Skeleton in the Corporate Closet Case Solution And Analysis, HBR Case Study Solution & Analysis of Harvard Case Studies

Skeleton in the Corporate Closet (HBR Case Study and Commentary)

“I KNEW IT WAS TIME TO LEAVE WHEN I REALIZED I COULD NO LONGER LOOK FELLOWS IN THE EYE AND TELL THEM WHAT A GREAT PLACE THIS WAS TO WORK”

GPC’S 7^th anniversary was about to come. Preparations were in progress when DAVID FISHER (company’s archivist) founded a bundle of letters which proved that AMID HUD PARKER was not a real inventor of the company’s product PARKELITE (miracle plastic). The formula which he provided was not his own. KARL GINTS was a real inventor of PAKELITE who discovered the formula. HUD AND KARL had been studying chemistry in PRINCETON and had been close friends. Both were in army together as well. GINTZ family could have become famous by this invention. David did find in the letter that KARL’s father did try to fight for their right.

Now everything is up on HAP PARKER. He is the grandson of HUD PARKER and working as company’s CEO. What must he ho? His grandfather’s name must not be attached on PARKELITE but the other hand he is the founder who introduced the finished product and has done many innovations.

NEWLAND LOWELL is GPC’S lawyer thought disclosing this fact might not be necessary as no hires to KARL are found. He also tried to convince HAP by the fact that both of the chemist had been working together and collaborating on the formula. According to him any legal actions can be taken on such basis. But what distracting HAP IS that being a good CEO, he always wanted to embrace integrity and that’s what he had been doing for his company’s corporate culture.

WILL it be fair to 8 those thousand employees if he fires them just to cover this myth? Will it be fair to company’s corporate culture if ignore?

COMMENTED: in R0206A & R0206Z

This case is written by JULIA KIRBY, comprising of 7 pages and published on 0106/2002.

Product no: R0206A-PDF-ENG

Case Discussion (Revised)