was charged with doping in 2012. Subsequent to this news, most of his endorsers terminated their contracts with him. Armstrong had started a foundation called Livestrong (formerly Louis Armstrong Foundation), to support cancer-survivors, which depended heavily on sponsorships received by Armstrong. Despite his resignation, the foundation was fast losing its sponsorships. Armstrong was trying to find a way to reduce negative publicity and save the foundation.

The case traces the development of Lululemon Athletica (Lulu) from founder Chip Wilson's first post-yoga euphoria in 1997 through the sale of all his shares in 2015. Officially founded in 1998, Lulu was built on the foundation of its “miracle” figure-enhancing yoga pants made from a proprietary stretch fiber. The case outlines Wilson's early experience in technical performance wear, which gave him the expertise needed to launch the Lululemon brand with its premium-priced, fashion-designed product line targeted at upscale women. The case also highlights the retailing and promotion approach that drove Lulu's first decade of success. The snapshot of how the Lulu brand cult was born and diffused provides the backdrop for assessing whether the brand has already hit its peak or whether it can sustain the explosive growth that effectively created the athleisure category. To aid in this determination, the case presents two competitors as comparative foils (Under Armour and Athleta) to contextualize Lulu's growth prospects.

The Lululemon case highlights the importance of the competitive frame of reference when positioning a brand and describes how this may differ for the three competitors. The case also allows for a discussion of the challenges of maintaining the congruence of a retail brand with a diverse product line. This struggle is unique to retailers who must fit ever-varied product assortments (not just a single product line) under the umbrella of a single brand proposition, and is particularly relevant to vertically integrated brands such as Lululemon.

The case should be introduced after students have been exposed to the following topics: the practice of entrepreneurship, opportunity recognition, market segmentation and minority business enterprise.

The names of the companies and individuals in this descriptive case have not been disguised, with the exception of the solar company representative and his company affiliation. Information was obtained from interviews (i.e. first-hand accounts) with Nikita Floyd, President and Owner of Green Forever Landscaping and Design, Inc., and secondary sources cited.

Nikita, a 50-year old, African American male, had grown his business from a one-person seasonal landscaping business to a year-round landscaping and design business with full-time, part-time, and seasonal employees and an array of services and customer segments. To his delight, he was able to unite his avocation with his vocation. With over 30 years of experience in landscaping and landscape design Nikita was always scanning the landscape for new business opportunities that would align with his company’s mission statement and help sustain Green Forever’s core business.

This case is most appropriate for introductory undergraduate and graduate level courses in entrepreneurship.

Case can be taught at the undergraduate or postgraduate level, including executive Master of Business Administration programs.

This case is intended for courses in strategic management, entrepreneurship and innovation at the undergraduate or postgraduate level.

The case is about challenges faced by Linda Portnoff, the Co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of Riteband, a Sweden-based fintech startup. In March 2020, Portnoff was conducting beta testing of Riteband’s app, which experts considered the world’s first stock exchange for music trading. After completing a PhD, Portnoff who was working as a Research Analyst, left her job to pursue entrepreneurship. Through Riteband, Portnoff helped to resolve pain points of artists who were forced to give the copyright of their music tracks or albums to distributors, in lieu of funds or promotional campaigns that distributors arranged for them. Portnoff invested in developing a patent-pending machine learning-based algorithm that based on several parameters could predict the likelihood of a music track or an album to become a success. Based on this prediction and royalty that artists were interested in sharing with fans, shares were issued to investors, who were also fans of the artists. As Portnoff identified an innovative business opportunity to trade music on a stock exchange based on Riteband’s machine learning algorithm, competition in Riteband’s strategic group was also becoming intense. Consequently, Portnoff was facing challenges of establishing competitive advantage of Riteband. Furthermore, as women in general faced challenges in raising funds for their startups, and even though Portnoff obtained some funding for Riteband, but overall, funding was a challenge for her as well. Moreover, as machine learning was a technical aspect for artists and potential investors, Portnoff also faced challenges to monetize on its machine learning algorithm.

By the end of the case study discussion, students should be able to: understand the principles of cross-industry innovation and explain the creation of new business opportunities based on cross-industry innovation; differentiate between direct and indirect competitors through strategic group analysis and further critically analyze the competitive advantage of business over other direct competitors; determine ways of reducing gender biases in venture capital funding; describe how machine learning works and further formulate ways to monetize a business through machine learning; and demonstrate the application of the value proposition canvas and business model canvas.

CSS 3: Entrepreneurship; CSS 11: Strategy.

Human resource management; Employee benefits management.

It can be used at undergraduate or postgraduate level for students at institutions of higher learning taking courses related to employee benefits management or human resource management.

The case is about the intention of Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) in purchasing health insurance for its employees in early 2011. For this purpose, a tender for group medical Takaful for UUM staff was placed in two major Malaysian newspapers on 20 February 2011. Then, after the tender closing date, a report was prepared and sent to the bursar of UUM, En Amron, on 28 April 2011. Ten companies had submitted their tenders; thus, En Amron had to identify the optimal group medical Takaful offered by the tenderers, so that he could put forward his recommendation to UUM tender committee board for its consideration and approval before the matter was brought to higher authorities for endorsement and implementation.

This teaching case will enable students to explain the reasons why an employer provides health insurance, to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of providing health insurance programme as non-contributory and contributory plans, to conduct company and plan assessment in making decision to purchase group medical Takaful and to evaluate either to purchase group health insurance directly from life insurer or to engage insurance broker.

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

Presents an analysis of the decision regarding a new product introduction. The main issues for discussion are: sunk costs, incremental costs, cannibalization, shared facilities, and the treatment of inflation.

Josh Williams is a Student at the NAU who has driven buses on campus and wants to improve the transportation on campus. He is convinced that purchasing a new type of bus that is more fuel efficient, has larger capacity, better designed for boarding, and has a longer life is worth the higher purchase cost. He sets out to prove it by creating a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. Since many of the estimates for the DCF analysis are uncertain, he decides to perform a Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) analysis. Students are asked to step into Josh’s role and perform the analysis.

Josh Williams was a Student in the authors’ MBA program. Both authors teach in this program and one author was the Advisor for Net Impact and worked with Josh to present his idea to the university administration. The authors have changed a name or two but otherwise, the case describes a real situation in a real organization without disguise.

The authors have used this case in a first semester MBA-Applied Management course, Decision Modeling and Simulation. Students already have experience with DCF analysis and have been introduced to MCS. With this case, students apply MCS at the conclusion of a three-week module on predictive analytics. Students have run at least two MCS models and have become comfortable with the software. The case would also be appropriate for a senior-level undergraduate course such as business analytics or management science. It might also be useful for other courses that include the MCS modeling technique learning objectives such as project management.

This case provides an opportunity for students to perform an MCS analysis. MCS is useful when many of the inputs to a DCF analysis (or any model) have been estimated and the modeler is concerned that the estimates are uncertain and could perhaps be a range of values. MCS can be used to understand the effect of this uncertainty on NPV which in turn may affect the decision. The case could also be used without MCS focusing just on the DCF analysis with deterministic sensitivity analysis.

To recapture lost market share, tobacco giant R. J. Reynolds (RJR) developed Uptown, the first cigarette brand created and targeted specifically at a minority group—in this case, African-Americans. RJR planned to launch a six-month test market in Philadelphia in February 1990, which coincided with national Black History Month. The launch generated grassroots opposition from the black community in Philadelphia, which became intent on ensuring there was “No Uptown in our town or any town.”

After analyzing the case, students should be able to:

• Identify some of the complex issues surrounding targeting specific populations

• Recognize the importance of understanding cultural context

• Recognize the limits of profit-based decision-making

Identify some of the complex issues surrounding targeting specific populations

Recognize the importance of understanding cultural context

Recognize the limits of profit-based decision-making