IMD business school for management and leadership courses

It is now four years later, and Drinkotec is scaling up fast. They’ve had to make some tough decisions in order to focus, have the best people and build the culture that they want, but today, major beverage companies are seeking their technology in order to go packaging-free. This case is about leadership, culture, sustainability and taking the leap to follow your dreams.

The deal is closed; Franck-Erik Flegbo and Cyril Le Terrien become the owners of Drinkotec but discover that the existing team doesn’t really have the capabilities or culture to innovate. The Covid-19 pandemic hits, and they discover that their customers need Drinkotec’s help.

Franck-Erik Flegbo and Cyril Le Terrien were already successful executives in a major multinational when they decided that it was time to dream, and to build their own company, with a culture that delivered performance, created a culture where everyone wanted to work, used the latest technologies, and did its part to save the planet. The opportunity to acquire 40-year-old Drinkotec came to them, and with it, they saw the vehicle for their dreams

Coal plays a critical role as an energy pillar in many parts of the world. In three of the world’s most populous countries – China, India and Indonesia – coal supplies more than 60% of electricity needs. However, coal is also one of the most polluting and greenhouse gas emission-intensive substances, holding the dubious title of the single largest contributor to global warming. Mining is one of the industries under scrutiny for its role in the coal supply chain. Amid growing negative public sentiment and investor pressure, the mining majors are pursuing different strategies regarding coal. Rio Tinto completely exited in 2018. Anglo American spun out its coal assets into a separate company, effectively putting the decision in shareholders’ hands. Meanwhile, Glencore held on to coal, declaring “managed decline” the most responsible approach. The case’s dilemma – “who has it right” – offers fertile ground for debate. Participants should analyze the pros and cons of the company’s strategies from different angles and explore the repercussions on various stakeholders, on shareholders and on the environment. The potential learnings from this case and previews of the difficult trade-offs leaders face extend beyond mining to many industries in transition.

Birth registration – considered a basic human right provided by government services – was still not working in many countries. One in four children worldwide is not registered. Yet, Zainab Siddiqui, head of sustainability at Telenor Pakistan, had a different idea. In 2013, she initiated the Digital Birth Registration Project in Pakistan in two provinces to replace the existing paper-based approach. Her entrepreneurial leadership was encouraged in Telenor, a global mobile network operator based in Norway, active in 8 markets with over 170 million subscribers. The company was an organization true to its original purpose of “promoting a country’s prosperity” – by “empowering societies and connecting its subscribers to what matters most.” What mattered most could be digital health, digital farming or digital banking services – several of the services that the company had launched over the years. Digital birth registration and its potential follow-on services – such as digital marriage certificates and digital driver’s licenses – were considered good not only for what matters most but also potentially for the bottom line. After several years of successful implementation of the project, Zainab considered how Telenor Pakistan could take on full responsibility for the service from the Pakistani government. How would the company prepare and position itself for the eventual negotiations with the government for this potential growth opportunity?

Companies are now aiming to decarbonize their supply chains by tackling scope 3 emissions (indirect emissions along the value chain). Scope 3 emissions are difficult for companies to manage because they reside outside the companies’ direct control, and for this reason, they always require partnerships. However, partnerships are not easy, and it is difficult to determine exactly which partnership will best achieve the desired sustainability objectives. This case study focuses on the sustainability partnership portfolio of ZUCCA, a fictitious company in the food and agriculture sector that is looking to dramatically reduce its scope 3 emissions. ZUCCA’s new chief sustainability officer (CSO) is considering the future of the company’s sustainability partnerships portfolio and evaluating which partnership will best help the company dramatically reduce scope 3 emissions. The CSO considers partnering with three different NGOs: the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD); World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF); and the World Economic Forum (WEF).

Better Cotton was founded in 2005 to set standards for cotton production, with a goal of facilitating ethical, environmental and development-friendly agricultural practices. As multiple players come under increasing pressure to address social and environmental issues across their supply chains, Better Cotton aims to engage all actors to work together. The Better Cotton Standard System was developed as a holistic approach to sustainable cotton production that addresses the three pillars of sustainability: environmental, social and economic. The organization works to build capacity by working with local partners to train cotton farmers worldwide in more sustainable farming practices that improve their livelihoods and protect and restore the environment. Its assurance model aims to balance scalability with cost effectiveness. Its Chain of Custody system matches supply and demand by tracing transactions throughout the supply chain. Better Cotton subscribes to a multi-stakeholder governance model, bringing stakeholders together to participate in dialogue, decision making and implementation of responses to joint problems. By seeking input from multiple types of actors involved in a question, the eventual consensual decision gains greater legitimacy, and it can be more effectively implemented than a response by any single actor. Multi-stakeholder governance requires balancing representation with the need for efficiency and effectiveness in developing and implementing strategy. The case allows for a discussion on the extent to which the BetterCotton governance model is aligned with its strategy and mission, and more broadly, how to design governance for multi-stakeholder organizations.