Search results

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.

This case illustrates the rationale for adopting employee ownership, and difficulties in implementing employee empowerment beyond investment. In the beginning it focuses on why Jerry Pritchett, one of the co-founders of Pritchett Controls, decided to convert it to an employee-owned company. In the body of the case, it details the efforts of the company to operate under its new ownership structure in an increasingly competitive environment. Although Pritchett established employee owners, only selected High Performance Work Systems (HPWS) practices have been implemented. The issue that reader must grapple with is whether other HPWS practices should be adopted or not.

Primary data were collected by interviewing eight managers including the current and former CEO at two of the firm’s three locations. Secondary data were used to supplement industry and competitive information.

Human resources courses, especially those that focus on strategic human resource management, organizational development, and how high performance organizations can be built, would be most appropriate for this case.

The primary theoretical foundations for this submission are shared entrepreneurship and HPWS. Knowledge of leadership, employee ownership, human resources, corporate governance, organizational culture and strategy would also be helpful in analyzing this case.

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.

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.