Search results

This case builds on elements of project management (PM) – specifically project initiation – including the development of a project charter and stakeholder analysis.

The case was developed from secondary sources as well as first-hand knowledge of the project by one of the authors. This author was on faculty at a private university in the southeastern USA, teaching numerous courses in the pharmacy curriculum while also serving as the Community Practice Residency Director for community pharmacies around the state. While connecting with these organizations, additional revenue requirements and complementary services were frequent topics of attention, leading to a grant to assist pharmacies in building out such services. Through this grant, the author engaged in consultations with community pharmacies around the state, including the pharmacy highlighted via this case. Pseudonyms have been used for the business, and all individuals associated with it, to maintain anonymity. Secondary sources used for additional research include industry reports and related websites.

Richard has owned and operated a community pharmacy, Our Family Farmacy (OFF), for years. A changing industry climate has forced Richard to diversify the products and services he provides. In addition to the distribution of medicine and front-end sales of consumer goods, Richard is seeking to expand into a larger spectrum of healthcare services. After researching several different types of services, and after dealing with related personal family circumstances, Richard decided that OFF should begin their expansion by offering depression screening services. He turned initiation of the project over to his pharmacy intern, Caitlin.

This compact case is geared toward undergraduate- and graduate-level students taking courses in general management and, more specifically, PM. This case might also be used by students with a career focus in the healthcare sector, and could of particular interest for students in a pharmacy program. Classroom application should encompass discussions on the project initiation process group, particularly with the processes regarding the project charter deliverable and the identification and assessment of project stakeholders.

This case presents the “best practices” of a highly successful post-merger integrator that grew from $400 million in 1997, to $1.5 billion in 2000, to $4 billion in 2002. The case focus is on the $4.0 billion IT sector of Northrop Grumman, a company confronting immense change in the rapidly consolidating defense business. This integration is unique in that the product is a complete melding of various companies, systems, leaderships, and cultures of 11 legacy organizations. Not only is the result an organization with a new identity, but also one with new strategic capabilities unavailable to any of the stand-alone legacy companies. A teaching note is available to registered faculty, along with video clips that include footage of weapons systems (e.g., B-2 bomber) and information about the company's PMI process.

This case details the rise of a hard-disk storage manufacturer in the mid-1980s and the company's demise after executives manipulated the financial information.

The saga of Market Basket took place over a period of months during which a significant upheaval occurred in the long-successful business. The turmoil drew in a broad range of stakeholders. In a rare chain of events, non-unionized workers and managers engineered a change in senior management of the company. Their willingness to sacrifice their livelihoods in support of one person exemplifies the impact that can be made by a single, authentic, leader. This case draws upon secondary sources which provide insight into broad panoply of business and organizational behavior issues. The primary focus of the case, however, is leadership.

This case was developed using secondary sources and court documents that reported on the events that precipitated the problems at Market Basket as well as the strike and aftermath.

Management principles, organizational behavior. All undergraduate class levels would be appropriate.

This case exemplifies these three major theories in a real-life situation: stakeholder theory, corporate culture theory, organizational commitment.

The authors used Sue’s (2010) microaggression process model and Freeman et al.’s (2010) stakeholder theory as a theoretical basis for this case.

Information for the case was gathered from publicly available sources. No formal data collection efforts were undertaken.

Guess Who’s Coming to Deliver is a case that examines an event that occurred at Lowe’s Home Improvement Warehouse in late July and early August of 2015. A customer who had purchased some products from Lowe’s requested that only White delivery people were dispatched to her home because she did not allow African–American people in her house. The case is factual and was written from information that was publicly available in the media. The case is designed to help instructors facilitate a meaningful classroom discussion about microaggressions from the different stakeholder perspectives.

The case is relevant for undergraduate and graduate organizational behavior and human resource management courses.

Josh Williams is a Student at the NAU who has driven buses on campus and wants to improve the transportation on campus. He is convinced that purchasing a new type of bus that is more fuel efficient, has larger capacity, better designed for boarding, and has a longer life is worth the higher purchase cost. He sets out to prove it by creating a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. Since many of the estimates for the DCF analysis are uncertain, he decides to perform a Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) analysis. Students are asked to step into Josh’s role and perform the analysis.

Josh Williams was a Student in the authors’ MBA program. Both authors teach in this program and one author was the Advisor for Net Impact and worked with Josh to present his idea to the university administration. The authors have changed a name or two but otherwise, the case describes a real situation in a real organization without disguise.

The authors have used this case in a first semester MBA-Applied Management course, Decision Modeling and Simulation. Students already have experience with DCF analysis and have been introduced to MCS. With this case, students apply MCS at the conclusion of a three-week module on predictive analytics. Students have run at least two MCS models and have become comfortable with the software. The case would also be appropriate for a senior-level undergraduate course such as business analytics or management science. It might also be useful for other courses that include the MCS modeling technique learning objectives such as project management.

This case provides an opportunity for students to perform an MCS analysis. MCS is useful when many of the inputs to a DCF analysis (or any model) have been estimated and the modeler is concerned that the estimates are uncertain and could perhaps be a range of values. MCS can be used to understand the effect of this uncertainty on NPV which in turn may affect the decision. The case could also be used without MCS focusing just on the DCF analysis with deterministic sensitivity analysis.

The case was created via an interview of the protagonist in 2018 at the US Military Academy by the authors.

The case describes the dilemma First Lieutenant Williams faces when his platoon sergeant unexpectedly leaves. Organizational norms and accepted practices suggest Lieutenant Williams should choose the most senior squad leader, Staff Sergeant Boyer. The departing Platoon Sergeant even recommended Staff Sergeant Boyer. However, based on recent observations, Lieutenant Williams felt Staff Sergeant Boyer may not be the best fit. Instead, the lieutenant considered choosing the newest squad leader, Staff Sergeant Harrison, who seemed to be highly proficient, but had yet to prove himself. Before the lieutenant could fully weight his options, Staff Sergeant Boyer confronted him about a decision.

This case is designed for use in undergraduate courses on leadership and management. The case was not only designed primarily for teaching a lesson on organizational justice, but can also be used to integrate lessons on communication, power and influence, and decision making. Each of these elements is present in the case. The instructor can choose to incorporate them into the lesson for a more wholly encompassing lesson or choose to focus on only the organizational justice aspects at play in the case.

This case involves the issues within an organization of growth, expansion, change, and a possible shift of focus from hobby to profit. The case also deals with important factors, which could potentially impact any company's operation. The owners are seeking to address two key issues. The first is a valuation issue prompted by one of the shareholders wishing to sell her interest in the railcar LLC. The second issue is one of expansion. A potential investment ($60,000-$135,000) would permit the company to lease the railcar to other operators who could run the railcar on Amtrak certified tracks nationwide but would remove the shareholders from the day to day operations of the train. The critical decision is whether the owners should invest more money in the business or maintain their current business model and operational structure.

Risk literacy matters for business students. A significant aspect of decision-making is accurately evaluating the risks involved in a decision. Research shows that many people are challenged to understand simple, health-relevant risk rates and probabilities. It also shows that many people are functionally innumerate, even educated people like doctors. While there is much academic work in health aimed at understanding how to communicate health risks to patients, an important personal area for business students, there are many industries and organizations where understanding risk is important for business students’ careers. This case provides opportunities for business students to practice these skills.

This is a secondary-data, compact case. The impetus for the case was a blog and the data gathered is primarily from Aviation Safety Net, Worldbank, Airlines.org, International Air Transport Association and Statista.com.

Coming across a blog headline, a professor is dismayed at the message: 2018 saw a sharp increase in air crash deaths. Questioning that the headline is appropriate and that the number of fatalities is an appropriate measure, the professor sets out to analyze airline safety data.

This case is intended for undergraduate or graduate students in an introductory business analytics course. The focus is on using and communicating risk rates and visualization.