Search results

To ensure that students are well prepared to successfully analyze this case, they should be familiar with the following concepts, theories and principles:

▪ Stakeholder theory

▪ Concept of duty to consult and accommodate

▪ Concept of social license to operate (SLO)

▪ Concept of indigenous economic self-determination

▪ Indigenous world view

▪ Seventh generation principle

▪ Cree principles

▪ Dene principles

The information provided in this case was gathered by the authors through face-to-face interviews, phone interviews, e-mail exchanges and secondary research. Meadow Lake Tribal Council (MLTC) separates business operations from council operations through use of corporate entities (as shown in Exhibit 1 of the case). Meadow Lake Tribal Council II (MLTCII) is the corporate entity that oversees two companies referenced in the case: Mistik Management and NorSask Forest Products LP. Interviews were conducted with the General Manager at Mistik Management, Certification Coordinator at Mistik Management, Chief of Buffalo River Dene Nation, Chief of Waterhen Lake First Nation, MLTC Vice-Chief, Board Member and Advisor to MLTCII, President and CEO of MLTCII, MLTCII Business Development Consultant and a former consultant with MLTC, NorSask Forest Products and Mistik Management.

Mistik Management Ltd., a forestry management company co-owned by the nine First Nations of MLTC, was a leader in economic reconciliation in 2022. However, the company had dealt with significant challenges not long after it was established in 1989. Richard Gladue, former Chief of the one of MLTCs Member First Nations and a leader in economic development at MLTC, had been actively involved in establishing the organization. Gladue loved the life and vitality of the boreal forest in the Meadow Lake region and felt a sense of responsibility to take care of the forest and the land for generations to come. This responsibility was balanced with the acknowledgement that the forest also provided vast economic development, employment and wealth generation opportunities for MLTC and its Member First Nations.

In the early 1990s, MLTC and Mistik Management dealt with a year-long blockade by a group of protesters that included members of Canoe Lake Cree First Nation, one of the Member First Nations of MLTC. They had not been consulted on Mistik’s processes and policies, and the company’s clear-cut logging had affected their ability to continue their traditional way of life and practices on the land. After the incident, Mistik Management moved more quickly to invest in a co-management process that they were still refining and using in 2022 when consulting with Indigenous groups and communities.

A natural resource economy brings together Indigenous peoples, industry and government. In this case, students will learn about the important role that relationships play and how decisions are made when balancing complex legal, environmental and economic interests. Students will learn about the history of duty to consult and accommodate in Canada; conduct a stakeholder analysis and reflect on how decisions affect stakeholder interests; and make recommendations for meaningful Indigenous engagement strategies using the concept of social license and indigenous principles.

This case is suitable for use in undergraduate courses on indigenous business, ethical decision-making, public policy and/or natural resource development. There may also be applications in other fields of study, including anthropology, economics and political science.

If the case is used in an indigenous business course, it would be best positioned in the last third of the class, after topics such as duty to consult and accommodate, social license and meaningful engagement with indigenous communities have been covered. If used in an ethical decision-making course, it would be best used when discussing stakeholder theory and engaging in stakeholder analysis. If used in a public policy course, the case could be used to start a discussion around the duty to consult and accommodate indigenous communities in Canada. If used in a natural resource development course, the case would be best used as an example of indigenous economic development.

This case was written with publicly available information about Nintendo.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Nintendo dominated the video game industry with a market share of 90%. In 2020, Nintendo’s market share dropped to nearly 31%. This case examines a 40-year history of Nintendo, including its core strategy of video game and video game console development and its growth strategy using its intellectual property. Throughout its history, Nintendo has faced and continues to face stiff competition from Sony, Microsoft and new emerging technologies like virtual reality video games. Nintendo has the challenge of competing in a rapidly changing industry with changing customer preferences where it once had a dominant market share. Can Nintendo continue competing, relying on its core competency of developing new video games and consoles? Or moving forward, should it further define itself more broadly by continuing to leverage its intellectual property in the entertainment industry?

This case is suitable for undergraduate courses in marketing, marketing management and business strategy, or where an instructor focuses on strategic decision-making. This case will provide valuable in-class discussions on the importance of defining what a business should do and how it should grow. Additionally, this case will be useful for courses that include advanced discussions on tradeoffs between focusing on core competencies and growth by expanding into other opportunities that are not necessarily part of a business’s core strategy. A portion of this case was tested in an undergraduate marketing strategy and marketing principles course. The case created an excellent environment for critical thinking and analysis.

The case study is designed to help students understand how the “growth at all costs” attitude can lead to compromised corporate governance in a start-up leading to disastrous implications for all the stakeholders. This case study aims to make students understand the components of the fraud triangle, the impact of financial fraud on various stakeholders, the role of venture capitalist (VC) investors and the importance of good corporate governance in start-ups. The case study presents an excellent opportunity for students to discuss the consequences of ignoring good governance in the pursuit of growth in a start-up. After analyzing the case study, the students shall be able to explain the concept of the fraud triangle and to be able to identify the motivation, opportunity and rationalization of financial irregularities in a start-up; analyze the impact of financial irregularities on various stakeholders; comprehend the business model of VCs and evaluate its influence on VC-funded start-ups; and appraise the importance of good corporate governance in start-ups.

The case study revolves around the confession of financial irregularities made by one of the cofounders of GoMechanic, a start-up headquartered in Gurugram, India. On January 18, 2023, Amit Bhasin confessed to financial irregularities in the company’s financial statements, leading to laying off 70% of the workforce of the company. GoMechanic had earlier raised close to US$62m [1] from maverick global investors including Sequoia Capital, Tiger Global, Orios Venture Partners and Chiratae Ventures, and was negotiating to raise Series D financing from the Japanese multinational SoftBank with aspirations to be a unicorn (start-up with a valuation of over $1bn). The confession led to a debate about the consequences of the “growth at all cost” culture being followed by start-ups as well as VCs. GoMechanic was not an isolated instance of a lack of governance in the start-ups. The confession had consequences not only for the GoMechanic but for the entire start-up ecosystem of India, which was the third largest in the world. Bhasin stated that the founders take full responsibility for the situation, and they were working on a plan which was most viable under the circumstances. However, it was not going to be easy to regain the confidence of the investors.

The case study is best suited for senior undergraduate- and graduate-level business school students and in executive education programs in courses such as corporate governance and ethics, private equity and entrepreneurial finance.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and finance

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.