Financial Management Case Studies at Columbia Law School

by Rachel Gibson

Silvia Hodges

Columbia Law School launches a new course this fall, Law Firm Financial Management, co-taught by Madhav Srinivasan, Director in Finance at Paul Weiss, and Dr. Silvia Hodges, Director of Research Services at TyMetrix Legal Analytics. The course will prepare students who are planning to enter the profession by teaching them material essential for practicing lawyers: elements of law firm finance, including income statements, balance sheet, cash flow, financial planning, analysis and forecasting as well as the financial implications of growth. Additional concepts include understanding the competitive landscape, business development, business intelligence, law firm success and failure, and practical career considerations for associates.

Madhav Srinivasan

Srinivasan said that he and Hodges set out to design a course focusing on three main objectives. The first is to help students recognize that the global legal industry is large, profitable, and evolving through ongoing structural changes. The second goal is to help students understand and respond to the changing legal landscape through a clear understanding of “the heart and soul of what happens in law firms – finance.” By enabling students to evaluate the financial consequences of management actions, Srinivasan and Hodges hope students will take away frameworks and techniques which will help them throughout their entire careers: “obtaining a real perspective of law firms from a financial standpoint – whether as future associates, partners, law firm leaders, or general counsel.”

Geared toward those in the second and third years of their JD, as well as toward JD/MBA and LLM students, the format is more in line with a business school course rather than a traditional law school course. “In a typical class, law school students would listen to lectures, read law cases, debate them and write exams,” explains Srinivasan.  Instead, in this course “students are expected to be active in class discussions, write case analyses and work on finance problem sets,” said Srinivasan.  The course will also host several industry experts as guest speakers.

Both Hodges and Srinivasan believe that case studies truly facilitate lively class discussions on business topics.  “Since the course is very practical, case studies were a natural choice as an effective teaching tool,” said Srinivasan. Hodges and Srinivasan zeroed in on a mixture of Harvard Law School Case Studies and Harvard Business School Case Studies. The HLS case studies they plan to use include Linklaters (A): Seeking Clear Blue Water, Business Planning at McDermott Will & Emery, and Bingham McCutchen: Combinatorial Mathematics. These cases highlight “how firms have faced a challenge, how they reacted, and how events worked out,” notes Srinivasan, who added that students will also gain from knowing “the current situation in the law firm long after what is described in the case study.”

“We designed this course to give students a new perspective as well as practical and crucial skills which otherwise they may never be formally taught,” Srinivasan explains. “We are very excited to be able to offer this content to students.”

About the author: Rachel Gibson,  rgibson@law.harvard.edu, is the Case Development Initiative Program Coordinator.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

All the World’s a Stage: When a Prosecution becomes a Media Circus

Case Study in Criminal Law

May 14, 2011. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the director of the International Monetary Fund and front runner in the French presidential campaign, was handcuffed and led off an Air France flight as it sat on the tarmac at New York’s Kennedy International Airport.  DSK’s arrest and prosecution for the sexual assault of a maid at a Manhattan hotel created a media frenzy, not only in New York City, but throughout the world. The case was the subject of 150,000 headlines in the ten days following his arrest, and countless news outlets played footage and published photos of Strauss-Kahn’s “perp walk.” The perp walk in particular elicited outrage in France, where it is against the law to show images of celebrity defendants.  As the summer wore on, onlookers became increasingly polarized about the case.  Either DSK was an innocent man railroaded by an overzealous law enforcement system and a shadowy political smear campaign, or he was a serial sexual predator who had forced himself on an illiterate immigrant housekeeper.  At the center of this maelstrom was the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, led by Cyrus Vance, Jr. For Vance, the DSK case was by far the “hottest potato” his office had encountered in his relatively young tenure as DA.  Every legal movement, every statement by one of his staff, every rumor or leak was published and examined by the scandal-hungry public.

Harvard Law School professor Philip Heymann’s new case study, “Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Cyrus Vance: Dilemmas in a High Profile Prosecution,” explores issues faced by prosecutors when the justice system becomes the center of a media circus.  How should district attorneys conduct prosecutions of famous or influential people who are accused of crimes? Is it possible to conduct a “normal” investigation when the perpetrator is an international figure and when the case is followed so closely by the media? Can—and should—the DA ignore the pressure to come to a quick decision? 

In the “A” case, students debate the pros and cons of the DA’s bail decision: Should Vance ask the judge to deny bail to DSK, and, if so, what are the repercussions of that decision? This question triggers discussions on the best way to build an investigative strategy at the onset of a criminal case. Students are encouraged to develop investigational hypotheses to explain what occurred in DSK’s hotel room that day, and what facts they would need to prove or disprove their theories. The “B” case takes place in August 2011, when Vance must decide whether or not to bring the case to trial. Students reevaluate their opinions from the “A” case discussion. They consider what Vance should do next and the political and legal repercussions of each possible action. They also explore the role of the DA: should the DA bring forward cases if the prosecutors are not convinced of guilt? At what point should the DA’s office decide guilt or innocence, and at what point should a jury decide? The case initiates larger discussion on the nature of the U.S. prosecutorial system.

To purchase this case study, see the product page on our website. Registered educators and trainers can receive free review copies of this case through the Case Studies website. For more information, or to discuss how to adapt case studies for your academic or professional education needs, contact Lisa Brem, Case Studies Program manager, at lbrem@law.harvard.edu.

Posted in Case Study Program Blog Posts | Tagged | Leave a comment

Too Many Cooks in the FDA Kitchen?

New Product: Margaret Hamburg and the FDA

In December 2011, long-standing tensions between the Food and Drug Administration and presidential cabinets came to a head: for the first time in its history, a cabinet member publicly ordered the FDA to retract a regulation when Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sibelius overruled the FDA’s decision to dispense contraceptive pills over the counter to women under 17.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sibelius (left), with FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg

FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg stood behind her decision as “reflect[ive of] a body of scientific findings,” but Sibelius had a different appraisal of the same information: “I have concluded that the data [...] do not conclusively establish that Plan B One-Step should be made available over the counter for all girls of reproductive age.”

The incident was far more than a difference in scientific judgment. Obama publicly backed Sibelius. “As the father of two daughters,” he wanted to see “common sense” applied to these regulations.  They could not rule out the potential for misuse, if birth control were sold to children “alongside bubble gum and batteries.”

 

Many believed that the White House was making a political move; that the threat of backlash from conservatives, particularly while the Administration was promoting the National Health Care law, made it difficult for the Obama administration to push the envelope on technology and science.  But for the FDA—which was formed in the 1880s to combat shoddy scientific protocol—its clout as an autonomous regulator was on the line.

 

Professor Philip Heymann’s new case study, Margaret Hamburg and the FDA, looks at this push-and-pull history of the FDA, replete with pressure from lobbyists, politicians, and administrations. The case study explains the FDA’s history, role, and organizational structure and highlights the conflicts over such issues as side effect labels on medications, approval schemes for new medical devices, and unregulated drugs grandfathered into legal sale.

With this case, Heymann presents an opportunity for students to grapple with conflicts between policy and science, and how they can best navigate these waters as future leaders. Case study participants consider Hamburg’s role in balancing divisions of power, vague and broad statutes, and stakeholders in policy and science. How might Hamburg address these conflicts of interest? At what point (if any) should Hamburg threaten to resign? And would such a threat ultimately backfire?This case study was taught this semester in HLS Professor Todd Rakoff’s Administrative Law course, as well as Professor Heymann’s Decision-Making and Leadership in the Public Sector (Fall 2012) and the Senior Managers in Government program through the Kennedy School of Government (Summer 2012).

All educators and trainers can receive free review copies of this case through the Case Studies website. For more information, or to discuss how to adapt the case study for your academic or professional education needs, contact Lisa Brem, Case Studies Program Manager, at lbrem@law.harvard.edu.

Posted in Case Study Program Blog Posts | Leave a comment

Between a Rock and a Very Hard Place: Leadership in International Conflict

New Product: Reputation, Credibility, and the Goldstone Report

by Amanda Reilly, Lisa Brem, and Elizabeth Moroney

Richard Goldstone

When the United Nations published the Goldstone Report assessing the 2008 Israeli military strike in Gaza, it (and its main author, Jewish South African jurist Richard Goldstone) received a barrage—a landslide—a torrent—of criticism. Certainly, Goldstone did not set out to engender such a visceral response. So what went wrong? Was there some way Goldstone could have mitigated the negative impact, or was this mission doomed from the start? And if such missions are doomed, what does this say about the people willing to wade into the most intractable international conflicts? Are they misguided or courageous? These are some of the questions put to senior managers from governments around the globe at Harvard’s Kennedy School last August when Professor Philip Heymann debuted his new case study, Reputation, Credibility, and the Goldstone Report. They also wrestled with questions such as: What were the UN’s goals for the Gaza Mission? Would you have counseled Goldstone to take or refuse the position? How should Goldstone respond to the massive attacks on the Report and on him personally? This case study covers the years from 2008 to 2011, examining the fact-finding mission and the decisions Goldstone made before, during, and after the report’s publication.  The follow-up “B” case details the actions Goldstone took in response to the public backlash.

In his class, Heymann asks participants not to find the truth about Operation Cast Lead, but rather to understand the difficulty of being charged with finding it. Students ponder whether they would take on such a controversial situation, how they would navigate it, and what they could do to keep their reputation and credibility intact throughout the process.

Airstrikes in Gaza (Amir Farshad Ebrahimi, Flickr)

Heymann, who studies criminal justice, political violence, and terrorism, has also taught the case study in his Harvard Law School course: Decision-Making and Leadership in the Public Sector at Harvard Law School (Fall 2012).

For more information, or to discuss how to adapt the case study for your academic or professional education needs, contact Lisa Brem, Case Studies Program Manager, at lbrem@law.harvard.edu.

Posted in Case Study Program Blog Posts | Leave a comment

The Balancing Act of a General Counsel

New Product: Hewlett Packard and Mark Hurd

by Rachel Gibson

On June 29, 2010, Hewlett Packard’s (HP’s) celebrated CEO Mark Hurd handed over to HP’s general counsel Michael Holston a troubling letter he had received barely half an hour ago. The letter, from celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, alleged that he had sexually harassed an HP consultant.

The (A) case in the series Hewlett Packard and Mark Hurd details the rise of Mark Hurd to his successful tenure as CEO of Hewlett Packard leading up to Hurd’s receipt of the letter. Updates in subsequent cases (B), (C), & (D) highlight the interactions between the general counsel (GC), the board, and the CEO and illustrate the business and ethical judgments that GCs encounter and must manage.

Harvard Law School Professor Ashish Nanda, PLP Distinguished Senior Fellow Benjamin Heineman, and Dechert Fellow Nicholas Haas felt that a case outlining how this crisis was handled would provide an effective teaching tool for general counsels, particularly in the area of interactions with the board and the CEO. Nanda and Heineman have used the case series in a Leadership in Law Firms Colloquium in New York City and London, organized by Harvard Law School Executive Education. Nanda has taught the case series in several in-company programs for GCs.  Heineman has also taught about the incident in his HLS course Challenges of a General Counsel Seminar.

The case series portrays the dual responsibilities of the general counsel. According to Professor Nanda, “on one hand, general counsels must be seen as trusted advisors by their CEOs; on the other hand, they are often responsible to the board as well. In executing their responsibilities, the GCs have to exercise judgment to ensure they are acting in the best interest of the firm.”

Professor Ashish Nanda

“General counsels often have to handle sensitive issues where the tradeoffs are extreme,” says Professor Nanda. “Often, the challenge is made even more difficult, because the information the GC has is incomplete.” Participants are able to step into Holston’s shoes as they go through the case series. Should Holston advise Hurd, and if so, what advice should he offer? How much should he share with the board? Can he do this without losing Hurd’s trust? What action should he advise the board to take?

Participants have been very positive about the case. As Professor Nanda explains: “It gives participants a chance to discuss a critical aspect of general counsel life that practitioners often confront: how do I balance what is right for the organization, what is fair for the individual involved, and what is morally the right thing to do?”

For more information, or to discuss how to adapt the case study and problem solving pedagogy for your academic or professional education needs, contact Lisa Brem, Case Studies Program Manager, at lbrem@law.harvard.edu.

Posted in Case Development Initiative Blog Posts | Leave a comment

The Copyright Wars

New Product: From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide

by Lisa Brem and Elizabeth Moroney

When the Stop Online Piracy Act was introduced in the House of Representatives in the fall of 2011, the blogosphere erupted. Tech writers predicted a chilling effect on technology, legal experts feared a lack of due process, and open access advocates saw SOPA as censorship on par with the Chinese government. Wikipedia (and dozens of other websites) voluntarily blacked out for a day in protest of the legislation. Within a few months, the bill’s sponsors withdrew it from consideration.

Open access advocates protest outside the Supreme Court, speaking out in response to the MGM v. Grokster hearings (March 2005).

Certainly, the Internet helped to win this skirmish, as lightning-fast connections spread the word and consolidated opposition. But the larger war between content creators and technologists has been fought since the invention of the printing press. From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide, a new case study by Professors John Palfrey and Jonathan Zittrain, provides a brief history of the tug of war between new technologies and the laws and legislation they spawn. As technologists continue to open a Pandora’s Box of potential piracy tools—from the printing press to the Betamax to YouTube and BitTorrent—content creators urge legislators and courts to clamp the lid back down.

Used in the classroom to promote discussion and analysis of the SOPA legislation, From Sony to SOPA prompts participants to ponder questions such as: Is there really a problem with online piracy that the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) doesn’t already address? Are the precedents set by the Sony decision adequate in the face of today’s file sharing technologies? Is it possible to craft a law that will strike an appropriate balance between the interests of copyright holders and those of technology creators and individuals? Is some measure of piracy the price we pay for a robust technology sector in the United States? Or is piracy an ever-growing scourge, eviscerating U.S. entertainment industries?  In the classroom, student groups representing various stakeholders work to amend SOPA and try to create a bill more likely to be signed into law.

This background note made its teaching debut in Advanced Problem Solving course “Cyberlaw and Intellectual Property” at Harvard Law School last spring. To encourage adoption of the problem solving methodology, HLS has made many of the advanced problem solving cases, teaching plans, and the course syllabus available free of charge at the Case Studies website.  For more information, or to discuss how to adapt the case study and problem solving pedagogy for your academic or professional education needs, contact Lisa Brem, Case Studies Program Manager, at lbrem@law.harvard.edu.

Posted in Problem Solving Workshop Blog Posts | 1 Comment

Leadership Training for Practicing Lawyers

Case Study Spotlight: Ernest Shackleton’s Journey to the Endurance

Ernest Shackleton

Ernest Shackleton’s first journey to the Antarctic ended in a very public failure. On his second expedition, in a race to the South Pole, Shackleton turned back within 100 miles of his goal. In his third journey, Shackleton not only failed to achieve his goal of a transcontinental traverse of Antarctica, but his ship was trapped and destroyed by ice, stranding the crew on ice floes for over a year. So why do law and business students and executives in legal and business organizations study Shackleton as an example of successful leadership?

“Shackleton’s experience teaches us about navigating through extreme turbulence and what teams can do to survive volatile, changing circumstances,” explains Professor Ashish Nanda, who is teaching Leadership in Law Firms to students at Harvard Law School this spring and chairs an eponymous course offered in the Executive Education program. Although Shackleton did not succeed in reaching the Pole or traversing the continent, Nanda and other management scholars view Shackleton as an extraordinary leader who brought his teams through months of deprivation with their health, spirit, and morale intact.

Photograph from the Nimrod Expedition (1907-09) to the Antarctic, led by Ernest Shackleton

Nanda uses his case study on Shackleton’s third journey to prompt class discussions about effective leadership in the face of sudden challenges and environmental turbulence, and draw lessons on leadership in today’s law firms and legal departments. The case study is accompanied with a collection of historical video footage and photographs that take participants through the experiences of Shackleton’s expedition. Leaders of today’s law firms are navigating severe financial challenges and fundamental changes in how law firms operate and how law is practiced. In the last several years, Nanda explains, some well-established law firms have closed, in part because their leaders focused on short-term performance, failed to build resilient teams, and did not inspire confidence and loyalty in their partners and associates.

Nanda explains that the case study and class discussion allows students to ponder deeper questions about the true meaning of success and leadership. Effective leaders, whether navigating the high seas or the business world, must look beyond the horizon, inspire confidence, and build trust among their team members.

Ernest Shackleton leaves Elephant Island on the James Caird with five other members of the expedition, setting out to reach South Georgia Island 800 miles away. Twenty two men remain on Elephant Island, hopefully waiting.

Ernest Shackleton’s Journey to the Endurance is one of over 100 case studies, role plays, and simulations available on the Case Studies website.

Posted in Case Development Initiative Blog Posts | Leave a comment

Professor John Coates’ Legal Start-Up Case Studies Inspire Students

by Rachel Gibson

“I want to inspire students to start organizations and conquer the world.” – HLS Professor John Coates

Professor John Coates, a regular contributor to the Case Development Initiative’s catalogue, is developing a module of three case study series that highlight the challenges of starting new legal organizations.

Designed for Professor Coates’ Legal Profession course, the case studies illuminate the commonalities all start-ups face, despite the sector. The module will include case studies from the hybrid public/for-profit sector, the public sector, and the private sector.

“Start-ups in different sectors of the legal economy face common issues, namely, how to survive when resources are scarce, the financial constraints that shape the functioning of the organization, and how to cope without the organizational controls that come with time and funding,” explained Professor Coates.

Professor Coates believes this module of cases could prove beneficial to instructors in a variety of settings, including professional ethics professors, students and instructors participating in legal clinics, and executive education courses for current legal practitioners.

The first series, Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady A and B  explores the formation of a New York law firm that handles a mix of commercial litigation and public interest cases. Workers’ Rights in the Hudson Valley A and B focus on two lawyers who branch out from a legal non-profit to start their own public interest firm. The third series, currently in progress, examines the challenges involved with opening a for-profit legal organization.

When taught in his Legal Profession course in the Fall 2012 semester, the student response to the Workers’ Rights series was very positive. In a course of 50 students, “around 10-15 students ranked this case in the top three,” Professor Coates stated. The case series also sparked conversation amongst students about the public legal sector. “The students that are passionate about public interest lawyering sometimes know a lot more about the sector than I do,” explains Professor Coates, “Using case studies like these to spark a dynamic class discussion can really engage students to learn, not just from the professor, but from people in the class who have experience in the field.”

“Challenges for Legal Startups”

For a law student, the path to the public sector can be daunting. It’s difficult to find public sector jobs, let alone ones that could sustain a recent graduate trying to pay back student loans. “There is a lot of interest in non-profit and public sector work amongst law students, but for various reasons, they may not go into it at first and keep this passion on the back burner,” said Professor Coates. “Students often opt to work at a corporate firm for a few years and once their loans are paid off, they are able to pursue their public interest work.”

These cases can raise students’ awareness of the many paths available to them as they pursue their careers and encourage them to consider the challenges and rewards of starting their own organizations. This module of cases addresses the factors that motivated the founders of each organization to leave the corporate sector.

The unique combination of these cases taught in the classroom helps Professor Coates inspire students to “start organizations and conquer the world.”

Follow Professor Coates on Twitter: https://twitter.com/jciv

About the author: Rachel Gibson,  rgibson at law.harvard.edu, is the Case Development Initiative Program Coordinator
Posted in Case Development Initiative Blog Posts | Leave a comment

Negotiation Role Plays Available on The Case Studies Portal

The Program on Negotiation (PON) at Harvard Law School, a community of negotiation scholars, educators, and staff from HLS, Tufts University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is one of the world’s premier research and educational resources for negotiation theory and practice. We are happy to announce that PON has made available several of their negotiation and mediation role play simulations on the Harvard Law School | The Case Studies website. Professor Larry Susskind, co-founder of PON and the Ford Professor of Urban and Environmental Planning at MIT has authored or co-authored many of the simulations, which focus on resolving disputes concerning environmental issues, water rights, and cultural values. Read below for a short description of the role plays.

Water rights and environmental management role plays:

Indopotamia. What happens when countries can’t agree on a shared water plan?  In this simulation, a mediator helps eight stakeholder group representatives, including senior officials from three countries, discuss possible development strategies for the Indopotamia River basin. The three countries face significant water-management challenges, and there is no formal agreement governing how they are supposed to share or use the resources of the river basin. A multinational Regional Development Bank is prepared to offer substantial financial support if the parties can come to an agreement.

Flooding.  We’ve all heard about climate change, but how many of us have dealt with its effects first hand? This simulation puts us in the middle of a high stakes scenario: a real estate developer has sunk large amounts of money and is in the final planning phase of a mixed-use riverfront development project, only to find that, due to changes in the water table, the project now falls in the flood plain. Can (and should) the town seek to stop the development from proceeding? If the development is allowed to go forward, who will bear the cost of flood mitigation measures and the inevitable property damage due to flooding? What can the town (and other local, state, and federal governments around the world) do to deal with this increasing problem?

Long River. How can you make agreements when the future is uncertain? The Long River has been severely depleted by droughts, affecting those who rely on the river for irrigation, recreation, water supply, and fish and game. Although there have been some studies about future flow rates, various groups have different interpretations of the data. The stakeholders are trying to come to an agreement to preserve and protect this natural resource, but if they fail, it is very likely that federal regulators and the courts will step in and impose restrictions on water use.

Development Dispute at Menehune Bay.  Can groups with vastly disparate and opposing views on developing a large resort on Hawaii’s idyllic and rural Menehune Bay come to an agreement? Will environmental and user groups stop the project in its tracks or can construction and commerce lobbying groups push it through over objections? Is there any possible way for this project to go forward with the blessing of most (if not all) of the stakeholders?

Dirty Stuff II. How can negotiations get back on track after an angry party has derailed the talks? This simulation deals with regulating a harmful industrial waste product: “Dirty Stuff.” The press reported that the first meeting about regulating Dirty Stuff ended abruptly in a highly emotional and hostile way. The parties have come back together with the help of a facilitator to try again. How can the facilitator help the group reach an agreement about the best way to revise the proposed rule about the production and use of Dirty Stuff?

Harborco is a consortium of development, industrial, and shipping concerns interested in building and operating a deep-water port. It has already selected a site for the port, but cannot proceed without a license from the Federal Licensing Agency (FLA). The FLA is willing to grant Harborco a license, but only if it secures the support of at least 4 of 5 other parties: the environmental coalition, the federation of labor unions, a consortium of other ports in the region, the Federal Department of Coastal Resources (DCR), and the Governor of the host state. The parties have several issues to negotiate before deciding whether or not to approve the port, including the types of industries that will be be permitted to locate near the port, the extent to which environmental damage be mitigated, the extent to which organized labor will be given preference in hiring during construction and operation of the port, the amount of any federal financial assistance to Harborco, and the amount of any compensation to other ports in the region for potential economic losses.

Value-based conflict resolution role plays:

Springfield Outfest. Can parties with deeply opposing views on gay rights reach an agreement that protects their individual rights and identities? Springfield Pride supports gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights through its annual Outfest celebration during National Coming Out Day. Last year, members of Salvation Now!, a nationwide network of grassroots religious and social campaigners, protested loudly during the Outfest, resulting in arrests of Salvation Now! protesters and unfavorable media attention,  dampening the festival atmosphere. The simulation begins one year later. Springfield Pride has just submitted its permit application for this year’s upcoming OutFest. Fearing either an escalation of last year’s confrontation or legal liability and court challenges, the city has requested a meeting with all parties to try to agree on some parameters and rules before this year’s festival.

Ellis vs. MacroB. Ellis, a devoutly religious employee opposed to gay lifestyles, posts anti-gay Bible passages  on the walls of his cubicle in response to posters his employer is using in a gay rights diversity campaign. After talks between Ellis and MacroB’s diversity manager deteriorate, Ellis is fired for insubordination. Ellis is thinking about launching a lawsuit against MacroB, but instead both Ellis and MacroB have agreed (reluctantly) to work with a mediator. Can a mediator help the parties and their attorneys craft a settlement that does not require them to compromise their fundamental values?

Seoul Food in Urbana. How best can a mediator under time pressure resolve a highly-emotional ethnic dispute? Racial tensions explode between Korean grocery store owners and their African-American customers after an elderly African-American woman is accused of shoplifting, sparking a massive boycott against Korean merchants. African-Americans say store owners are unfriendly and unfairly accuse customers of stealing. Korean store owners respond by saying that African-Americans shoplift and use racial slurs in their stores.  Legal representatives of the local African-American and Korean-American communities are now meeting with the mayor’s Chief Aide for Urban Affairs in an effort to try to resolve the conflict. During the discussions, a newsflash will inform the parties that the boycott situation has worsened and that an urgent solution is necessary.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Program on Negotiation | Leave a comment

The Case Development Initiative at Harvard Law School

The Case Development Initiative (CDI), including Ashish Nanda, Faculty Director and Robert Braucher Professor of Practice (pictured left), Dechert Fellow Nicholas Haas (right), and Program Coordinator Rachel Gibson (center), focuses on producing cases for use in a variety of business-oriented courses at HLS. “We’re currently working on a professional service firm case study about the risky business of hiring stars,” said Haas. “We have been interviewing at a firm that seems to have developed an excellent approach to hiring and integrating lateral partners.”  Gibson explained what CDI looks for when they determine which case studies to pursue. “Good cases tell good stories,” said Gibson. “We want to develop cases that allow the reader to fully inhabit the shoes of the decision maker, and learn by wrestling with and discussing in class the dilemmas they face.”

Other HLS faculty members on the CDI team include John Coates, John F. Cogan Jr. Professor Of Law and Economics, Guhan Subramanian, Joseph H. Flom Professor of Law and Business, and David Wilkins, Lester Kissel Professor of Law and Vice Dean for Global Initiatives on the Legal Profession. Professor Coates has written cases on El Paso’s sale to Kinder Morgan, and Hilton’s hostile bid for ITT for his course on Mergers and Acquisitions. Professor Subramanian, who is also a professor at Harvard Business School, has contributed negotiation-oriented case studies, including Oracle v. PeopleSoft, which describes PeopleSoft’s tactics to thwart Oracle’s hostile takeover bid. Professor Wilkins has coauthored with Professor Nanda cases on innovations in legal services, including Axiom, a non-traditional provider of legal services. For more information on using CDI case studies in legal and professional education, contact Rachel Gibson, rgibson@law.harvard.edu.

Posted in Case Development Initiative Blog Posts | Leave a comment