Search results

Describes Myriad Genetics and its struggle to develop a genetic testing service while facing challenges from competitors and activist organizations. After Myriad's discovery of the BRCA gene, capable of genetic testing for breast cancer in women, Myriad needed to choose a strategy to provide this service to the public. With several major competitors offering similar services, intense media scrutiny, and a charged activist and political climate, a poor Myriad decision could have major repercussions.

AfrobitLink Ltd was an information technology (IT) firm with headquarters in Lagos, Nigeria. AfrobitLink started as a very small IT firm with less than two dozen staff. Within a few years of its founding, AfrobitLink established itself as a dependable organization known for delivering high-quality IT services. However, starting in 2004, AfrobitLink experienced rapid growth as it expanded to serve the telecommunications firms taking advantage of the deregulated market. This rapid expansion resulted in many challenges for AfrobitLink. The firm rapidly expanded into all 36 states in Nigeria, hiring a manager to oversee the company’s operations in each of the states. Poor hiring practices, inadequate training, excessive spans of control, low accountability, a subjective reward system, and other cultural issues, such as a relaxed attitude to time, resulted in low motivation, high employee turnover, poor customer service, and financial losses. By 2013, the firm was operating at a loss and its reputation was in shambles. Generally, the culture was toxic: employees did not identify with the firm or care about its goals, there were no performance standards, employees were not held accountable, self-interest and discrimination prevailed. The organization was in a downward spiral. Consultants were hired to help sort out the firm’s problems but these efforts yielded few results. Ken Wilson, the founder’s son, was hired in 2014 as VP of Administration to help get the firm back on track. As a change agent, Ken had to decide how to address the issues facing the firm and how to achieve profitable growth.

Primary sources included interviews with the company CEO, his wife, his son, and a volunteer staff member. Secondary sources included the company website. The names of the people and the firm in the case have been changed to provide anonymity.

This case is intended for use in graduate courses (although it can also be used in upper level undergraduate courses) in change management/organization development, organizational behavior, leadership, or international management. For graduate courses, students may focus on application or integration of several theories or concepts. For upper level undergraduate courses, students may focus on application of a single theory or concept. Below are suggested texts or readings for each type of student by subject.

Change management theories (e.g. Lewin’s force field analysis (Schein, 1996), Kotter’s eight-step change management process (Kotter, 2007), The change kaleidoscope approach (Balogun and Hailey, 2008)), social identity theory (Tajfel, 1981), attribution theory (Kelley, 1972), leadership theories (e.g. Hersey and Blanchard, 1969), intercultural/international management theories (e.g. Hofstede, 1980, 1991).

To understand how certain cultural dynamics play out in the case, the main attributes of Hofstede and Meyer’s work are first highlight. While Hofstede focuses on national culture, Meyer’s uses culture as a tool by which to gauge behavior within organizations, teams and individuals. Below the main elements of their work are highlighted. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are detailed in IM Exhibit 1. Note there are six dimensions on a scale of 0–100. The higher the number, the higher that element of that dimension. For example, the individualism score for the USA is 91, whereas China’s score is 20, suggesting that Americans are much more individualistic, whereas the Chinese are much more collectivist. Students can find where the USA, France and China, the three countries discussed in the case, stand at the Hofstede’s website noted below. For reference, these are also noted in IM Exhibit 2.

All of the information in the case was gathered using publicly available secondary sources (i.e. news articles, annual reports and executive/employee interviews). All sources are cited at the end of the Case/IM.

On April 12, 2022, LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton (LVMH), the global leader in the personal luxury goods, released first quarter earnings for 2022, highlighting their latest acquisition, the New York City-based Tiffany & Co (Tiffany). Tiffany had performed well due to growth in demand in the USA following two difficult years because of the global COVID-19 pandemic. This underscored the fact that Tiffany was still largely dependent on the US market, which was a cause for concern for CEO, Anthony Ledru, who was brought in by the parent LVMH to elevate Tiffany and exploit the high growth market for personal luxury goods in China and other parts of Asia-Pacific. LVMH’s acquisition of Tiffany had been completed on January 7, 2021, and LVMH was expecting the turnaround of the largely US-centric Tiffany to show results by shifting focus to higher-end and more iconic jewelry lines and greater expansion in China. Nonetheless, Ledru’s ability to address the China market for Tiffany was constrained by culture clashes between the company’s French owners and management team and its large cadre of US-based employees. Employees chaffed at what they felt was a rigid and autocratic management style and at the company’s insistence on limits to a work-from-home policy that was instituted in early 2020 because of the pandemic. Ledru and his top management team had to quickly overcome the internal clashes and employee issues to make significant inroads in the China market.

This case is appropriate for undergraduate and MBA courses addressing dynamics of global business, strategy and culture, such as cross-cultural management, international business, global strategy and organizational behavior. At both levels, its is found that the case will be valuable in generating a lively discussion on organizational and strategic challenges grounded in often lesser discussed issues around cultural fit. In most courses, the case should be positioned toward the end, mainly because it examines both cultural challenges (French ownership of a quintessentially American company) and strategic initiatives (how to grow the brand itself along with geographic expansion, i.e. China), assuming that the module has covered one or the other/or both at different points in the course.

Aramex PJSC: carving a competitive advantage in the global logistics and express transportation service industry.

Entrepreneurship, International Business, Strategy.

Post-graduates, Practitioners.

This case chronicles the Aramex PJSC story of entrepreneur Fadi Gandhour. The case looks at the new start-up, its growth and financing plans for expansion and how it got a competitive advantage in an industry dominated by big players. Aramex, as of 2012, was the only Arab company to have successfully listed on the NASDAQ Stock Exchange. After 30 years at the helm of the company, Fadi Ghandour, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), was stepping down and was being succeeded by regional head, Hussein Hachem, the CEO of Middle East and Africa. Aramex had a competitive edge in emerging markets, and Fadi and Hussein knew that the route to sustainable growth was to capitalize on this opportunity using organic growth, acquisitions and strategic alliances.

Strategy included looking at gaining a competitive advantage in the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and other emerging markets. Lessons are provided on capitalization of opportunity, funding and creating an organization culture that is sustainable and reflects the Founder's ideal.

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