Search results

January 27, 2005, was an extraordinary day for Gillette's James Kilts, the show-stopping turnaround expert known as the “Razor Boss of Boston.” Kilts, along with Proctor & Gamble chairman Alan Lafley, had just orchestrated a $57 billion acquisition of Gillette by P&G. The creation of the world's largest consumer products company would end Kilts's four-year tenure as CEO of Gillette and bring to a close Gillette's 104-year history as an independent corporate titan in the Boston area. The deal also capped a series of courtships between Gillette and other companies that had waxed and waned at various points throughout Kilts's stewardship of Gillette. But almost immediately after the transaction was announced, P&G and Gillette drew criticism from the media and the state of Massachusetts concerning the terms of the sale. Would this merger actually benefit shareholders, or was it principally a wealth creation vehicle for Kilts?

To understand the factors that persuaded shareholders of both P&G and Gillette to merge their companies, the valuation metrics involved in determining the merger consideration, compensation packages for key managers, and the politics (internal, local government, and regulatory) that impact major mergers.

Although the federal gasoline tax played multiple roles in financing surface transportation infrastructure in the United States, experts did not agree on the tax's purpose. Some argued that it was essentially a fee for users of the nation's federally supported highways. Others suggested that it should play a more prominent role in environmental, energy, and transportation policy by correcting for driving-related externalities. Still others suggested that it should be used to reduce the federal budget deficit. Finally, the tax itself had remained at the same level since 1993, and with the Highway Trust Fund virtually insolvent, many experts believed it was time for an increase. The case presents a background on the U.S. federal gasoline tax, an overview of the market for gasoline in the United States, and survey of gasoline taxes in U.S. states as well as several other countries around the world.

The case can be used to discuss the incidence of the gasoline tax, as well as its role as a Pigouvian tax to deal with negative externalities related to gasoline consumption and driving. There is sufficient data in the case to enable students to analyze the incidence of the federal gasoline tax and to determine the socially efficient level of the tax in light of externalities related to gasoline consumption and driving.

Describes the history of the tobacco industry and its emergence as an extremely effective marketer and non-market strategist. After years of success, both publicly and politically, the leaders of the tobacco industry are faced with mounting political pressure and the financial threat of litigation from class-action lawsuits. The leaders face an industry-wide strategic decision of whether to acquiesce to government demands in exchange for immunity, focus on judicial success, or develop a new course of action.

To evaluate the formulation and implementation of non-market strategies in the context of regulatory, legislative, and legal institutions. To understand how various aspects of the non-market environment interact and how these environments not only change over time, but change market competition within an industry. Further, to formulate and decide between firm-specific and industry-wide strategies. Finally, to appreciate and reflect upon the potential conflict between non-market strategies and ethical concerns.

Set in September 1992, this exercise provides teams of students the opportunity to negotiate terms of a merger between AT&T and McCaw Cellular. AT&T, one of the largest U.S. corporations, was the dominant competitor in long-distance telephone communications in the United States. McCaw was the largest competitor in the rapidly growing cellular-telephone communications industry. Prior to the negotiations, AT&T had no position in cellular communications. This case and its companion (F-1143) are designed to allow students to be assigned roles to play. The case may pursue some or all of the following teaching objectives: exercising valuation skills, practicing strategic analysis, exercising bargaining skills, and illustrating practical aspects of mergers and acquisitions.

On March 1, 2001, Jessica Gallinelli, managing director of Bancroft Capital Management, heard surprising and somewhat disturbing news about the proposed bid by General Electric Company (GE) for Honeywell International Inc. Despite recent public assurances about the deal from GE's chairman and chief executive officer (CEO), John F. “Jack” Welch Jr., the antitrust regulatory authority of the European Commission (EC) announced it had initiated a review of the proposed merger. Gallinelli, whose fund owned a large stake in Honeywell, considered this major development and wondered whether Bancroft should alter its investment. Immediately, Gallinelli instructed her associate to provide background material on the merger, an assessment of the probability the merger would be approved by antitrust regulators in the U.S. and Europe, and valuation analyses to assist Gallinelli in assessing Bancroft's investment in Honeywell. She would need to decide quickly whether to hold or sell her fund's 10 million shares in Honeywell and short position of 10 million shares in GE. As a risk arbitrageur, she thought prices would respond rapidly to the EC's announcement. She remembered Jack Welch's confidence of five months earlier that this was the “cleanest deal you'll ever see,” and she wondered whether that was still the case.

This case looks at the design and implementation of a risk management strategy. It reviews the early moves by Great Plains Energy (GPE) to establish a corporate-wide Enterprise Risk Management program. The corporate Chief Risk Officer is Andrea Bielsker. Andrea appointed Jana Utter to take charge of coordinating the design and implementation of the ERM program. Utter faces a number of challenges. She has had to first conceptualize the program given the charge by the Board of Directors, then design a process by which she identifies the risks that the corporation faces, assist in designing measures for the risks, and work with the various divisions and functional areas to put processes in place to mitigate the identified risks.

The Dudley Beauty case illustrates a contemporary branding, management and marketing challenge facing many companies that are 50 plus years old. Movahhed (2016) highlights the six elements to consider during brand strategy: the target audience, the brand promise, brand perception (past, current and future), brand values, brand voice and brand positioning. The times have changed with changing macroenvironmental factors including political, economic, sociological, technological, legal and other environmental (PESTLE) changes that affect a business but which the business does not directly control.

The case is based upon an interview with Dudley Beauty CEO and President Ursula Dudley Oglesby and secondary sources.

The “A Makeover for Dudley’s Q+” case explores the challenges of a second-generation textured hair care and personal care company in the direct selling channel as it faces an aging market and changing business and economic environment. A Black-owned company, begun in 1967 by her parents, Dudley Beauty is led by the founders’ daughter, Harvard College and Harvard Law School-educated, Ursula Dudley Oglesby. At over 50 years old, the company has continually created new textured hair products and has high brand awareness among older Black consumers but has not adequately addressed changing hair trends and shifting communication preferences of younger consumers. The company is at a critical point needing to reach a younger, larger market to survive. The business situation supports marketing, management, strategy, and/or entrepreneurship undergraduate students in understanding how macroenvironmental forces and internal structures affect businesses.

This case is intended primarily for use by undergraduates in a variety of courses. It is suitable for courses in Principles of Marketing, Entrepreneurial Marketing, general Entrepreneurship and Marketing Strategy courses covering topics such as direct selling, the role of environmental factors in business, rebranding efforts using digital and social media marketing and women/minority business owners.

The central issue in the case is opportunity identification and decision making. While the literature on direct selling is limited, much has been written about ideation, effectuation, causality and opportunity identification and assessment. Scholars of entrepreneurship debate whether entrepreneurial opportunities are identified and assessed primarily through effectuation or causation.

This case is based upon a combination of interviews with the protagonist, her staff and secondary research.

This case explores the opportunity identification, assessment and decision making of an energetic, African American, female founder and CEO in the rarely-researched direct selling channel. Dr Traci Lynn Burton founded her company at 24 with an investment of $200. In 2008, in its second incarnation, Traci Lynn Jewelry became a direct selling company and has taken bold steps. By 2018, the company was a direct selling leader and was preparing to launch a new product line. The case supports undergraduate students in understanding effectuation and causation, opportunity identification and assessment, and direct selling.

This case is primarily for upper division undergraduates. It is suitable for courses in entrepreneurial strategy, entrepreneurial marketing, general entrepreneurship emphasizing opportunity identification, opportunity assessment and/or effectuation.

In 2010, approximately one-third of US children and adolescents were classified as at least overweight, with 17 percent classified as obese. In addition to other causes, the marketing and advertising of food directly to children was identified by a Task Force on Childhood Obesity as a contributing factor. As a result, food industries began to self-regulate. Consumer advocacy organizations developed guidelines for advertising products targeted to children. Cereal companies, such as General Mills (GM), struggled with whether or not to adopt those standards. GM began to change both marketing and product advertising in small ways. The changes were considered steps in the right direction but GM continued to be under scrutiny of advocacy groups. This case addresses the struggle of General Mills to make changes to product nutritional content and/or marketing and to address the societal concern about childhood obesity while also meeting responsibilities to consumers and shareholders.

The case was researched utilizing secondary data – all materials are readily available to the public. There is no disguise of any actual person or entity and no relationship between the authors and the organizations or individuals mentioned in the case. Frequent sources include the General Foods, Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative and Center for Science in the Public Interest web pages.

This case could be used at an undergraduate or graduate level. Legal Environment of Business, Business Ethics and any Marketing course.

The ethics frameworks in most business law or ethics textbooks may be used to discuss the dilemma identified in this case. This Instructor's Manual uses Hosmer's model. Hosmer (2008), The Ethics of Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach, 7th ed.

Whole Foods and Wild Oats were both natural- and organic-food stores that competed for similar customers on values such as high-quality and healthy products, excellent customer service, knowledge of products, and an enjoyable shopping experience. In February 2007, Whole Foods announced that it would purchase a smaller but formidable competitor, Wild Oats. There was tremendous geographic complementarity involved: The merger would give Whole Foods the largest footprint within the natural- and organic-grocery industry in North America.