Search results

Entrepreneurship, finance, technology and innovation, general management.

This case is suitable for students in finance, entrepreneurship and general management. The case seeks to understand the challenges of funding in technology startups and how they vary from product to service areas.

Availability of capital, short term and long term, is a major constraint faced by entrepreneurs. In India, in the technology sector, services companies have been able to innovate and grow whereas product-based companies that survived the challenges of funding have been scarce. Aluru Karthik Prasanth is presented in the case as a young entrepreneur with passion and drive to pursue the commercialization of an idea he developed during his undergraduate studies in engineering. Leaving behind the beaten paths ofMTech and employment, he decides to pursue MS entrepreneurship at IIT Madras. As he starts with his program, he analyses the challenges faced by previous technology start ups, Karthik has a dilemma – deciding whether to follow a product idea or change his plans to a technology service.

A detailed analysis of the case would help students address the following questions in entrepreneurial decision making: should an entrepreneur in technology in India pursue a product idea or service idea?. What are the pros and cons of each choice in financing? How can an entrepreneur pursue a product idea and minimize his/her risks? How does an entrepreneur's personal attributes influence his/her course? (e.g. family background, need for control) What are the challenges and opportunities in each kind of funding: debt, venture, angel, etc. in the Indian context?

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

By the end of their studies, students are expected to: undergraduate level. Learning objective 1: Describe the concept of social entrepreneurship. Learning objective 2: Explain the sources and challenges of funding social entrepreneurial activities. Learning objective 3: Discuss the different strategies that social entrepreneurs may use to raise funds. Postgraduate level. Learning Objective 1: Use theory to explain the concept of social entrepreneurship. Learning objective 2: Discuss the role of social capital in facilitating resource acquisition for social entrepreneurial activities. Learning objective 3: Evaluate the current action for fundamental change and development (AFFCAD) funding model and propose strategies that may be used by a social enterprise to achieve financial sustainability when donor funding expires.

The past decade has seen the emergence of many social enterprises from disadvantaged communities in low-income countries, seeking to provide solutions to social problems, which in developed countries would normally be addressed by government sponsored welfare programmes. The social entrepreneurs behind such initiatives are typically drawn from the disadvantaged communities they serve. They are often young people committed to improving the lives of their most disadvantaged community members. Being poor themselves and located in the poorest communities, establishing their enterprise faces fundamental challenges of obtaining resources and if accessed, sustaining the flow of resources to continue and grow their enterprise. Targeting external donors and mobilizing social resources within their community is a typical route to get their enterprise off the ground, but sustaining momentum when donor funding ceases requires changes of strategy and management. How are young social entrepreneurs dealing with these challenges? The case focusses on AFFCAD, a social enterprise founded by Mohammed Kisirisa and his three friends to support poor people in Bwaise, the largest slum in Kampala city. It illustrates how, like many other similar social enterprise teams, the AFFCAD team struggled to establish itself and its continuing difficulties in trying to financially sustain its activities. The case demonstrates how the youngsters mobilised social networks and collective action to gain access to donor funding and how they are modifying this strategy as donor funding expires. From an academic perspective, a positive theory of social entrepreneurship (Santos, 2012) is applied to create an understanding of the concept of social entrepreneurship. The case uses the social capital theory to demonstrate the role played by social ties in enabling social entrepreneurs to access financial and non-financial support in a resource scarce context (Bourdieu, 1983; Coleman, 1988, 1990). The National Council for Voluntary Organisations Income Spectrum is used as a tool to develop the options available for the AFFCAD team to sustain their activities in the absence of donor support. The case provides evidence that social entrepreneurs are not limited by an initial lack of resources especially if they create productive relationships at multiple levels in the communities where they work. However, their continued success depends on the ability to reinvent themselves by identifying ways to generate revenue to achieve their social goals.

This case study is aimed at Bachelor of Entrepreneurship students, MBA, MSc. Entrepreneurship and Masters of Social Innovation students.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS 3: Entrepreneurship.

This is a field-researched case about a nonprofit organization, the Accelerated Cure Project (ACP), dedicated to accelerating advances toward a cure for multiple sclerosis (MS). Inspired by the successful open source software development platform, ACP brings the strengths of that platform into the medical research and development environment. At the opening of the case, Robert McBurney, an Australian scientist with extensive experience in the biotech world, has been named CEO. McBurney and his team want to use ACP's bio-sample and data Repository to drive innovation in the search for the cure for MS by fostering collaborative research and development across research institutions, pharmaceutical and bio-tech companies. To encourage such collaboration ACP waives its rights to potentially lucrative Intellectual Property. This decision to foster collaboration at the expense of revenue sources appears problematic, since ACP does not have the staff or resources to undertake fundraising at the scale needed to fund current projects. ACP chooses to serve instead as an open access research accelerator making an impact on the field by functioning as an innovation driver rather than a profit maker. Is this an innovative recipe for success in finding a cure for MS or a recipe for financial disaster for ACP?

Interviews provided the primary source of data for this case. Four semi-structured interviews were conducted with the CEO of ACP, the Vice President of Scientific Operations, and a member of the organization's Board of Trustees, a collaborating university researcher, and the President of a bio-tech company working with ACP. Interview data was supplemented with additional information from ACP's web site, news reports, McBurney's comments at Suffolk University's Global Leadership in Innovation and Collaboration Award event, and follow-up conversations.

This case is intended for use in an undergraduate course examining strategic management issues midway through the term. The case discussion can center on issues relating to: first, the development of the business model; second, revenue resources and fundraising. Students are expected to spend two to three hours of outside preparation reviewing concepts of change leadership and the collaborative enterprise business model. They should read the case materials and brainstorm options for improved change leadership. The case can be taught in one two-hour class period.

The purpose of this case is to introduce students to the strategic management and funding challenges faced by an organization that is using a non-traditional business model in an increasingly complex environment. As a result of discussing this case, students should be able to: first, examine strategic organizational strengths, analyze opportunities created by business, market and environmental factors, and strategize to minimize weaknesses and to address threats identify an organization's strategic focus; recognize and recommend options at crucial decision making junctures in a business situation; second, assess an organization's revenue model; analyze how this model can be improved; third, analyze the functionality and sustainability of an organization's business model.

Venture capital and private equity.

This case is suitable for II MBA/Executive MBA (venture capital and private equity/entrepreneurship/business models/managing family business) courses.

Soliton is a technology and software services company with operations in India and the USA providing machine vision products and virtual instrumentation services. Soliton was started by Ganesh Devaraj in 1998 after his return from the United States after higher studies. Ganesh hails from a business family in Coimbatore that had interests in the textile spinning sector. The family had been in the textile business since the early 1940s and had revenues of Rs 400 million and employed about 700 people. Ganesh, not wanting to continue in the traditional family business, ventured into the technology sector using his academic and professional experience. His family was supportive of his venture and funded his company for the first two years of operation and for scaling up operations. Ganesh is now evaluating various sources of raising additional capital at a time when there was general slowdown in the automobile sector as a result of the global financial crisis.

The goal of this case study is to illustrate the complexities that exist in financing growth of companies in uncertain times. This following are the expected learning outcomes: discuss and understand the nuances between different sources of early stage funding: personal wealth, family, and angels; compare and contrast the differences between family funding and venture funding; and highlight the benefits and limitations of family funding.

Teaching notes are available.

▪ Identify and explain the factors that contribute to the success of a restaurant business.

▪ Analyse different sources of entrepreneurial finance.

▪ Identify and explain local entrepreneur’s expectations from a funding agency.

▪ Evaluate investment decision-making criteria for entrepreneurial funding agencies.

Kartikey Rajput, the promoter of a food park Urban Chowk, was waiting for the Covid regulations in the country to be relaxed. The entrepreneur in him found a business opportunity to provide hygienic food with a beautiful ambience and floated a food park (Urban Chowk) with the support of his wife Nikita Agrawal in 2017 and the second edition amidst Covid in 2020. The business model was well-appreciated by food vendors as well as customers. Rajput could see future growth potential in urban India. But his aggressive business plan to open five food parks in different cities in the next three years was disrupted due to the Covid pandemic. The expansion required huge investments, and post-pandemic challenges were plenty. The decision to go beyond Ahmedabad required the selection of cities besides the major challenge of the financing choice. The new cities might have huge footfall potential but finding the right location at the right price was a different challenge. Rajput was also concerned with the sources of getting the required finances. The entrepreneur was contemplating and evaluating the alternative sources of finance available to a start-up.

This case is appropriate for a graduate and post-graduate level programme in the courses like entrepreneurial finance, entrepreneurship and strategy. This case can also be used in an executive programme on management and Management Development Programmes (MDPs) on entrepreneurship or entrepreneurial finance.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

The learning outcomes focus on enabling students to view operational model changes critically, as they pertain to:

■ evaluating different management styles and uses of the ADKAR change management model in decision-making moments in times of crisis (such as COVID-19) in non-profit organisations (NPOs);

■ evaluating different ways in which NPOs pivot to sustainability, including the use of social enterprise models and change management;

■ anticipating and managing change in institutional formations through new technologies;

■ articulating trade-offs between grant and non-grant resource mobilisation for African philanthropy; and

■ application of change management theory to organisations’ sustainability journeys.

In May 2020, working from her home office just over one month into a nationwide lockdown because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Masego Madzwamuse, chief executive officer (CEO) of the Southern Africa Trust (the Trust), knew that it could once again be at a crossroads. In 2015, the Trust had found itself in a quandary when its primary donor gave notification of its intention to withdraw its funding. The Trust had responded by making changes to its structure and strategy. Now, with uncertainty rife throughout South Africa, the CEO knew that she had to consider whether the changes that had been implemented over the past five years had prepared the Trust not only to respond to, but also to survive the pandemic and continue its vital work long into the future.

Postgraduate Diploma in Management, MBA, Masters in Management.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

Micro Finance Institution (MFI) named Rojiroti had been doing good work for weaker sections of the society and had brought about significant transformation in the lives of poor people, especially the Scheduled Castes, in villages of Patna district, the capital city of Bihar, India. Rojiroti was run by Centre for Promoting Sustainable Livelihood (CPSL) and had tested successfully a unique innovative model in micro financing which focused on helping the weaker sections by addressing their imminent needs which usually required very small loan amounts. With the various types of benefits people got from buying government subsidized ration to health and education in family to construct home or buy small livelihood assets. The beneficiaries developed high level of respect and trust for the MFI, Rojiroti. Rojiroti had received international recognition from universities such as University of Nottingham, UK; the University was not only researching on the model and its contributions to society, but also had supported it with funding to cater to its audience. Rojiroti did not believe in just providing finance to people like other microfinance institutions (MFI) or corporate social responsibility (CSR) funding by private and public sector organizations; its model focused more on creating capacities in the beneficiaries to sustain their livelihoods. However, after a decades time, Sunil, the protagonist in the case found himself in a situation where he had to decide for the future journey of Rojiroti after having reached a decent stage of growth The case discusses the journey of Rojiroti where the protagonist Sunil had a significant role to play and dwells upon the Rojiroti business model, its beneficiaries and value offerings to them, the changing environment outside and leaves the discussion open on the question of the choice of best road suited for Rojiroti.

The case is intended for the course on Strategic Management with a focus on business models topic. The case introduces the working of social cooperative business model and the nuances around it which is very much pertinent in today’s times where social enterprises have gained space in business and where businesses work around inclusive business models. The case is designed to provide supplemental support or discussion piece while dealing with business model / cooperative enterprise business model. This case provides opportunity to discuss strategic framework for an organization from the promoter’s perspective. The teaching notes is written from the perspective of the entrepreneur (the protagonist in this case, Sunil) who initiated the enterprise, with a learning goal to empathize and develop skills to have strategic decision making for a social enterprise.

The case is designed to provide supplemental support or discussion piece while dealing with business model / cooperative enterprise business model. This case provides opportunity to discuss strategic framework for an organisation from the promoter’s perspective. The teaching notes is written from the perspective of the entrepreneur (the protagonist in this case, Sunil) who initiated the enterprise, with a learning goal to empathize and develop skills to have strategic decision making for a social enterprise.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS: 3 Entrepreneurship.

The case and discussion questions posed will allow the instructors the opportunity to introduce critical strategic concepts from strategic, nonprofit management and social enterprise literature. Specifically, (1) strategic transformation: countering drift and anticipating future trends and crises; (2) types of leadership: transactional versus transformational; (3) hybridity and mission drift; and (4) nonprofit funding models, the starvation cycle and the overhead myth.

Both primary and secondary sources have been used to prepare the case. The first two authors had the opportunity to interview Thomas Tighe, Direct Relief’s (DR) President and CEO in July of 2019. The interview lasted one hour and was transcribed by one of the authors and reviewed by the other two authors for accuracy. In addition, the authors conducted nonparticipant observations in DR’s headquarters in Santa Barbara (California). Given the longevity and media exposure of the organization, extensive internal and external archival data was also available for the analysis.

This real and undisguised case is based on DR, a +70-year-old humanitarian $1.2bn nonprofit organization headquartered in California (USA). From its headquarters in Santa Barbara, DR responds to emergencies and delivers medical support for vulnerable people affected by poverty, natural disasters and civil unrest in all 50 US states, six US territories including Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands, and in more than 90 countries.

The case presents Thomas Tighe, DR’s President and CEO, reflecting in late 2018 on the transformation and growth that the organization had experienced since he started his tenure in 2000. Specifically, he is considering the most effective way to allocate an unrestricted recent cash donation. Should DR spend that money on traditional fundraising, reducing its efficiency rate, or should DR take a long-term approach and use the funds to build long-term capabilities? In addition, the case outlines the history and evolution of DR over its more than 70 years of existence, the CEO’s background and motivations, as well as a detailed description of the organization’s revenue portfolio. Students will have an opportunity to learn about a unique nonprofit named among “the world’s most non-for-profit organizations” by Fast Company; DR was also included in the Charity Navigator’s list of the “10 Best Charities Everyone’s Heard of.” In addition, in January 2009, DR was designated as a Verified-Accredited Distributor by The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy, which placed it as the first nonprofit to receive this designation to deliver prescription medicines to all 50 US states. Throughout Tighe’s tenure, DR had been lauded for its fundraising efficiency. The unique distinction to DR’s efficiency is its tradition of adopting new technologies and modern business practices for humanitarian purposes.

Students will learn how DR, under the leadership of Thomas Tighe, reinvented and reinforced the organization’s traditions to retain high levels of efficiency in the face of an ever-larger organizational scale, public scrutiny and demand for humanitarian support across the world. Students will witness many strategic and operational tenets that they may be more familiar with from the for-profit world. The case also will help students to understand the concept of hybrid organizations and different nonprofit funding models.

The case has been written to be used in graduate Nonprofit Leadership Management and Social Entrepreneurship courses. Given the scope and implications, the case could also be used on an upper-level strategy course. To maximize students’ learning, the case should be introduced halfway into the course after students have a solid understanding of what nonprofits are and how they operate. If students are not familiar with some of the concepts introduced in the analysis, the proposed readings will prepare them for a more fruitful discussion.

“Starting up a new company” and “development of technology-based venture”.

The target audiences for this study are advanced business or non-business undergraduate students and MBA students taking courses of entrepreneurship, management of innovation and organization theory and design.

Yeayyy.com was a private limited company based in Bandar Baru Bangi, Selangor, a township located about 30 km south of Kuala Lumpur. It was founded by Mr Hazmin in early 2010 with a seed funding of RM150,000 (about US$50,000). By the end of 2014, its core businesses include developing mobile application (app), software and website, as well as conducting information technology (IT) training. The company had developed its own animation cartoon, Oolat Oolit, and had commercialized several mobile app inventions. These mobile apps include a Jawi (traditional Malay writing system) app, mobile games and Facebook apps which were compatible with most mobile operating systems. Since its inception, Yeayyy.com had aspired to follow the footsteps of the internationally acclaimed Malaysian home-grown animation production house, Les’ Copaque, which had produced the popular Upin Ipin series. Similar to Les’ Copaque, Yeayyy.com also planned to commercialize its in-house characters into TV series and to market related merchandises, along with its collaborative partner, CikuTree Studio. However, by the end of 2014, the company’s seed funding had depleted, thus forcing Mr Hazmin to strategize for the company’s future.

Understanding the process of entrepreneurship and technology-based venture development enables case analysts to apply the concepts in many situations involving business opportunities and company development.

CSS:3 Entrepreneurship.

The learning outcomes of this paper are as follows: to critically assess and analyse public and private funding options and determine which private option is best suited to a company (finance – decision-making). To calculate the internal rate of return (IRR) of a project (finance – analytical). To critically assess the underlying structures of traditional and new industries (Strategy/BMI – analytical). To analyse the challenges and disruption potential of intermediated industries (Strategy/BMI – analytical).

The Triggerfish case looks at how films are funded in South Africa. The company is currently funding films mostly through government channels, but CEO Stuart Forrest would prefer to independently and privately fund their projects. The case looks at what returns can be expected by investors in film through the “recoupment waterfall” – the means whereby the producers and investors of a film recoup their investments and earn returns. The investment horizons of select private lenders (bank, mezzanine financiers, risk financers and venture capital firms) and public funders are explored. The case also explores the impact that video-on-demand platforms, such as Netflix and Disney+, is having on the traditional models of filmmaking.

This teaching case is aimed at postgraduate business students such as Master’s degrees in Business Administration degrees, postgraduate diplomas, executive education or specialist Master’s degrees.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 3: Entrepreneurship.