Search results

The data for the case is a mix of both primary and secondary data, from the following sources: – personal interviews with the protagonist, Sofana Dahlan; – Tashkeil website; – official documents provided by the company: ■ “Tashkeil – Corporate Brief,” ■ “Saudi National Creative Initiative – Activities Report 2016”; and ■ “Tashkeil Global Company”. – published media sources.

The case outlines the story of Sofana Dahlan (Sofana) (she/her), a social entrepreneur and one of the first few women lawyers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. She established Tashkeil as a social enterprise, helping creative entrepreneurs (creatives) with strategic, operational and legal inputs, thus enabling the creative industry in different parts of the Arab world, focussing on Saudi Arabia and Lebanon. Her story can be used to inspire students on how a female entrepreneur fought against an extremely restrictive social and cultural environment and achieved her goals. It helps them to understand the challenges faced by women in the context of the Arab world and the key attributes required for them to succeed as an entrepreneur, especially in the context of certain social and cultural barriers. It also helps to understand the importance of resilience in entrepreneurs and to discuss how entrepreneurs can become more resilient.

The case can be used mainly in undergraduate Business Management Programs in courses such as Entrepreneurship, with specific reference to Women Entrepreneurship. The case would be a good fit for courses on Social Entrepreneurship and Creative Businesses.

In June 23, 2016, voters in the United Kingdom have just approved a referendum calling for leaving the European Union. The case describes the motives for European integration, the rise of separatist movements in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, and the referendum process itself.

The purpose of this case is to provide a contemporary counterpoint to a discussion of the economic and political motivations for the American Civil War. Dominant themes highlighted here are economic nationalism, political nationalism, cultural centrism and ethnocentrism, and populism.

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 data for this case were obtained primarily through a series of in-person interviews in Penang between the authors and Pete Browning (a pseudonym) from 2017 to early 2019. The authors also consulted secondary data sources, including publicly available material on BMax and “Company B”.

This case examines a key decision, or set of decisions, in the life of a small- to medium-sized management consultancy group, namely, whether they might expand their operations in Southeast Asia, and if so, where. These key decisions came in the wake of their having already established a very modest scale presence there, with an operating base on the island of Penang just off the north western coast of Peninsular Malaysia. The initial establishment of a Southeast Asian branch had been somewhat spontaneous in nature – a former colleague of one of the two managing partners in the USA was on the ground in Malaysia and available: he became the local partner in the firm. But the firm had now been eyeing expansion within the region, with three markets under particular consideration (Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand) and a further two (Vietnam and China) also seen as possible targets, though at a more peripheral level. The questions facing the decision makers were “was it time they expand beyond Malaysia?” and “if so, where?”

This case could be used effectively in undergraduate courses in international business. The key concepts on which the case focuses are the factors affecting market entry, particularly the choice of market and the assessment of potential attractiveness such markets offer.

As an Internet fashion brand, HSTYLE has developed into an Internet enterprise with annual sales of 1.5 billion RMB within 10 years, establishing its position as the top industry performer in China. This case studies HSTYLES' innovation in business model and organizational management. HSTYLE's workgroups have achieved the balance of responsibilities and rights in a small team of three members at minimum, while mobilizing the enthusiasm and initiative of the line managers with the support of public service sector. At the same time, HSTYLE enriches its brand style, establishes a fashion cloud platform, and integrates individual and organizational consumers into its existing fashion design, manufacturing and sales system.

What started as a FMCG distributor in 1967 in Kenya as Export Finance Company, is now a dynamic global conglomerate across 48 countries and 5 continents — Export Trading Group. ETG was taken over by the then CFO Mahesh Patel after exit of the founding stakeholders. It was then when the company shifted its focus to being a key regional player. In the next 35 years, the company grew systematically. Business focus evolved when Patel saw an opportunity in logistics in remote sub-Saharan Africa. This was followed by business expansion with supply chain diversification and significant infrastructure investments. All the different businesses amalgamated under a single group for better operations and ease of scaling up. They were later divided into six separate verticals for better management. Vamara (FMCG vertical) was launched in 2018 as the company moved towards digitalisation — externally and internally. ETG plans to focus on new business opportunities and continue to diversify across geographies and portfolios.

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.

Upon completion of this case study, students should be able to apply lessons learned in core readings, analysis and discussion to a specific case study dealing with a current, real-world situation, specifically: critically assess Livestock Wealth’s case facts and present and justify their point of view – based on attentive reading, critical analysis and engagement – about the company; use a range of strategic tools such as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis, PESTLE analysis and the Ansoff matrix to thoroughly evaluate Livestock Wealth’s internal and external business environment for developing strategic options for business growth and improvements to marketing strategy; use strategic thinking to develop a range of creative solutions to guide the company’s business growth and improvements to marketing strategy; and assess their own growth and development in terms of personal preparation and organisation, collaboration, critical thinking, decision-making skills, participation and problem-solving.

By February 2022, Ntuthuko Shezi, the founder and chief executive officer of Livestock Wealth, had turned his idea of “crowd farming”, which enables anyone to invest in living farm assets and earn a profit at harvest, into a full-fledged business that was creating wealth for both investors and farmers. Underpinning this case study is Shezi’s vision of an African continent where there is “no ground that is not planted with something of value”, local economies are created in those areas, communities are wealthy, there is abundance, there is money for children to attend school and ultimately where “cows (and agricultural produce in general) are seen as money”. Shezi had grown up in a rural area with grandparents who owned a couple of cows, realizing that the cows were the bedrock of the family’s finances. Describing his business, he says, “Cattle are like a walking bank, and we see ourselves as the bank of the future, where every person who owns a cow can access financial services through Livestock Wealth, just like it has always been in Africa.” This case study describes the two key decisions that Shezi needed to make – what direction to take in terms of business growth and how to improve his marketing strategy (with a limited budget) to attract sufficient investment into Livestock Wealth to make his dreams a reality.

This case study is suitable for use for a post-graduate diploma in business, master of business administration or master’s in management.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

The case describes the structure of Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs) created and launched in Indian markets in 2017. Besides introducing InvITs and their potential role in relaxing the financing constraint created by the lack of an active corporate debt market in India, the case can help in analysing why the market is discounting the IndiGrid unit price relative to its issue price. It also offers an opportunity to value IndiGrid's Patran acquisition.

Incorporated on February 18, 1959, Oil India Ltd. (OIL) was a leading public sector oil and gas company involved in the exploration, development, production and transportation of crude oil and natural gas in India. Since its inception, OIL had committed itself to being a socially responsible organisation in and around operational areas, particularly the north-eastern state of Assam where 90% of company operations were concentrated. Despite many successes, the “People's Company” continued to be a target for disgruntled local and student communities who frequently created operational hazards for the firm—from sit-ins and blockades to pilfering and disrupting production facilities. No less than 400 organisations, of which 50-60 had been consistently active, were currently in the forefront of demanding something from OIL. Many of these demands were beyond the purview of OIL's CSR policy and focus areas. Additionally, being a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU), OIL also faced multiple demands from the government. On February 16, 2019, news arrived that there was yet another blockade in Duliajan, Assam. What should OIL do to address and possibly mitigate operational interruptions?