Gene One - Problem Solution

Problem Solution: Gene One

Gene One’s success as a private research-based company allowed it to grow from a $2 million start-up to a $400 million company with excellent growth potential. Over its eight-year history, a group of talented and creative people has joined the firm. Despite some setbacks in the biotechnical field due to prior scandal in the industry, Wall Street is showing an increased interest in this industry. GO’s Board of Directors and its CEO have established three main goals (a) make the company competitive by enabling it to keep pace with demand, (b) realize annual growth of 40%, and (c) go public within three years. GO will have to overcome a number of obstacles to accomplish these goals, not the least of which is internal resistance to these initiatives. Gene One’s CEO, Don Ruiz, although a creative young entrepreneur, is inexperienced in many of the areas which need addressing. However, he is intelligent enough to realize the areas in which he needs training and assistance. GO’s mission to become a public company within three years should be attainable with a feasible strategy and determination.

Situation Analysis

Issue and Opportunity Identification

Gene One’s CEO and Board of Directors believe that the company must go public in order to realize an annual growth rate of 40% per year and to keep up with the demands of the industry. This vision brings with it numerous issues to be resolved and opportunities to be realized, including (a) obtaining investors for its IPO, (b) allaying the skepticism of key personnel fearful of taking this research-based company public, (c) persuading employees to remain positive during the transition, (d) maintaining a high level of corporate social responsibility, (e) resolving various conflicts which have arisen among certain members of the leadership team, (f) the need for its CEO and other leaders to establish effective leadership techniques, and (g) establishing work teams to gather information and develop implementation strategies.

Stakeholder Perspectives/Ethical Dilemmas

Numerous stakeholders and stakeholder issues present themselves within the parameters of Gene One’s plans to implement an IPO and go public. Investors who are needed for initial investment capital and stockholders later on will require a reasonable return on their investments based on activities by Gene One that are legal and adhere to governmental regulations. In light of recent scandals in the corporate world, investors all expect full disclosure of all accounting practices and a more open book position of key personnel at the companies in which they invest. Government agencies are also major stakeholders, having a direct bearing on how Gene One operates. Particularly in the fledgling field of biotechnical research, these entities are extremely wary of the societal implications of genetic engineering and are apt to scrutinize Gene One in depth. Without customers, be those individual, corporate, or governmental, Gene One has no profit base. GO must provide innovative products and technologies to increase not only the type and size of its customers, but the availability of safe and economically feasible products and technologies. Gene One’s Board of Directors, also a stakeholder, is responsible for guiding GO’s activities to ensure profitability. The Board has the right to expect GO to structure itself in line with that goal without violating any legal or ethical guidelines that could put the company in jeopardy. The community in which Gene One operates looks to GO contributing to its economy by utilizing local vendors, hiring local residents, and paying taxes. The community also has the right to expect GO to operate a legal and environmentally safe facility. Gene One’s employees, research teams, key personnel and leadership personnel have similar interests, rights, and values. They are all interested in the continued viability of the company and value the ethical and social environment that is a part of GO’s corporate culture. They all have the right to a fair and safe working environment. The transition from a private to a public company will require a change in the ways that business is done and these stakeholders have the right to expect the company to provide any support required including training and qualified personnel at all levels.

Problem Statement

Gene One must transition from a private to a public company in order to remain a viable and profitable entity and can do so by implementing a successful IPO, developing a strong and appropriate leadership style ((McShane & Von Glinow, 2005, p. 416), maintaining and recruiting qualified personnel at all levels, developing plans to remain a socially responsible on a corporate level ((McShane &Von Glinow, 2005, p. 17), implementing strategies to develop and market new products and technologies to an increased customer base, and persuading skeptical stakeholders to join its efforts to take GO public (McShane & Von Glinow, 2005, p. 369).

End-State Vision

Gene One is off to a profitable and exciting start as a private company. In order to remain competitive in its industry and realize an annual growth rate of 40%, GO must transition from a private to a public company within 36 months. Doing so will require that it obtain substantial financing through a successful IPO, developing and marketing innovative advances, and restructuring its corporate infrastructure and culture. GO aims to be a leader in its field, offering biotechnical technologies and products to a wide range customer base comprised of individual, corporate, and governmental consumers, and providing a healthy return to its investors.

Alternative Solutions

Gene One faces many challenges on the road to realizing the goals necessary to meet its end state vision. Some of these challenges are completely novel in GO’s experiences, such as effecting a successful IPO. Some, while not novel, have taken on new perspectives, such as having to develop products and technologies on a timetable.

LEADERSHIP: Looking at Dow Chemical Company, GO found that much of its success revolved around a form of self-directed work teams headed by effective leaders. “At Dow, our leadership organization effectively places decision-making at the appropriate level and ensures the proper checks and balances exist” (This is Dow, 2007, para. 1). Further, in 2003, Dow formed the Office of the Chief Executive (OCE). Despite its name, the OCE is not made up of one individual, but is an executive leadership