Search results

The case is derived from secondary sources, including publicly available reports and information about all companies directly or indirectly engaged in the industry. No primary sources were available.

This teaching case is designed for students to demonstrate their mastery of industry-level analysis in the emerging space tourism industry. It allows students to understand what constitutes the industry within the broader space sector and to apply analytical tools such as PESTEL and Porter’s Five Forces, with the option to discuss strategic groups. Students gain insights into how the industry is evolving within its broader environment and how companies could respond or differentiate themselves. Information is also provided for students to consider the broader social impact of a relatively new industry from the perspective of sustainable development.

The case is written for undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in strategic management courses. The case placement is ideally in conjunction with industry-level analytical frameworks such as Porter’s Five Forces, PESTEL analysis, strategic groups (optional) and industry life cycle. Most strategic management textbooks cover these concepts in the first few chapters. For example, “Strategic Management, 14th edition” by Hill, Schilling and Jones (2023) covers these topics in chapter 2. Given that space tourism is an embryonic industry dependent on technological innovation, instructors might also use this case in innovation or entrepreneurship-related courses. This case could also be used to address critical issues, such as sustainability, in tourism management courses.

The case is designed to be used with the digital business model framework developed by Peter Weill and Stephanie Woerner of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (Weill and Woerner, 2015) and is referred to as the W & W framework. This approach provides a useful structure for thinking through the strategic options facing environments ripe for digital transformation.

Research for this case was conducted through face-to-face interviews with the protagonist, as well as through a review of their business planning documents and other data and documentation provided by the founder. Some of the market and industry data were obtained using secondary research and industry reports. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed to ensure accuracy.

The case follows the story of Kurt Waltenbaugh, a Minnesota entrepreneur who shared the dream of using data analytics to reduce costs within the US health-care system. In early 2014, Waltenbaugh and a physician colleague founded Carrot Health to bring together their personal experience and expertise in both consumer data analytics and health care. From the beginning, they focused on how to use data analytics to help identify high-risk/high-cost patients who had not yet sought medical treatment. They believed that they could use these insights to encourage early medical interventions and, as a result, lower the long-term cost of care.

Carrot’s initial success found them in a consultative role, working on behalf of insurance companies. Through this work, they honed their capabilities by helping their clients combine existing claims data with external consumer behavioral data to identify new potential customers. These initial consulting contracts gave Carrot the opportunity to develop its analytic tools, business model and, importantly, to earn some much-needed cash flow during the start-up phase. However, they also learned that, while insurance companies were willing to purchase data insights for one-off market expansion projects, it was much more difficult to motivate them to use data proactively to eliminate costs on an ongoing basis. Waltenbaugh believed that Carrot’s greatest potential lay in their ability to develop predictive models of health outcomes, and this case explores Carrot’s journey through strategic decisions and company transformation.

This case is intended for either an undergraduate or graduate course on entrepreneurial strategy. It provides an effective introduction to the unique structure and constraints which apply to an innovative start-up within the health-care industry. The case also serves as a platform to explore the critical criteria to be considered when developing a digital transformation strategy and exposing students to the digital business model developed by Weill and Woerner (2015) at MIT (referred to in this instructor’s manual as the W&W framework). The case was written to be used in an advanced strategy Master of Business Administration (MBA) class, an undergraduate specialty health-care course or as part of a health-care concentration in a regular MBA, Master of Health Care Administration (MHA) or Master of Public Health (MPH). It may be taught toward the end of a course on business strategy when students are building on generic strategy frameworks and adapting their strategic thinking to the characteristics of specific industries or sectors. However, the case can also be taught as part of a course on health-care innovation in which case it also serves well as an introduction to the health-care payments and insurance system in the USA. Finally, the case can be used in a specialized course on digital transformation strategy in which case it serves as an introduction to the MIT W&W framework.

The case is particularly well-suited to students who are familiar with traditional frameworks for business strategy and business models. The analysis builds on this knowledge and introduces students interested in learning about the opportunities and challenges of digital strategy. Equally, the case works well for students with clinical backgrounds, who are interested in how business strategy can influence changes within the health-care sphere. Finally, an important aspect of the case design was to develop students’ analytical confidence by encouraging them to “get their hands dirty” and to carry out some basic exploratory data analytics themselves. As such, the case requires students to combine and correlate data and to experience the potentially powerful combination of clinical and consumer data. Instructors should find that the insights from these activities give students unique insights into the potential for of data analytics to move health care from a reactive/treatment ethos to a proactive/intervention ethos. This experience can be particularly revealing for students with clinical backgrounds who may initially be resistant to the use of clinical data by commercial organizations.

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.

This case replaces UVA-M-0837. It can be used in a variety of marketing and strategy classes to understand how (1) at a macro level, a shift in consumer and environmental factors can impact firm strategy and (2) at a micro level, an e-mail-based marketing campaign designed to address these changes can impact firm-level performance.

The case puts the students in the position of CEO Robert Huth as he is preparing for a board meeting. He had taken David's Bridal from a loss in 1996 to sales of over $1 billion by 2011, but he was concerned about future growth. People were waiting longer and longer to get married and, once they decided to, were spending much less than in the past, so the industry had seen year-over-year declines since 2007. How would David's Bridal establish its brand in the minds of a new generation of brides who shopped, purchased, and decided differently than had brides in past generations?

This case describes the growth of ReNew Power during its first decade of operation. Sumant Sinha, a first-generation entrepreneur and former banker, founded the company, which grew from a modest generator-cum-developer of wind energy-based electricity to one of India's largest companies in the renewable energy sector. With the entry of large, well-funded players such as Tata Power and Adani Green into the Indian renewable sector by the end of 2020, Sinha had to make a strategic decision: should ReNew continue to organically scale up its presence in an increasingly competitive yet expanding Indian renewable energy sector, should it diversify geographically, or should it pursue emerging opportunities for vertical or horizontal integration within the sector? The case provides an opportunity to discuss how alternative business models and competitive scenarios may facilitate or inhibit the growth of a player in the renewable energy sector.

This compact case provides a relatively large data set that students explore using visualization and a Tableau dynamic dashboard that they create. Students were asked to describe what the data set contained in relation to employee attrition experience of Baca Beverage Distributors (BBD). The application and managerial questions are set in human resources and a company that is facing high attrition during the pandemic.

BBD shared their data and problem scenario for this compact case. The protagonist, Morgan Matthews, was the authors’ contact and provided significant clarification and guidance about the data. Both the company and the protagonist have been disguised. Some of the job positions have been rephrased. All names of employees, supervisors and managers have been replaced with codes.

During the 2020–2022 pandemic years, BBD experienced, like many companies, a higher than usual employee turnover rate and Morgan Matthews, Director of People, was concerned. Not only was it time-consuming, expensive and disruptive but the company had prided itself on being a good place to work. Were they hiring the right people, people that fit the company culture and people that fit the positions for which they were hired? The company had been using the Predictive Index [1] when on-boarding employees. In addition, there were results from self-reviews and manager reviews that could be used. Morgan wondered if data visualization and visual analytics would be useful in describing their employees and whether it would reveal any opportunities to improve the turnover rate. Before seeking a solution for the high turnover, it was important to step back and learn what the data said about who was leaving and the reasons they gave for leaving.

This compact case can be used in courses that include visualization using Tableau and dashboards. As it is a compact case, it requires less preparation time from the students and less class time for discussion. The case is for students who have been recently introduced to business analytics, specifically visualization and data storytelling with Tableau. For this reason, significant guidance has been provided in the case assignment. The level of the case can be adjusted by the amount of guidance provided in the case assignment. Courses include introduction to business analytics, descriptive analytics and visualization, communication through data storytelling. The case can be used for all modalities – in person, hybrid, online. The authors use it here for visualization and dynamic dashboards but using the same data set and compact case description, exploratory data analysis could be assigned.

Supplementary material for this article can be found online.

The objectives of the case study are to provide an overview of intellectual property rights and intellectual property rights in Indian context; understand the intellectual property rights implementation and challenges for implementing it in emerging economies; understand what would be the best approach that companies can adopt when the companies face backlash in such circumstances; and explore the scope for redefining the intellectual property rights in the changing global environment.

In December 2021, the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority (PPV&FRA) in India revoked the plant variety protection (PVP) certificate granted to PepsiCo India Holding (PHI) for its Lays variety potato (FL-2027, known as FC-5). The FC-5 variety possessed low moisture content which made it suitable for making potato chips. The controversy started with Pepsi suing the small and marginal farmers of Gujarat for alleged patent infringement and cultivating the patented variety. Pepsi’s legal suit against nine marginal potato farmers in Gujarat initiated the dispute over how intellectual property (IP) rights are used to intimidate small, marginal farmers and its infringement of farmers’ rights. But, on the other side, the interesting aspect was how IP infringement could be a setback for the companies that made the capital investment to develop the variety. The case study discusses the backlash Pepsi faced due to this IP rights legal suit and the punitive aspects of IP rights (IPR) law. Moreover, in the context of the global pandemic, the case study helped discuss the need to redefine the intellectual property rights regime keeping in mind global welfare.

The case is intended for use in postgraduate-level management courses in agricultural marketing, agribusiness, international business and economics. This study can help management students understand how IPR is defined, the apparent complexities associated with it and the adverse effect of it on small and marginal farmers in emerging economies.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 5: International business.

This case is the first of a three-part series that follows the managerial, strategic, and communications decisions of the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) or Clean India Mission, the flagship programme of the Government of India to eliminate the practice of open defecation (i.e., not using a toilet) from 2014 to 2019. As of 2014, 550 million people in India practiced open defecation. This problem posed a massive public health hazard and economic drag for the country as well as a threat to global health. Written from an insider's perspective, the cases centre on the decisions made by a new Secretary of the India's Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, who was hired to manage SBM, and the team he assembled. Case A sets the stage for addressing open defecation in rural India and discusses the human resources and strategic challenges to implementing SBM from the vantage point of the new Secretary. It ends with strategic dilemmas related to what the new SBM team should do once they had sized up the challenges to eliminating open defecation by 2019. The case provides an opportunity to deliberate the managerial and strategic decisions of a globally relevant public behaviour change and rural infrastructure development program as well as different forms of public sector implementation in the Indian context.

This case is the second of a three-part series that follows the managerial, strategic, and communications decisions of the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) or Clean India Mission, the flagship programme of the Government of India to eliminate the practice of open defecation (i.e., not using a toilet) from 2014 to 2019. As of 2014, 550 million people in India practiced open defecation. This problem posed a massive public health hazard and economic drag for the country as well as a threat to global health. Written from an insider's perspective, the cases centre on the decisions made by a new Secretary of India's Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, who was hired to manage SBM, and the team he assembled. Case B discusses the start-up challenges for SBM, including implementation in India's complex federal system, workplace culture, and the deep-rooted behaviour of open defecation in rural India and the managerial and communication strategies formulated to address them. The case concludes by framing the difficulties with slow-moving states and monitoring rigour that the leadership SBM, with a new team, strategic focus, and early momentum, faced as the mission entered its final two years.

On May 27, 2020, a blowout occurred in Well No. 5 at Baghjan (Assam); the well, owned by Oil India Ltd., caught fire on June 9, 2020. For almost five and a half months, the company tried to douse the 200-foot high flame but failed to do so. Finally, on Day 173, Oil India Ltd succeeded in capping the well. Biswajit Roy, Director (Human Resources and Business Development), was tasked with investigating the nature and cause of the crisis. Roy pondered on the nature of the crisis: Had it been purely technical or stakeholder-induced? What had led to the chaotic condition? Could things have been done differently?