Search results

Chris Barnett, director of global business solutions for Rand McNally, was deliberating how Rand McNally should respond to the emergence of wireless technologies for its traditional business of providing static maps and route-planning services. As maps became electronic, interactive, mobile, and enhanced with value-added features, Rand McNally's mapping business was gravely threatened. The opportunities for Rand McNally weren't obvious, and the pace at which wireless technology would disrupt its traditional business was also unclear. Barnett was considering three opportunities: syndicate Rand McNally's brand and mapping content to popular Web sites, become a provider of value-added services to businesses, or focus on automobile manufacturers and try to forge relationships for providing in-car mapping services.

To discuss organizational design, potential responses to disruptive technologies, and market opportunity analysis in order to identify the kind of technology, organizational, and sales force restructuring required to align Rand McNally's organization with the new environment.

The case traces the development of Lululemon Athletica (Lulu) from founder Chip Wilson's first post-yoga euphoria in 1997 through the sale of all his shares in 2015. Officially founded in 1998, Lulu was built on the foundation of its “miracle” figure-enhancing yoga pants made from a proprietary stretch fiber. The case outlines Wilson's early experience in technical performance wear, which gave him the expertise needed to launch the Lululemon brand with its premium-priced, fashion-designed product line targeted at upscale women. The case also highlights the retailing and promotion approach that drove Lulu's first decade of success. The snapshot of how the Lulu brand cult was born and diffused provides the backdrop for assessing whether the brand has already hit its peak or whether it can sustain the explosive growth that effectively created the athleisure category. To aid in this determination, the case presents two competitors as comparative foils (Under Armour and Athleta) to contextualize Lulu's growth prospects.

The Lululemon case highlights the importance of the competitive frame of reference when positioning a brand and describes how this may differ for the three competitors. The case also allows for a discussion of the challenges of maintaining the congruence of a retail brand with a diverse product line. This struggle is unique to retailers who must fit ever-varied product assortments (not just a single product line) under the umbrella of a single brand proposition, and is particularly relevant to vertically integrated brands such as Lululemon.