Search results

This case is appropriate for use in undergraduate and MBA courses.

This case can be used in courses in business ethics, leading teams and organizations or business strategy. The focus of the case aligns well with discussions of managing up, navigating changes in top leadership and conflicts between executive vision and future company growth. Instructors that choose to emphasize the ethical approach could assign this case to explore tradeoffs between loyalty to current and future bosses.

Associate Director of Forecasting Cindy March faces a multi-faceted dilemma as biotech firm Veracity’s acquisition date by pharmaceutical giant Makhola approaches. After a new competitor enters the market, March expects Veracity drug Sangren’s future revenue to drop to $600m in 2019, but the outgoing Veracity CEO refuses to accept a forecast of less than $700m. March suspects that the CEO is intent on handing over a financially successful company and is overly optimistic about Sangren’s ability to maintain market share. In two weeks, March is due to present a 2019 Sangren forecast to incoming Makhola leadership, who she anticipates becoming her direct boss after the acquisition. Should March present the inflated forecasts and accept the poor reflection on her professional abilities or should she refuse to present numbers she does not believe in?

By analyzing and discussing the case, students should be able to:Evaluate the potential business and ethical conflicts arising from decision-making based on both data and intuition. Synthesize an appropriate strategy for navigating tradeoffs between current and future leadership.Analyze the gender dynamics of male-dominated executive leadership structures and strategies for female employees to combat gender biases.

The Behavioral Science Guys, 2015. One Simple Skill to Curb Unconscious Gender Bias. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEHi4yauhu8&ab_channel=VitalSmartsVideoTeaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 6: Human resources.

This case allows students to engage with classical marketing tenets of branding, media and communications decisions and content marketing within a management framework.

This case is appropriate for an undergraduate or graduate-level programme in marketing management.

Suzanne Stevens was part of a group of four former senior employees of a large life insurance firm that decided to establish a new and innovative South African insurance company, BrightRock. They identified a gap in a large and highly competitive (albeit generic and opaque) insurance market and developed a distinctive positioning within the market. There was low consumer understanding of the technical aspects of life insurance products, and no existing life insurance product provided an individualized offering. Stevens developed the company’s brand and marketing strategy by drawing on reputation drivers, traditional advertising and a content marketing approach. BrightRock focused on change moments in consumers’ lives, including getting married, having children or getting a new job, and changed the standard insurance product model by launching an individualized flexible product that could adapt with the consumer through their various life stages. The case study documents the first three years of BrightRock’s operations, with a strong focus on brand and product development, distribution and communication. The case dilemma involves choices Stevens faced at the beginning of 2015 about marketing investments across paid, earned and owned media.

This study enables to critique the development of a services brand; integrate paid, owned and earned media to increase communication effectiveness and efficiency; and critique a content marketing strategy.

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

CSS 8: Marketing.

The learning outcomes focus on enabling higher-order learning for students to critically assess Agile project management in philanthropic settings, specifically compare and contrast Agile project management versus traditional project management in the context of a non-profit organisation (The Solidarity Fund) during a crisis; discuss and evaluate the role and contribution of philanthropy during times of crisis; rate the value additions and contributions of Agile approaches in philanthropy; evaluate the phases of Agile (unconventional) project management executed by The Solidarity Fund; and develop a review of the impact of the work done by The Solidarity Fund in terms of the approach that the Fund used. How effective/not effective was it?

Chaos, crisis and confusion: the three “C”s that succinctly condense the status quo during the COVID-19 pandemic. The roles and contributions of non-profit organisations gained recognition as countries worldwide responded to the crisis to save lives and livelihoods.

In South Africa, there was a sense of urgency and considerable pressure for a multi-stakeholder approach led by the government to save as many South African lives as possible. The conditions, however, were the opposite of traditional project management methodologies that advocate for the management of the triple constraints, namely, cost, time and scope.

How could cost be managed in a project without a set budget and which was reliant on philanthropy? How could time be managed without a set deadline and while tackling an invisible enemy – a virus that changed dynamics on a daily basis and – how could scope be managed in a context where the future was increasingly uncertain?

This case study can be useful for students undertaking postgraduate diploma in business, master of business administration (MBA), master of management courses.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.