Timothy Feddersen

Feddersen, Timothy, Jochen Gottschalk and Lars Peters. 2007. Roche and Tamiflu: Doing Business in the Shadow of a Pandemic. Case 5-107-010 (KEL349).

The spread of bird flu outside of Asia, particularly in Africa and Europe, topped headlines in 2006. The migration of wild birds brought the virus to Europe, where for the first time it spread to productive livestock, bringing it closer to the Western world. Due to today’s globalized and highly interconnected world, the consequences of a potential bird flu pandemic are expected to be much more severe than those of the Spanish flu, which killed 50–100 million people between 1918 and 1921. A vaccine for the bird virus is currently not available. As of July 2006, 232 cases of human infection had been documented, mostly through direct contact with poultry. Of those, 134 people died. The best medication available to treat bird flu was Roche’s antiviral drug Tamiflu®. However, Tamiflu was not widely available; current orders of government bodies would not be fulfilled until the end of 2008. Well aware that today’s avian flu might become a global pandemic comparable to the Spanish flu, Roche CEO Franz Humer had to decide how Roche should respond. While the pharmaceutical industry continued its research efforts on vaccines and medications, Tamiflu could play an important role by protecting healthcare workers and helping to contain the virus—or at least slow down its spread. Due to patent protection and a complicated production process with scarce raw ingredients, Roche had been the only producer of the drug. Partly in response to U.S. political pressure, in November 2005 Roche allowed Gilead to produce Tamiflu as well. Even so, it would take at least until late 2007 for Roche and Gilead to meet the orders of governments worldwide. The issue was a difficult one for Roche: What were the risks; what were the opportunities? If a pandemic occurred before sufficient stockpiles of Tamiflu had been built up, would Roche be held responsible? What steps, if any, should Roche take with respect to patent protection and production licensing in the shadow of a potential pandemic?

Feddersen, Timothy and Kimia Rahimi. 2012. Nonmarket Action and the International Counter-Money Laundering Act . Case 5-411-756 (KEL649).

The case describes the international problem of money laundering and summarizes U.S. bank regulations aimed at reducing money laundering activities. The introduction of H.R. 3886 in 2000 was one in a series of attempts to formalize U.S. banks’ monitoring of their customers. The bill was prompted by a government report that named and criticized U.S. banks for laundering billions of dollars linked to drug trafficking, fraud, and organized crime. Interest groups in favor of H.R. 3886 were predominantly law enforcement agencies that viewed current anti-money laundering laws as ineffective. Groups opposed to the bill included the American Civil Liberties Union, which believed that the collection of more information about bank customers’ activities was an invasion of privacy, and the American Bankers Association, which claimed that the legislation would impose unnecessary costs on banks.

The case can be used to introduce the distributive politics framework for analyzing nonmarket issues and formulating non-market strategies in the context of government institutions. The epilogue reveals that H.R. 3886 died before it ever reached the House floor, but that an expanded version of the legislation ultimately passed—with the support of stakeholders who originally fought it—as part of the USA PATRIOT Act after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This stance reversal provides an opportunity to explore how events, public opinion, and the media can create windows of policy opportunity.

Feddersen, Timothy and Susan Edwards. 2012. A New Mission Statement for the MBC Corporation. Case 5-112-002 (KEL710).

Dave Williams has taken over as CEO for MBC Corporation and wants to change the mission statement of the company. However, he needs to get approval from four shareholders: a former board chairman, his father and current board chairman, and two members of his own executive team. Williams must navigate the varying dynamics and opinions of the shareholders to gain their buy-in and create a new mission statement that will take MBC on a new path for the future.

Feddersen, Timothy and Senoe Torgerson. 2007. U.S. Food Aid: Cash or Commodities?. Case 5-307-510 (KEL342).

In October 2005 the Bush administration was considering a dramatic change to the U.S. Food Aid program that would take 25 percent of the budget that would otherwise be used to buy food domestically and instead send direct cash transfers that could be used to buy food in or close to the countries in desperate need. The U.S. Food Aid program traditionally enjoyed support in Congress because it provided support to American farmers, agribusiness, and U.S. shipping interests in addition to nongovernmental organizations like Catholic Relief Services and CARE. The case considers the proposal from the perspective of four different stakeholders: Cargill, USAid, Catholic Relief Services, and Oxfam. Each must come up with a response to the proposal.

Feddersen, Timothy and Scot R. Wheeler. 2007. The Environmental Entrepreneur. Case 5-307-503 (KEL370).

Because U.S. legislators are often most attentive to the issues raised by people who create jobs in their states, Bob Epstein, a local business owner, has been asked by activists to help lobby for a bill that would mandate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in California. Before deciding whether he should work to establish the business community’s backing for this bill, Epstein must weigh the pros and cons of supporting measures that might put his business (and standing in the community) at risk.

In this case, students will use the 4 I’s framework to evaluate the nonmarket environment, assess the political impact of the potential coalitions in favor of and opposed to the bill, identify the type of politics that characterizes the situation, and describe the strategies each side will likely use in contesting the bill.

Feddersen, Timothy, Jochen Gottschalk and Lars Peters. 2007. Roche and Tamiflu: Doing Business in the Shadow of a Pandemic. Case 5-107-010 (KEL349).

The spread of bird flu outside of Asia, particularly in Africa and Europe, topped headlines in 2006. The migration of wild birds brought the virus to Europe, where for the first time it spread to productive livestock, bringing it closer to the Western world. Due to today’s globalized and highly interconnected world, the consequences of a potential bird flu pandemic are expected to be much more severe than those of the Spanish flu, which killed 50–100 million people between 1918 and 1921. A vaccine for the bird virus is currently not available. As of July 2006, 232 cases of human infection had been documented, mostly through direct contact with poultry. Of those, 134 people died. The best medication available to treat bird flu was Roche’s antiviral drug Tamiflu®. However, Tamiflu was not widely available; current orders of government bodies would not be fulfilled until the end of 2008. Well aware that today’s avian flu might become a global pandemic comparable to the Spanish flu, Roche CEO Franz Humer had to decide how Roche should respond. While the pharmaceutical industry continued its research efforts on vaccines and medications, Tamiflu could play an important role by protecting healthcare workers and helping to contain the virus—or at least slow down its spread. Due to patent protection and a complicated production process with scarce raw ingredients, Roche had been the only producer of the drug. Partly in response to U.S. political pressure, in November 2005 Roche allowed Gilead to produce Tamiflu as well. Even so, it would take at least until late 2007 for Roche and Gilead to meet the orders of governments worldwide. The issue was a difficult one for Roche: What were the risks; what were the opportunities? If a pandemic occurred before sufficient stockpiles of Tamiflu had been built up, would Roche be held responsible? What steps, if any, should Roche take with respect to patent protection and production licensing in the shadow of a potential pandemic?

Feddersen, Timothy and Kimia Rahimi. 2012. Nonmarket Action and the International Counter-Money Laundering Act . Case 5-411-756 (KEL649).

The case describes the international problem of money laundering and summarizes U.S. bank regulations aimed at reducing money laundering activities. The introduction of H.R. 3886 in 2000 was one in a series of attempts to formalize U.S. banks’ monitoring of their customers. The bill was prompted by a government report that named and criticized U.S. banks for laundering billions of dollars linked to drug trafficking, fraud, and organized crime. Interest groups in favor of H.R. 3886 were predominantly law enforcement agencies that viewed current anti-money laundering laws as ineffective. Groups opposed to the bill included the American Civil Liberties Union, which believed that the collection of more information about bank customers’ activities was an invasion of privacy, and the American Bankers Association, which claimed that the legislation would impose unnecessary costs on banks.

The case can be used to introduce the distributive politics framework for analyzing nonmarket issues and formulating non-market strategies in the context of government institutions. The epilogue reveals that H.R. 3886 died before it ever reached the House floor, but that an expanded version of the legislation ultimately passed—with the support of stakeholders who originally fought it—as part of the USA PATRIOT Act after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This stance reversal provides an opportunity to explore how events, public opinion, and the media can create windows of policy opportunity.

Feddersen, Timothy and Susan Edwards. 2012. A New Mission Statement for the MBC Corporation. Case 5-112-002 (KEL710).

Dave Williams has taken over as CEO for MBC Corporation and wants to change the mission statement of the company. However, he needs to get approval from four shareholders: a former board chairman, his father and current board chairman, and two members of his own executive team. Williams must navigate the varying dynamics and opinions of the shareholders to gain their buy-in and create a new mission statement that will take MBC on a new path for the future.

Feddersen, Timothy and Senoe Torgerson. 2007. U.S. Food Aid: Cash or Commodities?. Case 5-307-510 (KEL342).

In October 2005 the Bush administration was considering a dramatic change to the U.S. Food Aid program that would take 25 percent of the budget that would otherwise be used to buy food domestically and instead send direct cash transfers that could be used to buy food in or close to the countries in desperate need. The U.S. Food Aid program traditionally enjoyed support in Congress because it provided support to American farmers, agribusiness, and U.S. shipping interests in addition to nongovernmental organizations like Catholic Relief Services and CARE. The case considers the proposal from the perspective of four different stakeholders: Cargill, USAid, Catholic Relief Services, and Oxfam. Each must come up with a response to the proposal.

Feddersen, Timothy and Scot R. Wheeler. 2007. The Environmental Entrepreneur. Case 5-307-503 (KEL370).

Because U.S. legislators are often most attentive to the issues raised by people who create jobs in their states, Bob Epstein, a local business owner, has been asked by activists to help lobby for a bill that would mandate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in California. Before deciding whether he should work to establish the business community’s backing for this bill, Epstein must weigh the pros and cons of supporting measures that might put his business (and standing in the community) at risk.

In this case, students will use the 4 I’s framework to evaluate the nonmarket environment, assess the political impact of the potential coalitions in favor of and opposed to the bill, identify the type of politics that characterizes the situation, and describe the strategies each side will likely use in contesting the bill.