Search results

In 2007, Best Buy was the leading electronics retailer in the United States with more than 941 stores, revenue totaling $31 billion, and a market cap of $21 billion. In 2005, Best Buy had adopted a new business model, culture, and customer-segmentation template called Customer Centricity. This move created volatility in the price of Best Buy stock because of the higher-than-expected employee costs that went with this new way of doing business and the difficulty of executing the old and the new business models simultaneously while the new model was rolled out. Best Buy responded to Wall Street's short-term focus in a myriad of ways. It first asked for investor patience, and stressed the strong operating results achieved in Best Buy stores operating under the new model. But in June 2007, after the stock dropped again, the CEO knew he had to decide whether to open more Best Buy stores, increase the company's dividend, or increase the stock-repurchase program.

After a successful run for many years as a resilient consumer electronics giant, Best Buy was under intense pressure at the end of 2014. Even as competitors like Circuit City melted away, Best Buy had been able to withstand the onslaught of online behemoth Amazon and discount retailers like Target and Walmart. However, its competitive position was threatened as online shopping became more popular, particularly among millennial customers.

With a new leadership team, Best Buy had recently undertaken bold initiatives to expand and refine its online presence and position itself for success. These initiatives had produced encouraging results, but Best Buy needed to do more to stem the loss of market share to Amazon and to become more relevant to millennial customers. To address these challenges, Best Buy approached the Kellogg School of Management to solicit ideas from student teams by sponsoring a Business Challenge competition. The teams came up with several strategic initiatives. Best Buy needed to evaluate these initiatives on two criteria: First, how well did these initiatives leverage Best Buy's privileged physical assets (stores, salespeople, and Geek Squad services staff) to create a winning customer experience? Second, how effective would these initiatives be in attracting and retaining millennial customers?

Chris Morrison and two partners introduced the first Fairtrade bananas in New Zealand in a bid to improve the social and environmental impacts of banana consumption. The trio started All Good Bananas in 2010. Using social media as a key marketing tool, the startup had grown to take a 5 percent market share in a fiercely competitive industry dominated by big players. In 2012, the entrepreneurs needed to decide the best way to increase sales of ethically sourced products under the All Good brand. Should they expand their share of the banana market or diversify into drinks?

The case is primarily based on tape-recorded interviews by the authors with the founding entrepreneur and three employees of All Good from May to July 2012 and an analysis of the company’s website and social media activities. Other publicly available information sources were drawn upon, and a discussion held with a New Zealand national grocery chain CEO.

This case has been written for use in classes in undergraduate and graduate level entrepreneurship, strategic management and sustainability. The case can be used to illustrate how very small resource-constrained startups can compete in an industry dominated by large multinational corporations, and how Fairtrade might provide a worthy differentiation focus. It is open to a consideration of judo economics. While several of the questions ask students to consider the New Zealand context in which this case is set, knowledge of New Zealand and the various industries beyond what is offered in the case is not necessary.

At a broad level the case illustrates how a small, resource-constrained startup can compete against much, much larger players through a niche Fairtrade product focus and the use of alternative marketing strategies such as guerrilla marketing and social media. In relation to the competitive dynamics within an industry, this case can be used to illustrate the concept of judo economics (also referred to as judo strategy). Both the utility and potential limits of judo economics can be demonstrated through the case by considering current activities and potential future dynamics.

The purpose of this case is to introduce the topic of socially responsible investing from both the investor and investee perspectives. The students will walk away with an understanding of 1) how to evaluate a portfolio company on a social/environmental mission and on traditional financial criteria, and 2) what considerations should be top of mind for a social venture considering accepting an equity investment. Wes Selke is a portfolio manager at Good Capital, an investment fund created to increase the flow of capital to innovative nonprofit and for-profit social ventures that are using market-based solutions to solve problems of poverty, illiteracy, and inequality. In 2007, Good Capital is ready to make its first growth equity investment in a for-profit social enterprise and Selke is considering Better World Books as the firm's primary target. Selke must evaluate whether or not the firm is a financially sound investment and if its social and environmental missions can be preserved upon a liquidation event. If Good Capital proceeds with the investment, Selke must also rework some of Better World Books' current procedures, including fine-tuning the philanthropic giving strategy that is the main component of its social mission.

To expose students to both the investor and investee perspectives in social venture capital (SVC) deal ensuring they understand the criteria that must be considered when evaluating a potential investment in a for-profit social enterprise (investor perspective) and know what questions to ask both the investor and your organization before accepting an equity investment (investee perspective). To emphasize the importance of structuring a deal so that the social/environmental mission of a portfolio company is preserved upon exit.

The reading and discussion on case will enable participants to appreciate importance of reward management in performance management system for both employee and organizational good; to develop insight on the effect of perceived discrimination on the motivation of employees; to internalize the effect of perceived unjust, subjective, non-communicative, non-transparent policies on the behavior and productivity of employees and overall organizational culture and climate; and to comprehend the importance of HR and OB issues with respect to performance management system for the benefit of employee morale, motivation and organizational culture.

The effectiveness of an employee is the key factor for the employer. All the profit that the company or the organization makes depends on the employees’ productiveness. The case needs to be understood in the overall context of performance management system (Ferreiraa and Otley, 2009) with focus on elements of appraisal and compensation via rewards and recognition as per objective standards. Performance management systems (PMSs) is a more general descriptor if the intention is to capture a holistic picture of the management and control of organizational performance. Performance management policies and practices refer to the processes of setting, communicating and monitoring performance targets and rewarding results with the aim of enhancing organizational effectiveness (Fee, McGrath-Champ and Yang, 2011). PMS includes both the formal mechanisms, processes, systems and networks used by organizations, and also the more subtle, yet important, informal controls that are used (Chenhall, 2003; Malmi and Brown, 2008). Otley (1999) proposed a framework which highlights five central issues which need to be considered as part of the process of developing a coherent structure for performance management systems. The five areas addressed by this framework include identification of the key organizational objectives and the processes and methods involved in assessing the level of achievement under each of these objectives, formulating and implementing strategies and plans, as well as the performance measurement and evaluation processes, process of setting performance targets and the levels at which such targets are set, rewards systems used by organizations and the implications of achieving or failing to achieve performance targets and types of information flows required to provide adequate monitoring of performance. While the case touches upon all the aspects of the PMS framework, it revolves round the reward episode and elaborates on the way it affects all stakeholders, those who got the benefit, those who felt discriminated and those were mere observers to the episode. Objective performance appraisals are needed to ensure that every employee produces the best performance and that the work performed is rewarded with reasonable increases in pay scales or special additional allowances or incentives. This system carries crucial importance as it helps managers to decide which rewards should be handed out, by what amount and to whom. Additionally, performance appraisals may increase an employee’s commitment and satisfaction (Wiese and Buckley, 1998) The case readers need to notice that when organizations fail to follow objective appraisal or reward standards, the same rewards become a cause of contention. The reward which was handed over to the employees in this case was in addition to the annual appraisal. Though the role of rewards has been well-recognized in motivating the employees to continue performing at high level and encourage others to strive for better performance, what needs to be recognized that rewards’ per say does not serve purpose. They need to be dealt within the context of performance management system. Using rewards to favor or discriminate a few employees by using subjective standards backfires and does no good as the person who is favored cannot take pride in it and is not motivated to perform better or equally well as he/she also knows that the work has no relation to the reward, it is personal favor, on the other hand, the one who is discriminated feel discouraged and demotivated to perform. Rewards have the potential to both help and harm the organization if dealt in a callous and careless manner. Use of rewards to favor or discriminate certain people due to subjective preference can be suicidal for the organization and irreparably damage the trust of the employees in the management. It has been well stated that fairness and objectivity are the core principles using an assessment of the nature and size of the job each is employed to carry out (Torrington et al., 2005). If any organization decides to include rewards as a motivating mechanism, it needs to cull out unambiguous and transparent criteria for rewarding. If employees perceive procedural or distributive injustice from the management, it is not only detrimental for the employee’ relations and teamwork, it also tarnishes the reputation of the organization and jeopardizes the culture of the organization. Reward management needs to be closely related to performance appraisals, job evaluations and overall performance management systems. The current case elaborates on one such instance where unjustified inequity in reward system not only disturbed the employees concerned but it had bred a negative image of the organization among other employees too, organizational citizenship was replaced with contempt and feeling of apathy.

Post graduate students and working professionals can benefit from this study.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

Human resource management.

Describes the winning formula at Neiman Marcus that has made it the No. 1 luxury retailer in the United States in terms of sales per square foot and profitability. Highlights Neiman Marcus' efforts to define who its customers are and are not and to achieve superior focus on its customers by aligning location, price, service, and merchandise to fulfill these customers' every need. Describes ways in which Neiman Marcus prevents typical silo behavior between merchandising and selling and how it ensures that the right merchandise gets to the right customer, despite the challenge of doing this in 36 micromarkets.

To show how a company integrates two strong high-performance functions—merchandising and sales—to get the right merchandise to each customer in more than 30 diverse selling locations while consistently providing exceptional customer service.

This case focuses on social entrepreneurship where social externalities lie behind a commercial activity. It aims to help students understand the ins and outs of social entrepreneurship concept and justify its application or not to “The Good Thymes”. It leads to an in-depth reflection in the strategic management field but within the framework of a social enterprise. It presents a good foundation to help students applying the strategic tools to this particular context. It aims to help master’s students in the business field to explain the concept of social entrepreneurship by drawing out its elements from the case study, identify and list the components of business development and management, design "The Good Thymes" business model and list its value chain and evaluate the future orientation of a company based on its characteristics.

Young, ambitious, in love with his native village "Kfarhouna", in Southern Lebanon, Fady Aziz, a branding specialist living in the capital Beirut, proposed in January 2016, in a friendly discussion, to the priest of the monastery of Saint-Georges to rent him an agricultural land. He aims to have a reason, at the end of the week, to go up in his village with his family. Skeptical to the idea, the priest accused him of "not understanding anything about agriculture" and challenged him to propose a valuable agricultural project likely to make him change his mind. M. Fady Aziz fought to meet this challenge which will allow him not only to reinvigorate his abandoned village but also to reconnect with his origins. He obtained the right to exploit a plot of land belonging to the Monastery of St. Georges. He had the idea of planting thyme and transformed his "hobby" into the outset of a long journey where his products crossed the borders, under a purely artisanal brand: "The Good Thymes". Today, M. Aziz is facing a new challenge: Would he be able to fulfill all these orders and remain faithful to the philosophy that led him to invest in his village without impairing the natural and artisanal aspect of his thyme?

Master in Business.

Teaching notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 11: Strategy.

The purpose of this case is to introduce the topic of socially responsible investing from both the investor and investee perspective. The students will walk away with an understanding of: 1) how to evaluate a portfolio company on a social/environmental mission as well as on traditional financial criteria and 2) what considerations should be top of mind for a social venture considering accepting an equity investment. Wes Selke is a portfolio manager at Good Capital, an investment fund created to increase the flow of capital to innovative non- and for-profit social ventures that are using market-based solutions to solve problems of poverty, illiteracy, and inequality. In 2007, Good Capital is ready to make its first growth equity investment in a for-profit social enterprise and Selke is considering Better World Books as the firm's primary target. Selke must evaluate whether or not the firm is a financially sound investment, and if its social and environmental mission can be preserved upon a liquidation event. If Good Capital proceeds with the investment, Selke must also rework some of Better World Books' current procedures, which includes fine-tuning the philanthropic giving strategy that is the main component of its social mission.

To expose students to both the investor and investee perspectives in social venture capital (SVC) deal ensuring they understand the criteria that must be considered when evaluating a potential investment in a for-profit social enterprise (investor perspective) and know what questions to ask both the investor and your organization before accepting an equity investment (investee perspective). To emphasize the importance of structuring a deal so that the social/environmental mission of a portfolio company is preserved upon exit.

Subject area – Leadership and organizational change. Study level/applicability – Undergraduate and Master's degrees in Business and Management. Managers and executives undergoing training in leadership-related issues will also benefit from the case study through development of analytical and decision-making skills. Case overview – The case study highlights a successful retail business leader who has been directly involved in the transformation of his family business from a mere merchandiser to hypermarket owner. For more than five decades of developing and cultivating his leadership skills, business competencies and continuous learning, he successfully competes with foreign giant retailers. To comprehend the transformation process undergone by his business, the case study captures the development phases of the organizational changes and the leader's leadership and decision-making styles from the early establishment of the company until becoming a local giant retailer, that is chosen as a ”value for money” merchandiser by the customers. Expected learning outcomes – The target users of the case study are expected to:

Identify the critical success factors of successful leader.

Examine the leadership and decision-making styles employed by the leader.

Develop the competencies or capabilities of a retail business leader.

Determine programmes or initiatives and strategies used by the leader in transforming the business organization.

Apply the lesson learnt of a successful leader to their organization.

The assignment is to design a plan that aligns patient satisfaction scores with quality care metrics. The instructor’s manual (IM) introduces models for designing and implementing a strategic plan to approach the quality improvement process.

This is a field research case. The author(s) had access to the Chief Operating Officer (COO) and other members of the management team, meeting with them on numerous occasions. Cleveland Clinic Florida (CCF) provided the data included in the appendices. Additionally, relevant hospital data, also included in the appendices, is required to be made public on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) databases. Accordingly, all data and information are provided by original sources.

Osmel “Ozzie” Delgado, MBA and COO of CCF was faced with a dilemma. Under the new CMS reimbursement formula, patient satisfaction survey scores directly impacted hospital reimbursement. However, the CCF patient satisfaction surveys revealed some very unhappy patients. Delgado pondered these results that really made no sense to him because CCF received the highest national and state rankings for its clinical quality at the same time. Clearly, patients were receiving the best medical care, but they were still unhappy. Leaning back in his chair, Delgado shook his head and wondered incredulously how one of the most famous hospitals in the world could deliver such great care but receive negative patient feedback on CMS surveys. What was going wrong and how was the hospital going to fix it?

This case is designed for graduate Master’s in Business Administration (MBA), Master’s in Health Sciences Administration (MHSA) and/or Public Health (PA) audiences. While a healthcare concentration is useful, the case raises the generic business problems of satisfying the customer to increase brand recognition in the marketplace and displacing competition to increase annual revenues. Indeed, the same analysis can be applied in other heavily regulated industries also suffering from a change in liquidity and growth occasioned by regulatory change.