Search results

In early 2014, recent Stanford University graduate Tyler Shultz was in a quandary. He had been working at Theranos, a blood-diagnostic company founded by Elizabeth Holmes, a Stanford-dropout wunderkind, for almost a year. Shultz had learned enough about the company to realize that its practices and the efficacy of its much-touted finger-prick blood-testing technology were questionable and that the company was going to great lengths to hide this fact from the public and from regulators.

Theranos and Holmes were Silicon Valley darlings, enjoying positive press and lavish attention from potential investors and technology titans alike. Just as companies like PayPal had revolutionized the stagnant payments industry and Uber had upended the for-hire transportation sector, Theranos had been positioned as the latest technology firm to substantially disrupt yet another mature sector: the medical laboratory business. By the start of 2014, the company had raised more than $400 million in funding, and had an estimated market valuation of $9 billion.

Shultz's situation was exacerbated by the fact that his grandfather, the highly respected former US Secretary of State George Shultz, was on the Theranos board and was one of Elizabeth Holmes's biggest supporters.

But Tyler Shultz worried about the customers he was convinced were receiving highly unreliable and often inaccurate blood-test results. With so much at stake, Shultz wondered how he should proceed. Should he raise his concerns with the firm's investors? Blow the whistle externally? Report to industry regulators? Go away quietly?

This case and its subsequent four brief follow-up cases are based largely on interviews with Tyler Shultz, and outline the dilemma he faced and the various steps he would take both to extricate himself from his unsavory position and let the public know the full extent of the deception at Theranos.

Five optional handouts are available to instructors to further discussion after the case has been debriefed. The handouts serve as additional decision points for the students if your class time permits.

The data used to present this case was collected from secondary data sources. These sources included media reports associated with Michael Jordan and his trajectory since entering the sport, as well as specific information published about his time at the Chicago Bulls. Another key source of information is the ESPN documentary conducted specifically on Jordan’s relationship with his National Basketball Association (NBA) team.

The case follows the story of Michael Jordan, who took his team, the Chicago Bulls, to fame in a rather controversial manner. To do so, Michael Jordan had to alter his leadership style over the years to be respected as a leader and motivate his team to win one NBA championship after another. On 20th April 2020, ESPN’s “The Last Dance”, a 10-part documentary about Michael Jordan and his time playing for the Chicago Bulls was released to much acclaim. The documentary became highly noted as Jordan himself, both directed and starred in the documentary. Jordan’s great achievements stood out, but so did the conflicts that the basketball star had with The Bulls’ management team and mainly, his teammates. Relationships between teammates were far from harmonious, which led to questions around whether Michael Jordan was as good a leader, as he was a star player. Cultural change within the organisation was primarily linked to the often-contested leadership of Jordan.

The case can be used at UG, MSc and MBA levels. It works for in-person teaching and for online teaching. It is most suitable in leadership, strategy and strategy in practice courses. However, it is critical to note that the case can shed light on the dynamics that leaders and teammates have within their teams. Therefore, this case may be valuable to students studying courses where they themselves must work in groups and oftentimes encounter challenges in managing their team. These challenges can arise at all levels of experience. As such, the case provides particularly useful reflection for decision makers who may be beginning to develop their leadership skill (UG), those who have already experienced working in teams (MSc) or leading teams themselves (MBA, Executive MBA). The case addresses the challenges associated with achieving high team motivation and performance. It also sheds light on the challenges associated with leading a cultural change within a team and the approaches of different actors involved. It may be best to introduce the case in the context of a (1.5–2 h) workshop once students understand the basic frameworks and tools used to analyse leadership styles and their characteristics.