Search results

This case investigation used firsthand statements, reports, testimony and regulatory records. While widely publicized in the popular press, this case is based on primary documents. On their website, many documents were obtained from Wells Fargo’s Corporate newsroom, such as the internal audit report shared with shareholders and press releases. Most other sources were from US regulatory websites (.gov) or congressional testimony. In a few places, quotes and comments came from reliable journalistic sites that cite their sources and follow a journalist’s code of ethics and conduct, ensuring that the reported remarks and data were verified.

Since 2016, Wells Fargo Bank has faced multiple customer mistreatment investigations and resultant fines. Public outcry and distrust resulted from Wells Fargo employees creating hidden accounts and enrolling people in bank services without their knowledge to meet desired levels of sustained shareholder growth. Over the past five years, Wells Fargo has been fined and returned to customers and stockholders over $3bn. Wells Fargo executives spent the first year of the scandal citing improper behavior by employees. Leadership did not take responsibility for setting the organizational goals, which led to employee misbehavior. Even after admitting some culpability in creating the extreme sales culture, executives and the Board of Directors tried to distance themselves from blame for the unethical behavior. They cited the organizations’ decentralized structure as a reason the board was not quicker in seeing and correcting the negative behaviors of these ‘bad apple’ employees. Wells Fargo faced multiple concurrent scandals, such as upselling services to retirees, inappropriately repossessing service members’ vehicles, adding insurance and extra fees to mortgages and other accounts and engaging in securities fraud. As time has passed, the early versions of a handful of “bad apples” seem to be only a part of the overall “poison tree.”The dilemma, in this case, is who is responsible for the misbehavior and the inappropriate sales of products and services (often without the customer’s knowledge)? Is strategic growth year-over-year with no allowances for environmental and economic factors a realistic and reasonable goal for corporations? This case is appropriate for undergraduates and graduate students in finance, human resources, management, accounting and investments.

An active case-based learning pedagogical approach is suggested. The materials include a short podcast, video and other materials to allow the faculty to assign pre-class work or to use in the classroom before a case discussion.

A room attendant in a small hotel with approximately 63 employees undermines her supervisors and disregards authority in deliberate defiance of company policies, rules, regulations and procedures. Disrespect is shown in several behaviours that include interfering with the work of other employees, spreading rumours, gossiping to other room attendants and complaining about unfair treatment.

This case was field researched and the company and individuals are disguised.

This case is suitable for third- or fourth-year undergraduate students. Within human resource management it is suited for use in a course or series of classes on employee relations or performance management. The case could also be used for an organizational behaviour course to explore conflict and struggle in organizations and the range of passive and active resistance practices that occur. In this particular case the context of women and minorities working in low-skilled roles could be examined.

In advance of this case students should have a background in performance management theory and practice, disciplinary systems and practice and the behaviours associated with workplace resistance, insubordination and misconduct.

Judy was a high-performing professional manager who was with her company for 15 years and was a manager for six. She was a confident, positive, and happy person but recently lost her confidence in herself and her abilities. She dreaded going to work because she never knew what she would face from her boss, Dennis. Dennis was a brilliant man who was recently promoted to Senior V.P. He was condescending, and he humiliated people in public. Complaints to the CEO and a harassment claim produced no results. Dennis did the CEO's dirty work and served a role needed in a fast-paced and profit-driven corporate culture. Judy enrolled in an MBA program to build her resume and her self-confidence. She faced a critical juncture in her career. Should she quit, transfer, complain to HR, or confront Dennis?

Social Marketing, Entertainment Education Program.

Postgraduate program. Master in Strategic Marketing and Master in Business Administration.

In the midst of the many TV shows that do not provide enlightenment, Kick Andy TV Show appeared to provide answers to the public unrest. In the spirit of “Watch with Heart” Kick Andy serves Entertainment-Education and Social rarely glimpsed by the television station. Success of Kick Andy TV Show made this brand doing brand extension such as Kick Andy Foundation, Kick Andy Magazine, Kick Andy Enterprise and others. Challenge for this program is to maintain the right balance between social, entertainment and education.

This Case Study illustrates that Kick Andy TV Show filled the value gap that viewers experienced from existing TV show. This show is similar to the offer of Oprah Winfrey Show in the USA. Student is expected to understand social marketing primarily related to entertainment-education TV show.

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

The present case study would help readers to understand paternalistic leadership behavior with its underlying theory. Readers would be able to appreciate the nature of experiences employees may have while working with a paternalistic leader high on authoritarianism. This case study would motivate readers to work out appropriate strategies for working under paternalistic bosses. The teaching note sensitizes readers about the complicated relationship between paternalistic leadership and culture.

Pyramid Globe Management Institute (PGMI) is struggling to generate revenue. PGMI founder, Tugmanshu Lakhani, has to find out new sources of revenue to keep the institute functioning. He constitutes a team of three professors for starting a new academic program with a foreign university. The initial success of the team brings favor from the founder but jealousy from the colleagues reeling under job threat. High authoritarianism and interference of the founder create a problematic situation for the three professors. When the new program starts showing promising results, the founder gets apprehensive about whether the new course may hurt the enrolment in the flagship program of the institute. The authoritarian and erratic behavior of the founder had a demotivating effect on the team working for the new program. Some team members resign under pressure while three professors stay to ensure the launch of the program. The professors have to resolve the conflict between their commitment toward PGMI in a troubled time and a career uncertainty if they continue working for it. Anticipating no change in the behavior of the founder and an uncertain future with PGMI, three professors quit after the start of the new program. The founder may continue losing committed employees if he is unable to balance his authoritarianism with benevolence and moral behavior. It will create more problems for PGMI in the future.

This case can be used in organizational behavior, leadership and team-building courses in the regular Master of Business Administration (MBA) programs. The case can further be used in the executive development program, especially for analyzing the leadership problem in higher education organizations.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 7: Management science.

Anika, a new manager, is confronted by a dysfunctional organizational culture characterized by employee disrespect, insubordination, and low performance. Her charge is to “to turn the place around”. The case takes place in a service organization, a testing range run by the US Department of Defense. The staff is a combination of federal and contract employees who test clients’ high-tech systems in a sometimes dangerous, desert environment.

In addition, there are three vignettes that give a portrait of dysfunctional individual behaviors. Frequently, the response students want to make is “I'd just fire the guy.” Unfortunately, it is not so simple.

This case uses concepts from Korten’s strategies of development-oriented four generations of non-government organizations (NGOs) and social psychology such as stereotypes, prejudices and actions to explain the social phenomenon. In furtherance, the case presents Aristotle’s approach to creating a message for masses that include use of ethos, pathos and logos. Stood’s (2017) narrative, engagement and technology (NET) model of social leadership was used to analyse the characteristics of social leaders.

Prima facie the case was developed from primary sources i.e. interviewing with Ashish Thakur. Literature from secondary sources was obtained to make teaching notes. List of references is presented towards the end that depicts the use of textbooks, research papers, websites and blogs. This case was tested in the classroom with MBA students learning business communication.

The case dealt with the challenges of an NGO that included conducting respectful last rites of unclaimed dead bodies. As the NGO grew, Ashish Thakur, the initiator of Moksh started facing resource management challenges, namely, volunteer induction, fundraising and managing non-human resources. These issues are deeply embedded in several social stereotypes about dead bodies. Learning covers strategies of four generations of NGO development, a NET model of social leadership, breaking social stereotypes related to dead bodies and last rites (necrophobia), designing social communication and opportunity to assess faulty rationalizations and do critical thinking around the socio-religious practices.

This case is intended to be used for the students of the social leadership or social entrepreneurship, social psychology, business communication or communication skills, organizational behaviour, advertising and social media.

Launched in 2014, Amazon's Echo and Echo Dot smart speakers led the category's rapid adoption by households and enabled the penetration of artificial intelligence (AI) voice assistants into the everyday lives of millions of people. By 2019, Alexa the virtual brains behind Amazon's smart speakers was able to play music, create reminders, get weather reports, control lights and other home appliances, shop, and do much more in response to voice commands. Amazon had developed significant new capabilities for Alexa, developed an entire ecosysgtem around it, expanded Alexa's user base to more than 100 million users, and made significant progress in monetizing its digital voice assistant. However, Alexa's progress also created new challenges for Amazon, its Alexa-enabled customers, and society at large. Amazon needed to identify and address these challenges in order to encourage continued consumer acceptance and preclude detrimental government or regulatory action.

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.

On March 18, 2019, Yuvraj Mehta, head Corporate Brand Management & Communications (CBMC) at Larsen & Toubro (L&T), heard about negative media narratives against L&T, following a high-profile merger and acquisition (M&A) between the company and Mindtree. Some of the allegations against L&T were “hostile takeover” and “destruction of Mindtree's culture.” Mehta was faced with the issue of influencing all stakeholders; turning the tide and changing the narrative from hostile takeover to continuity, growth and profitability; and integrating Mindtree and its employees and culture into L&T. Compared to L&T's previous acquisitions, which were small, and other strategic initiatives, which were mostly organic, Mindtree acquisition was the largest (in value terms) in its history. It was also the most complex as Mindtree promoters aggressively resisted the acquisition, and L&T had to acquire a large number of shares through an open offer. Media speculations began in January 2019 when L&T, the engineering and construction giant, planned to acquire a majority stake in the young IT firm, Mindtree. Soon the reporting changed to aggressive media ranting. Time was at a premium. Mehta knew he would need to begin strategising almost immediately. How should he proceed? What should be his first move?