Search results

Marketing, entrepreneurship, operations management, and transportation/logistics.

The case is suitable for junior, senior undergraduate and first-year graduate business classes. It can be used entirely in business classes in marketing, entrepreneurship, operations management, and transportation/logistics, and parts of it can be used for discussions in classes related to emerging economies/markets, environmental management, sustainability, and technology management.

The case builds on the expansion plan considered by a young software company, called Hangzhou Omnipay located in the city of Hangzhou, China. Mr Chao, Vice President (VP) of Omnipay, is the main character of the case. He was aware of the current car-sharing industry leader – Zipcar headquartered in Boston and also identified multiple stakeholders in the city for decision making. By collaborating with a global student project team, Mr Chao collected a great deal of information and data. This teaching case provides students and educators ample opportunities to examine, from a multitude of aspects, the viability of a car-sharing service in Hangzhou.

The central goal is to help students gain a comprehensive understanding of the role of car-sharing service in a country's development in sustainability, socio-economy, environmental commitment, and new urban life style, as well as in a technological company's active pursuit of business expansion opportunity. In addition, students will not only understand the social, cultural, technological and strategic perspectives of car-sharing service implementation, but also develop and enhance analytic skills needed to conduct fundamental cost analysis, determine a base-line pricing scheme, and service location network design.

Teaching notes are available, please contact your librarian for access.

The first across-the-table negotiation between Google and China concluded successfully in 2006, when Google received a license to establish a local domain (google.cn) targeted at Chinese Internet users and not subject to the “Great Firewall.” During these negotiations both Google and the Chinese government struggled to reach an outcome that would be acceptable to their constituents. Google was caught between pleasing its shareholders and preserving its reputation for free access to information, while China was balancing the desire for cutting-edge search technology and the concern that liberal access to information would undermine its political-economic model. In the end, the negotiation resulted in Google operating two domains in China: Google.com and Google.cn. In early 2010, Google announced that its corporate infrastructure had been the target of a series of China-based cyber attacks and accused the Chinese government of attempting to further limit free speech on the web. These incidents led to a public conflict and private negotiations between Google and the Chinese government, which culminated in July 2010 when the Chinese government renewed the google.cn license knowing that Google was redirecting all Chinese customers search to its google.hk.com site This case concerns the changes in Google and the Chinese government's environment that led to Google withdrawing services from google.cn and the Chinese government saving face by renewing the google.cn license. The case is based on the publicly reported events surrounding two series of negotiations between the U.S. technology giant Google and the Chinese Government regarding Google's license in China.