EMBA‌‌Dec.

‌‌2021‌‌Cohort‌  ‌
Leading‌‌Organizations‌‌Case‌‌Study‌  ‌
 ‌
Robin‌‌Chase‌‌founded‌‌Zipcar‌‌with‌‌the‌‌goal‌‌of‌‌making‌‌a‌‌car-sharing‌‌business‌‌profitable‌‌and‌‌  
long-term‌‌viable.‌‌Her‌‌leadership‌‌inclinations‌‌appear‌‌to‌‌have‌‌gotten‌‌in‌‌the‌‌way‌‌of‌‌achieving‌‌that‌‌  
broad‌‌goal‌‌efficiently.‌  ‌
 ‌
Robin‌‌Chase’s‌‌Leadership‌‌Style‌  ‌
 ‌
- The‌‌Mission‌‌    ‌
 ‌
Chase‌‌wanted‌‌Zipcar‌‌“to‌‌provide‌‌urban‌‌dwellers‌‌with‌‌convenient,‌‌reliable,‌‌fast‌‌access‌‌to‌‌cars.”‌‌If‌‌  
this‌‌statement‌‌can‌‌be‌‌ascribed‌‌to‌‌her‌‌and‌‌to‌‌the‌‌founding,‌‌Chase‌‌had‌‌a‌‌decent‌‌mission‌‌  
statement.‌‌It‌‌contained‌‌a‌‌clear‌‌explanation‌‌of‌‌what‌‌was‌‌being‌‌provided‌‌(cars)‌‌and‌‌to‌‌whom‌‌(urban‌‌  
dwellers)‌‌and‌‌the‌‌benefits‌‌(convenience,‌‌reliability,‌‌and‌‌speed).‌‌However,‌w ‌ hy‌‌‌those‌‌things‌‌were‌‌  
important‌‌to‌‌provide‌‌to‌‌the‌‌world‌‌was‌‌lacking.‌‌Chase‌‌knew‌‌that‌‌data‌‌from‌‌European‌‌car-sharing‌‌  
companies‌‌showed‌‌clear‌‌environmental‌‌benefits‌‌from‌‌reduced‌‌car‌‌ownership,‌‌and‌‌thus‌‌traffic‌‌and‌‌  
emissions;‌‌however,‌‌that‌‌aspect‌‌was‌‌deemed‌‌secondary‌‌to‌‌the‌‌mission.‌  ‌
 ‌
Chase‌‌explored‌‌the‌‌car-sharing‌‌industry‌‌and‌‌found‌‌it‌‌to‌‌be‌‌largely‌‌unsuccessful‌‌and‌‌unprofitable.‌‌  
She‌‌developed‌‌an‌‌understanding‌‌that‌‌the‌‌challenge‌‌to‌‌making‌‌money‌‌was‌‌due‌‌to‌‌clunky,‌‌manual‌‌  
reservation‌‌systems‌‌and‌‌limited‌‌control‌‌of‌‌operational‌‌costs.‌‌Chase‌‌believed‌‌that‌‌wireless‌‌  
technology‌‌was‌‌the‌‌solution‌‌and‌‌would‌‌be‌‌the‌‌key‌‌difference‌‌setting‌‌Zipcar‌‌apart.‌‌However,‌‌that‌‌  
still‌‌didn’t‌‌explain‌‌“why”‌‌Zipcar‌‌needed‌‌to‌‌exist.‌‌In‌‌fact,‌‌it‌‌seemed‌‌to‌‌muddle‌‌the‌‌company’s‌‌sense‌‌  
of‌‌urgency‌‌into‌‌existing‌‌for‌‌urgency’s‌‌sake.‌‌    ‌
 ‌
Without‌‌a‌‌critical‌‌mission‌‌of‌‌serving‌‌a‌‌population‌‌in‌‌distinct‌‌need‌‌or‌‌addressing‌‌a‌‌critical‌‌  
ecological‌‌concern,‌‌Chase’s‌‌leadership‌‌of‌‌Zipcar‌‌was‌‌angled‌‌more‌‌like‌‌a‌‌personal‌‌enterprise.‌‌  
Instead‌‌of‌‌building‌‌the‌‌best‌‌team‌‌to‌‌create‌‌the‌‌best‌‌product‌‌as‌‌quickly‌‌as‌‌possible,‌‌Chase‌‌chose‌‌  
to‌‌iterate‌‌on‌‌her‌‌own‌‌pricing‌‌assumptions,‌‌ignore‌‌ready-made‌‌technological‌‌solutions,‌‌and‌‌build‌‌a ‌‌
leadership‌‌team‌‌that‌‌was‌‌made‌‌of‌‌people‌‌unlikely‌‌to‌‌question‌‌her‌‌judgment.‌  ‌
 ‌
- Technology‌‌and‌‌the‌‌Pricing‌‌Model‌  ‌
 ‌
Chase‌‌believed‌‌that‌‌technology‌‌was‌‌the‌‌backbone‌‌to‌‌making‌‌a‌‌car-sharing‌‌business‌‌profitable.‌ 
However,‌‌when‌‌Zipcar‌‌was‌‌founded,‌‌she‌‌did‌‌not‌‌personally‌‌focus‌‌on‌‌that‌‌technology.‌‌Instead,‌‌she‌‌  
focused‌‌on‌‌“raising‌‌money,‌‌writing‌‌and‌‌designing‌‌the‌‌website,‌‌and‌‌determining‌‌a‌‌pricing‌‌model‌‌  
for‌‌the‌‌business.”‌‌These‌‌efforts‌‌are‌‌critical‌‌aspects‌‌of‌‌any‌‌business,‌‌but‌‌it’s‌‌worthy‌‌of‌‌criticism‌‌that‌‌  
the‌‌Zipcar‌‌CEO‌‌was‌‌not‌‌focused‌‌on‌‌the‌‌one‌‌thing‌‌that‌‌was‌‌supposed‌‌to‌‌differentiate‌‌her‌‌company‌‌  
from‌‌a‌‌list‌‌of‌‌historically‌‌unprofitable‌‌companies.‌‌    ‌
 ‌
Chase’s‌‌idea‌‌was‌‌to‌‌leverage‌‌wireless‌‌technology,‌‌but‌‌in‌‌early‌‌2000,‌‌there‌‌were‌‌no‌‌ready-made‌‌  
wireless‌‌solutions‌‌that‌‌would‌‌allow‌‌the‌‌cars‌‌to‌‌communicate‌‌with‌‌a‌‌central‌‌server.‌‌An‌‌engineering‌‌  
firm‌‌hired‌‌by‌‌Zipcar‌‌designed‌‌a‌‌keypad‌‌prototype‌‌that‌‌would‌‌let‌‌the‌‌member‌‌use‌‌the‌‌car,‌‌but‌‌  
Chase‌‌discarded‌‌this‌‌solution‌‌as‌‌too‌‌complicated‌‌and‌‌not‌‌set‌‌up‌‌to‌‌leverage‌‌wireless‌‌technologies‌‌  
-‌‌be‌‌they‌‌in‌‌existence‌‌or‌‌imagined.‌‌As‌‌a‌‌result,‌‌Zipcar‌‌had‌‌to‌‌design‌‌technology‌‌from‌‌scratch,‌‌  
incurring‌‌expenses‌‌and‌‌costing‌‌the‌‌company‌‌time‌‌to‌‌launch.‌‌It’s‌‌a‌‌bit‌‌of‌‌a‌‌toss-up‌‌as‌‌to‌‌whether‌‌  
this‌‌is‌‌a‌‌misstep.‌‌On‌‌the‌‌one‌‌hand,‌‌designing‌‌the‌‌technology‌‌resulted‌‌in‌‌a‌‌simpler‌‌experience‌‌for‌‌  
the‌‌Zipcar‌‌user‌‌and‌‌led‌‌to‌‌the‌‌technology‌‌backbone‌‌Chase‌‌wanted‌‌for‌‌the‌‌company.‌‌On‌‌the‌‌other‌‌  

1‌  ‌
 ‌

hand,‌‌importantly,‌‌it’s‌‌not‌‌clear‌‌that‌‌Zipcar‌‌couldn’t‌‌have‌‌pursued‌‌both‌‌technology‌‌solutions‌‌at‌‌the‌‌  
same‌‌time.‌‌By‌‌rejecting‌‌an‌‌available‌‌solution,‌‌Chase‌‌rejected‌‌an‌‌opportunity‌‌to‌‌get‌‌some‌‌cars‌‌on‌‌  
the‌‌road‌‌generating‌‌some‌‌revenue‌‌and,‌‌more‌‌importantly,‌‌data‌‌from‌‌her‌‌would-be‌‌customer‌‌base‌‌  
to‌‌help‌‌build‌‌the‌‌pricing‌‌model.‌‌   ‌
 ‌
Chase‌‌relied‌‌on‌‌her‌‌finance‌‌background‌‌and‌‌business‌‌school‌‌reputation‌‌as‌‌a‌‌“quant‌‌jock”‌‌in‌‌  
developing‌‌the‌‌pricing‌‌model.‌‌Existing‌‌Canadian‌‌and‌‌European‌‌car-sharing‌‌company‌‌pricing‌‌  
models‌‌were‌‌the‌‌root‌‌of‌‌her‌‌Zipcar‌‌model‌‌-‌‌but‌‌Chase‌‌admitted‌‌that‌‌“we‌‌had‌‌no‌‌insight‌‌into‌‌how‌‌  
much‌‌use‌‌was‌‌going‌‌to‌‌be‌‌hourly‌‌versus‌‌how‌‌much‌‌was‌‌going‌‌to‌‌be‌‌daily.”‌‌As‌‌a‌‌result,‌‌she‌‌spent‌‌  
three‌‌months‌‌refining‌‌a‌‌model‌‌-‌‌by‌‌herself‌‌-‌‌that‌‌appears‌‌to‌‌have‌‌been‌‌based‌‌largely‌‌(if‌‌not‌‌
 
entirely)‌‌on‌‌assumptions.‌‌As‌‌a‌‌result,‌‌when‌‌the‌‌data‌‌from‌‌June‌‌2000‌‌to‌‌October‌‌2000‌‌use‌‌and‌‌  
earnings‌‌came‌‌in,‌‌the‌‌pricing‌‌model‌‌had‌‌turned‌‌out‌‌to‌‌be‌‌materially‌‌inaccurate‌‌and‌‌not‌‌  
sustainable.‌‌In‌‌a‌‌vacuum,‌‌it’s‌‌not‌‌entirely‌‌clear‌‌why‌‌the‌‌other‌‌leaders‌‌at‌‌Zipcar‌‌would‌‌have‌‌allowed‌‌  
Chase‌‌to‌‌hold‌‌all‌‌of‌‌the‌‌action‌‌and‌‌responsibility‌‌for‌‌this‌‌critical‌‌model.‌‌The‌‌motivation‌‌Chase‌‌  
exhibited‌‌in‌‌choosing‌‌her‌‌team‌‌sheds‌‌some‌‌light‌‌on‌‌why.‌  ‌
 ‌
- Innovation‌‌and‌‌The‌‌Team‌  ‌
 ‌
As‌‌expected,‌‌Chase’s‌‌personal‌‌values‌‌and‌‌aims‌‌for‌‌Zipcar‌‌established‌‌much‌‌of‌‌the‌‌early‌‌culture‌‌  
for‌‌the‌‌company.‌‌Chase’s‌‌words‌‌demonstrate‌‌belief‌‌in‌‌an‌‌adhocracy‌‌model‌‌of‌‌company‌‌culture.‌‌  
She‌‌wanted‌‌to‌‌have‌‌employees‌‌who‌‌were‌‌“can-do,‌‌non-complainers‌‌who‌‌were‌‌ingenious‌‌and‌‌  
innovative,‌‌didn’t‌‌need‌‌a‌‌lot‌‌of‌‌oversight,‌‌and‌‌didn’t‌‌need‌‌money‌‌to‌‌get‌‌something‌‌done.”‌‌Despite‌‌  
this‌‌outward‌‌belief‌‌in‌‌innovation‌‌and‌‌being‌‌responsive,‌‌Chase’s‌‌hiring‌‌and‌‌firing‌‌of‌‌the‌‌Zipcar‌‌  
startup‌‌team‌‌was‌‌more‌‌indicative‌‌of‌‌classic‌‌hierarchical‌‌position‌‌power‌‌over‌‌people.‌‌The‌‌aspect‌‌of‌‌  
adhocracy‌‌that‌‌was‌‌present‌‌was‌‌the‌‌inclination‌‌toward‌‌autonomous‌‌leadership‌‌style.‌‌Chase‌‌  
expected‌‌her‌‌team‌‌to‌‌act‌‌based‌‌on‌‌their‌‌own‌‌beliefs‌‌and‌‌ideas‌‌-‌‌and‌‌she‌‌drew‌‌this‌‌team‌‌from‌‌  
family,‌‌friends,‌‌and‌‌people‌‌she‌‌already‌‌knew.‌‌Presumably,‌‌this‌‌was‌‌so‌‌she‌‌could‌‌have‌‌a‌‌level‌‌of‌‌  
certainty‌‌that‌‌when‌‌they‌‌acted‌‌from‌‌their‌‌own‌‌beliefs‌‌and‌‌ideas‌‌it‌‌would‌‌be‌‌congruent‌‌or‌‌at‌‌least‌‌  
compatible‌‌with‌‌Chase’s‌‌own.‌‌The‌‌Zipcar‌‌story‌‌shows‌‌some‌‌of‌‌the‌‌inherent‌‌danger‌‌in‌‌seeking‌‌  
homogeneity‌‌of‌‌viewpoint‌‌in‌‌this‌‌fashion.‌  ‌
 ‌
From‌‌a‌‌Leader-Member‌‌Exchange‌‌Theory‌‌perspective,‌‌hiring‌‌family‌‌and‌‌familiars‌‌intuitively‌‌seems‌‌  
to‌‌be‌‌a‌‌practical‌‌way‌‌to‌‌immediately‌‌move‌‌beyond‌‌the‌‌stranger‌‌and‌‌acquaintance‌‌phases.‌‌Zipcar‌‌  
makes‌‌one‌‌question‌‌whether‌‌that‌‌would‌‌work.‌‌For‌‌example,‌‌Chase’s‌‌hiring‌‌of‌‌her‌‌friend‌‌and‌‌  
neighbor‌‌Stephen‌‌Oakley‌‌to‌‌be‌‌a‌‌leader‌‌in‌‌Zipcar‌‌operations.‌‌Oakley‌‌was‌‌a‌‌person‌‌who‌‌had‌‌a ‌‌
varied‌‌and‌‌unfocused‌‌career‌‌background,‌‌he‌‌admitted‌‌that‌‌“[Chase]‌‌had‌‌this‌‌impression‌‌of‌‌me‌‌as‌‌  
a‌‌numbers‌‌person,‌‌and‌‌I’m‌‌really‌‌not‌‌a‌‌natural‌‌numbers‌‌person.”‌‌The‌‌reality‌‌of‌‌this‌‌statement‌‌  
shows‌‌that‌‌Oakley‌‌was‌‌still‌‌very‌‌much‌‌a‌‌stranger‌‌to‌‌Chase‌‌from‌‌a‌‌business‌‌perspective,‌‌even‌ 
though‌‌they‌‌were‌‌friends.‌‌That‌‌business-unfamiliarity‌‌meant‌‌Oakley‌‌was‌‌an‌‌early‌‌hire‌‌without‌‌any‌‌  
apparent‌‌ability‌‌to‌‌aid‌‌the‌‌company‌‌toward‌‌addressing‌‌the‌‌crucial‌‌technology‌‌or‌‌pricing‌‌factors.‌  ‌
 ‌
More‌‌problematically,‌‌Chase’s‌‌inclination‌‌toward‌‌hiring‌‌personal‌‌connections‌‌created‌‌a‌‌potentially‌‌  
false‌‌in-group‌‌out-group‌‌dynamic.‌‌It’s‌‌not‌‌addressed‌‌in‌‌the‌‌assigned‌‌case‌‌study,‌‌but‌‌Co-founder‌‌  
Antjje‌‌Danielson‌‌was‌‌fired‌‌by‌‌Chase‌‌within‌‌a‌‌year‌‌of‌‌Zipcar’s‌‌incorporation.‌1‌‌ ‌Danielson‌‌was‌‌a ‌‌
scientist‌‌with‌‌previous‌‌experience‌‌in‌‌the‌‌technology‌‌and‌‌automotive‌‌sectors.‌‌The‌‌idea‌‌for‌‌a ‌‌

1
‌Duhaime-Ross,‌‌Arielle.‌‌“Driven:‌‌how‌‌Zipcar's‌‌founders‌‌built‌‌and‌‌lost‌‌a‌‌car-sharing‌‌empire.”‌‌The‌‌Verge,‌‌2014‌‌
 
https://www.theverge.com/2014/4/1/5553910/driven-how-zipcars-founders-built-and-lost-a-car-sharing-empire‌  ‌

2‌  ‌
 ‌

car-sharing‌‌company‌‌was‌‌Danielson’s‌‌originally‌‌that‌‌she‌‌shared‌‌with‌‌Chase.‌‌When‌‌Zipcar‌‌was‌‌  
founded,‌‌Danielson‌‌was‌‌working‌‌her‌‌full-time‌‌job‌‌at‌‌Harvard‌‌and‌‌an‌‌additional‌‌30‌‌hours‌‌weekly‌‌at‌‌  
Zipcar,‌‌which‌‌would‌‌indicate‌‌a‌‌willingness‌‌to‌‌“go‌‌the‌‌extra‌‌mile”‌‌typically‌‌ascribed‌‌to‌‌an‌‌in-group‌‌  
member.‌‌However,‌‌Chase’s‌‌husband,‌‌brother,‌‌and‌‌her‌‌brother’s‌‌colleague,‌‌Larry‌‌Slotnick‌‌-‌‌all‌‌  
early‌‌Zipcar‌‌leadership‌‌-‌‌characterize‌‌Danielson‌‌as‌‌someone‌‌who‌‌was‌‌not‌‌dedicated‌‌or‌‌  
incorporated‌‌into‌‌Zipcar’s‌‌goals.‌2‌‌ ‌This‌‌is‌‌a‌‌contrary‌‌viewpoint‌‌to‌‌Paul‌‌Covell,‌‌Zipcar’s‌‌first‌‌
 
engineer,‌‌who‌‌describes‌‌Danielson‌‌as‌‌someone‌‌who‌‌was‌‌trying‌‌to‌‌contribute,‌‌but‌‌who‌‌was‌‌  
excluded‌‌from‌‌decision-making.‌3‌‌ ‌Ultimately,‌‌in‌‌January‌‌2001,‌‌Chase‌‌received‌‌Board‌‌of‌‌Directors‌‌  
approval‌‌to‌‌make‌‌unilateral‌‌hiring‌‌and‌‌firing‌‌decisions,‌‌and‌‌she‌‌fired‌‌Danielson.‌‌    ‌
 ‌
Similarly,‌‌Chase‌‌developed‌‌a‌‌distaste‌‌for‌‌Keefer‌‌Welch‌‌as‌‌company‌‌president.‌‌Advisors‌‌  
suggested‌‌that‌‌Zipcar‌‌needed‌‌corporate‌‌managerial‌‌experience‌‌on‌‌staff,‌‌and‌‌Welch‌‌was‌‌selected‌‌  
for‌‌that‌‌role.‌‌Chase‌‌terminated‌‌Welch‌‌in‌‌three‌‌months,‌‌asserting‌‌he‌‌was‌‌not‌‌a‌‌good‌‌role‌‌fit‌‌  
because‌‌he‌‌lacked‌‌startup‌‌or‌‌small‌‌company‌‌experience.‌‌Assuming‌‌this‌‌was‌‌true,‌‌these‌‌are‌‌  
characteristics‌‌that‌‌come‌‌out‌‌in‌‌a‌‌candidate’s‌‌interview‌‌process.‌‌Moreover,‌‌Chase‌‌and‌‌team‌‌never‌‌  
replaced‌‌Welch‌‌with‌‌a‌‌better-fitting‌‌president.‌‌I‌‌wonder‌‌how‌‌much‌‌diligence‌‌Chase‌‌and‌‌her‌‌core‌‌  
team‌‌put‌‌into‌‌the‌‌selection‌‌of‌‌Welch,‌‌and‌‌whether‌‌anyone‌‌that‌‌was‌‌not‌‌already‌‌in‌‌their‌‌core‌‌group‌‌  
of‌‌familiars‌‌would‌‌have‌‌been‌‌deemed‌‌to‌‌be‌‌acceptable.‌‌In‌‌addition‌‌to‌‌paying‌‌Welch‌‌severance,‌‌  
Zipcar‌‌lost‌‌$150,000‌‌in‌‌committed‌‌investment‌‌-‌‌a‌‌cautionary‌‌tale‌‌of‌‌what‌‌can‌‌happen‌‌when‌‌you‌‌  
ignore‌‌critical‌‌stakeholder‌‌desires.‌‌    ‌
 ‌
Chase’s‌‌Response‌‌    ‌
 ‌
When‌‌Chase‌‌realized‌‌that‌‌her‌‌pricing‌‌model‌‌was‌‌faulty,‌‌her‌‌initial‌‌response‌‌was‌‌visible‌‌despair‌‌  
and‌‌self-isolation.‌‌This‌‌is‌‌an‌‌extreme‌‌example‌‌of‌‌transparent‌‌leadership,‌‌and‌‌not‌‌one‌‌that‌‌I‌‌can‌‌  
endorse.‌‌Leaders‌‌should‌‌be‌‌expected‌‌to‌‌display‌‌the‌‌core‌‌and‌‌aspirational‌‌values‌‌derived‌‌from‌‌a ‌‌
company’s‌‌mission.‌‌Transparency‌‌is‌‌laudable,‌‌but‌‌how‌‌do‌‌you‌‌convince‌‌your‌‌workforce‌‌that‌‌they‌ 
are‌‌doing‌‌something‌‌worthwhile‌‌while‌‌you‌‌demonstrate‌‌lack‌‌of‌‌belief‌‌in‌‌your‌‌mission‌‌and‌‌your‌‌  
ability‌‌to‌‌achieve‌‌it?‌‌However,‌‌when‌‌Chase‌‌composed‌‌herself‌‌and‌‌discovered‌‌a‌‌solution,‌‌her‌‌staff‌‌  
felt‌‌that‌‌she‌‌demonstrated‌‌herself‌‌to‌‌be‌‌an‌‌emotionally‌‌invested‌‌and‌‌transparent‌‌leader.‌4‌‌ ‌I‌‌have‌‌a ‌‌
strong‌‌suspicion‌‌that‌‌this‌‌would‌‌only‌‌occur‌‌in‌‌a‌‌very‌‌young,‌‌very‌‌lean‌‌company,‌‌staffed‌‌almost‌‌  
entirely‌‌with‌‌leadership‌‌drawn‌‌from‌‌family‌‌and‌‌friends.‌‌I‌‌think‌‌this‌‌suspicion‌‌is‌‌borne‌‌out‌‌by‌‌  
Chase’s‌‌dismissal‌‌from‌‌the‌‌company‌‌that‌‌she‌‌founded‌‌in‌‌less‌‌than‌‌four‌‌years.‌5‌  ‌
 ‌
The‌‌one‌‌decision‌‌that‌‌Chase‌‌made‌‌that‌‌I‌‌completely‌‌agree‌‌with‌‌is‌‌her‌‌same-day‌‌email‌‌to‌‌her‌‌  
6‌‌
customer‌‌base‌‌about‌‌the‌‌pricing‌‌issue‌‌and‌‌the‌‌need‌‌to‌‌raise‌‌rates.‌ ‌Direct‌‌problem‌‌  
acknowledgment‌‌and‌‌solution‌‌proposal‌‌is‌‌the‌‌kind‌‌of‌‌transparent‌‌leadership‌‌that‌‌rallies‌‌customer‌‌  
and‌‌employee‌‌loyalty.‌‌If‌‌I‌‌had‌‌found‌‌myself‌‌in‌‌Chase’s‌‌position,‌‌I‌‌would‌‌have‌‌sent‌‌the‌‌same‌‌email.‌‌  
However,‌‌I‌‌also‌‌would‌‌have‌‌hired‌‌subject‌‌matter‌‌experts,‌‌leveraged‌‌existing‌‌technology‌‌for‌‌data‌‌  
sources,‌‌and‌‌invited‌‌others‌‌to‌‌work‌‌on‌‌the‌‌price‌‌model‌‌before‌‌launch‌‌-‌‌so‌‌I‌‌question‌‌if‌‌I‌‌would‌‌  
have‌‌been‌‌caught‌‌in‌‌the‌‌same‌‌position.‌   ‌ ‌

2
‌ uhaime-Ross.‌‌“Driven.”‌‌Paragraphs‌‌8-9.‌  ‌
D
3
‌Duhaime-Ross.‌‌“Driven.”‌‌Paragraphs‌‌8‌‌&‌‌10.‌  ‌
4
‌Quittner,‌‌Jeremy.‌‌“Robin‌‌Chase:‌‌How‌‌I‌‌Survived‌‌a‌‌Huge‌‌Screw-up.”‌‌Inc.,‌‌2013.‌‌
 
https://www.inc.com/magazine/201303/how-i-got-started/robin-chase.html.‌  ‌
5
‌Duhaime-Ross.‌‌“Driven.”‌‌Timeline‌‌Graphic.‌  ‌
6
‌Quittner.‌‌“Robin‌‌Chase”‌‌Paragraph‌‌5.‌  ‌

3‌  ‌