Search results

The theoretical basis for this case is a focus on ethical decision-making based upon a decision-making tree proposed by Bagley et al. (2003). Once multiple options are determined as ethical, integrating authentic leadership into the decision-making process can help leaders made difficult decisions.

The authors conducted extensive research through IBISWorld, EBSCOhost, and academic journals to review ethical decision-making and authentic leadership. The authors successfully piloted the case with over 100 undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in leadership courses.

The case describes an ethical decision a young commanding officer must make. A soldier under their leadership has been charged with an inappropriate relationship with a minor. The officer must decide between two actions that are legal within the military justice system. Each decision has ramifications that will significantly affect the organization.

The case is best taught in undergraduate and graduate leadership courses. Course participants do not need a detailed understanding of military leadership or military law to apply fundamental concepts.

The Tata owned Coastal Gujarat Power Limited is seeking to reopen Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with state owned distribution utilities because of increase in imported coal prices resulting from a change in Indonesian laws. The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has decided to provide relief through a “compensatory tariff”. This is opposed by the power purchasers. Simultaneously, another Reliance Energy owned power project is seeking relief from unprecedented change in exchange rates using the CGPL decision as a precedent. The CERC and the power purchasers have to decide what to do next.

After studying and analysing this case, students would be able to evaluate and understand the importance and need of an infrastructure sector in a country, its inherent risks and scope of infrastructure investment and financing in India – National Infrastructure Pipeline and the important role of Non-Banking Finance Company’s (NBFC) vis-à-vis banks in infrastructure financing in India; critically analyse and recommend alternative decisions in a business problem situation using multi-criteria decision analysis, which is a tool used for business portfolio analysis; understand and evaluate the corporate portfolio management (CPM) tools used for an optimum portfolio mix to turn around companies; identify and suggest an optimum portfolio mix to turn around a finance company using CPM assessment applied to Pidun matrix; and recommend operational and strategic levers for successful turnaround implementation by using the integrated canvas on turnaround.

On 10 May 2020, in New Delhi, India, J. Ray took charge as a full-time director of an Indian Non-Banking Finance Company – Infrastructure Finance Company (NBFC-IFC). The NBFC-IFC of the Indian Government extended long-term financial assistance to infrastructure projects in India. During the financial year (FY) 2017–2018 till FY 2019–2020, the company suffered substantial losses to the tune of US$13.7bn, with profitability experiencing a notable decline – return on assets at a negligible 0.11% and return on equity of only 0.68%.

The NBFC-IFC had a declining yield on advances at 7.05%, net interest margins (NIMs) of 2.08% against a high cost of borrowing at 7.66%, a declining loan book (by 4.35%) of US$336.27bn and a fast-deteriorating asset quality with highest ever non-performing assets (NPAs) at 19.70% of its loan book. Such financial parameters, compared with that of the industry average of banks and finance companies, meant that the NBFC-IFC Ray had taken over was fast bleeding and was on the brink of being declared a sick company. In comparison, private and other government players had profitable and much healthier financials, and Ray felt that there was a need for improvement. To make things worse, Ray got to know that the Indian Government was in the final stages of setting up a new development finance institution focused on long-term infrastructure financing in India. Ray realized the question was not only of the NBFC-IFC remaining relevant but also of its existence in the fast-evolving sector. Ray wondered what could his his integrated canvas be for a turnaround strategy that could include effective management of an optimal portfolio mix.

With a healthy capital-to-risk (weighted) assets ratio of 30.85% and a satisfactorily improved net worth of US$103.1bn, in the given Reserve Bank of India regulatory provisions for the NBFC-IFC including restrictive exposure norms and NBFC-IFC’s operational mandate prescribed by the Indian Government, Ray had to shift the product and sectorial investment of the NBFC-IFC to reduce the NPAs, increase loan book size and improve the yield of advances and its NIM to effectively turn around the company’s profitability. Ray realized that he needed his team to evaluate and select a product and sector strategy for this change.

The present case of financing investment in infrastructure is interesting for implementation in developing economies because a lack of infrastructure is a common problem and there is a necessity of achieving a more developed infrastructure system to support accelerated economic growth in these countries. This case can be used in elective courses on corporate finance strategy and corporate portfolio management for infrastructure finance companies. This case can be taught in elective courses in post-graduate and MBA programs. This case can also be included in management development programs (MDP), executive MBA programs and executive-level courses that have subjects such as corporate finance strategy, corporate portfolio management and strategy management that focus on turnaround strategies including portfolio management for banks and finance companies.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

The learning outcomes of this paper is as follows: to review the basic differences between the two evolving bonds, i.e. green vs masala bonds in the Indian capital market; to comprehend the factors that need to be considered in deciding the type of bond to be issued; to assess complexities, such as process, timing, risk and location in relation to the issue of the green bonds; and to understanding the rudiments of bond economics, such as pricing, all-in-cost and yield-to-maturity of bonds and make a comparison of all-in-cost of the Reg-S bond and green bond to Indian Railway Finance Corporation (IRFC).

In September 2017, IRFC, a public sector undertaking registered as a Non-Banking Finance Company with Reserve Bank of India under the administrative control of the Ministry of Railways, was planning to raise US$500m 10-year green bonds from investors in Asia, Europe and the Middle East. The green bond proceeds were proposed to be used for low carbon transport and in this way, contribute significantly to the green initiatives of the Indian Railways. Many companies in India had issued regular bonds without labeling them as green but had used the proceeds of the bond for climate-aligned assets. Therefore, a bigger challenge before the IRFC management was the economics of green bond for getting a nod from the Board of Governors to go ahead. Some preliminary estimates on cost of green bonds were received from few bankers but to see that the terms of green bonds are met eventually, the Director (Finance) developed his own estimate of the cost of the new bonds. The Managing Director and Director (Finance) of IRFC were trying to figure out the economic advantage of green bonds besides its social benefits.

MBA Programme Executive Training.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

This case is a sequel to the “IndiGrid: Creating India's First Power Transmission InvIT (A)” case. It describes the deal that would replace the trust's original sponsor, Sterlite Power, with a new set of KKR-led financial investors. It provides an opportunity to discuss the consequences of this change on the new investment manager's outlook for management and future acquisitions. The new investment manager, freed from the limiting interest of the original sponsor, had to search for investment opportunities from the perspective of incoming financial investors, which included the new sponsor. It also provides an opportunity to evaluate the trade-offs in investing in operational utility-scale renewable energy assets by the IndiGrid, which had so far only acquired operational transmission assets in its portfolio.

The essence of discounted cash flow valuation is simple; the asset is worth the expected cash flows it will generate, discounted to the reference date for the valuation exercise (normally, the day of the calculation). A survey article was written in Parker (1968), where it was stated that the earliest interest rate tables (use to discount value to the present) dated back to 1340. Works from Boulding (1935) and Keynes (1936) derived the IRR (Internal Rate of Return) for an investment. Samuelson (1937) compared the IRR and NPV (Net Present Value) approaches, arguing that rational investors should maximize NPV and not IRR. The previously mentioned works and the publication of Joel Dean’s reference book (Dean, 1951) on capital budgeting set the basis for the widespread use of the discounted cash flow approach into all business areas, aided by developments in portfolio theory. Nowadays, probably the model with more widespread use is the FCFE/FCFF (Free Cash Flow to Equity and Free Cash Flow to Firm) model. For simplification purposes, we will focus on the FCFE model, which basically is the FCF model’s version for the potential dividends. The focus is to value the business based on its dividends (potential or real), and thus care must be taken in order not to double count cash flows (this matter was treated in this case) and to assess what use is given to that excess cash flow – if it is invested wisely, what returns will come of them, how it is accounted for, etc. (Damodaran, 2006). The bridge to the FCFF model is straightforward; the FCFF includes FCFE and added cash that is owed to debtholders. References: Parker, R.H. (1968). “Discounted Cash Flow in Historical Perspective”, Journal of Accounting Research, v6, pp58-71. Boulding, K.E. (1935). “The Theory of a Single Investment”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, v49, pp479-494. Keynes, J. M. (1936). “The General Theory of Employment”, Macmillan, London. Samuelson, P. (1937). “Some Aspects of the Pure Theory of Capital”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, v51, pp. 469–496. Dean, Joel. (1951). “Capital Budgeting”, Columbia University Press, New York. Damodaran, A. (2006). “Damodaran on Valuation”, Second Edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

All information is taken from public sources and with consented company interviews.

Opportunities for value creation may be found in awkward and difficult circumstances. Good strategic thinking and ability to act swiftly are usually crucial to be able to take advantage of such tough environments. Amidst a country-wide economic crisis and general disbelief, José de Mello Group (JMG) saw one of its main assets’ (Brisa Highways) market value tumble down to unforeseen figures and was forced to act on it. Brisa’s main partners were eager in overpowering JMG’s control of the company, and outside pressure from Deutsche Bank was rising, due to the use of Brisa’s shares as collateral. JMG would have to revise its strategy and see if Brisa was worth fighting for; the market implicit assessment about the company’s prospects was very penalizing, but JMG’s predictions on Brisa’s future performance indicated that this could be an investment opportunity. Would it be wise to bet against the market?

This study is excellent for finance and strategy courses, at both undergraduate and graduate levels. Company valuation and corporate strategy are required.

The case describes the dilemma a young leader, First Lieutenant Toomey, faces after arriving at a new organization. Toomey’s subordinate (sergeant first class Rodgers) is more experienced and accomplished and has enjoyed a degree of autonomy under Toomey’s predecessor. Rodger’s demeanor and the physical setup of the joint office space speak to a dysfunctional dynamic in an organization that values a traditional hierarchy and relatively high power distance between supervisor and subordinate. The potential for conflict exists as Toomey contemplates how to address the dysfunctional norms he has observed while maintaining a functional relationship and reputation as an effective leader in his new unit.

The case was created via an interview of the protagonist.

This case is designed for use in undergraduate and graduate level courses on leadership and management. The case is useful for teaching lessons (or electives) on power, influence, conflict management, culture and leading change.

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.

GMR Infrastructure Limited (GMRIL) had to make a decision on its continued role in the 555.48 km Kishangarh Udaipur Ahmedabad (KUA) Expressway Project, India's then longest road public-private partnership (PPP) project. GMR had terminated the contract citing NHAI's failure in fulfilling Conditions Precedent (CP) of providing (i) environment clearance (EC), (ii) revised toll free notification and (iii) 80% of required land. The case intends to educate the reader on the concessionaire-authority dynamics in typical Indian infrastructure PPPs. Taking into account its internal strategy, the extant unfavourable investment climate, the Central Government's steps to revive private interest in the highways sector and NHAI's quick turnaround in fulfilling CP, GMR had to decide how to respond.