Search results

Plymouth Tube, a family business, was a manufacturer of precision tubing and extruded shapes for aerospace, desalination, medical, mining, energy, and water industries globally. Founded in 1924, as of 2012 it employed 770 people at thirteen plants in seven U.S. states and had sales of about $240 million. The family had twenty members across three generations, including spouses. The board was composed of eight members, three from the family and five who were independent. Stacy, age 30, was the only fifth-generation family member working for the company. Her father, Van, age 64 and a fourth-generation member, had been in the business for forty years and had succeeded his father as president, CEO, and chairman.

In early 2013, management presented a very large expansion project that was riskier than previous recent investments to the board, and requested the board's approval. Independent board members asked Van to obtain feedback from the family about the proposal. Van asked Stacy to direct the process for informing the family, asking for their input, and communicating it back to the board.

How should Stacy conduct the process? What should be done with the information once it has been gathered? Should family members be involved in this type of business decision? Based on the information given in the case, is this a good investment?

This case study is based on an MBA team's experience in analyzing a scrap metal recycling business and developing recommendations to improve the performance of the business. The company, Steel City Salvage, has three locations which are managed as separate business entities. The case focuses on the business repercussions of the poor integration across the three locations, and the team's choice of options to improve the integration. These options include changes in organizational structure, processes or culture/leadership style. The case allows students to see how their own experience and education may bias their selection of a preferred option.

Marketing

The case is suitable for MBA/MS students.

The famous Taj Mahal Palace and Towers became the centre of one of the most deadly terrorist attacks in the Indian sub continent on the night of 26 November 2008, which became famous as “26/11”. Terrorists created havoc shooting guests on sight and throwing grenades. The attacks lasted for three days but all of the four terrorists who entered Taj were killed. The terrorists had killed 160 people across Mumbai. Of these, 36 died at the Taj Mahal Palace and Towers, Mumbai. The dead included 14 guests, most of whom were foreign nationals. However, due to the selfless and extraordinary behavior of the employees and the staff of Taj, many guests were saved. They put forth an extraordinary example justifying the Indian code of conduct towards guests, “Atithi Devo Bhav” meaning “Guest is God”. In spite of knowing back exits and hiding spots, the employees did not flee, instead helping guests. The employees' behavior during the crisis saved the lives of nearly300 guests. This gesture of Taj employees was much talked about, but it was amusing even for the management to explain why they behaved in that manner. The condition of Taj after the attacks was so disastrous that it would have been profitable to leave the hotel as it was rather than reopening it. This, however, would have dented the Taj brand as a whole, as well as the spirit of all employees and staff who had behaved bravely. Taj started its restoration and reopened a part of the Taj Mahal Palace and Towers on 21 December 2008. It became operational by August 2010. The case provides an opportunity to closely examine employee behavior in an extreme crisis situation, and the possible reasons and motivation behind such exceptional behavior which ultimately helped to sustain the Taj brand. However, the scope of the case can also be extended to illustrate recovery efforts typical to service industries.

The case is designed to enable students to understand: the employees role in service delivery; the service profit chain; the relationship between profitability, customer loyalty, employee satisfaction and loyalty, and productivity; service failure; service recovery; and the service recovery paradox.

Teaching notes are available. Please consult your librarian for access.