Search results

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.

Corporate Strategy; Strategy.

Post-graduate; Executive education; Under-graduate.

The case is based on Titan Company Limited (Titan), one of India’s profitable diversified companies. Set in April 2020, the case presents the evolution of Titan’s growth strategy in the last three decades. The company had grown by continuously exploring adjacent categories in the personal lifestyle space. The case asks whether the strategy that has guided Titan for the past three decades would continue to provide growth. What changes, if any, should be made by C.K. Venkataraman—the new CEO who had taken charge a few months back in October 2019—and his team?

The case describes Titan’s evolution from 1987 to 2020. ‘Winning times’, the first section of the case, describes Titan’s early choices in the watches business that helped the company achieve market dominance and its successive choices to expand the scope of watches businesses by entering new adjacencies. The section also details the evolution of Titan’s design, manufacturing, marketing and retailing capabilities in early years. ‘Looking for another gem’ describes Titan’s venture into the jewellery business – the failure of its early attempts to export and its pivot to domestic market and the successful turnaround of the business. ‘On the fast track to growth’ deals with Titan’s accessories business. The section ‘Eyeing new businesses’ describes Titan’s foray into prescription eyewear and precision engineering businesses and the company’s performance in these businesses. ‘A new identity’ details Titan’s adoption of a distinct corporate identity in 2013. ‘New businesses’ provides information on Titan’s recent foray into fragrances and sarees business. The case ends with the section ‘Years ahead’ which asks what changes, if any, should be made by the leadership team.

Upon completion of the case study discussion, participants will be able to: understand the concept of the ‘core competence’ and the three tests of core competence; how core competencies evolve in an organization over time; diversification (growth) strategy based on core competencies and adjacencies; and key managerial choices and organizational processes required to ensure effectiveness of diversification strategy based on core competencies.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

Product Management, Marketing Strategy, Growth Strategies.

Bachelor of Business Studies, MBA, Executive MBA.

The case documents the humble beginning of Kewal Kiran Clothing Limited (KKCL) in 1981 to its current position as a leading fashion apparel brand in India. However, competition from new national players, emergence of global players in India, private labels of retailers and dawn of Internet retailing has created significant growth challenges for the firm. Mr Jain, the Managing Director of KKCL, is contemplating the growth strategies for the firm and possible changes in the business model, as he is developing the 2014-2015 strategic plan for KKCL. This is imperative to reach the ambitious sales target of INR 10 billion by 2018-2019. The students are expected to assess the performance of KKCL on multiple quantitative and qualitative data points given in the case and exhibits. It encourages them to come up with possible growth strategies for the firm.

The case is expected to guide students in comprehending the multi-thronged challenges pertaining to fashion apparel industry; in Situational Analysis of the firm, which includes assessing internal and external factors; and in recommending the best possible growth strategy after due evaluation and deliberation using Ansoff's Matrix.

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

Captain Joseph Brunetti was given the assignment to provide his superior officer an analysis of what to expect when the US Army implemented its new process to evaluate the performance of noncommissioned officers (NCOs), called sergeants. Brunetti had about 104 sergeants in his unit. The US Army created a new process in 2015 to evaluate sergeants to overcome the deficiencies in the Army’s old process, now 28 years old. Under the old process, almost every sergeant was rated at the highest levels, making it nearly impossible for the US Army to know whom to promote to higher ranks. Under the old process, very little counseling took place, so NCOs were not given guidance on how to develop themselves. Raters and senior raters (SRs) were not held accountable for their work in performance management, either. Under the new process, which included a forced distribution form of ranking, SRs had to offer counselings as well as options for future assignments. Brunetti, who had only limited experience in rating sergeants anyway, had to prepare for his boss what was called an “operations report” outlining what the organization could expect with the changeover to the new process and what may need attention as the process would continue in subsequent years.

This case has been developed from actual experiences and the assignment given to Brunetti also happened as described in the case. Since many of the individuals in the case are still employed by the US Army, the names of the individuals and the company units in this case have been disguised. Even so, the events of the protagonist’s tours of duty prior to the assignment described in this case did occur, but some of the locations within the USA have been changed. The other persons quoted from public documents or otherwise referenced in the articles are the actual persons so identified. The old NCOERs in Exhibit 3 are as these were written but the personally identifiable data about the individuals have been blackened out.

This case is suitable for both undergraduate and graduate courses in human resource management and especially on the topical material on performance management and performance appraisal. The case can also be used in both undergraduate and graduate courses in general management, for modules on human resource management. The Relevant Theory section below is centered on human resource management.

This relevant theory which undergirds this case centers on the broad concept of performance management and on performance appraisal instruments. The case underscores the important concept that performance management has to be more than “completing the appraisal form.”

A product manager at Apple examines the past, present, and future of the PC industry in September 2011 in the wake of Steve Jobs's resignation and HP's announcement that it was exiting the PC industry in favor of enterprise software solutions and consulting. The protagonist thinks through current forces in the PC industry, including market share trends, mobile computing, ultrabooks, and cloud computing services—as well as the position of the Mac in Apple's product portfolio—and is faced with making a decision about the future of the Mac.