Search results

This case is based on primary archival research. The original reports from MSCI, Sustainalytics and S&P 500 formed the foundation of the case in addition to the 144-page Tesla’s 2021 Impact Report. Secondary sources were used to provide contextual information. All sources are cited as endnotes.

In June 2022, Tesla, Inc., the Austin, Texas-based electric car company faced a number of challenges that called into question its environmental, social and governance (ESG) credentials. Questioning the company’s corporate governance practices, SOC Capital, a watchdog organization publicly released a letter that it had sent to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission where it had demanded that the agency sanction the company for not replacing an independent director at its next stockholder meeting. The State of California’s Department of Fair Housing and Employment filed a lawsuit alleging various counts of discrimination at Tesla’s manufacturing facility in Fremont, California. S&P Global removed the company from its index of ESG companies. This action had negative consequences for the company’s stock price. Tesla’s board of directors, led by Robyn M. Denholm, had to address Tesla’s overall approach to ESG in light of these challenges.

The case is suitable for an upper-level undergraduate or an MBA course on strategy or strategic management.The issues in the case involve the stakeholder perspective, corporate governance and the purpose of a firm. Instructors face two choices here: using this case early in the course introduces the broader stakeholder perspective early on without addressing it as an afterthought at the very end of the course. The other choice is to use it at the end because most strategy textbooks cover these topics at the back end.

Lilly ICOS is preparing to launch Cialis, a prescription drug that treats erectile dysfunction, and executives must decide how to position Cialis against market leader Viagra and recent entrant Levitra.

HSBC (The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited) Holdings Plc. is a part of various trade finance consortia which aimed to digitise the traditional paper-based trade finance process. It had successfully executed multiple trade finance pilots using a blockchain based platform Voltron and was launching its Contour blockchain trade finance platform as a service to its clients. The trade finance market was estimated to be USD 18 trillion on an annual basis and HSBC had a 12% share in the trade finance transactions worldwide. This case revolves around the challenges facing banks/consortia while porting the traditional trade finance process to the blockchain based system. The crux is how the banks form the consortia, implement blockchain and facilitate trading globally given that it is a new technology and will require bringing all the stakeholders involved in the trade finance value chain to the blockchain based platform. HSBC is facing some decision questions on the formation, governance and management of the consortium, on the interoperability between consortia and on how to price its services to its customers.

On the evening of December 29, 1972, Eastern Air 401 (EA401) was on a routine flight from New York to Miami. Despite EA401 flying one of the most advanced aircraft at the time (the Lockheed L-1011), it crashed in the Florida Everglades killing 101 of its 176 passengers. Drawing from various first-hand accounts (cockpit voice recorder) and secondary evidence (news reports and online sources) of the tragedy, this teaching case provides a detailed account of the key events that took place leading up to the accident. The case describes how the pilots on EA401 were confronted with a simple scenario, a landing gear bulb not working in the cockpit, and through the distraction that ensued made a series of errors. Through many of the quotes in the text, readers gain an understanding of the impressions and perceptions of the pilots, including how they felt about many of the critical decisions and incidents during the last minutes of the flight. The case concludes by highlighting the main findings of the NTSB report.

Depending on individual course objectives, this case can take two or one day to debrief. Specifically, if this case is used in an organizational behavior course, most of the case questions could be discussed in one day. However, if this case is used in a capstone HRM or group dynamics type course on teams and team training and performance, a second day could be used to develop documentation outlining training design or performance evaluation designs.