ShareThis Page
Hampton/Shaler

Glenshaw natives shine as part of Duquesne University academic team

| Thursday, May 31, 2018, 9:47 p.m.
Duquesne University students Michael Findley, Kelsey Aerni, Patricia Nicholson and Joseph Winkler earned third place in the Aspen Institute's 2018 Business and Society International MBA Case Competition.
Duquesne University students Michael Findley, Kelsey Aerni, Patricia Nicholson and Joseph Winkler earned third place in the Aspen Institute's 2018 Business and Society International MBA Case Competition.

A pair of Glenshaw natives were part of a team of four students from Duquesne University's MBA Sustainable Business Practices program (MBA-SBP) who won third place in the Aspen Institute's 2018 Business and Society International MBA Case Competition in New York City.

In the final round of competition, Duquesne's team from the Palumbo-Donahue School of Business finished just behind teams from New York University and the University of Denver while edging ahead of teams from George Washington University and Wilfrid Laurier University.

Representing Duquesne University were: Patricia Nicholson, Glenshaw; Joseph Winkler, Glenshaw; Kelsey Aerni, Strongville, Ohio; and Michael Findley, Ligonier.

As part of the annual competition, student teams are given a 72-hour window to address a new and challenging business case. This year's case focused on the luxury resort Marina Bay Sands Singapore. Teams were tasked with identifying detailed, practical and actionable means to decrease the negative environmental impact of the resort through innovative sustainability solutions.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me