A-Level Business Studies · Case Study Pack
Six UK Business Failures
What Carillion, Thomas Cook, BHS, Patisserie Valerie, Wilko and Debenhams teach Year 13 about evaluation, risk and strategy.
Most A-Level case studies are success stories — Apple's premium pricing, Costa's brand, Greggs' volume play. But the questions that score highest in 16-mark evaluation answers are the ones that examine why decisions didn't work. This pack puts six recent UK collapses on the desk.
Thomas Cook
collapsed 2019
Patisserie Valerie
collapsed 2019
How to use this pack
Why teach failure — and how this pack works
In any year, three or four of the names in this pack will appear in exam questions, mark scheme indicative content, or a "current real-world examples" prompt. Yet most teachers reach for the same successes — Apple, Greggs, Tesco — when scaffolding a 16-mark answer. The students who pick out a Carillion or a Patisserie Valerie tend to score one band higher on synoptic questions because they are reaching for evidence that fewer of their peers will use.
Each of the six cases sits on a single page with the same structure: company background, the collapse, why it failed (three points), the lessons (three points), and Edexcel/AQA/OCR theme tags. Twelve to fifteen minutes of class reading per case, or set them as homework and run a comparison lesson the next day.
Three ways teachers use this pack
A
As a Year 13 mock-exam booster
Set 6 cases as half-term reading. In the next lesson, run the 4-question comparison on page 9 as a 30-min discussion. Students write a 16-mark answer using two cases as paired evidence.
B
As a single-lesson stretch task
Pick one case (Patisserie Valerie or Wilko work best), give 15 min reading, then run a 30-min "what went wrong, what should they have done" discussion. Useful Year 12 → Year 13 bridge.
C
As a synoptic theme thread
Use the comparison matrix on page 9 to teach the synoptic links: cash flow + leadership, ethics + financial reporting, debt + economic shock. Students see how A-Level themes interact in real collapses.
D
As essay practice with the question bank
Page 10 has six exam-style questions (one per case) at 12, 16 and 20 marks. Use as plenary, homework, or paired marking exercises against the spec mapping.
Suggested 60-minute lesson structure
20 min
Two cases — paired analysis
12 min
Plan a 16-mark answer
Note on currency: figures and dates are drawn from publicly reported sources (FT, Companies House, official inquiry reports) and rounded for teaching clarity. The lessons drawn are educational interpretation — not a forensic statement of cause.
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
02 / 13
Construction & Outsourcing
FTSE 250
Government contractor
Annual revenue 2016
£5.2 bn
The story
Carillion was the UK's second-largest construction firm and a major government services contractor — running NHS hospitals, schools, military bases and major rail projects. It collapsed into compulsory liquidation on a single Monday morning in January 2018, the largest ever for a UK construction business. Three profit warnings in 2017 had wiped £1.1 bn off its share price; the final lender refused new credit.
Why it failed
- Aggressive bidding on long-term contracts. To win against rivals, Carillion priced contracts on optimistic cost assumptions. When real costs ran higher (Royal Liverpool Hospital, Aberdeen bypass), losses compounded across years.
- Cash flow collapse despite revenue. Revenue stayed near £5 bn, but customer payment terms (90+ days) plus supplier payment demands (30 days) created a cash gap the company filled with short-term debt.
- Aggressive accounting and weak governance. A 2018 parliamentary inquiry called the board "complicit" in propping up reported profits. Auditor KPMG was fined £14.4m in 2022 and a further record £21m in October 2023 for misconduct in the audit.
What students should remember
- Profit on paper is not cash. A business with strong revenue and reported profit can still fail — it is cash flow that pays bills.
- Long-term contracts magnify pricing errors. A 5% mis-bid on a 10-year contract is not a 5% problem — it is a permanent margin trap.
- Audit independence matters. Carillion's auditor had been in place for 19 years. Familiarity reduced challenge.
Themes
Edexcel 2.2 Cash flow
Edexcel 1.3 Pricing
AQA 3.5 Strategy
AQA 3.7 Cash flow forecasts
OCR 5.2 Strategic choice
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
03 / 13
Travel
FTSE 250 (former)
178-year-old brand
Holidaymakers stranded
150,000
The story
Britain's oldest travel company collapsed overnight, triggering the largest peacetime repatriation in UK history. The Civil Aviation Authority ran a chartered airlift — Operation Matterhorn — to bring 150,000 Britons home over two weeks. The company had asked the government for a £150 m bailout the previous Friday and been refused.
Why it failed
- Debt accumulated after the 2007 MyTravel merger. By 2019 net debt had reached around £1.7 bn through subsequent operations, refinancings and currency moves. Annual interest payments alone consumed roughly the company's entire annual operating profit.
- Slow response to digital disruption. Customers booked flights via Skyscanner, hotels via Booking.com, package deals via Jet2 and TUI — Thomas Cook still owned 555 expensive UK high-street stores in 2019.
- External shocks compounded the structural weakness. Brexit-driven sterling weakness, the 2018 European heatwave (people stayed home), and Boeing 737 MAX grounding hit a balance sheet with no margin of safety left.
What students should remember
- Heritage brand value is not infinite. 178 years of trust did not survive a structurally outdated cost base.
- External shocks hit the most leveraged first. A healthier balance sheet might have absorbed the same shocks. Debt removes options.
- Distribution model decisions are strategic, not tactical. Closing high-street stores would have hurt — keeping them was fatal.
Themes
Edexcel 1.5 Forms of business
Edexcel 4.4 External influences
AQA 3.6 Mergers
AQA 3.10 Globalisation
OCR 5.1 Strategic analysis
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
04 / 13
High-street retail
88-year-old brand
Pension scandal
The story
Sir Philip Green's Arcadia Group sold BHS to Retail Acquisitions — a consortium led by a former bankrupt with no retail experience — for £1 in March 2015. Thirteen months later the chain collapsed into administration with a £571m pension deficit affecting 19,000 people. A parliamentary inquiry called the deal "the unacceptable face of capitalism" and Sir Philip eventually paid £363m into the pension fund.
Why it failed
- Underinvestment in stores and product over a decade. While Primark and supermarket clothing brands grew, BHS stores became dated. Footfall halved between 2007 and 2014.
- Asset-stripping under previous ownership. Dividends of around £423 m were paid out to the Green family between 2002 and 2004 — money that did not go into stores, supply chain or product.
- An inappropriate buyer accepted as a way out. Selling to a buyer with no retail experience and limited capital simply transferred the inevitable collapse to a new corporate envelope, while leaving the pension obligations unresolved.
What students should remember
- Stakeholder obligations outlive ownership transfers. Pension promises do not disappear when a business is sold.
- Dividend policy is a strategic choice. Cash extracted as dividends cannot also be invested in stores. Boards face a real trade-off.
- Reputation contagion is real. Sir Philip Green's reputation across the rest of his retail empire suffered for years.
Themes
Edexcel 1.5 Stakeholders
Edexcel 4.5 CSR
AQA 3.6 Acquisitions
AQA 3.7 Dividends
OCR 5.2 Strategy
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
05 / 13
Cafe chain
Accounting fraud
AIM-listed
Reported cash 2018
£28.8 m
Restated black hole
~£94 m
The story
In October 2018, Patisserie Valerie's directors discovered that the published accounts were fictitious. Reported cash of £28.8 m did not exist. Two secret bank loans of around £10 m had been hidden from the board. The Serious Fraud Office began an investigation. Three months later, after a rescue rights issue failed to fix the underlying gap, the chain entered administration. The fraud is one of the largest accounting scandals in UK AIM-market history.
Why it failed
- Accounting fraud disguised the true financial position. The Finance Director was arrested in October 2018; the Serious Fraud Office charged four individuals in 2021. For years the board, auditor (Grant Thornton) and shareholders thought they were investing in a profitable, growing business.
- Single-point-of-failure on financial reporting. Internal controls were weak enough that one senior figure could maintain a fraudulent picture for an extended period. There was no effective challenge from the audit committee.
- Aggressive expansion masked operational weakness. New store openings drove top-line growth that disguised falling like-for-like sales. When the fraud was discovered, the underlying business model also looked fragile.
What students should remember
- Audit is the third line of defence — but it is not infallible. Grant Thornton was fined £4 m by the Financial Reporting Council (reduced to £2.34 m for cooperation).
- Internal controls protect the firm from itself. The fraud was possible because no one could meaningfully check the CFO's numbers.
- Headline growth can hide problems. Investors should ask whether the growth comes from new openings or from existing stores.
Themes
Edexcel 4.5 Business ethics
Edexcel 2.2 Financial reporting
AQA 3.6 Corporate governance
AQA 3.7 Internal controls
OCR 5.6 CSR & ethics
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
06 / 13
Discount retail
Family-owned
93-year-old brand
Family dividends 2014–22
£77 m
The story
Wilko, the family-owned discount homewares chain, entered administration after years of falling sales and rising debt. Most stores closed within weeks; B&M and Poundland bought a portion of the leases. The parliamentary committee that examined the collapse criticised £77 m of dividends paid to the founding family between 2014 and 2022 while the company was visibly losing market share to B&M, Home Bargains and Poundland.
Why it failed
- Cost leadership lost to faster-moving rivals. B&M, Home Bargains and Poundland all grew faster, opened stores in better locations, and built more efficient supply chains. Wilko's average margins fell every year from 2017.
- Working capital squeeze. Suppliers, anxious about being unpaid, demanded cash on delivery. Wilko had to draw on increasingly expensive short-term debt to keep stock on shelves — which compressed margins further.
- Dividend policy at odds with reinvestment needs. The £77 m paid out to the family during a period of declining performance was money that could have refurbished stores or modernised the IT systems.
What students should remember
- Cost leadership is a treadmill. If a competitor lowers their cost base further, the original cost leader becomes the high-cost player overnight.
- Family ownership has trade-offs. No outside investor scrutiny, but also fewer external sources of capital and harder governance challenges.
- Working capital is a leading indicator. Suppliers tightening terms is one of the earliest signs an outsider can see of a retailer in trouble.
Themes
Edexcel 1.3 Pricing
Edexcel 3.5 Competitiveness
AQA 3.5 Cost leadership
AQA 3.7 Working capital
OCR 5.2 Strategy
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
07 / 13
Department store
242-year-old brand
Online relaunch
Debt at first administration 2019
£600 m
The story
Debenhams entered administration twice — April 2019 and April 2020 — before final liquidation in late 2020 after the failed Arcadia rescue talks and the Covid-19 lockdowns. Boohoo bought the brand and online business for £55 m in January 2021 and relaunched it as a pure online retailer. The 242-year-old brand survives only as a website.
Why it failed
- Long high-street leases at unsustainable rents. Stores were committed to 25-year upward-only rent reviews signed when prime retail was booming. By 2018, those leases were millstones.
- Slow online migration. Online was only 33% of revenue in 2018 — far behind direct-to-consumer competitors. The fashion department-store proposition (multiple brands under one roof, mid-tier price) was directly disrupted by ASOS, Boohoo and Amazon.
- Covid-19 closed stores faster than the company could pivot. Three lockdowns in 18 months pushed monthly cash burn beyond what a balance sheet already weakened by debt could sustain.
What students should remember
- Long-term leases lock in cost structures. They look manageable when rents are rising and footfall is strong; they are catastrophic when both reverse.
- Survival as a brand is not survival as a business. Debenhams.com exists. Debenhams the employer of 12,000 high-street staff does not.
- External shocks accelerate underlying decline. Covid did not start the rot — it shortened the timeline by perhaps a decade.
Themes
Edexcel 4.4 External influences
Edexcel 1.3 Distribution
AQA 3.10 Macro environment
AQA 3.5 Strategic positioning
OCR 5.4 International
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
08 / 13
Pattern recognition
Comparison matrix — what the six failures have in common
Use this matrix to structure paired-evidence answers. The strongest 16-mark answers cite two cases that share a primary cause but differ in context — that is the synoptic move examiners reward.
| Company |
Primary cause |
Trigger event |
Key A-Level theme |
| Carillion 2018 |
Cash flow crisis from aggressive bidding |
Lender refused new credit after 3rd profit warning |
Cash flow vs profit · pricing |
| Thomas Cook 2019 |
Legacy debt + slow digital pivot |
Government refused £150m bailout |
External shocks · M&A legacy |
| BHS 2016 |
Underinvestment + dividend extraction |
Sold to inappropriate buyer for £1 |
Stakeholders · pensions · ethics |
| Patisserie Valerie 2019 |
Accounting fraud |
Board discovered missing £20m+ |
Governance · ethics · internal controls |
| Wilko 2023 |
Cost leadership lost + dividend extraction |
Suppliers cut credit terms |
Competitiveness · working capital |
| Debenhams 2020 |
High-street decline + slow digital pivot |
Covid lockdowns + Arcadia collapse |
External shocks · distribution |
Pattern 1 · The dividend extraction trap
BHS (£423m to the Green family 2002–04) and Wilko (£77m to the Wilkinson family 2014–22) both saw owners take cash out during periods of underperformance. Pair these two for any 16-mark answer on dividend policy, owner discipline, or the trade-off between shareholder returns and reinvestment.
Pattern 2 · External shocks meet structural weakness
Thomas Cook (Brexit + heatwave + 737 MAX) and Debenhams (Covid + Arcadia) were both pushed over the edge by external shocks — but both had structural weaknesses (debt, leases, slow digital pivot) that turned manageable shocks into existential ones. Pair these for any synoptic question on resilience or PESTLE-style external factors.
Pattern 3 · Cash flow tells the truth
Carillion looked profitable for years; Patisserie Valerie reported £28.8m of cash that did not exist. Both reinforce a single A-Level point: profit can be reported, cash flow has to actually be there. The smartest evaluation answer references both — same lesson, different mechanism.
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
09 / 13
Specification mapping & question bank
Where this pack fits the spec — and six exam-style questions
Edexcel A-Level (9BS0)
- 1.3.5Pricing strategies
- 1.5.4Stakeholders & conflict
- 2.2Cash flow & budgeting
- 3.5Strategic positioning
- 3.7Decision-making
- 4.4External influences
- 4.5Business ethics & CSR
AQA A-Level (7132)
- 3.5.4Strategic positioning
- 3.6.2Mergers & takeovers
- 3.7.1Cash flow forecasts
- 3.7.2Working capital
- 3.10.2Macro environment
- 3.11Ethics
OCR A-Level (H431)
- 5.1Strategic analysis
- 5.2Strategic choice
- 5.4International business
- 5.5Mergers & acquisitions
- 5.6CSR & ethics
Six exam-style questions — one per case
12 mkCarillion. Analyse two reasons why a profitable business can run out of cash, using Carillion as evidence. (Edexcel-style application)
16 mkThomas Cook. Evaluate the view that Thomas Cook's collapse was caused more by external shocks than by internal strategic failures. Justify your judgement. (Edexcel evaluation)
20 mkBHS. "Owners have a moral and a legal duty to leave a business in a stronger position than they found it." Discuss this view, using the BHS collapse and at least one other case to support your argument. (OCR-style synoptic)
16 mkPatisserie Valerie. Evaluate whether the Patisserie Valerie collapse was primarily a failure of governance or a failure of audit. Justify your judgement. (Edexcel evaluation)
16 mkWilko. Analyse the trade-offs the Wilkinson family faced between paying dividends and reinvesting in the business between 2014 and 2022. (AQA analysis)
25 mkDebenhams. "External shocks did not cause Debenhams to fail — they exposed why it was already going to." Discuss this view. Justify your judgement using evidence from the Debenhams case and from one other failed UK retailer of your choice. (AQA-style 25-mark)
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
10 / 13
Student activity sheet
Six failures · what students take away
Use this sheet alongside the six case-study pages. Write in your own words — examination marks at A-Level reward application and evaluation, not memorised text. Your teacher can collect this sheet for marking or self-assessment.
Case 01 · Carillion (2018)
Top reason it failed:
If I were CEO, the one decision I would make differently:
Case 02 · Thomas Cook (2019)
Top reason it failed:
If I were CEO, the one decision I would make differently:
Case 03 · BHS (2016)
Top reason it failed:
If I were CEO, the one decision I would make differently:
Case 04 · Patisserie Valerie (2019)
Top reason it failed:
If I were CEO, the one decision I would make differently:
Case 05 · Wilko (2023)
Top reason it failed:
If I were CEO, the one decision I would make differently:
Case 06 · Debenhams (2020)
Top reason it failed:
If I were CEO, the one decision I would make differently:
Synoptic challenge
Pick two of the six cases. Write one sentence explaining what their failures had in common.
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
11 / 13
Teacher delivery notes
How to teach each case — pause points and pitfalls
Concise pedagogical notes per case. Each row gives the most likely student misconception, a discussion pause-point that surfaces it, and a stretch task for the most confident students. Use as a planning crib-sheet — print or annotate as needed.
| Case |
Likely student misconception |
Pause-and-discuss prompt |
Stretch / differentiation |
| 01 · Carillion 2018 |
"Profitable companies don't go bust." Students conflate profit with cash. |
"Carillion reported revenue of £5.2bn the year before collapse. So how could it run out of cash?" |
Stretch: ask whether KPMG bears more responsibility than the board. SEND: focus on the keyfacts strip only. |
| 02 · Thomas Cook 2019 |
"Old brands will always survive." Students underestimate digital disruption speed. |
"You are 18. When did you last visit a high-street travel agent? Now imagine running 555 of them in 2019." |
Stretch: compare to Jet2's growth in the same period. SEND: focus on the £1.7bn debt vs operating profit point. |
| 03 · BHS 2016 |
"Selling for £1 must mean it had no value." Students miss the dividend extraction point. |
"If the Green family took out £423m in three years, what does that tell you about their priorities?" |
Stretch: discuss whether the £1 sale was an attempt to dodge pension obligations. SEND: build a simple before/after timeline. |
| 04 · Patisserie Valerie 2019 |
"The auditor must always catch fraud." Students over-rate the reach of audit. |
"Why did neither the board nor Grant Thornton challenge the CFO's numbers for years?" |
Stretch: research the related Sarbanes-Oxley regime and contrast with UK governance. SEND: focus on the £28.8m vs reality gap. |
| 05 · Wilko 2023 |
"Cost leadership is a permanent moat." Students think being cheap is enough. |
"Wilko was the cheap option a decade ago. What changed — Wilko, or the rivals?" |
Stretch: compare to B&M's growth strategy in the same decade. SEND: focus on supplier credit terms as an early warning. |
| 06 · Debenhams 2020 |
"Covid killed the high street." Students miss the structural decline that pre-dated 2020. |
"Did Covid cause Debenhams to fail — or did it just speed up something already happening?" |
Stretch: pair with the Boohoo acquisition: how does buying just the website change the business model? SEND: focus on the lease problem. |
Three universal pitfalls — flag these before students write
1. Single-cause framing. Examiners reward students who recognise multiple interacting causes. Encourage "X was the trigger; Y was the underlying weakness."
2. Hindsight bias. Avoid "any sensible person would have seen this coming." Strong evaluation acknowledges what was reasonable at the time.
3. Generic theory drift. "They didn't innovate" is not enough. The mark scheme rewards specific case evidence, not generic strategy theory.
TBS Education · Free for UK teachers
12 / 13
Mark scheme · two worked examples
How to award the 16 marks — full level descriptors
Full Level 1–4 indicators for two of the page-10 questions. Use these to mark student responses, or share them with students for self-marking after a timed essay.
Q2 · 16 marks
Thomas Cook · evaluation
"Evaluate the view that Thomas Cook's collapse was caused more by external shocks than by internal strategic failures. Justify your judgement."
13–16
Level 4. Strong arguments both sides with case-specific evidence. For external: Brexit, 2018 heatwave, Boeing 737 MAX grounding, currency volatility. For internal: £1.7bn legacy debt, 555 high-street stores in 2019, slow digital pivot, interest payments consuming operating profit. Reasoned judgement reaching a defensible position — typically that the internal weaknesses (debt, store estate, slow online) made manageable external shocks fatal.
9–12
Level 3. Both sides discussed with reasonable case application. Judgement reached but justification limited or partly generic. May over-emphasise one side.
5–8
Level 2. Mostly one-sided argument or generic discussion. Limited use of the case. Some attempt at evaluation.
1–4
Level 1. Knowledge-only response with little or no evaluation. May list facts without analysis.
Q4 · 16 marks
Patisserie Valerie · evaluation
"Evaluate whether the Patisserie Valerie collapse was primarily a failure of governance or a failure of audit. Justify your judgement."
13–16
Level 4. Strong arguments both sides. For governance: the board accepted CFO numbers without challenge, single-point-of-failure controls, weak audit committee, no independent verification. For audit: Grant Thornton fined £4m by FRC (reduced to £2.34m), failure to spot fictitious cash for years. Top responses recognise these are linked — the audit failure was enabled by governance failure, not separate from it. Reasoned judgement reaches a justified position.
9–12
Level 3. Both sides discussed with reasonable case application. Judgement reached. May treat governance and audit as fully separate without seeing the link.
5–8
Level 2. Mostly one-sided. Limited use of case-specific evidence. Surface-level evaluation.
1–4
Level 1. Knowledge-only response. May not distinguish governance from audit.
TBS Education · thebusiness.school
13 / 13