The Ready-Made Garment Industry: A Bangladeshi Perspective (A), (B), (C), and (D)

Nien-hê  Hsieh

Teaching Note | HBS Case Collection | March 2018

The Ready-Made Garment Industry: A Bangladeshi Perspective (A), (B), (C), and (D)

Abstract

Responsibility for working conditions in contract factories within the supply chain presents an ongoing challenge for managers and area of debate. Much of the debate approaches the challenge from the perspective of large global apparel brands. This case helps students take the perspective of a Bangladeshi contract factory that is part of the brands' supply chain but must also deal with challenges in its own supply chain. The case leads up to the Tazreen factory fire of 2012, in which over 100 people died, and covers subsequent developments in Bangladesh and the apparel industry. Teaching Note for HBS Nos. 317-052, 317-053, 317-054, and 318-028.

Keywords: Labor; Working Conditions; Supply Chain; Safety; Rights; Corporate Social Responsibility and Impact; Apparel and Accessories Industry; Bangladesh;

Language: English

Format: Print

15 pages

Purchase

Citation:

Hsieh, Nien-hê. "The Ready-Made Garment Industry: A Bangladeshi Perspective (A), (B), (C), and (D)." Harvard Business School Teaching Note 318-124, March 2018.

Case | HBS Case Collection | April 2017 (Revised August 2018)

Making Target the Target: Boycotts and Corporate Political Activity

Nien-hê Hsieh and Victor Wu

Through the challenges facing Target, the case examines ways in which corporations can become involved in political and legislative debates and processes, ranging from campaign contributions to lobbying to political activism. In 2016, Target CEO Brian Cornell must determine how to respond to the debate over North Carolina's recently signed law, commonly known as "HB2," that invalidated LGBT non-discrimination ordinances at the local level. In contrast to other organizations, Target did not threaten to leave the state. However, its public statement in support of LGBT rights prompted a boycott against its stores. Adding to the difficulty was the fact that Target was caught on the other side of the debate in 2010 in one of the earliest high-profile controversies resulting from the Supreme Court Citizens United ruling. Target had contributed to a super PAC supporting business friendly candidates. As one of the candidate's opposition to same-sex marriage became well publicized, Target faced a consumer boycott as well as a shareholder proposal to change its policies on political contributions. The case covers current campaign finance regulations as they relate to business as well as Target's lobbying activities regarding online sales tax legislation.

Keywords: boycott; corporate accountability; corporate political activity; lobbying; LGBTQ; campaign contributions; campaign finance; retail; shareholder activism; Public Opinion; Social Issues; Corporate Social Responsibility and Impact; Mission and Purpose; Problems and Challenges; Laws and Statutes; Rights; Crisis Management; Risk Management; Media; Political Elections; Taxation; Corporate Accountability; Values and Beliefs; Fairness; Diversity; Customers; Communication; Business and Government Relations; Retail Industry; United States;

Citation:

Hsieh, Nien-hê, and Victor Wu. "Making Target the Target: Boycotts and Corporate Political Activity." Harvard Business School Case 317-113, April 2017. (Revised August 2018.) View Details

Cite View Details Educators Purchase

In August 2017, Google fired James Damore, a 28-year-old software engineer who had been employed by the company since 2013. The move came after Damore penned an internal company memo titled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” which posited that innate biological differences between men and women—as opposed to hiring biases, gender discrimination, or a hostile workforce—were at least partially responsible for the low numbers of women in tech. At the time, 20% of Google’s tech workforce, and 31% of its overall staff, was female. Damore also admonished Google for silencing opinions that challenged what he viewed as the company’s politically liberal belief system. Reactions to both the memo’s content and Google’s decision to fire Damore were swift and varied. Some praised the company for signaling intolerance of any marginalization of women. Others criticized Google for terminating an employee for a seemingly innocuous act of expression. Danielle Brown, Google’s new vice president and chief diversity and inclusion officer, hired just a few weeks before the memo was leaked to the public, must now advise Google’s top leadership team on dealing with the fallout.

This case supplements “Apple: Privacy vs. Safety (A), covering select events in 2017, including 1) a mass shooting in which U.S. law enforcement was not able to access the shooter’s encrypted iPhone and 2) Apple’s compliance with the Chinese government’s request to make it more difficult for iPhone users to download “Virtual Private Network” apps.

Faculty & Research

The Ready-Made Garment Industry: A Bangladeshi Perspective (A), (B), (C), and (D)

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author