Case Study: “Balancing Growth and
Employee Well-being at NexaTech”
Background:
NexaTech is a mid-sized software company headquartered in Bengaluru, India, with 500
employees. Over the past five years, the company has grown rapidly, acquiring several small
startups to expand its product portfolio. With increased market pressure, NexaTech’s leadership
is facing challenges in maintaining productivity while keeping employees satisfied and engaged.
Scenario:
Ravi Sharma, the newly appointed Chief Operating Officer (COO), has noticed a sharp increase
in employee burnout and attrition. The HR department reports that employees in product
development teams are working an average of 60–70 hours per week. Meanwhile, the company
is facing aggressive deadlines from international clients and ambitious revenue targets for the
next fiscal year.
Ravi has three potential strategies:
1. Strict Deadlines Strategy: Enforce current deadlines strictly with mandatory overtime to
meet client expectations.
2. Flexible Work Strategy: Introduce flexible working hours, remote work options, and
wellness programs but risk slowing project delivery.
3. Selective Outsourcing Strategy: Outsource some high-pressure projects to external
vendors, which will increase costs but reduce internal workload.
Constraints:
• Annual revenue growth target: 25%
• Employee satisfaction score: Minimum 75/100
• Budget for HR initiatives: ₹50 lakh per year
• Client deadlines are non-negotiable for at least 50% of projects
Key Challenges:
• Balancing growth, cost, and employee well-being
• Retaining top talent in a competitive market
• Maintaining client trust and meeting deadlines
Decision Needed:
Ravi Sharma must choose one primary strategy while also considering hybrid approaches to
meet both financial and human capital objectives.
Questions for Students:
1. Using the Classical Decision-Making Model, identify the problem, alternatives,
decision criteria, and optimal solution.
2. Discuss how Bounded Rationality might influence Ravi’s decision.
3. Could Intuitive Decision-Making play a role in this scenario? Justify.
4. Evaluate the decision using Mintzberg & Westley’s Thinking-First and Doing-First
approaches.
5. Recommend a strategy that balances employee well-being with business goals,
supporting your recommendation with reasoning.
Hints for Analysis (for students):
• Criteria to consider: cost, employee satisfaction, revenue growth, long-term
sustainability.
• Risk assessment: High overtime → burnout, outsourcing → higher cost, flexibility →
slower delivery.
• Ethical consideration: Employee welfare, corporate social responsibility.
• Potential hybrid approach: Combine flexible work with selective outsourcing for high-
pressure projects
Case Study 1: Balancing Growth and
Employee Well-being at NexaTech
Step 1: Identify the Problem
Problem: Employees in product development are overworked, causing burnout and high
attrition, while company growth targets and client deadlines must be met.
Step 2: Decision Criteria
1. Employee well-being / work-life balance
2. Revenue growth / client satisfaction
3. Cost of implementation
4. Long-term sustainability
5. Alignment with organizational values
Step 3: Alternatives
1. Strict Deadlines → enforce overtime
2. Flexible Work → introduce remote/flexible hours and wellness programs
3. Selective Outsourcing → outsource high-pressure projects
Step 4: Analysis using Classical Decision-Making
Alternative Pros Cons Score (1–5)
Strict Deadlines Meets revenue & deadlines Burnout, attrition, morale ↓ 2
Flexible Work Employee satisfaction ↑ Delivery delay, cost ↓ 3
Outsourcing Reduces workload Cost ↑, quality risk 4
Optimal Solution: Selective Outsourcing + Flexible Work (Hybrid)
Rationale: Balances employee well-being, reduces burnout, manages client deadlines, and aligns
with organizational sustainability.
Step 5: Bounded Rationality
• Complexity and limited data make it impossible to evaluate all possible alternatives fully.
• “Satisficing” approach: First hybrid solution that meets both growth and well-being
criteria is chosen.
Step 6: Intuitive Decision-Making
• Ravi may rely on past experience handling similar projects to decide how much work can
be outsourced safely.
• Complements rational analysis.
Step 7: Mintzberg & Westley Approach
• Thinking-First: Define problem → diagnose burnout → design hybrid solution →
decide.
• Doing-First: Implement selective outsourcing → monitor employee stress → adjust
flexible hours.
Step 8: Recommendation
• Implement hybrid strategy: Flexible work arrangements + selective outsourcing of
critical projects.
• Monitor outcomes: Employee satisfaction, delivery timelines, client feedback.
• Communicate transparently to maintain trust.
Case Study: “Strategic Dilemma at Aurora
HealthTech”
Background:
Aurora HealthTech is a leading Indian healthcare technology company specializing in AI-driven
diagnostic solutions. The company has 2,000 employees and operates across India and Southeast
Asia. Aurora has built a reputation for innovation and ethical practices, but rapid expansion and
technological disruption have created strategic challenges.
Scenario:
Dr. Meera Rao, the CEO, is facing a critical decision. The company recently developed
AuroraScan 2.0, an AI-based diagnostic tool capable of detecting early-stage cancers with 90%
accuracy. Early trials show massive potential for revenue and global expansion.
However, there are significant challenges:
1. Regulatory Uncertainty: Government approval for AI medical devices is pending in
multiple countries. Delays could stall the launch.
2. Employee Capacity: The R&D and QA teams are overworked. Employee burnout is
rising, and key talent may leave if workload continues.
3. Competitive Pressure: A global competitor is about to release a similar product in three
months.
4. Ethical Concerns: The AI system occasionally misclassifies rare diseases, posing patient
safety risks.
5. Financial Constraints: Investors are pressuring for rapid returns, but additional trials
and QA would increase costs by ₹20 crore.
Strategic Options:
Option Description Risk/Benefit
Launch in select countries + First-mover advantage, + Investor
Fast-Track
immediately, accepting some satisfaction, – Risk of misdiagnosis, –
Launch
regulatory and safety risk Potential regulatory fines
+ Higher patient safety, + Regulatory
Cautious Conduct extended trials and improve
compliance, – Delay in revenue, –
Launch accuracy before launch
Competitor may capture market
Option Description Risk/Benefit
Launch in low-risk regions with + Balanced approach, + Reduced risk, –
Hybrid
limited rollout while continuing Moderate revenue, – Requires strong
Strategy
trials elsewhere operational coordination
Decision Criteria:
• Regulatory compliance
• Patient safety & ethics
• Revenue growth & investor satisfaction
• Employee well-being & retention
• Brand reputation
Additional Complexity:
• Dr. Rao is also considering outsourcing QA to reduce internal workload but worries
about quality control and confidentiality.
• Market analysis shows a 30% chance of competitor delay, a 50% chance of regulatory
approval in 6 months, and a 20% chance of reputational backlash if a misdiagnosis
occurs.
Decision Needed:
Dr. Rao must select the most strategic approach considering risk, ethical responsibility,
financial pressure, and employee welfare.
Questions for Students:
1. Apply Probabilistic Decision-Making (decision tree) to identify the expected value of
each strategy.
2. Use Classical vs Bounded Rationality models: How would each influence the decision?
3. Discuss Intuitive Decision-Making: Should Dr. Rao rely on experience and gut feeling?
4. Apply Mintzberg & Westley Thinking-First and Doing-First approaches to propose a
decision-making path.
5. Identify key ethical and cultural factors affecting the decision.
6. Recommend a strategy balancing innovation, ethics, employee well-being, and
investor expectations.
Hints for Analysis:
• Include decision trees or payoff matrices for probabilistic reasoning.
• Highlight trade-offs: safety vs speed, revenue vs employee burnout.
• Discuss value alignment: company ethics vs investor pressure.
• Suggest hybrid/creative solutions, not just a single rigid option.
Case Study 2: Strategic Dilemma at Aurora
HealthTech
Step 1: Identify the Problem
Problem: Launching AuroraScan 2.0 requires balancing regulatory risk, patient safety,
revenue goals, employee capacity, and investor expectations.
Step 2: Decision Criteria
1. Regulatory compliance & safety
2. Ethical responsibility
3. Revenue growth & investor satisfaction
4. Employee well-being
5. Brand reputation
Step 3: Alternatives
1. Fast-Track Launch
2. Cautious Launch
3. Hybrid Strategy (limited rollout + ongoing trials)
Step 4: Probabilistic Analysis (Decision Tree / Expected Value)
• Assign probabilities:
o Competitor delay: 30%
o Regulatory approval in 6 months: 50%
o Reputational backlash: 20%
Option Expected Outcome Risk
Fast-Track High revenue, early market share High regulatory & safety risk
Cautious Compliance & safety assured Revenue delay, competitor advantage
Option Expected Outcome Risk
Hybrid Balanced revenue & safety Moderate risk, complexity
Optimal Solution: Hybrid Strategy
Rationale: Balances growth, ethics, risk, and employee workload.
Step 5: Classical vs Bounded Rationality
• Classical: Would attempt to analyze all outcomes → may delay decision.
• Bounded Rationality: Select first “satisficing” option that meets safety + revenue
balance → Hybrid strategy.
Step 6: Intuitive Decision-Making
• Dr. Rao’s experience in prior product launches helps gauge risk vs reward and employee
capacity.
Step 7: Mintzberg & Westley Approach
• Thinking-First: Define strategic priorities → analyze regulatory & financial constraints
→ design limited rollout → decide.
• Doing-First: Pilot in low-risk regions → monitor outcomes → scale gradually.
Step 8: Ethical & Cultural Factors
• Ethical: Minimize misdiagnosis risk
• Cultural: Maintain organizational reputation as patient-centric and ethical
• Employee: Avoid burnout and stress
Step 9: Recommendation
• Hybrid Strategy:
o Limited launch in low-risk regions
o Continue extended trials in high-risk regions
o Communicate transparently to investors, clients, and employees
o Monitor results and scale accordingly
✅ Key Takeaways for Exams
1. Always identify problem & criteria first.
2. Use Classical Model for structured analysis.
3. Mention Bounded Rationality & Intuition to show sophistication.
4. Apply Mintzberg & Westley for strategic/innovative cases.
5. Use tables / decision matrices where possible — it earns marks.
6. Always justify your recommendation with risk, ethical, and strategic reasoning.
