Twelve Case Studies of Terminations and Divestitures by Business Firms

by Susan J. Bodilly


Download eBook for Free

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.5 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.


Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price Price
Add to Cart Paperback45 pages $23.00 $18.40 20% Web Discount

To aid the Air Force in planning for potential budget cuts dictated by the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act, this Note considers case studies of twelve firms that have terminated or divested major activities. The study's findings suggest the following conclusions: (1) large organizations have difficulty terminating or divesting major activities; (2) a decision to terminate a major activity is usually made in conjunction with a decision to continue or initiate another activity, tying it to broad questions of corporate strategy; (3) successful corporations viewed termination in the larger context of corporate strategy, while often reformulating that strategy; (4) the strategy provided a context for decisions, not a plan; (5) top management's leadership skills were crucial in initiating, encouraging, and supporting the corporate strategy changes; and (6) termination efforts required the use of nonroutine procedures outside the established budgeting and planning processes.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Note series. The note was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1979 to 1993 that reported other outputs of sponsored research for general distribution.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.