Search results

This case presents turnaround alternatives for a UK-based company, Carpets International (CI), a manufacturer focused on woven carpets and suffering from the ageing equipment and resulting product quality issues during the late 1990s. The case profiles CI’s position in the UK marketplace as well as highlights the growing international competition from Europe and Mexico. Comparisons between customer’s preferences for carpeting in the USA vs the UK are included. Additionally, the case introduces first-mover advantages in the application of innovational ideas applied to a mature industry in another country.

This case study was written by the CEO of the company as the lead author. The case is not disguised.

This case is appropriate for undergraduate strategic management/business policy classes.

Founded in 1971 and acquired by CEO Howard Schultz in 1987, Starbucks was an American success story. In forty years it grew from a single-location coffee roaster in Seattle, Washington to a multibillion-dollar global enterprise that operated more than 17,000 retail coffee shops in fifty countries and sold coffee beans, instant coffee, tea, and ready-to-drink beverages in tens of thousands of grocery and mass merchandise stores. However, as Starbucks moved into new market contexts as part of its aggressive growth strategy, the assets and activities central to its competitive advantage in its retail coffee shops were altered or weakened, which made it more vulnerable to competitive threats from both higher and lower quality entrants. The company also had to make decisions on vertical integration related to its expansion into consumer packaged goods.

Understand how strategy needs to be adapted to new contexts. Understand how to manage tradeoffs involved in growth. Be able to identify possible threats to competitive advantage as a result of growth.

Data for the case came from public sources, including legal proceedings, court filings, company press releases and Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

In June 2020, former Pinterest employees made public charges of gender and racial discrimination. Despite changes implemented by the company, several Pinterest shareholders filed derivative lawsuits charging the company with breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, abuse of control and violating federal securities laws. The case provides an overview of the company’s management, board and stock structures, as well as information on the shareholders who sued the company and their concerns. The case raises substantial questions about management’s and board member’s responsibilities in corporate governance, illustrates how stock structures can be used to impede governance and suggests ways to evaluate activist shareholders.

This case is appropriate for graduate, advanced undergraduate or executive education courses in strategy, corporate governance or strategic human resources that discuss corporate governance, fiduciary responsibilities, designing workplace culture or management responses to shareholders. Instructors can apply two sets of theories and frameworks to this case: theories of corporate governance and Hirschman’s (1970) exit, voice or loyalty framework in the context of shareholder activism.