Search results

In recent years Lehman Brothers, one of the five largest investment banks in the United States, had grown increasingly reliant on its fixed income trading and underwriting division, which served as the primary engine for its strong profit growth. The bank had also significantly increased its leverage over the same timeframe, going from a debt-to-equity ratio of 23.7x in 2003 to 35.2x in 2007. As leverage increased, the ongoing erosion of the mortgage-backed industry began to impact Lehman significantly and its stock price plummeted. Unfortunately, public outcry over taxpayer assumption of $29 billion in potential Bear losses made repeating such a move politically untenable. The surreal scene of potential buyers traipsing into an investment bank's headquarters over the weekend to consider various merger or spin-out scenarios repeated itself once again. This time, the Fed refused to back the failing bank's liabilities, attempting instead to play last-minute suitors Bank of America, HSBC, Nomura Securities, and Barclay's off each other, jawboning them by arguing that failing to step up to save Lehman would cause devastating counterparty runs on their own capital positions. The Fed's desperate attempts to arrange its second rescue of a major U.S. investment bank in six months failed when it refused to backstop losses from Lehman's toxic mortgage holdings. Complicating matters was Lehman's reliance on short-term repo loans to finance its balance sheet. Unfortunately, such loans required constant renewal by counterparties, who had grown increasingly nervous that Lehman would lose the ability to make good on its trades. With this sentiment swirling around Wall Street, Lehman was forced to announce the largest Chapter 11 filing in U.S. history, listing assets of $639 billion and liabilities of $768 billion. The second domino had fallen. It would not be the last.

This case covers the period from the sale of Bear Stearns to JP Morgan to the conversion into bank holding companies by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, including the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and the sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America. The case explains the new global paradigm for the investment banking industry, including increased regulation, fewer competitors, lower leverage, reduced proprietary trading, and-potentially-reduced profits.

Dave Williams has taken over as CEO for MBC Corporation and wants to change the mission statement of the company. However, he needs to get approval from four shareholders: a former board chairman, his father and current board chairman, and two members of his own executive team. Williams must navigate the varying dynamics and opinions of the shareholders to gain their buy-in and create a new mission statement that will take MBC on a new path for the future.

The concept this case addresses is that of the mission statement and how it is used to align an organization and its stakeholders. After students have analyzed this case, they will be able to:

• Communicate the importance of a mission statement

• Engage stakeholders in the creation of a mission statement

• Implement a new mission and culture at an organization

Communicate the importance of a mission statement

Engage stakeholders in the creation of a mission statement

Implement a new mission and culture at an organization

The authors used Sue’s (2010) microaggression process model and Freeman et al.’s (2010) stakeholder theory as a theoretical basis for this case.

Information for the case was gathered from publicly available sources. No formal data collection efforts were undertaken.

Guess Who’s Coming to Deliver is a case that examines an event that occurred at Lowe’s Home Improvement Warehouse in late July and early August of 2015. A customer who had purchased some products from Lowe’s requested that only White delivery people were dispatched to her home because she did not allow African–American people in her house. The case is factual and was written from information that was publicly available in the media. The case is designed to help instructors facilitate a meaningful classroom discussion about microaggressions from the different stakeholder perspectives.

The case is relevant for undergraduate and graduate organizational behavior and human resource management courses.

Fingerhut, based in Minnetonka, Minnesota, is a direct-marketing company that sells a smorgasbord of consumer goods through an array of specially targeted catalogs. In November 1996, an article in the Star Tribune, a major Minneapolis newspaper, drew attention to a class-action lawsuit pending against Fingerhut that suggests the firm made its profits by exploiting the poor. Several civil rights groups rallied around the suit and submitted amicus curiae in favor of the litigation. The case illustrates issues in ethics and management communication. Discussions focus on the constituencies. Is Fingerhut exploiting its customers or providing them with an affordable method of obtaining valued consumer goods on credit? Do retailers have a duty to offer products at reasonable prices? Are the high interest rates reasonable given the risk? What are the options: pawn shops, rent-to-own? What is the profile of the typical Fingerhut customer? Discussions also focus on the issues communicating to the constituencies. How much damage will the lawsuit do to Fingerhut's image as an ethical, socially conscious company? What communication strategies can the firm employ? Should it react to the lawsuit? What should it tell its employees?

In 1992 Joe Jackson, former manager of DuPont Motorsports for twelve years, was angling to get the paint business at Rick Hendrick's sixty-five automotive dealerships across the United States. In order to win the Hendrick car dealership paint contract, Jackson and Hendrick met to discuss the possibility of sponsoring Hendrick's new team and rookie NASCAR driver—Jeff Gordon. As a result of that meeting, DuPont signed on to be the primary sponsor. By 2006 Gordon was a NASCAR superstar, and the DuPont logo—viewed by millions—was a household brand. While this level of exposure was exciting for the company, executives at DuPont could not help but wonder if they were fully leveraging this tremendous marketing opportunity. Gordon was on fire—but was DuPont maximizing the heat? The DuPont-NASCAR case tasks students and executives with designing a creative marketing campaign to activate the NASCAR sponsorship opportunity and maximize value beyond conventional sponsorship marketing. This open-ended challenge encourages students and executives to think outside of the traditional marketing tactics typically employed by business-to-consumer (B2C) NASCAR sponsors. Additionally, the nature of DuPont creates the need to develop a multi-dimensional plan that caters to a breadth of brands. Beyond designing a new marketing campaign, a key objective of the case is to focus students and executives on designing metrics for measurement of the return on investment (ROI) into a campaign plan. As a first step, it is important to clearly articulate the campaign, business strategy, and key business objectives mapped to the strategy.

Students and executives learn how to design a marketing campaign for measurement. Specifically, they are tasked with designing a new marketing campaign for DuPont to activate the DuPont/NASCAR relationship. Students and executives must define metrics for measurement and learn to use a balanced score card approach. Since the DuPont sponsorship of Hendrick Motorsports is a brand campaign built to reach the DuPont business-to-business (B2B) customer, both non-financial and financial metrics are used. The key to success is to have a clearly defined sponsorship marketing strategy and business objectives. The case teaches students and executives how to define key metrics and articulate a methodology for campaign measurement pre and post to quantify the return on investment (ROI).

The case was developed from secondary sources. This descriptive case was classroom tested in undergraduate organizational behavior courses.

The 94th Academy Awards ceremony, which honored movies released in 2021, was held on March 27, 2022, at the Dolby Theater in Hollywood. Prior to Chris Rock announcing the winner in the category of best documentary film, Rock was assaulted on stage by Will Smith. On April 8, 2022, the Academy’s board of governors met to discuss disciplinary actions for Smith’s behavior. The Academy’s board decided to ban Smith from all Academy events for the next 10 years. Theories of individual behaviors and social processes can provide explanations for behaviors of Chris Rock, Will Smith, the producers and the Academy.

This descriptive case is most appropriate for undergraduate-level organizational behavior courses. The primary topics in this case align well with individual behaviors relative to emotional intelligence (EI) and motivation. The secondary topics in this case align well with social processes relative to decision-making, conflict and culture.

The data used to present this case was collected from secondary data sources. These sources included media reports associated with Michael Jordan and his trajectory since entering the sport, as well as specific information published about his time at the Chicago Bulls. Another key source of information is the ESPN documentary conducted specifically on Jordan’s relationship with his National Basketball Association (NBA) team.

The case follows the story of Michael Jordan, who took his team, the Chicago Bulls, to fame in a rather controversial manner. To do so, Michael Jordan had to alter his leadership style over the years to be respected as a leader and motivate his team to win one NBA championship after another. On 20th April 2020, ESPN’s “The Last Dance”, a 10-part documentary about Michael Jordan and his time playing for the Chicago Bulls was released to much acclaim. The documentary became highly noted as Jordan himself, both directed and starred in the documentary. Jordan’s great achievements stood out, but so did the conflicts that the basketball star had with The Bulls’ management team and mainly, his teammates. Relationships between teammates were far from harmonious, which led to questions around whether Michael Jordan was as good a leader, as he was a star player. Cultural change within the organisation was primarily linked to the often-contested leadership of Jordan.

The case can be used at UG, MSc and MBA levels. It works for in-person teaching and for online teaching. It is most suitable in leadership, strategy and strategy in practice courses. However, it is critical to note that the case can shed light on the dynamics that leaders and teammates have within their teams. Therefore, this case may be valuable to students studying courses where they themselves must work in groups and oftentimes encounter challenges in managing their team. These challenges can arise at all levels of experience. As such, the case provides particularly useful reflection for decision makers who may be beginning to develop their leadership skill (UG), those who have already experienced working in teams (MSc) or leading teams themselves (MBA, Executive MBA). The case addresses the challenges associated with achieving high team motivation and performance. It also sheds light on the challenges associated with leading a cultural change within a team and the approaches of different actors involved. It may be best to introduce the case in the context of a (1.5–2 h) workshop once students understand the basic frameworks and tools used to analyse leadership styles and their characteristics.

International strategy; finance; corporate innovation and technology management.

MBA/MA.

This case's subject is global/international strategy and how investment decisions are made to enter new markets by global companies such as Vodafone Group Plc. The case follows the executive team that is assigned the task of recommending a course of action to invest in various mobile telephony businesses globally and how to set the criteria and strategy for investing.

The case targets graduate students in MBA and technology management programs and can be used in courses in Global Business, Strategy and Policy, Finance, Corporate Innovation and Technology Management. The learning outcomes are expected to be a clearer understanding of the broad political, technical, economic and socio-legal issues to be addressed as well as the firm level strategies employed by transnationals to expand into developing countries.

The case includes teaching materials as well as financial statements, explanations of technologies and demographic data for use in analysis.

This case describes and analyzes the negotiations surrounding the U.S.–Thailand free trade agreement (FTA) that never materialized. The case offers an excellent opportunity to discuss the complexities of trade negotiations, the welfare analyses of FTAs (with trade diversion and creation), and the growth of FTAs and customs unions (CUs) as opposed to multilateral trade liberalizations.