The closing case examines how Royal Dutch Shell, a global petroleum company employing over $80,000$ people, of which about $7,000$ are expatriates. Managing this workforce is complex task. Shell wants to meet its commercial goals and also transfer valuable knowledge across its operations. Given that the company operates in more than $70$ countries, this is not easy. The company often finds it difficult to recruit skilled managers to work in different locations and is working to better understand employee concerns and develop ways to respond to them. Discussion of the case can begin with the following questions:

$1$: Royal Dutch Shell is one of the largest companies in the world and has been for years. With sales approaching $$400$ billion and $82,000$ employees worldwide, including some $7,000$ employees on expatriate assignments, the company is large, complex, and powerful. Compared with retail or consumer companies, Shell is much more narrowly focused and much more technical in orientation. How do you think this narrower focus and technical orientation affects global human resource management at Shell?

$2$: Spending significant time $($e$.$g$.,$ three years$)$ on an expatriate assignment has significant family and professional implications, as can be seen in the Shell survey that was mentioned in the case. How would you feel if you were given an expatriate assignment today? How would you feel about it if you were $25$ years old? $35?50?$

B$)$

The closing case explores the use of targeted advertising and the prevalence of fake news and alternative facts. Advances in technology have facilitated the collection of big data allowing businesses to abandon their reliance on mass advertising in favor of more targeted advertising. Technology is also facilitating the rather disturbing trend of targeted fake news and alternative facts via companies like Facebook. Discussion of the case can begin with the following questions:

$1$: Should it be the responsibility of news media and social media organizations like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn to monitor fake news, or should it be up to consumers to interpret the messages?

$2$: Most people would argue that information and data should be presented in an accurate, trustworthy, and correct manner. The focus is instead on interpreting the truth of the data and information. Can we trust people to correctly interpret the information flowing on social media and in media in general? Why or why not

$3.$ If we do not trust people to interpret the messaging and information on social media, who should be monitoring that information and whether it is true or not? Can we develop a system to monitor fake news? What about alternative facts? If $97$ percent of the world$$s climate scientists say global warming is real, is that a high enough percentage to say that global warming is real?

C$)$

The closing case explores IKEA$$s expansion into India. The Swedish retailer, renowned for its ability to maintain its entire concept in multiple foreign markets, decided that India required a different strategy. Despite its considerable experience operating in foreign markets, IKEA, aware that India is one of the largest markets in the world, wanted to avoid missteps and so carefully planned its expansion over five years, visiting some $200$ homes in India and learning about the Indian lifestyle. Today, the company has about $400$ employees in India, a number it expects to grow to $15,000$ by $2025$ as the company continues to expand its presence. Discussion of the case can begin with the following questions: