Search results

In early 2014, recent Stanford University graduate Tyler Shultz was in a quandary. He had been working at Theranos, a blood-diagnostic company founded by Elizabeth Holmes, a Stanford-dropout wunderkind, for almost a year. Shultz had learned enough about the company to realize that its practices and the efficacy of its much-touted finger-prick blood-testing technology were questionable and that the company was going to great lengths to hide this fact from the public and from regulators.

Theranos and Holmes were Silicon Valley darlings, enjoying positive press and lavish attention from potential investors and technology titans alike. Just as companies like PayPal had revolutionized the stagnant payments industry and Uber had upended the for-hire transportation sector, Theranos had been positioned as the latest technology firm to substantially disrupt yet another mature sector: the medical laboratory business. By the start of 2014, the company had raised more than $400 million in funding, and had an estimated market valuation of $9 billion.

Shultz's situation was exacerbated by the fact that his grandfather, the highly respected former US Secretary of State George Shultz, was on the Theranos board and was one of Elizabeth Holmes's biggest supporters.

But Tyler Shultz worried about the customers he was convinced were receiving highly unreliable and often inaccurate blood-test results. With so much at stake, Shultz wondered how he should proceed. Should he raise his concerns with the firm's investors? Blow the whistle externally? Report to industry regulators? Go away quietly?

This case and its subsequent four brief follow-up cases are based largely on interviews with Tyler Shultz, and outline the dilemma he faced and the various steps he would take both to extricate himself from his unsavory position and let the public know the full extent of the deception at Theranos.

Five optional handouts are available to instructors to further discussion after the case has been debriefed. The handouts serve as additional decision points for the students if your class time permits.

Data for the case came from public sources, including legal proceedings, court filings and Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The authors perused hundreds of court documents and identified 28 that were most relevant to this case. The authors also used press interviews with the women highlighted in the case. The authors have no relationship with the company and no one from the company has reviewed the information presented in this case. As the case is drawn from sworn legal testimonies, interviews and related documents in the public domain, the authors did not have to seek approval for publication.

Pinterest touted itself as “the nicest place on the Internet.” It had an almost 80% female user base and purported to have an inclusive culture that embraced diversity. However, in June 2020, in the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests, two former female employees of color violated their non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) to publicly accuse Pinterest of racial and gender discrimination. In August 2020, Pinterest’s former Chief Operating Officer, Francoise Brougher, filed a lawsuit charging the company with gender discrimination, retaliation and wrongful termination, and authored a public blog post titled, The Pinterest Paradox: Cupcakes and Toxicity, detailing her own experience with the company’s discriminatory culture. Three days later 236 of Pinterest’s 2,545 employees staged a virtual walkout and 445 employees signed a petition in an attempt to change Pinterest’s policies and culture. The case provides a brief overview of Pinterest, including its mission, values and organizational culture, and details several incidents and complaints by female and minority employees. The case questions whether employee complaints are a relatively narrow issue involving disgruntled former employees who did not fit at the organization or a much broader issue involving discrimination and managerial neglect in creating and maintaining a nondiscriminatory, inclusive culture. Students are encouraged to evaluate the situation in which Co-Founder, Board Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Ben Silbermann finds himself, evaluate the actions taken and decide if Silbermann should take any additional actions to address the discrimination claims and ensure a positive culture for all employees.

This case is appropriate for graduate and advanced undergraduate level courses in organizational behavior, human resource management and business law or any course where discrimination and workplace culture are discussed.

The case data are from a mix of secondary sources, which included company documents, webpages and blogposts, autobiographies co-written by Schultz, newspaper stories, news media and other publicly available videos, magazine articles, photographs of signed unionization statements, and webinar interview.

In late autumn 2021, the global retail coffee and foodservice company Starbucks dealt with employees at a few USA stores who initiated unionization efforts in an attempt to change their workplace. Their actions triggered a wave of similar attempts at Starbucks stores across the USA over the next few years. Employees amplified their voices on social media, stating both their love for the company and their disenfranchisement. They claimed to have little input about policies and workplace decisions that affected them and that leadership had not heard or adequately responded to concerns with staffing, safety, equipment, and abusive customers. Walkouts were staged and employees at numerous stores pursued unionization. In 2023, Laxman Narasimhan replaced Howard Schultz as CEO. His tenure started with the challenge of reengaging employees who claimed their collective voice was unheard by leadership Readers will consider what employee voice means in the context of baristas working for a large corporation, and how their emotions, commitment to and respect for the organization, and their desire to be heard, related to efforts to unionize and maintain employment.

This case can be used as a unit review to cover several organizational behavior topics or can be used with specific concepts for graduate or undergraduate students. The placement within the semester plan depends on which unit/concepts the instructor will pair with it, such as emotions in the workplace, a module on loyalty, voice and exit, or the introduction of employee voice and engagement. It can also be used in conjunction with cross-level concepts such as trust and leadership. For courses focused on talent management, employee relations, or human resource development, the case could be used to introduce multiple concepts or as a concluding assessment. It would best pair with topics such as employee satisfaction, exit, voice and loyalty, inclusive decision-making or emotions in the workplace. For a course in labor relations, the case could introduce the idea that employees’ experiences, emotions, and perceptions may be related to efforts to unionize.

The learning objectives are intended to stimulate the students’ comprehension of the various challenges faced by Indian startups in the digital ecosystem. With the changing working dynamics in organizations around the globe, managers are expected to explore unconventional business models to facilitate operational growth. The case study is a valuable resource for graduate students to enhance and evolve their critical thinking and solution-oriented skills as forthcoming managers of digital businesses. Students should be able to analyze the case, respond to the questions and evaluate the consequences of workplace flexibility, moonlighting and its applicability in an organizational context. With the Indian Government introducing schemes such as the Digital India initiative and Startup India, it is predicted that numerous startups will opt for digital business standards and a remote work approach. The case bridges classroom theories and a real-life digital company to help students connect with emerging market scenarios.

During the digital era, India witnessed a shift in companies’ work culture, which amplified when COVID-19 hit the country. Organizations started to work remotely and experienced the numerous benefits it brought. The comfort of working from home was greater for digital businesses whose significant operations could be performed online. However, is it really that productive for digital companies to telecommute? The case illustrates how a digital company, Career Pandit, formed in 2018, unfurls and expands its business and further highlights the challenges the pandemic raised concerning people management. In addition to the discussion, the purpose of the case is to determine the implication of workplace flexibility and moonlighting and how Indian startups cope with the uncertain future challenges it brings.

Under graduate and postgraduate students.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 6: Human Resource Management.

This case is based on primary and secondary sources of information. These sources include interviews with senior executives as well as documents provided by Mondragon and Eroski. The interviews were conducted on-site. In addition, the authors researched the literature on both organizations.

Eroski is the largest of Mondragon Corporation’s coops. Since its founding, Eroski has faced numerous challenges. It has responded to each challenge with out-of-the-box thinking. In response to the pandemic, Eroski become an e-commerce supermarket as well as selectively continuing bricks and mortar stores. As the pandemic is winding down, Eroski is considering how to respond to the “new normal,” which is largely undefined. The question posited at the end of the case is, “Will Eroski be able to hold to its social principles, maintain its unusual governance model and other unusual practices, and survive this latest challenge?”

Eroski of Mondragon is a complex and unusual organization. To appreciate the challenges and how they were overcome by its unique business model, a student must have a minimum background in management, corporate finance and marketing. Thus, this case would fit well into a senior or graduate class on strategic human resource management. It is also recommended for the strategy capstone course usually offered during the last year of a business bachelor’s degree (senior level) to ensure that students are introduced to what Paul Adler refers to as an alternative business model. It can also be targeted for an advanced management course or a strategy course at the MBA and executive levels.