Monster Networking

Thomas R. Eisenmann; David Andrew Vivero

Case | HBS Case Collection | April 2005 (Revised February 2006)

Monster Networking

by Thomas R. Eisenmann and David Andrew Vivero

Abstract

The management at Monster.com, the leading U.S. provider of online recruitment services, must decide how to proceed with Monster Networking (MN), a new business launched in late 2003. MN helps users identify other individuals who can offer career advice. Monster.com management views MN as: a vehicle for reducing the cost of attracting job seekers to its core matching services and a potential source of subscription revenue. As of early 2005, MN's performance has been mixed. Networkers were deeply engaged, but subscription revenue growth was disappointing. In the face of this performance, Monster.com management must decide whether to proceed with its original plan, eliminate subscription fees to boost traffic, augment MN's scale by acquiring an online social networking start-up, or simply terminate MN.

Keywords: Technology Platform; Online Technology; Social and Collaborative Networks; Recruitment; Service Industry; Employment Industry; United States;

Format: Print

21 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Eisenmann, Thomas R., and David Andrew Vivero. "Monster Networking." Harvard Business School Case 805-145, April 2005. (Revised February 2006.)

Baroo CEO Lindsay Hyde was facing unrest from the board of her pet services startup in August 2017. One board member (and lead investor) was alarmed that Baroo’s growth was slowing while its appetite for funding was accelerating. Hyde wanted to hit the gas and continue expanding to new cities, which meant she needed to raise venture capital. How could she convince the board and potential investors that the business opportunities were too good to pass up and an infusion of capital could help her steer Baroo through the speed bumps?

Baroo CEO Lindsay Hyde must secure venture capital funding if she wants to save her pet services startup. If she is unable to finance a series A, she will need to sell or shut down.

In 2016, senior management at Moz, a venture capital-backed startup providing software tools for digital marketing professionals, must decide how to address a looming cash flow crisis precipitated by failed efforts to broaden its product line. Seattle-based Moz had originally focused only on search engine optimization (SEO) software. Aiming to accelerate growth, over the past three years the startup had launched products targeted at content marketers, social media marketers, and small local businesses. Adoption of these new products had been disappointing, and the resource drain and distraction of launching them had reduced the growth of Moz's core SEO product. Management was wrestling with whether to either: 1) shut down or sell the new products; or 2) double down on the new products, funding further investment in them by selling the core SEO business or milking it as a "cash cow."

Faculty & Research

Monster Networking

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author