Search results

This case describes what happened when three Boston area hotels, the Hyatt Regency Boston, the Hyatt Regency Cambridge, and the Hyatt Harborside, decided, during the 2009 recession, to layoff all their housekeepers and replace them with employees from an outsourcing company headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. The action created a public relations nightmare for the company. In 2009 many other organizations had implemented layoffs with little reaction from the public. Students are asked to think about why the Hyatt Hotels had been singled out. Was the main problem their decision, or the communication and implementation of their decision, and what could they have done differently?

The case includes theoretical references to family business, organizational culture, resource-based value and leadership.

The case combines primary and secondary data. There is ample public information about Martin Guitar including histories of the company and its instruments. These were used for background. Primary data were provided by the company in the form of customized data and interviews.. The case writer has served Martin Guitar as a consultant and also plays Martin instruments. The case writer had numerous opportunities to interview Chris and his key lieutenants.

In 2019, C.F. Martin IV (Chris) was in his fourth decade leading one of the America’s oldest family-owned companies, C.F. Martin & Co., Inc. Martin Guitar is a globally known maker of fine guitars that are prized by collectors, working musicians and amateur musicians. Chris was raised in the family business and took on the CEO’s position at the age of 30. The case describes the company’s management practices and the culture that has emerged from them. In 2019, at age 64, Chris confronted issues faced by his predecessors over multiple generations: how to prepare the company for succession, and maintain its strong performance as a family-owned company in a dynamic industry environment.

The case is designed for a management course for upper-level undergraduates.

Marketing

The case is suitable for MBA/MS students.

The famous Taj Mahal Palace and Towers became the centre of one of the most deadly terrorist attacks in the Indian sub continent on the night of 26 November 2008, which became famous as “26/11”. Terrorists created havoc shooting guests on sight and throwing grenades. The attacks lasted for three days but all of the four terrorists who entered Taj were killed. The terrorists had killed 160 people across Mumbai. Of these, 36 died at the Taj Mahal Palace and Towers, Mumbai. The dead included 14 guests, most of whom were foreign nationals. However, due to the selfless and extraordinary behavior of the employees and the staff of Taj, many guests were saved. They put forth an extraordinary example justifying the Indian code of conduct towards guests, “Atithi Devo Bhav” meaning “Guest is God”. In spite of knowing back exits and hiding spots, the employees did not flee, instead helping guests. The employees' behavior during the crisis saved the lives of nearly300 guests. This gesture of Taj employees was much talked about, but it was amusing even for the management to explain why they behaved in that manner. The condition of Taj after the attacks was so disastrous that it would have been profitable to leave the hotel as it was rather than reopening it. This, however, would have dented the Taj brand as a whole, as well as the spirit of all employees and staff who had behaved bravely. Taj started its restoration and reopened a part of the Taj Mahal Palace and Towers on 21 December 2008. It became operational by August 2010. The case provides an opportunity to closely examine employee behavior in an extreme crisis situation, and the possible reasons and motivation behind such exceptional behavior which ultimately helped to sustain the Taj brand. However, the scope of the case can also be extended to illustrate recovery efforts typical to service industries.

The case is designed to enable students to understand: the employees role in service delivery; the service profit chain; the relationship between profitability, customer loyalty, employee satisfaction and loyalty, and productivity; service failure; service recovery; and the service recovery paradox.

Teaching notes are available. Please consult your librarian for access.

Jefferson County was in a financial crisis as the commissioners faced a decision concerning whether the County should file for bankruptcy. The County was under an EPA mandate to update an outdated and overrunning sewer system. Estimates to do the work ranged from $250 million to $1.2 billion. The situation led to graft, corruption, bribery and illegal activities. More than 20 people were prosecuted in association with the illegal activities involved in financing and construction of the sewer system and four of the five commissioners were sentenced for their involvement in the corruption. Five new commissioners were elected and had to determine what to do after the down-grade of the County's bonds and warrants; the reduced revenues; and the corruption had put the County in a situation where funds were not available to continue to operate the County and provide services to its citizens. Should they declare bankruptcy or choose other paths open to them?

Data sources – this case is based on field research and interviews with a commissioner, court documents and from many other public sources. Extent of disguise – the case is not disguised.

The case can be used in graduate or upper division undergraduate courses in accounting, strategy, public administration or finance. There are several topics in the case that could be addressed: governance; economics, government and political issues, ethics, accounting, financial instruments, and strategy.