Publications

In 2016, Tribune Publishing responded to a takeover attempt by Gannett with a strategic rebranding, aiming to establish itself as a technology company instead of a traditional newspaper publisher. This rebranding involved renaming the company to tronc (Tribune Online Content), moving its shares from the New York Stock Exchange to NASDAQ, and announcing ambitious plans to use artificial intelligence to produce and manage content. The leadership team, composed mainly of individuals with backgrounds in healthcare technology and artificial intelligence rather than newspaper publishing, faced skepticism and ridicule from analysts and the media, who criticized the strategic pivot and expressed doubts about its viability.

Analysts confronted several challenges in valuing tronc. The company’s new strategy and rebranding efforts blurred the lines between a media company and a tech firm, complicating traditional valuation metrics. Furthermore, the lack of clarity regarding the funding for the digital transformation raised questions about the firm’s financial stability. 

Jon Soderstrom and Yale faced a significant ethical and public relations dilemma concerning the patent of the HIV/AIDS drug ZERIT (stavudine). The problem arose from Yale's licensing of the patent to Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), which controlled the drug's market distribution and pricing. Activists and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) argued that the licensing agreement prevented the production of low-cost generics, thus restricting access to the lifesaving medication in developing countries like South Africa, where the HIV/AIDS epidemic was rampant. Yale's exclusive licensing deal conflicted with the urgent human need for affordable treatment, leading to intense campus protests and negative media attention.

The controversy raised broader questions about the role and responsibilities of academic research institutions. Critics contended that the financial ties between universities and for-profit corporations, such as BMS, could compromise the societal mission of academic research. This situation led to debates on whether the pursuit of patent revenues might overshadow the ethical imperatives to make essential medications accessible to those in need. The affair challenged Yale's policies on the commercialization of research and its commitment to societal benefit through innovation. Additionally, it stirred discussions about the proper balance between intellectual property rights, financial incentives for research and development, and global health equity.

Designers faced with the task of developing a new product model of a brand must balance
several considerations. The design must be novel and express attributes important to the
customers, while also recognizable as a representative of the brand. This balancing is left
to the intuition of the designers, who must anticipate how customers will perceive the new
design. Oftentimes, the design freedom used to meet a product attribute can compromise
the recognition of the product as a member of the brand. In this paper, an experiment is
conducted for measuring changes in ten styling attributes common to both design freedom
and brand recognition for automotive designs from four brands, Audi, BMW, Cadillac, and
Lexus, using customer responses to two- and three-dimensional vehicle designs created
and presented interactively through a crowdsourced web application. Results show that
while brand recognition is highly dependent on the manufacturer, two brands have strong
negative relationship between design freedom and brand recognition, suggesting that these
two manufacturers face a significant challenge when evolving their respective brand styling.
This study is a first effort toward quantifying and predicting tradeoffs between design
freedom and brand recognition, contributing to existing efforts that augment human
intuition during strategic design decisions.