{"title":"股份有限公司特斯拉:应对ESG挑战","authors":"R. Subramanian","doi":"10.1108/tcj-12-2022-0198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nResearch methodology\nThis case is based on primary archival research. The original reports from MSCI, Sustainalytics and S&P 500 formed the foundation of the case in addition to the 144-page Tesla’s 2021 Impact Report. Secondary sources were used to provide contextual information. All sources are cited as endnotes.\n\n\nCase overview/synopsis\nIn June 2022, Tesla, Inc., the Austin, Texas-based electric car company faced a number of challenges that called into question its environmental, social and governance (ESG) credentials. Questioning the company’s corporate governance practices, SOC Capital, a watchdog organization publicly released a letter that it had sent to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission where it had demanded that the agency sanction the company for not replacing an independent director at its next stockholder meeting. The State of California’s Department of Fair Housing and Employment filed a lawsuit alleging various counts of discrimination at Tesla’s manufacturing facility in Fremont, California. S&P Global removed the company from its index of ESG companies. This action had negative consequences for the company’s stock price. Tesla’s board of directors, led by Robyn M. Denholm, had to address Tesla’s overall approach to ESG in light of these challenges.\n\n\nComplexity academic level\nThe case is suitable for an upper-level undergraduate or an MBA course on strategy or strategic management.The issues in the case involve the stakeholder perspective, corporate governance and the purpose of a firm. Instructors face two choices here: using this case early in the course introduces the broader stakeholder perspective early on without addressing it as an afterthought at the very end of the course. The other choice is to use it at the end because most strategy textbooks cover these topics at the back end.\n","PeriodicalId":52298,"journal":{"name":"CASE Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tesla, Inc.: addressing ESG challenges\",\"authors\":\"R. Subramanian\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/tcj-12-2022-0198\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nResearch methodology\\nThis case is based on primary archival research. The original reports from MSCI, Sustainalytics and S&P 500 formed the foundation of the case in addition to the 144-page Tesla’s 2021 Impact Report. Secondary sources were used to provide contextual information. All sources are cited as endnotes.\\n\\n\\nCase overview/synopsis\\nIn June 2022, Tesla, Inc., the Austin, Texas-based electric car company faced a number of challenges that called into question its environmental, social and governance (ESG) credentials. Questioning the company’s corporate governance practices, SOC Capital, a watchdog organization publicly released a letter that it had sent to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission where it had demanded that the agency sanction the company for not replacing an independent director at its next stockholder meeting. The State of California’s Department of Fair Housing and Employment filed a lawsuit alleging various counts of discrimination at Tesla’s manufacturing facility in Fremont, California. S&P Global removed the company from its index of ESG companies. This action had negative consequences for the company’s stock price. Tesla’s board of directors, led by Robyn M. Denholm, had to address Tesla’s overall approach to ESG in light of these challenges.\\n\\n\\nComplexity academic level\\nThe case is suitable for an upper-level undergraduate or an MBA course on strategy or strategic management.The issues in the case involve the stakeholder perspective, corporate governance and the purpose of a firm. Instructors face two choices here: using this case early in the course introduces the broader stakeholder perspective early on without addressing it as an afterthought at the very end of the course. The other choice is to use it at the end because most strategy textbooks cover these topics at the back end.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":52298,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CASE Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CASE Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/tcj-12-2022-0198\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Business, Management and Accounting\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CASE Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/tcj-12-2022-0198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究方法:本案例以原始档案研究为基础。除了144页的特斯拉2021年影响报告外,MSCI、Sustainalytics和标准普尔500指数的原始报告构成了此案的基础。二手资料被用来提供上下文信息。所有来源均作为尾注引用。2022年6月,总部位于德克萨斯州奥斯汀的电动汽车公司特斯拉公司(Tesla, Inc.)面临一系列挑战,其环境、社会和治理(ESG)资质受到质疑。监督组织SOC Capital公开发布了一封致美国证券交易委员会(Securities and Exchange Commission)的信,质疑该公司的公司治理做法,要求该机构在下次股东大会上对该公司不更换独立董事进行制裁。加州公平住房和就业部提起诉讼,指控特斯拉在加州弗里蒙特的制造工厂存在各种歧视。标准普尔全球(S&P Global)将该公司从ESG公司指数中剔除。这一行动对公司的股价产生了负面影响。鉴于这些挑战,由罗宾·m·丹霍尔姆(Robyn M. Denholm)领导的特斯拉董事会必须解决特斯拉在ESG方面的总体方法。本案例适用于战略或战略管理方面的高级本科或MBA课程。案例中的问题涉及利益相关者视角、公司治理和公司宗旨。讲师在这里面临两种选择:在课程早期使用这个案例,在早期引入更广泛的利益相关者视角,而不是在课程结束时作为事后的想法来解决它。另一种选择是在最后使用它,因为大多数策略教科书在后端涵盖了这些主题。
Research methodology
This case is based on primary archival research. The original reports from MSCI, Sustainalytics and S&P 500 formed the foundation of the case in addition to the 144-page Tesla’s 2021 Impact Report. Secondary sources were used to provide contextual information. All sources are cited as endnotes.
Case overview/synopsis
In June 2022, Tesla, Inc., the Austin, Texas-based electric car company faced a number of challenges that called into question its environmental, social and governance (ESG) credentials. Questioning the company’s corporate governance practices, SOC Capital, a watchdog organization publicly released a letter that it had sent to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission where it had demanded that the agency sanction the company for not replacing an independent director at its next stockholder meeting. The State of California’s Department of Fair Housing and Employment filed a lawsuit alleging various counts of discrimination at Tesla’s manufacturing facility in Fremont, California. S&P Global removed the company from its index of ESG companies. This action had negative consequences for the company’s stock price. Tesla’s board of directors, led by Robyn M. Denholm, had to address Tesla’s overall approach to ESG in light of these challenges.
Complexity academic level
The case is suitable for an upper-level undergraduate or an MBA course on strategy or strategic management.The issues in the case involve the stakeholder perspective, corporate governance and the purpose of a firm. Instructors face two choices here: using this case early in the course introduces the broader stakeholder perspective early on without addressing it as an afterthought at the very end of the course. The other choice is to use it at the end because most strategy textbooks cover these topics at the back end.