Search results

Suitable for MBA, EMBA, and executive education programs, this case uses the complexities of the oil industry to set the stage to unfold a stakeholder analysis on BP's growth and opportunity in the renewable energy sector. This public sourced case offers a discussion about the firm's overall strategy, post Gulf Oil spill, moving forward. The case describes how within a single decade, BP had emerged as one of the largest energy companies in the world. Within that scope, BP had an odd achievement: It had been building an alternative energy business and had gained a reputation as being an oil company with a regard for the environment. Then a series of preventable accidents, in the United States in particular, started to chip away at the firm's status. In a matter of five years, BP went from celebrating its most profitable period to finding itself selling assets while industry watchers wondered whether the company would survive after being responsible for the largest oil spill in the United States. Shortly following the Gulf oil spill, Robert Dudley, a legacy Amoco executive, was appointed to replace Tony Hayward, the beleaguered BP group chief executive and director. Besides the oil spill and ongoing cleanup, Dudley had slumping revenues (even before the Deepwater tragedy) and a huge rebuilding task ahead of him. Not only did he have a multinational energy company to run, but Robert Dudley had to rehabilitate the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem, compensate all who suffered loss as a result of the damage, and repair the firm's shabby reputation. Dudley needed to implement a sound long-term strategy. How would his former division—renewable energy and alternative activities—fit into his plans?

This case describes the evolution of an entrepreneur's venture-capital fund-raising from seed-stage financing through later-round efforts. The case focuses on where the “action” is in venture finance: the exploitation of social capital by an entrepreneur and investors. Much of the teaching materials on venture finance focus on the economics of financing; while these materials provide useful information about the mechanics of valuation and how to structure venture-capital agreements, they miss the social side of venture-capital investing. The case illustrates the theoretical concept that social capital (i.e., a person's relationship to other people in society) influences venture finance. The case can be used in a class on entrepreneurship or venture finance.

This field-based case describes the approach and decisions used by Harris Corporation's vice president of supply chain management and operations to establish a set of financial benchmarks. It requires students to use those benchmarks to decide what areas need focus to potentially raise the company's financial results and elevate its financial performance through specific actions within its supply-chain group.

Describes the history of the tobacco industry and its emergence as an extremely effective marketer and non-market strategist. After years of success, both publicly and politically, the leaders of the tobacco industry are faced with mounting political pressure and the financial threat of litigation from class-action lawsuits. The leaders face an industry-wide strategic decision of whether to acquiesce to government demands in exchange for immunity, focus on judicial success, or develop a new course of action.

To evaluate the formulation and implementation of non-market strategies in the context of regulatory, legislative, and legal institutions. To understand how various aspects of the non-market environment interact and how these environments not only change over time, but change market competition within an industry. Further, to formulate and decide between firm-specific and industry-wide strategies. Finally, to appreciate and reflect upon the potential conflict between non-market strategies and ethical concerns.

1. Maria Jarlstrom, Essi Saru, and Sinikka Vanhala, “Sustainable Human Resource Management With Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective,” Journal of Business Ethics, 152, (2008): 703–724. 2. Benjamin A. Neville, Simon J. Bell, and Gregory J., “Stakeholder Salience Revisited: Refining, Redefining, and Refueling an Underdeveloped Conceptual Tool,” Journal of Business Ethics, 102, (2011): 357–378. 3. Mick Marchington, Fang Lee Cooke, and Gail Hebson. “Human Resource Management Across Organizational Boundaries,” Sage Handbook of Human Resource Management, (2009): 460–477.

This secondary source case is based mainly on three documents: the 20-page report by a labor union, Unite Here, titled “One Job Should Be Enough: Inequality at Starbucks”; and two reports by former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. and Covington & Burlington, LLP.

In February 2020, Unite Here, a labor union, released a damming report about employment practices at the airport Starbucks stores operated by licensee, HMSHost. Among other charges, the report identified several instances of racial and gender discrimination that HMSHost dismissed as a ploy by a union intent on organizing its employees. The adverse publicity, however, put Starbucks Corporation in the spotlight because of the company’s publicly stated commitment to workplace equality. The recently hired Nzinga Shaw, the company’s first-ever Global Chief Inclusion and Diversity Officer, had to address the issue at HMSHost lest it adversely affect Starbucks’ reputation as a progressive employer.

The case is best suited for a graduate or undergraduate course in human resource management or labor relations. As diversity is typically covered in the first third of such courses, the ideal placement of this case would be in the early part of the course. As Starbucks is a well-known name, and it is very likely that students have had their own experience with Starbucks, as either a customer or an employee, the case is likely to draw their interest.

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

Richard Alpert, senior partner at Evergreen Investments, must decide which of his two best employees to promote to the position of managing VP. He had initially preferred Charlie Pace over Daniel Faraday, but that decision had become less clear-cut when Alpert inadvertently overheard an office conversation and learned that Pace was taking Adderall, a stimulant primarily prescribed for people suffering from attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Pace did not have ADHD and apparently obtained the medication by deceiving a physician. Alpert is faced with a number of questions, including whether it was fair to Faraday—or any other high-performing employee—to be passed over for promotion in favor of someone who illicitly boosted his performance with a substance he did not medically need.

Jane Barrow, CEO of Caprica Energy, must recommend to the board which of three potential “unconventional ” natural-gas development sites in different parts of the United States the company should pursue. The case takes place in January 2011, when the “low-hanging fruit ” of natural-gas production in the United States had essentially been picked. All three of the potential sites (shale, coalbed methane, and tight sands) would require hydraulic fracturing, a process of removing gas that was formerly considered inaccessible by injecting water and chemicals into the ground. Because of emerging concerns about the potential harm “fracking ” can do to drinking water, Barrow must not only analyze which site might be most profitable but also what the potential risks to the environment and area residents might be.

This case used the interplay between individuals, firms and markets to examine how a company sustained success from its value adding activities. The theory of value creation was demonstrated by the leader’s ability to configure the firm’s tangible and intangible resources to create opportunities beyond the commodity markets. Also, what matters were not just the technical processes of developing value-added products, but how the company’s culture served as a link to new products, new markets and new ventures.

The case was based on primary and secondary sources. The primary sources face-to-face semi-structured recorded interviews with the protagonist at the company’s headquarters. The secondary data were from the company’s website, and public information about Johnsonville Sausage LLC. Supplemental information was gathered from market research firms. No names have been disguised. The case has been classroom tested with undergraduate students in a capstone course. The author has no personal relationship with the company.

Kevin Ladwig, Vice President, was concerned by the expanded production of ethanol, an attractive supplement to gasoline in the USA. Because most ethanol is processed from corn, expanded production of ethanol heightened the demand for corn. Since corn is a staple feed ingredient for animals, heightened demand for corn increased the cost of Johnsonville’s raw material – hogs. In fact, the cost of feed was Johnsonville’s major economic input in animal production from farrow to finish, accounting for up to 70 percent of the total production cost of hogs. The case introduces the nexus of food and energy markets and how the “Johnsonville Way” was used to convert an old idea into an innovation.

This case is appropriate for undergraduate and graduate courses in business and agribusiness management. It would also be appropriate for courses using concepts in innovation and organizational culture.

Urban Affordable Housing (UAH) Inc. was a real estate asset management syndication firm that sponsored affordable housing to low-income families and seniors across the USA. The case examines the firm’s management of an internal information technology (IT) change initiative. The case follows the firm’s recently hired IT manager, Anthony Bryant, as he works to change a culture while acquiring resources and acceptance for the project he was hired to oversee. Bryant deals with numerous changing priorities, inadequate sponsorship, resistance from various levels, and a dearth of resources as he struggles to get the organization to complete an overdue database conversion.

This case is based upon the firsthand experiences of the lead author over a seven-year period while working at UAH. Measures have been taken to disguise the firm’s identity, including using a pseudonym, fictitious names for firm employees, a fictitious location, and the alteration of key dates. Key elements of the case have been constructed around semi-structured interviews and the review of archival documentation. Most quotes are verbatim in an attempt to preserve their authenticity, and were drawn from the semi-structured interviews and from historical accounts of actual occurrences and conversations.

The UAH case is multi-faceted, as it can be used in a number of environments amid a business school curriculum. A primary use is likely in a course revolving around organizational change and development. It might also be featured as part of the organizational change component in a course on organizational behavior, used to illustrate and analyze organizational culture and change leadership. Furthermore, the case could be used for change-related topics in management information systems or project management courses. The authors suggest the case be assigned at the graduate level, though it could also be suitable for an advanced undergraduate class.

Critical knowledge for successfully analyzing this case includes the following concepts: the change process (Lewin, 1951); leading change (Kotter, 1996); resistance to change (Kegan and Lahey, 2001); and communicating change (Armenakis and Harris, 2002).

On a fine afternoon in January 2015, Divakar Kaza, President, Human Resources, at Lupin Ltd., took a sip of coffee from his cup, and shared the good news he had just received, with Rituraj Sar, head of Learning & Development. Lupin had just won the ‘Outstanding Company of the Year’ Award at the CNBC-TV18 India Business Leadership Awards, 2014-15¹. The accomplishment was heartening, given that it reinforced similar recognitions in the recent past. Lupin had won the NDTV Business Leadership Award for the Indian Pharmaceutical Company of the year in 2012, backed up by the same acclaim in 2010 by Frost & Sullivan².