“THE RELUCANT BOSS”:

HBSP No.: NTU251

LEADERSHIP AT MASTERMARK – A SINGAPORE SME Ref No. : ABCC-2020-002
Date :M0a5y 2020
Stewart L. Arnold

In 2003, Mr. Chris Wee left a promising corporate career and reluctantly took on the responsibility of
rescuing a family business that was in debt. Over time, he slowly built the business up and, in the
process, he developed managerial and then leadership capabilities. In 2018, the business was thriving
and he faced questions about his leadership role in expanding the company even further.

The business? Bird control!

INTRODUCTION

“I was reluctant to take over this fledgling company as I saw little potential in bird control, and
was very comfortable in my previous employment. My intention was to turn a profit, pay off all
the debts, then close the company as soon as possible so that I could rejoin my Japanese
employer. “Bird control” was not a viable career path for me!”

Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

In 2003, Mr. Chris Wee was in his early 20s and had a Business degree from a world-class university. He
was working for a multinational company in Singapore doing business development and looking at a
bright corporate future. Chris’ family members, however, persuaded him to quit his job and take over an
ailing Small-to-Medium Enterprise (SME) so that his father could retire. At that stage, Mastermark Pte.
Ltd. was a one-man bird-control company which was in debt.

When he took over Mastermark, there was no physical office and so Chris operated from his home. He
used his personal car as the primary transport vehicle for all the sales and operations work, and he had
one part-time staff who came in when there was work. The company had virtually no assets, except for
some hand tools. Fifteen years later, Chris had built the business substantially and was ambitious for the
future of the company.

As Mastermark expanded, the once-reluctant boss became, unashamedly, the company’s leader. He
faced progressively larger challenges in uniting his staff, and getting them to understand and commit to
his vision that Mastermark could be far more than a local bird-control company.

Dr Stewart L. Arnold prepared this case based on interviews with Mastermark. This case is intended for class
discussion and learning, and not intended as source research material, or as illustration of effective or ineffective
management.
COPYRIGHT © 2020 Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be copied, stored, transmitted, altered, reproduced or distributed in any form or medium whatsoever without the
written consent of Nanyang Technological University.
The Asian Business Case Centre, Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University, Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798. E-mail: asiacasecentre@ntu.edu.sg

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 2
ABCC-2020-002

This Case Study described how Chris Wee took an unexpected career path and eventually moved from
being a manager to being a leader. It served as a reminder to keep all career options open and be
prepared to reinvent yourself in order to pursue those options.

BACKGROUND: HOW TO CHANGE CAREERS WITHOUT INTENDING TO!

“I ended up with a start-up company without starting it up!”

Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

Mastermark was founded by Mr. George Wee (Chris’ father) in 1981, but it was only a sideline business
until 1997 when George decided to concentrate on bird control full time. After three years, Mastermark
was achieving a modest turnover of SGD 70,000 annually, but it was also running a loss every year, due
to the poor implementation of projects and cost overruns.

Chris took over the 20-year-old business in 2003 and turned it around from a one-man operation that was
losing money to a successful SME with continued growth opportunities. He did not start the business, but
he kick-started it.

By 2005, Mastermark’s annual turnover had quadrupled to over a quarter of a million dollars. At that time,
Chris’ previous employer was starting to downsize their operations in Singapore, and it appeared less and
less likely that he would be able to rejoin them. Chris realised that there was a lot of scope for expanding
the bird control business well beyond proofing buildings against intrusive birds.

After running Mastermark for three years, he finally decided that he would make this temporary job into
his career, and he gave up his original intentions of working for a large, established company. He had
been a reluctant boss, but he realised that this start-up company had the potential to grow into an exciting
business. He commented:

“The biggest draw to me was the flexibility in making my own business decisions, and being fully
accountable for their outcomes (whether positive or negative).”

In effect, Chris found himself in a totally different career path to the one he had envisioned upon
graduating from university. He found himself grappling with operational, management, and then
leadership issues, where he felt heavily responsible for the success or failure of his business.

Up to this stage, it had been a success: In 2018, Mastermark had an annual revenue of over SGD2
million, 32 staff members, and two office locations in Singapore. The company was the wildlife consultant
and contractor for both Changi and Seletar airports, and also in-charge of wildlife management for all five
military airbases in Singapore. Mastermark had a joint business venture with the second largest pest
control company in Dubai, with the intention to launch bird control programmes in all of the United Arab
Emirates. It was also the authorised distributor for a diverse range of bird management products from
Europe and the United States.

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 3
ABCC-2020-002

MANAGEMENT OF MASTERMARK – CHANGES IN APPROACH AS THE COMPANY GREW

The “Reluctant Boss” Was a Strict Boss, At First

“Birds won’t roost when they see spikes or nets…. So, the idea is to place these on ledges of
any description where birds would want to land and perch. The tips of the spikes are square so
the birds won’t harm themselves.”
Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

Chris had helped his father install spikes and netting to keep birds away from clients’ premises when he
was young (after school hours). Thus, he had a lot of “technical expertise” regarding the core business.
Chris’ reputation among his clients for his conscientious work had led to an increase in the number of
projects. By late 2004, he hired an installation team of four full-time staff members to work with him. He
admitted that during the early years of running Mastermark, he had very high standards for his operational
staff, “Everything had to be done my way. Bird systems needed to be well installed and visually
impressive.”

There were periods of frustration and disappointment for the then-new boss. He found himself supervising
his workers very closely and getting them to re-do work until it met his standards. He expected them to be
professional and polite, which meant he was continually chiding his workers for smoking in non-smoking
areas, spitting on the ground, or leaving tools lying around where members of the public could trip over
them. He expected his workers to know how to use basic power tools and to have a basic technical
knowledge of metals and concrete. All of this meant that Chris was frequently re-doing the work his
workers had done poorly. As time passed, he recognised, “I became the perfect example of a micro-
manager!”

Learning the Ropes as a Manager

“I would tell them: “No, this is not the best way to do it” and they would just stare at me, and then
let me do it my way. I was very picky about how I wanted things done.”

Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

Chris felt as if he was doing 80% of the work and, since his workers were often simply watching him, they
were only doing 20% of the work! Realising that this was inefficient, he reluctantly made the decision to
accept a drop in the quality of work done so that they would do 80% of the work.

Over time, workers were repeating tasks on a daily basis and the quality of their work improved with
practice, eventually surpassing the boss’s own standards. After two years, Chris promoted his best
workers to become quality control supervisors in order to replicate those high standards.

ICnh2ri0s1h8a, d an “installation department” consisting of some 24 workers, two assistant managers and
a manager. He no longer had to supervise the installation of bird control systems. Half of his workers had
certification from the Industrial Rope Access Trade Association and he paid for their yearly re-
accreditations. These certifications were a source of competitive advantage, especially for work in airplane
hangars, where cherry-pickers and boom lifts were not allowed and the installers used ropes to suspend
themselves while they did their work.

Chris had learnt the ropes for how to raise operational work standards, without micro-managing.

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 4
ABCC-2020-002

From “Do-everything-yourself Boss” to “Do-nothing-yourself Boss”

“When in “startup mode”, the leader or founder is usually the primary resource. But one must
have the adaptability to graduate away from DIY (do-it-yourself) micro-manager to be more of a
laissez- faasirgerobwosths occurs. ”
Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

In 2004, as well as being part of the installation team, Chris ran every other part of the business himself:
from strategic planning to client contact, from managing the accounts and finances to acquiring and
transporting bird control equipment. At this stage, he was working 60 hours a week.

As the business grew, Mastermark required more staff members to do various functions. For example,
payroll was relatively straightforward in 2004 when there were fewer than five staff members. It became
more challenging, however, when the company had 10 staff members for installation, production, and
administration tasks. There were, at times, several simultaneous installation contracts and he would
employ temporary workers to help on such contracts, as needed.

Mastermark began to acquire more vehicles to transport workers and equipment to different job locations
and, by 2010, they had six such vehicles. As the warehouse stock increased, it required better logistics
management. In addition, it was increasingly difficult for Chris to manage the company’s human resource
tasks, finances, and accounts. It was tedious and time-consuming for him to keep track of staff leave,
medical leave, salaries, employee insurance, and government compliance. Looking back, Chris
remarked:

“hIad to create a supervisor tier, and later a management tier consisting of managers and
assistant managers to effectively deliver our services. This taller hierarchy meant that I had to
shift away from being a “do-everything-yourself” boss, to a “do-nothing-yourself” boss, except
for providing general strategy, oversight and guidance. Fiddling around with the day-to-day
operations in this state would have diminished the empowerment I wanted for my managers,
and kept me as a micro-manager.”

From personal experience, Chris believed that beyond eight employees, a leader cannot micro-manage
and has to rely on a managerial hierarchy, systems and protocols to ensure efficient operations. He
based this belief on his experience in National Service for the Singapore Armed Forces, where there was
a strict hierarchy to ensure efficiency. Adopting similar principles, Chris created a functional departmental
structure so that the business would continue to grow.

In 2018, Mastermark had five departments: Business Development, Administration/Finance, Production,

Wildlife Biological Services, and Operations (which included the Installation team and Wildlife
Operations). Each department held weekly meetings, with the managers chairing those meetings. Chris
attended these meetings occasionally, but tried to be a “silent participant”. He believed it was important to
show support by simply being present.

The Management Team consisted of the Director (Chris), five managers, and four assistant managers.
This team met every month for the managers to update and share information with each other, and to
discuss the strategic direction of the company. Chris held formal strategic planning meetings every
quarter with his two most senior and strategic people: Ms. Gloria Ngoi, who was the Business
Development Manager, and Ms. Julienne Kee, who was the Principal Biologist and Manager of the
Wildlife Biological Services department.

Staff meetings were held every half-year, where Chris addressed his workforce of 32 staff members about
the strategic direction of the company.

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 5
ABCC-2020-002

Thus, there was a clear hierarchy in Mastermark and clearly defined job scopes. There were also
challenges of pursuing new and varied business opportunities for Management, which meant that, as
Julienne pointed out, “everything here is done from scratch”.

Well, “Do-some-things-yourself” Boss...

“The truth is – I still have trouble trusting everything to my staff. After all – at the end of the day –
I am the one accountable for what Mastermark does.”

Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

Chris kept abreast of what was happening in the company largely through the instant messaging
smartphone application, WhatsApp. He had created WhatsApp groups for each department and was
himself a member of each group. This meant that he was aware of what was happening across the
company, even though he actively avoided close supervision of the workers. He still had his finger on the
pulse of every aspect of the business.

In 2018, Chris retained the responsibility of recruiting people into Mastermark’s management team
because he wanted to be sure to get people with the right characteristics (i.e., the required knowledge
and skills for their role, and a desire to learn and become better at what they do). Furthermore, he
proactively matched managers and assistant managers for each department, so that they would
complement each other in terms of strategic thinking versus administrative abilities. This focus on getting
the right dynamics in the management team had resulted in a stable workforce. In 2018, more than 50%
of his staff had been with him for 5 years or longer.

Calhl nrieswput staff recruits on a 3-month probation to see if they met the company’s expectations. After
that, recruits were either offered permanent employment or let go. Of course, despite the probation
approach, not every recruit worked out. In the early years, he had to “fire” two friends who had worked
between one and two years at Mastermark because, ultimately, they were just not the right fit for the
company.

Although hiring and firing were challenging tasks and important for ensuring the right workforce at
Mastermark, over time, Chris had to let the managers take control. For example, there was a young
worker who Chris employed in 2014, even though the young man had been a teenage delinquent. Chris
took it upon himself to help this young man reform. Other staff members, however, complained about the
worker’s disruptive behavior. When Chris was overseas, he received a phone call from his managers who
wanted to fire the young worker. Reluctantly, Chris accepted their decision, although his preference would
have been to retain and mentor the disruptive employee some more. From this point on, managers were
responsible for staffing decisions for their own department.

Celhiervisedb that he and his managers should give the staff the same level of respect they would expect
the staff members to return them. This meant making a conscious effort to avoid sounding condescending
or taking a “holier than thou” tone, especially when reprimanding a staff member for wrongdoing. Gloria
said that as a manager, “Chris reads people well and if you have the ability to read people, you will be
able to manage them well.”

This sentiment was echoed by Julienne, who was employed in 2013 to start up the Wildlife Biological
Services department. She believed Chris had visionary ideas, and this was exciting for her and other
Mastermark employees. She appreciated being valued by Chris and being able to challenge his ideas and
put forward her own. Julienne even enjoyed these disagreements as they were about ideas, and never
became personal disagreements. In fact, she suggested, “When it comes down to it, Chris is really a very
soft-hearted person.”

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 6
ABCC-2020-002

A further testament to the boss’s person-centred approach was the reflections of the Operations
Manager, Mr. Anuar Bin Hassan, who was hired in early 2016 to oversee the Wildlife Operations team.
Anuar believed everyone in his department wanted to contribute to the success of the business. He could
see some areas for improvement in rope access, and he enjoyed the opportunities and responsibility of
implementing his ideas, which Chris allowed him to do.

In 2018, in answer to the question: “Is the boss of an SME a manager or leader?” Chris responded:

“thBo . A leader inspires, motivates, sells his ideas and communicates effectively, tends to be an
influential character, and must be passionate about his work. Very soft skills. Management, on
the other hand, is numbers and results driven, task oriented, focusing on efficiency and
productivity.”

LEADERSHIP AT MASTERMARK – PASSING ON THE PASSION, MOTIVATING STAFF

“Chris is the kind of boss who will lead you in a way that is based on your character as a person.”

Gloria Ngoi, Business Development Manager, Mastermark

Chris was passionate about his business. He had not taken more than a weekend off in 15 years, except
for a 2-week family holiday to Florida, USA which was still business-related for Chris. He said that he was
always thinking about the business and opportunities for expansion, as well as ways to retain and develop
his staff. He passed this passion on to his employees.

GinleodriaMjaostermark in 2010. She had previously worked in advertising for a Singapore tourist
attraction and she had job offers from similar companies at the time she answered Chris’s advertisement.
She chose to work for Chris because she found him to be a “charmer” and she was pleased to have an
intelligent boss who was also personable. She was also excited by the way he ran his business: in an
open manner, involving others. There were other employees such as her in Mastermark who were jaded
ex- employees from large firms and multinational companies. They all appreciated the level of input they
had into the direction of Mastermark. They also appreciated that Chris valued them for the type of person
they were, not just their qualifications, experience, or skill-set.

Gloria added that many of the new generation of employees wanted to avoid too much structure at work
and this was why working for the small enterprise was appealing. She acknowledged that, as Mastermark
continued to grow, however, more structure would become necessary. It would be a matter of getting the
right balance between flexibility and structure.

Chris set the overall strategic direction for Mastermark and discussed his ideas with Gloria and Julienne.
They echoed Chris’ belief that there was no point in having a written vision statement for the organisation
because it could be too rigid in terms of long-term development and the world was a very dynamic place.
Instead, there was a strongly shared sense of direction, which was to keep growing their pest control
business (especially the Wildlife Consultancy) and to expand internationally, when opportunities arose.
Chris and Gloria were constantly on the lookout for such opportunities, both locally and overseas.

Chris and the rest of the Management Team communicated individually with all staff to ensure that they
felt included and understood that the work they each did made an important contribution to Mastermark’s
success.

For example, Ms. Foo Wan Xuan was one of the research assistants in the Wildlife Consultancy team.
She was employed in mid-2016 as an Environmental Studies graduate. She chose to work in an SME
because it offered her the chance to suggest and to explore ideas that would help the company. On her
first day at

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 7
ABCC-2020-002

work, she was very impressed that Chris talked with her about the direction of the company and said that
he wanted ambitious people such as her to become experts in their areas so the business could diversify
even further.

After being on the job for two weeks, Wan Xuan remembered that her boss (Julienne) called her in to talk
about her career prospects and to reiterate the philosophy that the company wanted to maximise the
value of individual’s expertise. Thus, she would be working with others with different expertise and all
would respect each other. She recounted how Julienne let her drive a company car one day, even though
she had barely just got her license. She believed this attitude was representative of the Company’s
attitude: “To let you try out things, take responsibility, take ownership”.

LEADERSHIP AND ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AT MASTERMARK

“I believe that the boss ultimately sets the culture for his (or her) company. I’ve tried very hard to
avoid creating a culture of selfishness, stress, and personal gratification at the expense of
others, while still instilling a sense of personal responsibility and accountability. Mastermark is a
very “pro teamwork” organization.”
Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

Chris aimed to mould a culture at Mastermark that was highly professional and results-oriented, whilst still
taking care of its employees’ welfare through a culture of mutual respect and genuine care and concern.
He felt that Mastermark’s culture focused on teamwork, good employee welfare, and even, as he
emphasised, “forgiveness… because staff do occasionally make honest mistakes. I prefer my staff to be
happy working at a pace that is sustainable in the long run than to stress them out for short-term profit
and gain.”

Chris believed that people innately want to do a good job in their work. Consequently, he saw it as his
responsibility to help each staff member grow professionally and personally. He added:

“thIfey are doing what they like, they will naturally thrive in that role. If they thrive, they will
become respected. If the team does well, and they are appreciated and rewarded for the good
results, then they will continue to strive and do well. This makes for a very positive cycle for the
company. I think our current culture works, and the balance is good”

In 2018, it was this very personable and humanistic side of Chris that he admitted was getting in the way
of further expansion of the company. He cared so much for each employee, yet he wished to grow the
business internationally. Ideally, he and other managers would rotate into overseas managerial positions,
responsible for growing Mastermark in other countries. He mused: Would his WhatsApp groups be
enough to keep the SME culture he had created here in Singapore?

CONCLUSION

Chris Wee developed from a reluctant boss to a manager to a leader at Mastermark in the 15 years from
2003. He was the company’s driving force: a passionate, values-driven, opportunistic strategist who was
seen as a “charmer” by his staff. He wished to see his company grow further but he was reluctant to let go
of the reigns in order for this to happen. Deep down, he knew that something fundamental in his approach
to leadership had to change. What was his role, now?

He was both excited and reluctant to face a big decision: “How can I grow our business internationally,
and retain the essence of Mastermark?”

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 8
ABCC-2020-002

APPENDIX 1: THE BUSINESS OF BIRD CONTROL

“Wherever there’s a ledge, especially if it’s under cover of some sort, birds will want to roost.”

Chris Wee, Director, Mastermark

Although we often enjoyed the sound or sight of birds roosting in trees, their presence within structures
designed to house humans or their possessions could be an inconvenient at best, dangerous at worst.
Birds sitting on ledges were noisy, and their droppings could cause damage to small parts of machinery
or even prized personal possessions.

The principle behind “sustainable bird control” was to put a barrier on the ledges to prevent the birds from
landing there, without unduly harming them. There were several methods to do this. Mastermark used
“spikes” exclusively, producing their own product. The spikes were not sharp, but they were produced in
different sizes so they would cover the width of exposed ledges commonly found in Singapore residential,
commercial, and industrial buildings. The spikes prevented birds from roosting on these ledges and, over
time, this discouraged them from entering the buildings.

“BIRDSTRIKE”

Birdstrike was a term used in the aviation industry to describe collisions between a bird (or birds) and
windscreen of an airplane or, more seriously, when a bird was sucked into the engine of an aircraft.
These accidents caused damage and delays to flights, estimated to cost at least USD1.2 billion for
commercial airlines worldwide, annually.1

More than 200 people traveling by airplane had been killed worldwide as a result of birdstrikes since
1988.2 In addition to property damage, birdstrike was a contributing factor to the worldwide decline of
many avian species.3

One of the challenges for the aviation industry was that, with increased urbanisation, airports were often
wildlife habitats where birds and other animals thrived, so it was important to protect the birds and
animals, as well as airport infrastructure and airplanes.

MASTERMARK’S APPROACH TO “WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT” AT AIRPORTS

Mastermark’s Director, Mr. Chris Wee, had been attending the North American Birdstrike Conference
annually since 2006 to become familiar with the issues and potential solutions for birdstrike. Wanting to
decrease the volatility in Mastermark’s cash flow (which was dependent on smaller, one-off installation
contracts for offices, private condominiums, and public buildings), Chris saw that helping airports to
reduce birdstrike was a lucrative market, with potential for long-term contracts.

He approached the Singapore Armed Forces and discussed the cost of birdstrike to the airforce.
Mastermark then put together an integrated-systems programme to both monitor the birdstrike trends and
reduce birdstrike occurrences.

1
Solomon, A. (2013, November 26). Bird strikes cost aviation industry billions per year. Air Cargo World.
https://aircargoworld.com/allposts/bird-strikes-cost-aviation-industry-billions-per-year-8324
2
AviationKnowledge (2016). What is a bird strike? http://aviationknowledge.wikidot.com/aviation:air-safety-bird-strikes
3
Wikipedia. (2016). Birdstrike. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 Page 9
ABCC-2020-002

From then, he won contracts to do other Air Force aerodromes, Selatar airport, and then he courted
Changi Airport (one of the world’s busiest airports). Owing to his company’s proven success with the
military, he won contracts to reduce birdstrike on airport runways and further contracts to reduce bird
droppings in the hangars (particularly where airplanes underwent maintenance and repair) for several
major airlines.

In airplane hangars, birds would shelter up on the steel structures of the roof and their bird droppings
would fall onto the aircraft in the hangars. This needed to be cleaned up as it would be a huge concern if
droppings got into exposed parts of the plane. Other installation companies in Singapore would bid for the
job of installing netting to prevent the birds from settling in the rooves.

In 2013, however, Mastermark set up a wildlife consultancy business, employing biologists who would
assess the birds’ nesting and feeding habits, and address those issues, rather than simply keep the birds
away from aircraft. One solution was to transmigrate the birds to other areas. Other solutions included
putting netting over canals in the area and ensuring that there were lakes available for wildlife to access
without needing to cross the runways. Chris also had plans of using radar technology to plot the
movement of birds and then use robot technology to scare the birds away. With this competitive
advantage in their approach to bird control, Mastermark signed more contracts with Changi Airport,
including clearing birds from the land that was slated for construction of the third runway for the new
Terminal 5. This was an 8- yjeecat.r pro

In 2018, 50% of Mastermark’s sales turnover came from traditional installation of birdproofing, and 50%
from wildlife consultancy and wildlife operations. The Wildlife Operations did work on behalf of the
Singapore government such as removing snakes monitor lizards, civet cats, jungle fowl, and bats from
offices and residences. Mastermark had a contract to humanely reduce the wild peacock population on
Sentosa Island – home to Singapore’s beaches and other tourist attractions – by feeding them an oral
contraceptive.

Chris believed that the Wildlife Consultancy business would grow and expand internationally in the future.
He was thinking both strategically and as a people-centred leader. He considered the wildlife consultancy
work to be gratifying, personally and to the wildlife team. He wanted to give his wildlife consultants
opportunities for overseas postings in countries that interested them and where international airports
would provide potentially lucrative contracts to reduce birdstrike. Chris estimated that 99% of medium-to-
large airports did not have adequate protection against birdstrike, so this was a potentially huge market
for an innovative company like Mastermark.

This document is authorized for educator review use only by ANJANI KUMAR SINGH, Amity University until May 2021. Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860