Monsanto's March into Biotechnology (A)

Gary P. Pisano

Case | HBS Case Collection | January 1990 (Revised October 1993)

Monsanto's March into Biotechnology (A)

Abstract

Very early in the history of biotechnology (about 1979), Monsanto made a major commitment to move into this field. This case recounts the history from the point of view of the eminent scientist hired to head up corporate R&D. He took Monsanto from a very traditional agricultural chemicals technology base to one of the world's finest biotechnology centers and oversaw the purchase of Searle Pharmaceuticals. Raises a number of issues: How can a company move into a totally new technology? What are the advantages and disadvantages of sourcing technology from small firms and universities? How should research be organized? Emphasizes the very long-term view that Monsanto took in justifying their huge investment.

Keywords: History; Transition; Biotechnology Industry; Agriculture and Agribusiness Industry;

Format: Print

17 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Pisano, Gary P. "Monsanto's March into Biotechnology (A)." Harvard Business School Case 690-009, January 1990. (Revised October 1993.)

Case | HBS Case Collection | August 2019

Humanistic Capitalism at Brunello Cucinelli

Francesca Gino and Gary Pisano

This case explores one company’s attempt to experiment with a different underlying model for a capitalist enterprise. Brunello Cucinelli, S.p.A. is a leading manufacturer of luxury fashion apparel. Despite being a publicly traded enterprise with annual revenues exceeding 500 million, the company follows a somewhat unique human resource and cultural model. The company’s founder, Brunello Cucinelli, has striven to create an enterprise that follows principles of what he calls “humanistic capitalism”. Human capitalism, according to Cucinelli, means pursuing growth and profitability in a “gracious way.” At the company, humanistic capitalism manifests itself in a very specific set of policies and behavioral norms. Workers are paid wages that exceed 20% of the market norms; the workday (even for senior executive) is limited to the hours of 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM; emails are not to be sent after hours or on weekends; lunch breaks are one and half hours long to allow workers to have lunch at home should they choose. There are also strong cultural norms emphasizing respect and dignity. As part of this culture, employees are expected to keep their workspaces clean; eating at desks is not permitted; water can only be drunk from cups (not bottles); speaking should be done in hushed tones so as not to disturb colleagues. None of these cultural norms, however, are explicitly described in any written documents. The company has adopted this model in both its Solomeo, Italy headquarters and in its North American headquarters located in New York City.
The case allows students to explore the strengths and weakness of this culture and human resource model. A particular focal point of the case concerns the question of whether such a model is scalable and transferable across geographies. Does this model contribute to the company’s success or is ‘humanistic capitalism’ only possible because of the company’s underlying success? Is this model sustainable? The case invites discussion of deeper issues concerning alternative models of modern capitalism.

Keywords: corporate culture; Human Resource Practices; Growth; growth strategy; motivation; values; fashion; Capitalism; Organizational Culture; Values and Beliefs; Human Resources; Management; Business Model; Policy; Behavior; Growth and Development Strategy; Luxury; Italy;