Case Study Analysis

  1. Important Facts

The significant facts about the case study are on the aspects of Astar Enterprises. Astar Enterprises is a multi-billion business that is run by a board of members who through the Chief Executive Officer administer day to day undertakings (Beeson, 2006, p.1). Another fact is that the business operates in more than two continents with a substantial holder of its American and European markets. This is brought on by the fact that the firm serves as a retail distributor for major brands including the provision of services regarding personalized labeling (Beeson, 2006, p.2). The company, Astar Enterprises is currently undergoing strategic expansion actions which are necessary to the improved market share in its current and prospective markets.

  1. Key Issue(s)

Several issues are surrounding the business:

  • The company’s chairman, Calloway, is close to retirement due to old age and this has sparked debate on the succession planning for the business (Beeson, 2006, p.2).
  • Calloway seems adamant to create a succession planning with the obvious candidate, Bennett due to several personal and professional reasons (Beeson, 2006, p.2-3).
  • The business has experienced expansive growth under Bennett but, at the same time has experienced detrimental operational issues regarding packaging and authenticity of products (Beeson, 2006, p.2).
  • As a result, the board members are creating pressure for Calloway to determine who his successor is considering that in his old age, anything can happen.
  1. Course of Action

The company, Astar Enterprises, needs to address the issue at hand which is succession planning. The chairman, Mr. Colloway, needs to be given a time-frame from which he is to decide who is the best candidate for his succession. The board members are aware that the chairman may not be comfortable with the current choice, so an agreement is necessary on whether Mr. Colloway is the best person to determine his successor or the board.

Another course of action is to mitigate the issues about the expansion of the company. According to the case study, the business is set to break a record in profits over the next three years in $ 5 billion if the board decides to take on Mr. Bennett’s strategy.

  1. Evaluation of Course of Action

The course of action to decide on who is best to choose the successor is a good strategy. This will be risky in the sense that the board and the chairman may disagree on what is the best course of action. As such, the business may end up losing more than $ 10 million a month in backlash aspects in undertakings such as the issues in Europe (Beeson, 2006, p.2).  Another risk may include not being able to choose a successor at the right time. The danger in this is that the business may create a significant lapse in the stock exchange market as well as violate some SEC regulations (Beeson, 2006, p.3).

As for global expansion, the business may lose a lot of money due to the issues facing branding in Europe. A lot of speculations surround the business, and if not, the action is taken, the company may lose more than $ 1 billion a year. This may reduce the valuation of the company and may eventually, limit its capacity for expansion into other markets. There will be no benefit if the company does not address this issue.

  1. Best Course of Action

The best course of action is to choose a successor. The reason is that the board members are wary of the prosperity of the business if there is no successor. Additionally, it seems the board is not ready to handle any other issue apart from this. Therefore, it is best to decide on who will be the next chairman for the board to safely proceed with addressing the other issues the business is facing. Parallel to this, the chairman will be tasked with the duty of ensuring that the successor is at par with the business undertakings.



Beeson, John. (2006). Indispensable. Harvard Business Review Case Study. P 1-3.

Ip, B., & Jacobs, G. (2006). Business succession planning: a review of the evidence. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development13(3), 326-350.