On May 31, the School of Accounting and Finance (SAF) hosted its 7th Annual Strategy Case Competition, where 11 upper-year student teams tackled a high-stakes business challenge. With $4,000 in prizes available, participants were tasked with developing a turnaround strategy for Tesla during a fictional crisis. The winning team—Joel, Vanie, and John, all 4th-year AFM students, and Jaiden, a 3rd-year SFM student—stood out for their bold pivot and clear, compelling storytelling, earning them first place and the $2,000 grand prize.
How would you describe this year’s case challenge in your own words?
This year’s case focused on Tesla in crisis—facing financial strain, reputational damage, and at risk of bankruptcy. We had to assess whether Tesla was “too big to fail” and create a viable turnaround strategy. It was unlike typical growth cases, forcing us to analyze Tesla’s fundamentals, leadership, and long-term viability, all in a highly politicized and competitive space. It pushed us to think creatively and analytically about reimagining a company once considered untouchable.
What was the biggest complexity or twist in the case?
The hardest part was the dual challenge: building a strategic plan while modelling bankruptcy risk in detail. Every idea had to make sense strategically and hold up financially. Another major twist was having to imagine Tesla without Elon Musk and without trade tariffs—elements that heavily shape its real-world trajectory. Setting those aside and still building a credible strategy took a lot of independent thinking.
What industries or strategic themes did the case touch on?
The case spanned the EV, clean energy, and smart infrastructure industries. We explored Tesla’s position in a shifting EV market, but also dove into its energy division—looking at battery storage, energy systems, and virtual power plants. Strategic themes included brand repositioning, recurring revenue, leadership transition, and corporate recovery—real issues many companies face during major transformations.
What was the core idea behind your proposed solution?
Our strategy pivoted Tesla away from consumer EVs and toward B2B clean energy infrastructure. We proposed a sub-brand, “Thrive by Tesla,” focused on providing energy products and software to real estate developers, municipalities, and utilities. The idea was to leverage Tesla’s strengths in tech and manufacturing to enter a more stable, scalable, and profitable market while returning to its sustainability mission.
What made your solution unique or different from a typical strategy?
We challenged the assumption that Tesla’s future had to be EV-focused. Instead of optimizing their car business, we reimagined their role entirely. “Thrive by Tesla” focused on powering smart communities and commercial developments through Tesla’s energy products, with a clear business model and go-to-market plan. We used sentiment analysis and a bankruptcy dashboard to support our ideas and kept our messaging clear and simple so it stuck with the judges.
Why did you decide to participate in the Strategy Case Competition?
This was a chance to stretch beyond finance and apply our skills to a complex, real-world problem. Strategy isn’t always a focus in our coursework, so we wanted to practice thinking like consultants—making trade-offs, connecting ideas across disciplines, and telling a compelling story. For most of us, this was our last chance to compete, and we wanted to give it everything. It was one of the most intense and rewarding experiences of our undergrad.
What were the most valuable skills or lessons you gained from this experience?
We learned how to cut through complexity and make our ideas clear, defensible, and actionable. We had to think holistically, not just analytically—balancing storytelling, financials, and implementation. Working under pressure forced us to trust each other’s strengths and make decisions fast. It also gave us confidence: we now know we can step into ambiguity and deliver real-world solutions.
How did you handle feedback or critique during the judging process?
We treated feedback as a conversation, not a confrontation. Judges had sharp questions, and instead of getting defensive, we explained our thinking and were transparent about assumptions and trade-offs. We focused on being honest and clear, which helped build trust and made our recommendation stronger.
What advice would you give to students considering joining next year’s competition?
Be different. The best strategies aren’t the flashiest—they’re the ones that show a unique lens and make the most of what the company already has. Think like a real consultant: tell a strong story, keep it simple, and back it up with evidence. Also, build a team that collaborates well. Our team worked because we trusted each other, shared the load, and had fun doing it.
How do you see this experience helping you in your future career or studies?
This was one of the most practical strategy experiences we’ve had. It sharpened our ability to analyze quickly, communicate clearly, and build a full recommendation from idea to execution. Whether it’s in consulting, corporate strategy, or interviews, we’ll carry these skills—and the confidence we gained—with us into the next stage of our careers.