Search results

The case illustrates an entrepreneurial voyage and venture creation and through it helps in identifying the reasons and causes for that venture's failure. It also enables discussion on the importance of planning a venture, more importantly; financing, managing, growing, and ending a venture and on how to avoid the pitfalls that befall such enterprises. This case can be used in Entrepreneurship courses as well as MBA, PGP and Executive Education programmes on Entrepreneurship.

This case has multiple theoretical linkages at the micro-organizational behavior level (e.g. job enrichment), but it is best analyzed and understood when examined at the organizational level. Students will learn about shared entrepreneurship, high performance work systems, shared leadership and virtuous organizations, and how they can develop a sustainable competitive advantage.

The case was prepared using a qualitative approach. Data were collected via the following ways: literature search; organizational documents and published historical accounts; direct observations by a research team; and on-site audio recorded and transcribed individual and group interviews conducted by a research team (the authors) with organization members at multiple levels of the firm.

John Lewis Company has been in business since 1864. In 1929, it became the John Lewis Partnership (JLP) when the son of the founder sold a portion of the firm to the employees. In 1955, he sold his remaining interest to the employee/partners. JLP has a constitution and has a representative democracy governance structure. As the firm approaches the 100th anniversary of the trust, it is faced with multiple challenges. The partners are faced with the question – How to respond to the environmental turmoil?

This case has environmental issues – How to respond to competition, technological changes and environmental uncertainty and an internal issue – How can high performance work practices provide a sustainable competitive advantage? Both issues can be examined in strategic management courses after the students have studied traditionally managed companies. This case could also be used in human resource management courses.

The case was developed from two 2-h interviews with the Chief Operating Officer of A-Basin, Alan Henceroth; there is no CEO of A-Basin. The second interview was recorded on a Zoom call to provide accuracy of quotations and information. A variety of secondary sources were used in terms of better understanding the current state of the ski industry, as well as its history.

Arapahoe Basin (A-Basin) is a historic, moderately sized, ski area with proximity to metropolitan Denver, Colorado. For over 20 years A-Basin partnered with Vail, allowing skiers to use the Vail Epic Pass, for which A-Basin received some revenue from Vail for each skier visit. The Epic Pass allowed pass holders unlimited days of skiing at A-Basin. More and more skiers were buying the Epic Pass, thus increasing the customer traffic to A-Basin. However, the skier experience was compromised due inadequate parking, long lift lines and crowded restaurants. The renewal of the contract with Vail was coming due, and A-Basin had to consider whether to renew the contract with Vail. The case is framed primarily as a strategic marketing case. The authors use Porter’s five forces model to assess the external environment of A-Basin, and the authors use the resource-based view and the VRIO tool to assess A-Basin’s internal strengths. Both frameworks provide useful analysis in terms of deciding whether to continue A-Basin’s arrangement with Vail or end the contract and pursue a different strategy. In 2019, after consultation with the Canadian parent company Dream, A-Basin made the decision to disassociate itself from the Epic Pass and Vail to restore a quality ski experience for A-Basin’s customers. No other partner had ever left its relationship with Vail. An epilogue details some of A-Basin’s actions, as well as the outcomes for the ski area. Generally A-Basin’s decision produced positive results and solidified its competitive position among competitors. Other ski areas have since adopted a similar strategy as A-Basin. A-Basin’s success is reflected in a pending offer from Alterra, Inc., to purchase the ski area.

The A-Basin case can be used in both undergraduate and graduate strategic (or marketing) management courses. It is probably best considered during the middle of an academic term, as the case requires students to apply many of the theoretical concepts of strategy. One of the best books to enable students to use Porter’s five forces is Understanding Michael Porter by Joan Magretta (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2012). Magretta was a colleague of Porter for many years and was an Editor of the Harvard Business Review. For a discussion of the VRIN/VRIO concept, see Chapter 4 of Essentials of Strategic Management by Gamble, Peteraf and Thompson (New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2019).

To understand how certain cultural dynamics play out in the case, the main attributes of Hofstede and Meyer’s work are first highlight. While Hofstede focuses on national culture, Meyer’s uses culture as a tool by which to gauge behavior within organizations, teams and individuals. Below the main elements of their work are highlighted. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are detailed in IM Exhibit 1. Note there are six dimensions on a scale of 0–100. The higher the number, the higher that element of that dimension. For example, the individualism score for the USA is 91, whereas China’s score is 20, suggesting that Americans are much more individualistic, whereas the Chinese are much more collectivist. Students can find where the USA, France and China, the three countries discussed in the case, stand at the Hofstede’s website noted below. For reference, these are also noted in IM Exhibit 2.

All of the information in the case was gathered using publicly available secondary sources (i.e. news articles, annual reports and executive/employee interviews). All sources are cited at the end of the Case/IM.

On April 12, 2022, LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton (LVMH), the global leader in the personal luxury goods, released first quarter earnings for 2022, highlighting their latest acquisition, the New York City-based Tiffany & Co (Tiffany). Tiffany had performed well due to growth in demand in the USA following two difficult years because of the global COVID-19 pandemic. This underscored the fact that Tiffany was still largely dependent on the US market, which was a cause for concern for CEO, Anthony Ledru, who was brought in by the parent LVMH to elevate Tiffany and exploit the high growth market for personal luxury goods in China and other parts of Asia-Pacific. LVMH’s acquisition of Tiffany had been completed on January 7, 2021, and LVMH was expecting the turnaround of the largely US-centric Tiffany to show results by shifting focus to higher-end and more iconic jewelry lines and greater expansion in China. Nonetheless, Ledru’s ability to address the China market for Tiffany was constrained by culture clashes between the company’s French owners and management team and its large cadre of US-based employees. Employees chaffed at what they felt was a rigid and autocratic management style and at the company’s insistence on limits to a work-from-home policy that was instituted in early 2020 because of the pandemic. Ledru and his top management team had to quickly overcome the internal clashes and employee issues to make significant inroads in the China market.

This case is appropriate for undergraduate and MBA courses addressing dynamics of global business, strategy and culture, such as cross-cultural management, international business, global strategy and organizational behavior. At both levels, its is found that the case will be valuable in generating a lively discussion on organizational and strategic challenges grounded in often lesser discussed issues around cultural fit. In most courses, the case should be positioned toward the end, mainly because it examines both cultural challenges (French ownership of a quintessentially American company) and strategic initiatives (how to grow the brand itself along with geographic expansion, i.e. China), assuming that the module has covered one or the other/or both at different points in the course.

This case requires students to evaluate alternative dual-share-class corporate structures that allow companies and entrepreneurs to pursue profit with purpose. The case explores Impact Makers, an IT consulting company based in Richmond, Virginia. While original founders of the firm hold all voting rights, the cash flow rights belong to two nonprofits setting the stage for a Newman's Own model of management consulting. The case discusses whether and how the alternative corporate structure aids the firm's overall strategy to attract top-quality employees, pay them competitive salaries, and provide superior service to its clients while donating 100% of its lifetime value to charitable causes, largely through partnerships with various nonprofit organizations. More importantly, the case asks students to evaluate how such a dual-share-class and dual-purpose company can raise capital to fund continued growth.

The case opens with CEO Michael Pirron reminding himself of all the questions he had run through to execute a strategy to further grow Impact Makers' consulting business both through expanding a menu of services and through conquering new geographical markets. To do either, or both, the company needed a cash infusion. Internal cash was limited, as up to 40% of it flowed to charitable partners, demonstrating Impact Makers' commitment to its mission. Raising debt for a company without fixed assets was challenging and time consuming. Complicating it all was that being structured as a nonstock corporation rendered equity raising difficult. Could Impact Makers raise money to grow and stay true to community values at the same time?

The reading and discussion on case will enable participants to appreciate importance of reward management in performance management system for both employee and organizational good; to develop insight on the effect of perceived discrimination on the motivation of employees; to internalize the effect of perceived unjust, subjective, non-communicative, non-transparent policies on the behavior and productivity of employees and overall organizational culture and climate; and to comprehend the importance of HR and OB issues with respect to performance management system for the benefit of employee morale, motivation and organizational culture.

The effectiveness of an employee is the key factor for the employer. All the profit that the company or the organization makes depends on the employees’ productiveness. The case needs to be understood in the overall context of performance management system (Ferreiraa and Otley, 2009) with focus on elements of appraisal and compensation via rewards and recognition as per objective standards. Performance management systems (PMSs) is a more general descriptor if the intention is to capture a holistic picture of the management and control of organizational performance. Performance management policies and practices refer to the processes of setting, communicating and monitoring performance targets and rewarding results with the aim of enhancing organizational effectiveness (Fee, McGrath-Champ and Yang, 2011). PMS includes both the formal mechanisms, processes, systems and networks used by organizations, and also the more subtle, yet important, informal controls that are used (Chenhall, 2003; Malmi and Brown, 2008). Otley (1999) proposed a framework which highlights five central issues which need to be considered as part of the process of developing a coherent structure for performance management systems. The five areas addressed by this framework include identification of the key organizational objectives and the processes and methods involved in assessing the level of achievement under each of these objectives, formulating and implementing strategies and plans, as well as the performance measurement and evaluation processes, process of setting performance targets and the levels at which such targets are set, rewards systems used by organizations and the implications of achieving or failing to achieve performance targets and types of information flows required to provide adequate monitoring of performance. While the case touches upon all the aspects of the PMS framework, it revolves round the reward episode and elaborates on the way it affects all stakeholders, those who got the benefit, those who felt discriminated and those were mere observers to the episode. Objective performance appraisals are needed to ensure that every employee produces the best performance and that the work performed is rewarded with reasonable increases in pay scales or special additional allowances or incentives. This system carries crucial importance as it helps managers to decide which rewards should be handed out, by what amount and to whom. Additionally, performance appraisals may increase an employee’s commitment and satisfaction (Wiese and Buckley, 1998) The case readers need to notice that when organizations fail to follow objective appraisal or reward standards, the same rewards become a cause of contention. The reward which was handed over to the employees in this case was in addition to the annual appraisal. Though the role of rewards has been well-recognized in motivating the employees to continue performing at high level and encourage others to strive for better performance, what needs to be recognized that rewards’ per say does not serve purpose. They need to be dealt within the context of performance management system. Using rewards to favor or discriminate a few employees by using subjective standards backfires and does no good as the person who is favored cannot take pride in it and is not motivated to perform better or equally well as he/she also knows that the work has no relation to the reward, it is personal favor, on the other hand, the one who is discriminated feel discouraged and demotivated to perform. Rewards have the potential to both help and harm the organization if dealt in a callous and careless manner. Use of rewards to favor or discriminate certain people due to subjective preference can be suicidal for the organization and irreparably damage the trust of the employees in the management. It has been well stated that fairness and objectivity are the core principles using an assessment of the nature and size of the job each is employed to carry out (Torrington et al., 2005). If any organization decides to include rewards as a motivating mechanism, it needs to cull out unambiguous and transparent criteria for rewarding. If employees perceive procedural or distributive injustice from the management, it is not only detrimental for the employee’ relations and teamwork, it also tarnishes the reputation of the organization and jeopardizes the culture of the organization. Reward management needs to be closely related to performance appraisals, job evaluations and overall performance management systems. The current case elaborates on one such instance where unjustified inequity in reward system not only disturbed the employees concerned but it had bred a negative image of the organization among other employees too, organizational citizenship was replaced with contempt and feeling of apathy.

Post graduate students and working professionals can benefit from this study.

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

Human resource management.

This case will enable students to: understand reasons for mergers and acquisitions (M&A); identify and explain the risks associated with M&A and corresponding risk mitigation approaches; and decision-making on postmerger integrations.

The case discusses the integration dilemma around ChocoTravel’s M&A of Aviata. Both are among the largest online travel agencies in Kazakhstan. The acquisition of Aviata was not the first M&A deal for ChocoFamily – the Holding Company of ChocoTravel; however, it was the largest one. By combining their operations, ChocoTravel and Aviata together could capture 70% of the market share and become the market leader. Although the M&A had high potential toward superior business performance, it had significant risks. Threats of integration failures often make M&As fail. The management of ChocoTravel, therefore, had to consider several factors that could act as potential threats to post-M&A integration. First, each company had its own operating model and corporate culture. Second, both brands, ChocoTravel and Aviata, were well established and recognized in the market; each of them had its own loyal clients. Taking into account low switching costs to customers, the CEO of the new joint company needed to decide whether to integrate ChocoTravel and Aviata or keep them separate or even discontinue one. So, the important thing was not to disrupt operations and lose customers while introducing the post-M&A integration strategy. This case focuses on the challenges of post M&A integration.

The case targets last year’s bachelor’s students, Master of Business Administration/Master of Science students as part of the business strategy, marketing and branding and M&A classes. It allows students to have a broad in-class discussion and apply knowledge to make strategic management decisions in postmerger integration situations.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

The case includes issues in sustainable enterprises, marketing management, organizational development, organizational behavior, entrepreneurship, organizational leadership and small business management.

The Bahia Aventuras case may be used at both the undergraduate and graduate levels of study within most business school curricula (BSBA, MBA and MS). Potential courses may include building sustainable enterprises, marketing management, organizational development, organizational behavior, entrepreneurship, organizational leadership and small business management.

Bahia Aventuras is an ecotourism company in Costa Rica. A local entrepreneur, Walter Brenes, started the company in 2007 to specialize in marine tours, including whale watching, bird viewing and snorkeling. However, the founder had no business training and confronts both internal and external challenges to achieve sustainable success, both financially and environmentally. Internally, there were few financial control systems in place and as a result Walter's ability to accurately account for revenues and expenses was limited. Bahia Aventuras and Walter also faced external challenges. Construction of a new highway was likely, and that could bring more competition, including hotel chains such as the Marriott and Sheraton. Government regulation cut both ways for the company. He was the classic small businessperson, who needed help in moving to the next stage of development for his small business. Thus, a small ecotourism business was caught in the middle of rapid economic development, a growing national infrastructure and increasing pressures to preserve and protect the coastal ecosystem and rainforest of south central Costa Rica. He was just trying to figure out how to “stay alive” as a business. The case has a tragic ending for the owners. Both Walter and his partner, along with one of their tour guides, died in a car accident. But family, friends and the community has kept Walter's vision alive, and Bahia Aventuras continues to day.

outcomes Upon completion of the Bahia Aventuras case, each participant will be able to: Describe the economic development and growth prospects of ecotourism within Costa Rica. Evaluate the socio-economic challenges which confront Costa Rica as a developing nation within the Central American region. Describe how Costa Rica's environmental regulations have affected the continued growth and development of ecotourism within the country. Describe the complex set of relationships that may exist between small business owners, their employees, regulatory agencies and the local community. Apply management skills and competencies to analyze and propose feasible solutions to organizational performance problems. Explain how the implementation of sustainable business practices may serve as a catalyst for the creation of shared value for organizational stakeholders as enabled through economic growth, attainment of social equity and preservation of the environment.

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

This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Chrysler Corporation: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1240). Set in February 1998, the case places students in the position of negotiators for the company; their task is to value both firms, assess the potential earnings dilution of a combination, and negotiate a detailed agreement with their counterpart. The case can be used to explore such interesting negotiation issues as determination of a share-exchange ratio, treatment of major stockholders, and structuring a deal. Also, the case and exercise can be used to spark a discussion of acquisition in comparison with strategic alliance, or other less formal models of combination.

This case may be taught singly or used as a merger-negotiation exercise with “Daimler-Benz A. G.: Negotiations between Daimler and Chrysler” (UVA-F-1241). Set in February 1998, the case places students in the position of negotiators for the company; their task is to value both firms, assess the potential earnings dilution of a combination, and negotiate a detailed agreement with their counterpart. The case can be used to explore such interesting negotiation issues as determination of a share-exchange ratio, treatment of major stockholders, and structuring a deal. Also, the case and exercise can be used to spark a discussion of acquisition in comparison with strategic alliance, or other less formal models of combination.