Search results

This case is meant for MBA students as a part of their leadership/information technology and system curriculum. It is suitable for classes in both offline and online mode.

Human resources management/information technology and systems.

The case discusses how Poppy Gustafsson (Gustafsson) (she), Cofounder and Chief Executive Officer of Darktrace plc, one of the world’s largest cyber-AI companies, is reinventing enterprise security by using artificial intelligence (AI) to detect and respond to cyberthreats to businesses and protect the public. Darktrace’s technology leverages the principles of the human immune system to autonomously defend organizations from cyberattacks, insider threats and AI warfare. In addition to leading a cutting-edge cybersecurity company, Gustafsson evangelizes gender diversity at Darktrace where 40% of employees and four C-level executives are women, a number nearly unheard of in the tech sector.The case chronicles the journey of Gustafsson and how she led the company to growth and success. Under her leadership, Darktrace has grown into a market leader in the AI cybersecurity space serving 5,600 customers in 100 countries, as of June 2021. Gustafsson not only redefined the cybersecurity space but also inspired women to pursue a career in the field of cybersecurity. She also collaborated with a social enterprise called WISE to encourage more girls to consider STEM careers.However, along the way, she faced several challenges including growing competition, procuring funds from investors, cybersecurity talent shortage and training personnel. Going forward, some of the challenges before Gustafsson would be to meet the changing cyber protection demands of customers; hire, train and retain highly skilled cybersecurity personnel; beat the competition in a saturated cybersecurity services space; sustain revenue growth; and post profits as Darktrace had incurred losses every year since its inception.

This case is designed to enable students to: understand the issues and challenges women face in the field of cybersecurity; understand the qualities required for a woman leader to lead a technology firm; study the leadership and management style of Gustafsson; understand the importance of transformational leadership in management; understand the role of Gustafsson in Darktrace’s growth and success; analyze the traits that Gustafsson possesses as a tech leader in an emerging cybersecurity space; understand the importance of gender diversity in cybersecurity; and analyze the challenges faced by Gustafsson going forward and explore ways in which she can overcome them.

CSS: 11 Strategy.

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.

Over the last two decades, Under Armour (UA) has emerged from being the “underdog” in the sports apparel and footwear industry to being a leader in the industry, with a fierce attention to performance and great skill at picking up-and-coming athletes who emerge as superstars. This case underscores its administrative heritage, competitive strategy, and growth potential as a global player in a highly competitive industry. It addresses the tension between being a performance brand while launching lines for women vs technology applications and conflicts between its growth strategy and macro-economic forces. It highlights areas in which it has succeeded against macro-economic forces and where it has not.

The research relies primarily on secondary sources and countless studies of UA and its major competitors. Primary research is based on databases, videos of UA’s Chief Executive Officer, Kevin Plank, and articles from Bloomberg to The Baltimore Sun (UA’s headquarters) on the history, growth and future of UA. It also includes observations and site visits to one of its signature brand house stores as well as intensive research and directed studies with students in the USA and China.

The case can be applied to undergraduate, graduate or executive business classes in: business policy and strategy; general management; (sports) marketing; leadership or organisational behaviour classes.

This case describes how eight entrepreneurs discover different opportunities for new businesses to exploit a single technological invention. The case focuses on the process of entrepreneurial discovery and its implications for the creation of new firms. Many of the teaching materials on entrepreneurship assume that entrepreneurs have already discovered an opportunity. While these materials provide useful information about the process of creating new enterprises, they miss the crucial first step in the entrepreneurial process: identifying an opportunity. The case illustrates the theoretical concept of the role of information in the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. It can be used in a class on entrepreneurship or management of technology.

This case details the history of Southwest Airlines from its inception in 1971 until 2004. The case provides details of Southwest's business model and reasons for its success. It ends with a description of the company's competitive pressures in 2004. The case can be used for a course in service operations or strategy.

Hedge fund Magnetar Capital had returned 25 percent in 2007 with a strategy that posed significantly lower risk to investors than the S&P 500. Magnetar had made more than $1 billion in profit by noticing that the equity tranche of CDOs and CDO-derivative instruments were relatively mispriced. It took advantage of this anomaly by purchasing CDO equity and buying credit default swap (CDS) protection on tranches that were considered less risky. Now it was the job of Alec Litowitz, chairman and chief investment officer, to provide guidance to his team as they planned next year's strategy, evaluate and prioritize their ideas, and generate new ideas of his own. An ocean away, Ron Beller was contemplating some very different issues. Beller's firm, Peloton Partners LLP, had been one of the top-performing hedge funds in 2007, returning in excess of 80 percent. In late January 2008 Beller accepted two prestigious awards at a black-tie EuroHedge ceremony. A month later, his firm was bankrupt. Beller shorted the U.S. housing market before the subprime crisis hit, and was paid handsomely for his bet. After the crisis began, however, he believed that prices for highly rated mortgage securities were being unfairly punished, so he decided to go long AAA-rated securities backed by Alt-A mortgage loans (between prime and subprime), levered 9x. The trade moved against Peloton in a big way on February 14, 2008, causing $17 billion in losses and closure of the firm.

This case analyzes the strategies of the two hedge funds, focusing on how money can be made and lost during a financial crisis. The role of investment banks as lenders to hedge funds such as Peloton is explored, as well as characteristics of the CDO market and an array of both mortgage-related and credit protection-related instruments that were actively used (for better or worse) by hedge funds during the credit crisis of 2007 and 2008.

In recent years Lehman Brothers, one of the five largest investment banks in the United States, had grown increasingly reliant on its fixed income trading and underwriting division, which served as the primary engine for its strong profit growth. The bank had also significantly increased its leverage over the same timeframe, going from a debt-to-equity ratio of 23.7x in 2003 to 35.2x in 2007. As leverage increased, the ongoing erosion of the mortgage-backed industry began to impact Lehman significantly and its stock price plummeted. Unfortunately, public outcry over taxpayer assumption of $29 billion in potential Bear losses made repeating such a move politically untenable. The surreal scene of potential buyers traipsing into an investment bank's headquarters over the weekend to consider various merger or spin-out scenarios repeated itself once again. This time, the Fed refused to back the failing bank's liabilities, attempting instead to play last-minute suitors Bank of America, HSBC, Nomura Securities, and Barclay's off each other, jawboning them by arguing that failing to step up to save Lehman would cause devastating counterparty runs on their own capital positions. The Fed's desperate attempts to arrange its second rescue of a major U.S. investment bank in six months failed when it refused to backstop losses from Lehman's toxic mortgage holdings. Complicating matters was Lehman's reliance on short-term repo loans to finance its balance sheet. Unfortunately, such loans required constant renewal by counterparties, who had grown increasingly nervous that Lehman would lose the ability to make good on its trades. With this sentiment swirling around Wall Street, Lehman was forced to announce the largest Chapter 11 filing in U.S. history, listing assets of $639 billion and liabilities of $768 billion. The second domino had fallen. It would not be the last.

This case covers the period from the sale of Bear Stearns to JP Morgan to the conversion into bank holding companies by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, including the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and the sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America. The case explains the new global paradigm for the investment banking industry, including increased regulation, fewer competitors, lower leverage, reduced proprietary trading, and-potentially-reduced profits.

Several theories emerge in a reading of this case; however, the primary or overarching focus of the case is the role of communication and how ineffective or non-existent communication during training, coordination and follow-up of a critical incident can impact officers, departments and communities. Furthermore, this case provides valuable insights for civilian businesses on the importance of formal and informal communication.

The case was based upon extensive interviews with a police officer involved in a shooting. In addition to extensive semi-structured interviews, research for the case also included review of psychological evaluations of the officer involved, journalism pieces and blogs written about the shooting under study, and reports from the Attorney General’s investigation of this shooting.

Detective Keith Casey, an undercover Narcotics Officer for 12 years, had trained and served as a member and point person for the Emergency Response Team (i.e. Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team) for seven years. On April 25, 2010, Casey was working on an electronic surveillance (i.e. a wiretap) out of the FBI office when he received the call about a barricaded suspect in Hammonton, New Jersey. The barricaded suspect had pulled a gun on an EMT in Deptford New Jersey and threatened to kill himself and others. At approximately, 4:10 a.m. because he was perceived to be a danger to himself and others, the SWAT team was sent into the home where the suspect was barricaded. After ignoring repeated commands to drop his weapon, the barricaded suspect was struck down by cases moments after the SWAT team entered the home. Preparation and training on intervention and team management has become increasingly more important for police departments around the world. In recent years, a great deal of attention has been placed on officer bias; however, little attention has been placed on officers who pull the trigger and the events that follow. This case offers a first-hand account of how communication, between all players, before, during and after an officer involved shooting impacts all phases of the critical incident.

This case is targeted to undergraduate and graduate students in organizational communication, but may include public relations, introduction to management, strategic management and organizational behavior, especially if the course includes a discussion of communication and crisis management.

In March 2007 C. James Prieur, CEO of insurance provider Conseco, was faced with a crisis. The front page of the New York Times featured a story on the grieving family of an elderly woman who had faithfully paid for her Conseco long-term care (LTC) policy, only to find that it would not pay her claims. Her family had to pay for her care (until her recent death), which unfortunately resulted in the loss of the family business. The family was now very publicly pursuing litigation. For a company that depended on thousands of employees, investors, and independent agents who sold the insurance plans, this reputational risk was a serious threat. On top of this immediate crisis, all signs in the industry were pointing to the fact that the LTC business itself was not viable, yet over the years Conseco had acquired a number of LTC insurance providers. Students are asked to analyze not only what Prieur’s priorities should be in addressing the immediate crisis but also the risks inherent in the LTC industry and how this might affect Conseco’s success as a business moving forward

After reading and analyzing the case, students will be able to:

• Analyze the risks in the long-term care insurance industry

• Distinguish the various types of risk that caused a company’s crisis and recognize the potential for contagion

• Brainstorm how the risks faced by Conseco could have been avoided or better contained

• Recommend the first steps C. James Prieur and the Conseco leadership team should take to rectify the New York Times article crisis

Analyze the risks in the long-term care insurance industry

Distinguish the various types of risk that caused a company’s crisis and recognize the potential for contagion

Brainstorm how the risks faced by Conseco could have been avoided or better contained

Recommend the first steps C. James Prieur and the Conseco leadership team should take to rectify the New York Times article crisis

In 2007 Conseco's CEO, C. James Prieur, faced a complicated set of problems with his company's long-term care (LTC) insurance subsidiary, Conseco Senior Health Insurance (CSHI). CSHI faced the threat of congressional hearings and an investigation by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, triggered by an unflattering New York Times article alleging that CSHI had an unusually large number of customer complaints and was denying legitimate claims. This threat came in addition to broader systemic problems, including the fact that the entire LTC industry was barely profitable. What little profitability existed was dependent on the goodwill of state insurance regulators, to whom the industry was highly beholden for approvals of rate increases to keep it afloat. Furthermore, CSHI had unique strategic challenges that could not be ignored: First, the expense of administering CSHI's uniquely heterogeneous set of policies put it at a disadvantage relative to the rest of the industry and made rate increases especially necessary. Second, state regulators were negatively predisposed toward Conseco because of its notorious reputation and thus were often unwilling to grant rate increases. Finally, CSHI was dependent on capital infusions totaling more than $1 billion from its parent company, Conseco, for which Conseco had received no dividends in return. Faced with pressure from Conseco shareholders and the looming congressional investigations, what should Prieur do? Students will discuss the available options in the context of a long-term relationship between Conseco and state insurance regulators. Prieur's solution to this problem proved to be innovative for the industry and to have far-reaching consequences for CSHI's corporate structure.

After reading and analyzing this case, students will be able to: evaluate the impact of a regulatory environment on business strategy; and assess the pros and cons of various market strategies as well as recommend important non-market strategies for a firm in crisis in a highly regulated industry.