Search results

In mid-2012, after successful years in large public companies and obtaining an MBA, middle daughter Jen, 32, is trying to decide whether the time is right for her to enter her mother and sister's small family business to grow it further. Destira, Inc. was a designer/manufacturer of gymnastics wear for girls, headquartered in California. Donna Levy founded the company in 1990, after years of making leotards for her three daughters, who were competitive youth gymnasts, and getting requests from other parents to make the garments for their own children. In 2005, when Donna's oldest daughter, Jodi, joined Destira, Donna gave her a 50 percent equity stake. Between then and year-end 2011, the pair grew the revenues from $550,000 to $1.06 million, increased the number of outlets carrying the brand, upgraded the internal accounting/operations software, and added an online direct-to-customer retail business. The case shows realistic considerations for the individual, family, and business when evaluating whether or not to commit to join the family enterprise.

An examination of managerial rule breaking is potentially significant in times of rapid change where advantages have to be gained through flexibility and the effective use of power. This paper is based on a study of middle managers with professional backgrounds in public and private UK health care organizations. It analyses managers’ responses to rules and identifies to what extent they accept, subvert or reinterpret rules, ignore or hide rules, create new rules or manage without rules at all. The conclusion is reached that, within certain organizational, professional, gender and personal parameters, managers demonstrate great versatility. It is suggested that it is not the decision to avoid rules, nor the selection of particular ways to manipulate rules that is significant, but it is the ability of managers to move freely across different modes of behaviour as they deem appropriate that marks out successful opportunistic action.

A married couple who have a successful industrial B2B business evaluate whether or not to sell the business to two of their offspring, who are both entrepreneurial MBA graduates. Complicating factors include the fact that the sale price and structure need to finance the couple's retirement and give fair inheritance treatment to the remaining siblings. In addition, the father has had some health issues and the business is doing well, so there is a lot of forward momentum to sell to the next generation

Evaluate whether or not, and how, to keep a business founded and run by entrepreneurs as a family business into the sibling generation. Explore “escalation of commitment” and how it influences decisions to keep the business in the family or not.

A successful five-generation family business group in India separates its ownership role from its operational management role to meet the needs of a more global economy. This includes hiring professional nonfamily business unit managers as well as including nonfamily directors on the corporate board.

When a consultant recommends an overhaul of the HR compensation practices that the family business is known for and prizes, what should be the next steps?

Evaluating business advice when it is contrary to one's strengths, values, and beliefs.

A family media enterprise with very strong family culture and values is in the third and fourth generations of ownership and governance. They face a crisis when a large number of family shareholders want to cash out their shares. What led to this situation? How could it have been avoided? How should it be resolved?

Lack of succession and liquidity planning can harm the business through generations when it becomes a crisis.

As founders of First Interstate BancSystem, which held $8.6 billion in assets and had recently become a public company, and Padlock Ranch, which had over 11,000 head of cattle, the Scott family had to think carefully about business and family governance. Now entering its fifth generation, the family had over 80 shareholders across the US. In early 2016, the nine-member Scott Family Council (FC) and other family and business leaders considered the effectiveness of the Family Governance Leadership Development Initiative launched two years earlier. The initiative's aim was to ensure a pipeline of capable family leaders for the business boards, two foundation boards, and FC.

Seven family members had self-nominated for governance roles in mid-2015. As part of the development initiative, each was undergoing a leadership development process that included rigorous assessment and creation of a comprehensive development plan. As the nominees made their way through the process and other family members considered nominating themselves for future development, questions remained around several interrelated areas, including how to foster family engagement with governance roles while guarding against damaging competition among members; how to manage possible conflicts of interest around dual employee and governance roles; and how to extend the development process to governance for the foundations and FC. The FC considered how best to answer these and other questions, and whether the answers indicated the need to modify the fledgling initiative.

This case illustrates the challenges multigenerational family-owned enterprises face in developing governance leaders within the family. It serves as a good example of governance for a large group of cousins within a multienterprise portfolio. Students can learn and apply insights from this valuable illustration of family values, vision, and mission statement.

In late 2011, Jerry Bertram, vice president and general manager of the fire retardant additives business of Huber Engineered Materials (HEM), a division of family-owned J. M. Huber Corporation, was preparing to present the potential acquisition of the precipitated alumina trihydrate (PATH) business to the environment, health, and safety committee of Huber's corporate board. He had convinced HEM's leadership of PATH's strategic value to their business and the urgency of the acquisition based on PATH's parent company's movement into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and its plans to close the PATH plant.

Winning board approval posed a major challenge. It was unclear whether the plant would remain operational, because HEM would have to enter a shared-services arrangement with PATH's parent company, which continued to use the site. In addition, acquiring PATH would mean integrating its specialized, unionized labor force into Huber, which had very few union workers. Finally, early due diligence had revealed tens of millions of dollars of potential environmental risk on the site. The last issue was particularly critical, given Huber's generations-long history of respect for the environment, and its executives' and directors' reluctance to take on any business with excessive environmental risk.

This case illustrates in depth the family business values that can promote consideration of an ostensibly unconventional and risky strategic move, and enable executives to push for approval of the same, as backed by comprehensive risk assessment and mitigation plans.

The ATF case is a succinct opportunity to explore the many special features of leadership succession for a family business. In 2009 the company was passing the baton to the oldest of three sons in the second-generation family business.

ATF produced metal and plastic fasteners for, primarily, the automotive industry. ATF had grown into a company with more than $50 million in annual revenues. The company had grown in large part through alliances with other family businesses around the world. First-generation patriarch Don Surber had led the company since he acquired it in 1982. Don was known for his charismatic leadership style and his focus on driving value through a network approach.

The case traces the career paths of all three sons and looks at the succession through the eyes of the oldest son, Jason Surber. The elements, constituents, and challenges of succession are evident. The fundamental insight is that business leadership succession is far more than just passing the business leadership baton. It also requires attention to the family, the board, the whole system of external stakeholders, and the future of ownership.

The epilogue in this note covers the period from 2009 to 2012 by describing what Jason did to earn credibility, to incorporate his brothers, and to define his personal leadership philosophy and style. The epilogue thus provides students with an opportunity to consider and define their own personal philosophy of management leadership and their own style. They will see the art of melding styles from the past with their own for the future.

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?