Here is the Case study and the brief together please do from part 2 to part 5 by reading the case study. P.S don't reat the whole case study its bit lengthy. Just include all the questions asked in the brief.

Part 2: Case Study FINAL REPORT = 15% 1. Read the case. 2. Identify the problem that management needs to solve. a. What priority decision needs to be made? b. Make sure you describe the nature of the problem and why it is important. c. What impact will this decision have on the organization and other stakeholders? Part 3: Perform all these analyses to help you determine what factors are important for management to consider in making this decision: a. SWOT analysis b. CREST analysis c. Porter's 5Force Analysis d. Stakeholder analysis For each of these analyses, introduce the topic, and present the analyses [use a table or lists if this helps to make the information clearer]. Then, write a brief paragraph after each analysis summarizing the highlights ofthat analysis you think are most relevant to this decision. You will need more information about your client's industry or about environmental factors, so you will have to do some research. You will need at least 5 [five] sources [Wikipedia and the Dictionary do not count as sources.) Part 4: Based on your analyses, identify 3 [three] possible decisions you might offer to your client. In other words, what are three reasonable alternatives that management might choose to pursue to help solve this problem? {Don't forget to consult Chapter 10 as you consider strategic options.) For each of these three options, identify what you perceive to be the pros and cons of pursuing each alternative. Use the 5-1:- .____;.:_.____._ _l!_________l'.__ .._.__ _.__I.____ _.__l ___..___ ______.._ 1.- _..:_I_ .._._ _._J ;._.L_ I:_n. __ .______ __ .._.. ___ LI_E_I. _l: n__:_; LL For each of these analyses, introduce the topic, and present the analyses [use a table or lists if this helps to make the information clearer]. Then, write a brief paragraph after each analysis summarizing the highlights ofthat analysis you think are most relevant to this decision. You will need more information about your client' s industry or about environmental factors, so you will have to do some research. You will need at least 5 [five] sources (Wikipedia and the Dictionary do not count as sources} Part 4: Based on your analyses, identify 3 {three} possible decisions you might offer to your client. In other words, what are three reasonable alternatives that management might choose to pursue to help solve this problem? {Don't forget to consult Chapter 10 as you consider strategic options] For each ofthese three options, identifyr what you perceive to be the pros and cons of pursuing each altemative. Use the information you discovered in your analyses and course concepts to guide you and try to list as many as you can think of. Resist the urge to decide too soon!!! Try to remain objective as you consider each alternative. Part 5: Choose one solution you think is the best ogi on for the organization and create an action plan for that option. 1. Why do you believe this is the best option for the organization? Defend your choice. 2. Different groups may make very different recommendations! 3. Develop a stepbystep action plan to carry out your decision. a. Your action plan should include specific steps for each of the four management functions: Planning. Leading, Organizing and Controlling. b. Make sure the organization will be able to measure results and evaluate how the plan will work in the future. \"is concludes the portion of the assignment that you will be working on as a group. Part 6: APPENDIX 111is section will be submitted in a separate Whom your course project. Each student's response to PART 6 will be combined into a separate Appendix as either one Giant File or several les organized by team member name and submitted into the drop box by ONE team member. REFLECTION [individual submissions = each person in the group does this separately} A: Reect on and answer the following questions regarding this course project: 1. As you did the actual work of the project, what did you discover about the plan you created at the beginning of the project? a. What did you plan for effectively? L lllL_J. _l!_l_._._ __:__ 5.- ._.__ _I___.__ _______"I The societal implications are likely just as vast. 7 Autonomous vehicles are a futurist technology, meaning and its ripple effects cannot be predicted. Two types of uncertainty, in particular, distinguish a future technology from typical technologies: I Market uncertainty. We can't know which companies will produce these vehicles or how they will transform markets. The attending questions are manifold: 1Who is the right company to take charge? A software giant like lGoogle? An auto manufacturer like Ford or Tesla? A hardware company like Apple? Is this a winner-take-all market? Is it better for the consumer if it is? Should all AV technology be made patentable orbe protected by trade secrets? Or should all AV technology be published in an open-access and open-rights format? How will consumers adopt this technology? I Societal uncertainty. The car transformed twentieth-century society. We have seen the panoramic effects of the smartphone and social media in the twenty- Columbia Autonomous 1lit'ehicles: Futurist Technologies casework: in Markets and Society | Page 2 BY DAN .l. wane!- first century. Autonomous vehicles might have equal impact. Stakeholders are already raising questions that must be answered to accommodate the first iterations of autonomous vehicles. For instance, should cities be retrofitted with sensor technology? How should insurance laws change to reect AV adoption? Who gets the blame in accidents involving autonomous vehicles? Should these laws be written with flexibility in mind or with fixed rules? Sketching out all the questions raised by this teehnology is a nearly intractable task. As a start, strategists in this space must initiate a conversation between the stakeholders about how to integrate autonomous vehicles into business and society. Us Authorized for use only by vijul tendon in Prin 53202210 $132022. Autonomous Vehicles: Futurist Technologies in Markets and Society BY DAN J. WANG* Introduction A future remade by driverless cars was once the stuff of science fiction. Today, this future has become not just conceivable, but to some in the technology and automobile industries, inevitable. Some versions of this new world are easily imaginable: the absence of traffic accidents, steering wheels and gas pedals relegated to museums, and streets free of road signs and traffic lights. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation. But the era of autonomous vehicles may portend more radical and difficult-to-anticipate changes. How will work and play change as vehicles are transformed into mobile offices, Authorized for use only by vijul tandon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2 living rooms, stores, and entertainment centers? Will cities need to be built on grids? Will we even need conventional streets? Who will build these vehicles? What if autonomous vehicles usher in a society in which no one owns cars? Should law enforcement be able to access data from autonomous vehicles? Many of these questions remain unanswered and potentially unanswerable in the short term. Waymo, Google's autonomous vehicle (AV) subsidiary, is the largest Silicon Valley player in the space with a decade of AV technology development, 600 test cars operating in four cities, and five million miles logged on public roads.' But Waymo has yet to commercialize its technology in any meaningful way for consumers. Tesla, by comparison, has rolled out driverless features directly to Tesla car owners one by one including an Autopilot mode and touchscreen software that uses cameras, radar, ultrasonic sensors, and GPS to manage speed, Author affiliation Copyright information *David W. Zalaznick Associate Professor of Business, @2020 by The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New Management York. Acknowledgements This case is for teaching purposes only and does not represent an Jacob Levenson provided research and writing support for this endorsement or judgment of the material included. case. This case cannot be used or reproduced without explicit permission from Columbia CaseWorks. To obtain permission, please visit www.gsb.columbia. edu/caseworks, or e-mail ColumbiaCase Works@gsb. columbia.edu.autonomous vehicles, how should we evaluate costs in the industry? A variety of perspectives from transportation economists have emerged, but in general, researchers have focused on competition within what Bosch, Becker, Becker, and Axhausen, in a 2018 paper, labeled as three "generic operational models":" 1. Line-based mass transit (public transport; e.g., buses) 2. Taxi/Ridesharing (pooled or individual; e.g., Uber/Lyft) 3. Private car ownership (solely for individual or family and friends use) In terms of autonomous vehicle technology's impact on the direct cost of a car ownership, it was expected that the average price of purchasing a car would increase by 20%, which would also increase interest and depreciation costs for the car owner. However, researchers also expected this increased cost imposed by integrating autonomous vehicle technology could be offset by lower fuel costs - by about 10% -- and lower maintenance costs due to the technology's more efficient and less mistake-prone driving." Within these operational models, the researchers made assumptions about expected usage rates based on urban and suburban transportation data from Switzerland. Comparing cost- per-passenger-kilometer - the main metric for operational unit cost in transportation - for the three operational models above, the researchers found that automation had the biggest impact on the operational cost of the taxi/ridesharing model in both urban and suburban settings. Whereas in urban settings, autonomous vehicle technology had little impact on the unit cost of line-based mass transit (lowering unit costs from 0.53 Swiss Francs to 0.24) and private car ownership (increasing unit costs from 0.48 Swiss Francs to 0.50), unit costs for ridesharing Authorized for use only by vijul tandon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2022 to 8/12/2022. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation were projected to decrease from 1.61 Swiss Francs to 0.29 Swiss Francs. In suburban settings, taxi/ridesharing models became the most cost-efficient operational model with autonomous vehicle technology (see Exhibit 5 for a figure summarizing the full results). The implications from the researchers' analysis was clear. The impact of autonomous vehicle technology threatened business models focused on private car ownership the most, whereas projected profitability under ridesharing business models had the most to gain. The key question, however, is which current competitor in the automotive and transportation services industry was best poised to take advantage of these projections? Key Competitors in Autonomous Vehicles TESLA Tesla decided to move forward with Autopilot, its semi-autonomous technology, largely overlooking what was legally permissible. Elon Musk, the company's founder and CEO, reasoned that releasing its technology early could save lives. He stated it would be "morally reprehensible to delay release simply for fear of bad press or some mercantile calculation of legal liability."34 Musk envisioned Autopilot as a series of software releases that Tesla drivers could regularly install to add new functionality to their cars. "Full autonomy is really a software limitation," Columbia Autonomous Vehicles: Futurist TechnologiesMusk told investors in 2016, shortly after releasing the first version of the software. "The hardware exists to create full autonomy. So it's really about developing advanced narrow [artificial intelligence] for the car to operate on." From the start, industry analysts observed that the company was exposing itself to risk by widely releasing new AV functionality into a marketplace in which there was no political, legal, or societal consensus about liability. Indeed, MobileEye, the Israeli company that initially partnered with Tesla to develop Autopilot, cut ties with Tesla after two fatal accidents in 2016, accusing the company pushing risk too far. Nonetheless, Tesla persevered in releasing progressively more advanced versions of the system, which used a combination of radar, cameras, and GPS to allow Autopilot-enabled vehicles to self-steer, adjust speed, identify obstacles, brake, and park. All told, four drivers were killed using Autopilot in the first four years it was available. In 2019, the company, citing internal data, reported a single accident for every 4.34 million miles driven using Autopilot compared to one accident per 1.82 million miles driven without the feature turned on. Musk promised prospective Tesla buyers and current owners that the company would meet its ambitious timeline to advance towards full autonomy, despite growing scrutiny over its safety record. In the spring of 2019, Tesla released a version of Autopilot small enough to fit between the glove box and firewall and that could be retrofitted in earlier Tesla models. That summer Musk personally took over Autopilot's leadership team following the departure of Stuart Bowers, the company's VP of Autopilot software. Musk, in turn, promoted Milan Kovac to director of Autopilot software engineering, Ashock Elluswamy to head of the perception and computer vision teams, and Drew Baglino to head of planning. In October, Musk said Authorized for use only by vijul tandon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2022 to 8/12/2022. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation he hoped to give a small group of Tesla owners the opportunity to test a fully autonomous version of Autopilot by end of the year. FORD Ford unveiled an ambitious driverless car initiative in 2016 after becoming the first automaker to test a fully autonomous vehicle at the University of Michigan's Mcity. Mark Fields, the company's president and CEO at the time, told reporters that Ford would pursue a two- pronged strategy. The automaker was vague on details. But the first stage would involve launching a ride-sharing service. Stage two would focus on releasing fully autonomous cars- or SAE Level 4 capable vehicles-to the public as early as 2025. Raj Nair, Ford's then chief technical officer, told reporters that the company believed that the "the stepping-stone" approach (pursued by Tesla) presented too much risk. Moreover, Fields made clear that the company was not in a race to be first. But Ken Washington, Ford's vice president of research, stressed that Ford's goal was to win the space from rivals such as General Motors and Uber.39 Over the next two years, Ford invested in several technology-based companies in a bid to close the gap with Silicon Valley-based competitors like Waymo and Tesla. These included: Velodyne, a producer of laser-based sensors. Civil Maps, an AV mapping firm. . SAIPS, an Israeli machine learning startup company.Argo Al, an artificial intelligence company founded by former Google and Uber executives. Ford announced in the fall of 2019 that Washington, DC, Miami, and Austin would serve as test cities for a self-driving taxi service scheduled to launch 2021. This news was delivered as several competitors, including Waymo and General Motors, were scaling back plans and expectations for their AV initiatives. Sherif Marakby, the president of Ford's AV division, noted to observers that these companies had been "too aggressive and unrealistic," in their timelines. Ford claimed it was on schedule to unveil its first purpose-built self-driving car in 2020.40 WAYMO Sergei Brin launched Google's AV project at the company's secret X Lab in 2009. Sebastian Thrun, an inventor of Google's Street View led the initiative, which set an early goal of outfitting the Toyota Prius to drive autonomously over ten 100-mile routes within the year. Google invested $1.1 billion in the project over the next six years. The company completed 300,000 test miles by the end of 2012 without an accident, albeit never exceeding speeds of 25 miles per hour." They more than doubled that number by 2014. In 2016 Google announced that its AV project had graduated into the independent firm Waymo housed under its newly formed parent company Alphabet. By 2019 Waymo's annual operating costs reached $1 billion.42 During this same period Waymo developed partnerships with automakers, ride-hailing companies, and technology firms including Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Lyft, AutoNation, Authorized for use only by vijul tandon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2022 to 8/12/2022. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation Avis, Intel, and Jaguar Land Rover. It equipped cars ranging from the Toyota Prius to the Audi IT to the Fiat Chrysler Pacifica, and the Lexus RX450h with its AV technology. In 2018, it launched Waymo One, a Phoenix-based AV car service. In 2019 Waymo announced partnerships with Renault and Nissan, the company's first agreements to share technology with car makers developing their own autonomous vehicles. At the time of the deal, analysts anticipated that Waymo could achieve a valuation as high as $175 billion by 2030. Waymo, like Tesla, is more technology company than traditional automaker. Indeed it has no publicly announced plans to make its own cars. Rather, it retrofits cars made by traditional automakers with proprietary technology including: Laser Bear Honeycomb, the company's LIDAR system that boasts 95 degrees vertical field of view compared 30 degrees for other sensors. Three-dimensional maps that identify features on the road like curb height. Software that constantly scans for people, bicyclists, cars, and construction while reading traffic signals and signs of every kind from up to 300 yards away in all directions. Software that predicts and can distinguish surrounding movements and synthesize that information to anticipate the behavior of other actors on the road. 43Looking forward, Waymo's leadership team of CEO John Krafci, CCO Amee Chande, VP of engineering Dmitri Dolgov, and head of research Drago Anguelov is focused on continuing to leverage Google's advantage in AI to build the best automotive brain in the space. In practical terms, this means developing technology that will make autonomous vehicles as adept at identifying and navigating known features and objects in their environments as they are at adapting to novel behaviors and conditions that they encounter on the road." UBER Uber has bet its future on AV technology. In 2016, then CEO Travis Kalanic told Business Insider that the advent of driverless technology represented an existential moment for the ride-hailing company. "What would happen if .. . we weren't part of the autonomy thing? Then the future passes us by, basically, in a very expeditious and efficient way," he said." The company set an ambitious early goal of making its driverless car program profitable by 2018 and putting 75,000 driverless cars on the road by 2019." Over the next three years, Uber injected $1.1 billion into its Advanced Technology Group (ATG), which began as 40 Carnegie Mellon researchers in Pittsburgh and grew to more than 1,000 employees as it added offices in San Francisco and Toronto. During this period, ATG produced 250 self-driving cars, while also developing partnerships with carmakers, including: . Daimler, which promised to bring its own fleet onto Uber's network. . Volvo, which allowed Uber to develop autonomous vehicles based on Volvo's XC90. Toyota, which agreed to let Uber place its AV technology in purpose-built Authorized for use only by vijul tandon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2022 to 8/12/2022. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation. Toyotas. Yet Uber failed to meet many of its early goals, and in the spring 2018 it halted AV testing in San Francisco, Arizona, and Pittsburgh after one of its self-driving cars hit and killed a woman in Tempe." The New York Times reported that the company's cars had been having trouble "driving through construction zones and next to tall vehicles, like big rigs," in the months preceding the accident." Uber resumed limited testing eight months later. Even so, industry observers continue to believe that AV represents the best chance for Uber to achieve profitability, given that their drivers receive 70% of the average fare. The company shares this sense of urgency. As it noted in a prospectus to investors in advance of its IPO: In the event that our competitors bring autonomous vehicles to market before we do, or their technology is or is perceived to be superior to ours, they may be able to leverage such technology to compete more effectively with us, which would adversely impact our financial performance and our prospects." In the fall of 2019, Uber announced that Dallas would serve as the next test site for its AV fleet-the first expansion of its AV program since the crash in Arizona.steer within lanes, change lanes, and park.2 In the meantime, other more specialized startups, including DriveAI, NuTonomy, and Cruise Automation have entered the space. Incumbent auto manufacturers have also intensified their efforts in autonomous vehicles. General Motors acquired Cruise Automation for more than $1 billion in 2016, following a $500 million investment in Lyft Ford, Volvo, Nissan, and Mercedes-Benz have each promised to release autonomous features in their cars by 2021. Finally, Uber has been an early leader in autonomous vehicles, staffing a research and development department and partnering with automakers and leaders in machine learning! But even as companies race to market, there are signs that they have misjudged whether the technology is poised for the consumer market. Ford and Volkswagen, for instance, invested heavily in the ridesharing company Argo. But Argo's test cars in Pittsburgh and Miami have struggled to anticipate random human behavior like a cyclist careening the wrong way down a one-way street or a street sweeper making an unexpected U-tum in an intersection. \"We overestimated the arrival of autonomous vehicles,\" Jim Hacket, Ford's chief executive, recently admitted to industry observers at the Detroit Economic Club. He still believed that the technology would change driving and the nature of society. But the ethical and logistical complexities that accompany self-driving technologies would limit its use in the near future. Indeed, the uncertainties surrounding autonomous vehicles extend well beyond when and which technologies to invest in. Analysts believe AV technology represents the beginning of a revolution in the car and tech market that could disrupt the domestic economy. The auto industry represents nearly $2 trillion in revenuesmore than 10% of the United States' gross domestic product (GDP). The commercial trucking industry adds another $700 billion to that figure. Almost seven million people worked in the US auto industry in 2015, with another 3.3 million employed as motor vehicle operators. The Boston Consulting Group has predicted that the autonomous vehicles could gobble up a $42 billion market size by 2025.5 Meanwhile, Barclays estimates a 40% decline in traditional cars produced and sold before the market stabilizes The societal implications are likely just as vast. 7 Autonomous vehicles are a futurist technology, meaning and its ripple effects cannot be predicted. Two types of uncertainty, in particular, distinguish a future technology from typical technologies: . Market uncertainty. We can't know which companies will produce these vehicles or how they will transform markets. The attending questions are manifold: Who is the right company to take charge? A software giant like ,use onlyr by vijul tendon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 53i2022 to $132022. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation. Reimaglnlng the Car: Terminology for a New Era FROM MACHINE TO COHPUTER Autonomous vehicles represent arguably a nal step in the evolution of the car from a mechanical machine into a computer. As recently as the early 20005, lifting the hood of a new car would reveal how it functioned through the visible connections among its physical parts. Today's traditional cars can contain over 100 small computers built into their engines, bodies, and interiors. Simply unlocking the door requires pressing a button on a key that houses a miniature computer that signals a computer inside the car that in tum speaks to a third computer in the door The integration of the computer into the traditional car has quietly, yet rapidly, transformed the meaning of driving. Modem drivers may still think of themselves as masters of the road. But they are increasingly entrusting their safety to software. For instance, pressing the acceleration pedal sends a signal to a modem car's computer. This change has reconfigured the ethics of risk and responsibility for automakers and consumers alike. In a well-known incident in the early 20005, Toyota blamed drivers when their cars began spontaneously accelerating out of control. Eighty-nine people were eventually killed and 500 civil cases were brought against Toyota claiming that a computer malfunction caused the accidents. Toyota eventually settled a class-action lawsuit for $1.6billion.9 WHAT IS All AUTONOHOUS VEHICLE? Autonomous vehicles arguably represent a leap forward in reducing the risks of a computer- enabled car. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety projects that the introduction of AV features like forward collision and lane departure wan-ring systems, sideew [blind spot) assist, and adaptive headlights will eliminate nearly 30% of crashes and fatalities. Similarly, automatic braking will also likely reduce a significant number of rear-end collisions.\" Although the technology is changing so rapidly, a few unifying ideas and technologies have emerged that will likely guide debate over the next several years. Autonomous vehicles are robotic systems that use a combination of technologies to collect data about their environment. These inciude LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), which detects light and measures ranges; cameras; and ultrasonic and infrared sensors. The vehicles then also use GPS and inertial Page 3 | Autonomous Ilii'ehicles: Futurist Columbia Technologies in Markets and Society casework; BY DAN .l. WANG\" Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation. Authorized for use only by vijul tendon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from sea. navigation systems for localization. These systems are excellent at collecting data but as of early 2020, not yet reliable in making equally good sense of their surroundings.11 As such, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has recommended a continuum of five levels of autonomy that stakeholders can use to measure the development of the market and its implications (see Exhibit 1). I level 1: People control all levels of the car. This is how most traditional cars operate today. I level 2: A single automated control. This technology will have immediate societal effects. For instance, features focused on smoothing acceleration could increase fuel economy by 10% and reduce pollution. I level 3: The driver must remain attentive as the car automates multiple functions such as steering and acceleration. This level might reduce traffic accidents and increase development of city infrastructure to support these features. I Level 4: The car possesses enough automation for the driver to safely tum his or her attention to other actions. This technology could allow for the more efficient operation of cars and the lowering of productivity costs bom from trafc congestion. It could equally portend changes to urban density and the culture of work. I Level 5: The car can drive without human attention. This technology could allow for a profound redesign of the built landscape.12 Currently, many AV players in the technology and automotive industries are focused on enabling a transition from Level 2 vehicles to level 3. The question facing stakeholders is how to convene such a conversation that surfaces these possibilities given the uidity and complexity of the market, the technology, and the sheer volume of implications for society. Stakeholders In the AV Era MARKET STAKEHOLDER3 The AV space put simply is messy. A solution stack can help clarify the picture. Software developers use solution stacks to map the software systems necessary to complete the components of a platform-based product.13 In AV technology, the definition of a stack includes both hardware and software. One such example of a solution stack for autonomous vehicles comes from Comet Labs {see Exhibit 2). The first section of the stack is the operating system. These companies are working on a cl for use only by vijul tandon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5i'3i2022 to 8132022. Use outside these parameters is a oopyright violation. Stakeholders In the AV Era MARKET STAKEHOLDERS The AV space put simply is messy. A solution stack can help clarify the picture. Software developers use solution stacks to map the software systems necessary to complete the components of a platform-based product.\" In AV technology, the denition of a stack includes both hardware and software. One such example of a solution stack for autonomous vehicles comes from Comet Labs {see Exhibit 2). The first section of the stack is the operating system. These companies are working on a software platform that AV players can use as a common language to communicate with each other. For instance, PolySync has created an open-source car control software. The second section is the decision-making software. Mobileye, an Israeli technology that develops vision- based advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS), is a player in this area.1d The third section integrates software into cars. Waymo {Google's self-driving company) is the largest company in this space. Columbia Autonomous Vehicles: Futurist Technologies casework: in Markets and Society | Page 4 BY DAN .l. WANG' HON-HARKEI' STAKEHOLDERS What makes autonomous vehicles unique, however, is that their widespread adoption also requires attention to various stakeholders in society. This is such a potentially vast universe that it needs to be segmented into smaller galaxies. The first segment might be social scientists and critics. They are at once concemed with the broad societal consequences of autonomous vehicles and experts in how these issues might be addressed. This group would include urbanists, ethicists, philosophers, economists, sociologists, and architects. For example, Marshall Brown, an architecture professor from Tllinnis lnsfihil'e nf Technnlncrv. has. created the Drivel-less ('itv Pmier't tn mnvene an Use outsi Authorized for use only by vijul tendon in Principles - to 33132022. NON-MARKET STAKEHOLDERS What makes autonomous vehicles unique, however, is that their widespread adoption also requires attention to various stakeholders in society. This is such a potentially vast universe that it needs to be segmented into smaller galaxies. The first segment might be social scientists and critics. They are at once concerned with the broad societal consequences of autonomous vehicles and experts in how these issues might be addressed. This group would include urbanists, ethicists, philosophers, economists, sociologists, and architects. For example, Marshall Brown, an architecture professor from Illinois Institute of Technology, has created the Driverless City Project to convene an interdisciplinary group of scholars to imagine a human-centered AV cityscape. His team has modeled social scenarios, designed computer simulations, drafted visionary drawings, and built physical models that they hope will inform guidelines and inspire transportation agencies, municipal codes, and infrastructure. Their approach is purposefully provocative and playful. Key to their project is a mind map (see Exhibit 3) that visually represents four spaces that will be transformed by autonomous vehicles: streets, parking, commuter, and delivery. 's The purpose of the mind map-and similarly conceptual tools like a collection of large tokens for urbanists to conduct scenario building-is to encourage AV stakeholders to creatively right violation. design the world they desire. 16 Brown is by no means alone in his conviction that societal stakeholders must organize a response. Y Combinator, arguably the most well-known start-up accelerator in Silicon Valley, has launched New Cities, a research project aimed at reimagining the city from scratch." Authorized for use only by vijul landon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2022 to 8/12/2022. Meanwhile, the Alphabet-owned Sidewalk Labs is developing Quayside along 12 acres of Toronto's waterfront that will accommodate autonomous, electric, and shared vehicles. Another stakeholder segment would be the government and public sector. This category would include likely suspects in the political and administrative arms of government such as Use outside these pa federal, state, and local lawmakers; and departments of transportation, municipal transit, motor vehicles, and police. Urban transportation experts are already generating computer simulations to model how cities would work if traffic lights were rendered irrelevant. One possibility is that intersections would be outfitted with computers capable of choreographing traffic to tease congestion and reduce accidents. 's The third segment would consist of adjacent industries compelled to enter the AV space or adapt to AV technologies. Self-driving technology, for example, will need to be integrated into trains, buses, commercial trucks, and other forms of mass transit. What's more, as the in- vehicle transit experience becomes a defining feature of mobility, content providers, in-vehicle service providers, data and analytics companies, advertisers, entertainment equipment providers, and social media companies could potentially crowd the market." Insurers, in particular, might be expected to change their business models as the driver comes to represent less risk." An implication is that the automotive insurance industry could be less consumer facing. "Liability is likely to migrate from the individual to the manufacturer andthe licensers of the software that drives the [autonomous vehicle]," says Rodney Parker, an associate professor of operations management at Indiana University." The nature of risk might also change. Today, risk is largely modeled on random events. When risk moves to software or sensors, it could arguably become more systematic and predictable." Dan Peate, a venture capitalist, has launched a startup insurance company designed to respond to this new landscape." The idea came to him when he was thinking of buying a Tesla Model X and his insurance company quoted him a $10,000 premium. Peate, the founder of Hixme, a group health insurance provider, understood that there simply were not enough Model Xs on the road for conventional insurers to accurately price risk. But Peate also knew that Tesla and other AV carmakers were collecting vast amounts of data on their vehicles' operation with the purpose of improving performance and reliability. Peate realized "we can get large amounts of data across entire fleets and be able to underwrite without having to wait for years of data." This real-time data collection could enable an insurer to cut premiums for drivers of autonomous vehicles. Peate announced the creation of Avinew in January of 2019 and partnerships with major AV manufacturers including Tesla, Nissan, Ford, and Cadillac. Avinew's initial insurance product monitors drivers' use of autonomous features-with their consent-and then determines discounts based on how the feature is used. The company expects to begin issuing policies in 2020 in select states. With such a complex and growing array of societal stakeholders, business strategists in the AV space must develop a theory for what questions should -and can-be addressed first. e outside these parameters is a copyright violation Authorized for use only by vijul landon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2022 to 8/12/2022. Risk versus Liability Many observers believe that the most urgent problem facing AV companies and societal stakeholders is how autonomous vehicles make choices to mitigate injury and death. Vehicle accidents are a leading cause of death in the United States." In 2018, traffic fatalities exceeded 40,000 and an estimated 4.5 million people were seriously injured in car crashes." LIDAR, radar, and cameras are expected to be better at detecting trouble than humans. But it is unclear how these cars will make relative moral choices. Human drivers are constantly judging relative risks. Most decisions are routine and the probability of catastrophe is small: for example, accelerate through the yellow light or break swiftly and surprise the car behind you? The problem for AV companies is that there is no universal formula to reach a correct solution, given the variables involved in even minor of judgments. Furthermore, when faced with driving decisions that involve a profound moral dilemma-such as making a deliberate maneuver to save the life of a passenger at the expense of the lives of bystanders-AV technology might introduce new quandaries. Although an autonomous vehicle might not help with reaching a correct decision in a moral dilemma, a more practical challenge might be solving for whom to blame- or the problem of liability. Currently, there are no federal statutes or regulations governing automated driving systems. Only a handful of states have enacted laws for testing of automated vehicles. Many legal scholars believe that automobile collisions involving automated vehicles will be treated Columbia Autonomous Vehicles: Futurist Technologies CaseWorks in Markets and Society | Page 6as product liability cases that expose car manufacturers to more lawsuits." Juries might also hold automated vehicles to a higher standard than human drivers. In 2019, 43 companies were testing 295 different self-driving vehicles in California-and none had a blemish-free record when it came to accidents." This uncertainty has left carmakers and technology companies to approach these risks in a variety of ways. Financial Impact of Autonomous Vehicles OVERALL MARKET According to an estimate by Allied Market Research, the worldwide autonomous vehicle market stood at $54 billion in 2019, but was expected to grow to $557 billion in 2026." Critical to widespread adoption was finding a way for manufacturers, technology providers, and suppliers to lower production costs (see Exhibit 4 for a forecasted breakdown of adoption). As of 2019 alone, the cost of LiDAR technology alone made it prohibitive for consumers to purchase a vehicle capable of level 3 autonomy. Furthermore, because there were many stakeholders involved in the production of autonomous vehicles - all of whom would be interconnected - analysts divided the market into several key categories to better understand the impact of competitive forces. Experts agreed on three major categories, which contained the following segments (in parentheses):30 1. Technology Development: Level of Automation (Level 3, Level 4, Level 5) 2. Value Chain: Component (Hardware, Software, Service) 3. Demand: Consumer Application (Civil, Robo Taxi, Ridesharing/hailing, Public Authorized for use only by vijul landon in Principles of Management at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology from 5/3/2022 to 8/12/2022. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation Transportation, Freight Transportation) Analysts further categorized the market into regions, with a focus on North America (especially the U.S.) and Asia-Pacific (especially China) as regions in which they anticipated the market to grow the fastest. COST STRUCTURES Because autonomous vehicle technology faces uncertainty in development and adoption, forecasters are careful to register agreement on any trends when it comes to projected financial performance. However, one area of consensus is that the presence of autonomous vehicles will inevitably diminish the number of cars on the road, either in the form of personal ownership, pooled services, or public transit. The reason for this expectation is that non- autonomous vehicles are in use, on average, only 5% of the day because they require human operators whereas autonomous vehicles can operate without human control, thereby making it possible for a driverless car to serve productive uses almost constantly. That autonomous vehicles are more efficient and productive, however, has profound implications for the cost structures of the businesses and owners that might rely on them to create and capture value in the market. Therefore, an important question for investors is, which use case represents the most profitable area of growth? In other words, because changing cost structures will potentially have the greatest impact on the future profitability of