case study how deloitte reinvented their performance management

How Deloitte Reinvented Their Performance Management

• Team Leadership & Management

It has been 10 years since Weekdone started providing teams like yours with world leading  team management software .

We’ve been working hard to create something for team leaders everywhere. Weekdone Team Compass provides any great leader with a best practice based team management software and productivity tool-kit. It allows you to set and track goals, to review insightful weekly team reports and to run one-on-ones and pulse surveys. It helps to take your team management skills to the next level. Team Compass is free for small teams, offers a free trial and is just $29/month for larger teams!

Team Compass is your team management software that employees will love and use! Bring productivity, engagement, and organization to your team today.

This article on performance management was originally published on business.com .

Deloitte is the largest professional services network in the world in both revenue and number of professionals. In 2013–14, they earned a record of $34.2 billion USD in revenue. So, when one of the biggest companies in the world takes on reinventing performance management, they do it with a bang.

Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall described the process and findings of the large-scale Deloitte  performance management survey in the Harvard Business Review . We also examine how Deloitte changed their approach to performance management. In addition, we review the practical takeaways from Deloitte’s case study. The goal is to reexamine our own performance management system and how we can change it.

Old vs. new approach to performance management

Deloitte found that their current approach to performance management, annual 360 feedback, was wasting a shocking 2 million hours per year. Even more significant, they realized that their system wasn’t engaging employees at all. Performance levels were also dropping drastically. In an effort to combat this, Deloitte built something much more nimble, real-time, and individualized. They wanted something that was focused on fueling performance in the present rather than assessing it in the past.

First, let’s look at how Deloitte needed to change. You will find some of your own problems there. You should identify any issues. This is the first step to towards a useful solution.

With 360 feedback, goals were set once a year and reviewed once a year. The problem with this approach is that annual goals are too “batched” for real-time situations and a lot of time is wasted on performance ratings. Instead, this time should be spent on talking to people about their performance and careers consistently.

[Tweet “Insight: “Shift your performance evaluation focus from the past to the future””]

Their next realization was that assessing someone’s skills is always subjective.  The process says much more about the evaluator instead of the person being evaluated. This is called an idiosyncratic rater effect.

The discovery left Deloitte puzzled. They knew that in order to get the best feedback, it needs to come from a team leader. But how do you deal with the idiosyncratic rater effect?

[Tweet “Insight: “Ratings reveal more about the rater than they do about the ratee.””]

Before deciding how to deal with biased assessments, let’s take a look at another insight Deloitte discovered. They used the Gallup 1.4 million employee study to see what the similarities are between high and low performing teams .

The most powerful characteristic was that the high-performing team members felt they were doing their best to accomplish meaningful goals. On that basis, Deloitte identified 60 high-performing teams from their own ranks. Using these teams, they conducted a six-item survey to find out what their own high-performing teams had in common.

Insight: The most powerful commonality between Deloitte’s highest performing teams was the belief that “I have the chance to use my strengths every day.”

When the results came back, the most common trend was that their own high performing team members felt that they had the chance to use their strengths every day.

So, what can we learn from these results?

Deloitte set out a clear goal: “We want to spend more time helping people use their strengths.”

So, for a quick recap: Deloitte was able to recognize the strengths in performance. The concern came with evaluating it. They also now knew that the best insight comes from the immediate team leader, but how can they do provide it without the idiosyncratic effect getting in the way? That’s the million (or even a billion) dollar question.

Insight: “The key is that people rate other people skills inconsistently, but they are highly consistent when rating their own”

We also know that everyone rates other peoples’ skills inconsistently. To combat thisDeloitte did not ask team members what they think of each team member. Instead, they asked team leaders to rate their own future actions regarding each team member.

Here are the statements Deloitte asked leaders to select about an employee in order to overcome the idiosyncratic effect:

• Given what I know of this person’s performance, and if it were my money, I would award this person the highest possible compensation increase and bonus – this measures overall performance and unique value.
• Given what I know of this person’s performance, I would always want him or her on my team – this measures ability to work well with others
• This person is at risk for low performance – this identifies problems that might harm the customer or the team on a yes-or-no basis
• This person is ready for promotion today – this measures potential on a yes-or-no basis

[Tweet “Insight: In effect, they are asking what the team leaders would do, not what they think.”]

This evaluation is called “process performance snapshot.” The big difference is that it evaluates performance in real-time. Now they had the system to measure the performance. The question next became – how can we improve it?

Suggestions to reinvent performance management

One factor stood out the most from Deloitte case study – frequency. Deloitte points out that the optimal frequency of these new performance reviews should be weekly . They also suggest that the best way to ensure frequency is to have regular check-ins about near-time work initiated by team members.

Deloitte performance is also getting impact from a consumer technology platform that is designed to be simple, quick and above all, engaging. People tend to be interested in themselves – their own insights, achievements, and impact, so they believe that employing such a method would engage an employee around their own performance in a way they had not done before.

We’ve sorted the reviewing, so what about the reviews? Most team members are rated on a single number, but Deloitte began to wonder if that was the easiest way of viewing personal performance.

Deloitte hasn’t found the answer yet. From our perspective, team members should get a weekly progress report where there are 4 different indicators that correlate into the weekly score. The weekly score takes into account the individual’s happiness, progress, overdue Plans, and Problems. We don’t know if this is what Deloitte might be looking for, but it is definitely a step forward in the right direction.

To conclude, Deloitte realized that traditional, once-a-year, 360-reviews were inefficient. They also do not give a transparent view of the current working situation. It is time to reinvent the performance management process . Ask your team leaders to assess their team members through statements that describe what they do, not what they think.

Employee performance snapshots should be regular and weekly. The technology should be designed to be simple, quick, and above all, engaging to use.

And if you’re looking for a world leading software tool to implement this try Team Compass for free.

Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte

Wed Jan 13 2016

Deloitte didn’t originally set out to reinvent performance management. Really. When we got started, that was not our intent. The work was a natural outgrowth of other work we were doing in talent development, but has become foundational to how we are reshaping our culture as we grow our next generation of leaders.

It was 2011, and we had just cut the ribbon on the doors to Deloitte University—our 100-acre learning facility nicknamed “The Leadership Center.” This brick-and-mortar investment created a call to action for our talent development organization to redefine our strategy and to ensure that what we were doing inside all of Deloitte’s walls was driving the engagement and performance of our people and teams.

Like many strategy refreshes, ours began with research. We looked at external studies on high performance and development, and we conducted our own empirical study on the characteristics of high-performing teams at Deloitte. We were overwhelmed by one of our findings: performance, retention, and client satisfaction are strongly predicted by our people’s beliefs they are playing to their strengths.

This study was based on long-term research by Gallup, who studied 1.4 million individuals in high-performing teams across 192 organizations. Ours explored conditions on more than 60 high-performing Deloitte teams, comparing them to a baseline that included approximately 2,000 employees. It also reinforced our belief in strengths-based development—this notion that each of us can best contribute, grow, and differentiate our firm when we focus on our strengths.

So we asked ourselves what we were doing to deliver strengths-based development at Deloitte, and what might be getting in its way. We saw lots of bright spots, and we also began to see that our approach to performance management was no longer the best design for Deloitte’s emerging needs. What we saw in the research, as well as what we knew about how our business was evolving, called to question whether the process and philosophy we had relied on for years would be enough to propel the next generation of performance at Deloitte.

Setting Our Objectives

To build our future model, we started with another seemingly simple question: What is the purpose of performance management at Deloitte? This is one of those questions that if you ask several people you might get several answers. And we did just that. We conducted focus groups across the firm, and, from that feedback—and crystalized three primary purposes for performance management.

Many said performance management should enable us to RECOGNIZE performance . The system should drive annual activities that allow intelligent compensation, promotion, and low-performer management decisions.

But our people wanted more. Next, we heard that performance management should enable us to really SEE performance —to generate a rich stream of information that gives business leaders a view into the performance of their organizations. How does performance trend differently in different organizations? Who are our best performers? Who needs improvement? And what can individual leaders do to influence them all?

Which gets us to our final objective: FUEL performance . The purpose of a system to manage performance should be to create more of it—performance, that is. We’re all in business which, whether for profit or for purpose, has a bottom line that’s driven by the performance of our people. So we had to find a way to drive this in real time, on the teams, where the work happens, every day.

Fueling Performance

From emerging research, we know that an effective way to drive performance is through conversations. So, we created “check-ins”: frequent, future-focused conversations about the work. Here, team members and team leaders meet 1:1 to explore real-time feedback and expectations for the near-term work. It’s how they align on priorities for what’s coming next, and they do that with a strengths lens. They discuss how the individual will deliver on these priorities given their unique skills and strengths, and how the team leader will create opportunities for them to do that.

We called them frequent, but we didn’t mandate a frequency. We left this up to business leaders to communicate as they saw fit. Today, the majority of our people are doing them either weekly or biweekly.

We also didn’t require anyone to document anything going into or coming out of a check-in. We didn’t want anything to stand in the way of the conversation.

We stressed that the logistics of check-ins are not as important as making them a habit. The tone, nature and content of a check-in should evolve over time, differing from person to person, engagement to engagement, project phase to project phase, and week to week. There was no heavy training or how-to guides. To launch check-ins we did just two things:

We gave people prompts to spark conversations. 

We began sending out a simple weekly email with a Yes/No voting button and one question: “Did you have a check-in conversation with your team leader this week?”

What’s interesting, though, is that we didn’t use this data to monitor compliance, follow up with those who weren’t doing them, or reward those who were. We just looked at it on aggregate to understand organization-wide check-in behavior and its impact.

Our people who were used to heavy investments twice per year were now expected to shift that time to the location where the work—the performance—was happening in real time. We changed the notion that performance management is that thing you take time off from the work to do. Currently, check-ins are part of how our people get their work done.

Seeing Performance

Moving away from ratings didn’t mean we’d stop capturing performance data. For us, it just meant we’d now capture a different type of data. We designed several components that enable us to see the performance of our people and teams. I’ll focus here on just one: the Performance Snapshot.

Fundamentally, a performance management system needs a way to evaluate performance. What’s more, we know intuitively that the person with the most first-hand knowledge of someone’s performance is his or her team leader. So, the Performance Snapshot is a vehicle for the team leader to capture his or her assessment about each team member’s performance, at a moment in time.

Snapshots are timely , completed at the end of a project, phase, or at least quarterly—allowing team leaders to capture their judgement of performance as close as possible to when it occurs. By the end of the year, there are numerous snapshots completed for each person so that the work our people do ALL year is captured.

Snapshots are research-based . Rather than ask leaders to rate the skills of others, we’ve crafted questions that ask them to rate their own intended future actions. This approach counteracts the idiosyncratic rater effect, which research has shown distorts ratings because the main variable is the evaluator. Leaders in the new system make decisions based on what they know about a team member’s performance instead of what they think of the person.

Snapshots are easy . Our Performance Snapshots use four questions, answered on a Likert-type scale; no more paragraphs to write. We’ve even given folks mobile access to make these as simple as possible for our on-the-go workforce, to enable an ongoing flow of data throughout the year.

Recognizing Performance

So now that we’ve got all this data, what do we do with it? In short, the data is aggregated, and reviewed quarterly to give business leaders a holistic view of performance in their organizations. Every quarter HR sits down with individual business leaders to review a scatterplot that plots Performance Snapshot results.

Now, this isn’t the only thing they look at. They also can see who has been flagged at-risk for low performance, or who has been identified by at least one team leader as ready for promotion. They also look at important business measures per person, like revenue.

We ask our business leaders to integrate all of this data to make their own judgements to drive key talent decisions. See that’s the thing that makes this different from a single summative rating. In real life there are lots of things we know about people. When you review a job application, or follow a baseball player, or evaluate your latest lab results, you consume and integrate several data points to make a set of decisions about how to act.

With this design, we’re trying to bring that nuanced presentation of a person to Talent Management. Now, there are lots of things we know about you: we know what your local team leaders thought they might do based on what they observed of your performance, and we also know how you’ve performed against your business metric goals, the activities through which you’ve contributed to the community, and more. We ask our leaders to take all of it into account when making decisions. Our task in HR is to find a consumable way to present it. And the task of the leaders is to make intelligent decisions with it.

So that’s our model. Built on three objectives, with several components, that operate independently, but also reinforce one another to create an ecosystem of performance. I’ve only covered two features here, but it also includes:

Team Pulse survey that provides team leaders with insights about the engagement of their teams to drive team conversations around how to increase it

low -performer management approach that, due to the timeliness of the Snapshots, generates more real-time attention for those at risk

talent reviews in which panels of leaders plan investments in the career development of select talent segments

career coach who helps employees discover their strengths, find more ways to play to them, explore performance trends across experiences, and develop their careers.

What’s Next for Performance Management?

Deloitte has been at this for two years, and we now have data that indicates the design is having a positive impact. Our approach has evolved over the various pilots, and it will likely continue to evolve as we expand and learn. We’ve pursued a measured testing and implementation approach, rather than a big bang.

When we completed the first iteration of the design two years ago, we didn’t go to leadership and ask for a vote. All we asked for was permission to test the model—first in small populations, and then bigger ones. We used it with 2,000 people, then 7,000 people, then 40,000 people, and now more are opting-in, business by business.

Next up, Deloitte will begin looking past implementation and toward optimization. This shifts our efforts beyond “what is the process?” to “How do I optimize my role inside the model?’ How do i position team members, team leaders, coaches, and business leaders to take best advantage of the tools included in this model to do their jobs better? Optimization puts a focus on creating a new generation, with a new strengths mindset, and new skills and insights to fuel the performance and engagement of their people and teams.

Finally, let’s not forget what this approach has done for our talent professionals. This work is not just changing how our people and their leaders operate, but also how HR enables them. The integrated nature of this design is breaking down silos between previously distinct HR disciplines of performance management, talent management, leadership development, and employee engagement by generating a new set of analytics that we can consume about our people and teams that integrates them all. This work demands sophistication from all of us, but also creates amazing opportunity to deliver ongoing insights that will change the way our leaders think about leadership.

So, no, Deloitte did not originally set out to reinvent performance management. But we’re awfully glad we’ve started.

You've Reached ATD Member-only Content

Become an ATD member to continue

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Watch the latest explainer videos, case study discussions, and whiteboard sessions, featuring ideas and practical advice for leaders.

• Harvard Business School →
• Faculty & Research →
• June 2018 (Revised January 2020)
• HBS Case Collection

Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte (B)

• Format: Print
• | Language: English
• | Pages: 19

About The Author

Francesca Gino

Related work.

• Faculty Research
• Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte (B)  By: Francesca Gino, Paul Green, Jr. and Bradley Staats

• Corpus ID: 117309607

Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte (A)

• F. Gino , Paul I. Green , Bradley R. Staats
• Published 4 June 2018

12 Citations

Scrapping the bell curve: a practitioner’s review of reinvented performance management system, performance management and employee outcomes: what performance management processes drive improvement of employee performance, moving beyond initial success: promoting innovation in small businesses through high-performance work practices, the trinity of resilient organisation: aligning performance management with organisational culture and strategy formation, the application of strategy map in the balanced scorecard implementation: a case of a public organization, learning agility in context: engineers’ perceptions of psychologically safe climate on performance.

• Highly Influenced

Formalization of management control system

Thriving, surviving and performing in late career: a mixed-method study of pathways to successful aging in organizations, the revelation research of huawei performance management mode to china’s private enterprises, digital feedback for digital work affordances and constraints of a feedback app at insurcorp, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Search form

Deloitte: how we are reimagining performance management.

According to a recent Deloitte survey, 58% of executives believe that their current performance management processes neither drive employee engagement nor high performance . In this article from April’s Harvard Business Review , the firm outlines how it is redesigning its own internal performance management process to focus on assessing future potential, rather than evaluating past performance.

Deloitte’s existing performance management system, which is used to evaluate 65,000 people, focuses on an annual score produced for each individual, based on their strengths and weaknesses in delivering projects throughout the year. In evaluating this system, they found that focusing on a year-end review was too formulaic and, to their surprise, they discovered that they spent close to two million hours per year on performance management .

This fascinating article explains why Deloitte is moving away from assessing individuals’ skills and moving towards real-time feedback. It presents an interesting debate about how best to appraise high performing executives, and describes their new “performance snapshot” which, they say, allows them more time to spend actioning the findings of their performance management, rather than measuring them.

This article was originally published on HBR.org

As the World Revolves We Evolve at JIMS

A New Approach to Performance Management at Deloitte

Dr Preeti Singh

Assistant Professor

Jagannath International Management School

Last five years have depicted radical change in the way performance of employees was evaluated and recognized. In current scenarios, after an initial experimentation, continuous performance management practices were deployed on larger scale.  Although every organisation do not have robust processes in sink but new practices adopted by organisation have certainly standardised the procedures.

New models as adopted by organisations in regard of performance management practices at workplace include agile goal management, continuous feedback, check in and new model. The radical redesign of performance management has gained new momentum: 79 percent executive’s rate performance management at high priority, which was 71 percent three years ago, a rise in 8% observed in year 2022

The research statistics shows that ability of companies to implement performance management has improved to great extent in 2022. Studies shows that the organizations are 10 percent more capable than they were in 2015, and majority organisations are focusing on training leaders for the implementation of latest developmental management approaches.

The new performance practices have glorified great impact on the multinational companies. 90 percent of companies redesigned their performance management practices and have seen improvements in employee engagement .  96 percent of employees say that the existing processes are simpler than they were before, and 83 percent say that they see the quality of conversations between employees and managers going up.

The performance management (PM) revolution has taken new heights. Companies and industries are revaluating different aspect of their programs, starting from goal-setting and evaluation to incentives and rewards.

Organizations are aligning new changes to both business strategy and the ongoing transformation of work. Different software tools proved that performance management are understood and working well.

Companies like GE, Google, IBM; CISCO has brought radical transformation in performance management system prevailing in the company. The below case is the case of performance management system in Deloitte.

Rob Massey, Deloitte Tax LLP described performance management system that he used for first 12 years at his services to Deloitte as “An investment of 1.8 million hours across the firm that didn’t fit our business needs anymore.” Massey quoted that “Once a year, we looked back at what people did and then created a label for it.”  A new approach to performance management at Deloitte is altogether needed in current scenario.

At Deloitte Massey then engaged the workforce in new way of assessment and managing people performance which was then implemented on 2000 employees. The new method of assessment and management of employees proved to be successful and it rolled out across entire 70,000-person organization in eventual years.

The key elements in performance management system are:

• Check-in time of employees
• Frequent conversations between team leaders and team members in regard of the work
•  Performance snapshots
•  Reliable and frequent assessment of individual performance;
• Pulse surveys helps in assessing performance of teams.

This powerful innovation combine two dimensions of human behaviour like viz

• How to make workforce motivated and engaging? Primary way out for motivated workforce is to have conversation with other.
• To help people and the business, how assessments could be used to analyse individual performance.

Massey quoted in concern of his strategy, “Today we’re very forward-looking. It’s about strengths and real-time communication”.

The new system for performance appraisal is analogy focussing conversations. Conversation was considered biggest leap in reinventing Deloitte performance management system. Massey considered that numbers and words are equally powerful.  We need to let our people, their managers, and their counsellors tell the rest.

Inspite of moving from data altogether, the system at Delloitte have been made more digital. Delloitte make use of different tools that bring together perspectives from different people, tools could be used to manage people element of business in real time. This help in identifying the requisite conversations that can assist people in understanding how they can grow and advance.

One employee of Deloitte shared that check ins, flexible and transparent system positively impact he performance system in the organisation. Employees also talked about their current performance and challenges they faced in their assignments help in developing their skills.    The new system of performance management developed the following:

1)      Tracking Organizational Goals: Organisation goals to be well shared with the employees of the organisation. Organisations that have clear and concise goal duely shared with team scored amongst top 25% of business outcomes.

2)      Regular Feedback: old performance management practices focus on good or bad performance of employees. Delloitte redefined performance management as putting more emphasis on development of team and potential leaders. The idea of performance appraisal has been transformed from a pure directive to developmental initiative so that employees and supervisors can work together to meet organisational goals.

3)      Employee Leadership Development: Deloitte has changed their performance management . The transformation is to a developmental tool instead of a benchmarking device. The workforce needs a performance management system which is adaptive to their needs while maintaining company performance goals .

 Best practices for performance management are changing, and it’s time you caught up.

“Erica Bank  is Deloitte’s performance management leader. She designs and implements talent management strategies, processes, and technologies. She provides strategic direction on the management and continuous improvement of current performance management processes, and has been a key leader in the firm’s performance management reinvention. She can be reached at [email protected]”.

#jims #jimsdelhi #managementcollegeindelhi #pgdmcollegesindelhi #mbacollegesindelhi #toppgdmCollegesindelhi #topbschoolsindelhi

For more information visit: https://www.jagannath.org/

JIMS Kalkaji

Written by admin

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Recent Posts

• Understanding the Importance of Strategic Human Resources in the Age of AI Emergence
• Lessons in Management from Indian Mythology
• Investing in Silver – a silver lining or a risky bet?
• Mastering Efficiency: The Mathematics of Transportation Optimization
• Pioneering the Future: The Evolution of Start-ups in India

Recent Comments

• ishika on Navigating Career Success: Choosing the Right MBA College in Delhi NCR
• Shivani on Navigating Career Success: Choosing the Right MBA College in Delhi NCR
• nitesh on Navigating Career Success: Choosing the Right MBA College in Delhi NCR
• Aashna Sharma on Navigating Career Success: Choosing the Right MBA College in Delhi NCR
• smriti malhotra on Navigating Career Success: Choosing the Right MBA College in Delhi NCR
• September 2024
• August 2024
• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• August 2023
• February 2023
• January 2023
• December 2022
• November 2022
• October 2022
• September 2022
• August 2022
• February 2022
• January 2022
• December 2021
• February 2021
• January 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• Digital Marketing
• Economics & Finance
• Entrepreneurship
• Human Resource Management
• Information technology
• International Business
• Marketing Management
• Operations Management
• Personal well being
• Personal Well being
• Entries feed
• Comments feed
• WordPress.org

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

• You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
• You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
• You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
• A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Already have an account login, get 10% off on your next order.

Subscribe now to get your discount coupon *Only correct email will be accepted

(Approximately ~ 0.0 Page)

Total Price

Thank you for your email subscription. Check your email to get Coupon Code.

Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Analysis and Case Solution

Posted by Peter Williams on Aug-09-2018

Introduction of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Solution

The Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case study is a Harvard Business Review case study, which presents a simulated practical experience to the reader allowing them to learn about real life problems in the business world. The Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case consisted of a central issue to the organization, which had to be identified, analysed and creative solutions had to be drawn to tackle the issue. This paper presents the solved Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case analysis and case solution. The method through which the analysis is done is mentioned, followed by the relevant tools used in finding the solution.

The case solution first identifies the central issue to the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case study, and the relevant stakeholders affected by this issue. This is known as the problem identification stage. After this, the relevant tools and models are used, which help in the case study analysis and case study solution. The tools used in identifying the solution consist of the SWOT Analysis, Porter Five Forces Analysis, PESTEL Analysis, VRIO analysis, Value Chain Analysis, BCG Matrix analysis, Ansoff Matrix analysis, and the Marketing Mix analysis. The solution consists of recommended strategies to overcome this central issue. It is a good idea to also propose alternative case study solutions, because if the main solution is not found feasible, then the alternative solutions could be implemented. Lastly, a good case study solution also includes an implementation plan for the recommendation strategies. This shows how through a step-by-step procedure as to how the central issue can be resolved.

Problem Identification of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Solution

Harvard Business Review cases involve a central problem that is being faced by the organization and these problems affect a number of stakeholders. In the problem identification stage, the problem faced by Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A is identified through reading of the case. This could be mentioned at the start of the reading, the middle or the end. At times in a case analysis, the problem may be clearly evident in the reading of the HBR case. At other times, finding the issue is the job of the person analysing the case. It is also important to understand what stakeholders are affected by the problem and how. The goals of the stakeholders and are the organization are also identified to ensure that the case study analysis are consistent with these.

Analysis of the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A HBR Case Study

The objective of the case should be focused on. This is doing the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Solution. This analysis can be proceeded in a step-by-step procedure to ensure that effective solutions are found.

• In the first step, a growth path of the company can be formulated that lays down its vision, mission and strategic aims. These can usually be developed using the company history is provided in the case. Company history is helpful in a Business Case study as it helps one understand what the scope of the solutions will be for the case study.
• The next step is of understanding the company; its people, their priorities and the overall culture. This can be done by using company history. It can also be done by looking at anecdotal instances of managers or employees that are usually included in an HBR case study description to give the reader a real feel of the situation.
• Lastly, a timeline of the issues and events in the case needs to be made. Arranging events in a timeline allows one to predict the next few events that are likely to take place. It also helps one in developing the case study solutions. The timeline also helps in understanding the continuous challenges that are being faced by the organisation.

SWOT analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

An important tool that helps in addressing the central issue of the case and coming up with Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A HBR case solution is the SWOT analysis.

• The SWOT analysis is a strategic management tool that lists down in the form of a matrix, an organisation's internal strengths and weaknesses, and external opportunities and threats. It helps in the strategic analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A.
• Once this listing has been done, a clearer picture can be developed in regards to how strategies will be formed to address the main problem. For example, strengths will be used as an advantage in solving the issue.

Therefore, the SWOT analysis is a helpful tool in coming up with the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Study answers. One does not need to remain restricted to using the traditional SWOT analysis, but the advanced TOWS matrix or weighted average SWOT analysis can also be used.

Porter Five Forces Analysis for Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

Another helpful tool in finding the case solutions is of Porter's Five Forces analysis. This is also a strategic tool that is used to analyse the competitive environment of the industry in which Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A operates in. Analysis of the industry is important as businesses do not work in isolation in real life, but are affected by the business environment of the industry that they operate in. Harvard Business case studies represent real-life situations, and therefore, an analysis of the industry's competitive environment needs to be carried out to come up with more holistic case study solutions. In Porter's Five Forces analysis, the industry is analysed along 5 dimensions.

• These are the threats that the industry faces due to new entrants.
• It includes the threat of substitute products.
• It includes the bargaining power of buyers in the industry.
• It includes the bargaining power of suppliers in an industry.
• Lastly, the overall rivalry or competition within the industry is analysed.

This tool helps one understand the relative powers of the major players in the industry and its overall competitive dynamics. Actionable and practical solutions can then be developed by keeping these factors into perspective.

PESTEL Analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

Another helpful tool that should be used in finding the case study solutions is the PESTEL analysis. This also looks at the external business environment of the organisation helps in finding case study Analysis to real-life business issues as in HBR cases.

• The PESTEL analysis particularly looks at the macro environmental factors that affect the industry. These are the political, environmental, social, technological, environmental and legal (regulatory) factors affecting the industry.
• Factors within each of these 6 should be listed down, and analysis should be made as to how these affect the organisation under question.
• These factors are also responsible for the future growth and challenges within the industry. Hence, they should be taken into consideration when coming up with the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case solution.

VRIO Analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

This is an analysis carried out to know about the internal strengths and capabilities of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A. Under the VRIO analysis, the following steps are carried out:

• The internal resources of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A are listed down.
• Each of these resources are assessed in terms of the value it brings to the organization.
• Each resource is assessed in terms of how rare it is. A rare resource is one that is not commonly used by competitors.
• Each resource is assessed whether it could be imitated by competition easily or not.
• Lastly, each resource is assessed in terms of whether the organization can use it to an advantage or not.

The analysis done on the 4 dimensions; Value, Rareness, Imitability, and Organization. If a resource is high on all of these 4, then it brings long-term competitive advantage. If a resource is high on Value, Rareness, and Imitability, then it brings an unused competitive advantage. If a resource is high on Value and Rareness, then it only brings temporary competitive advantage. If a resource is only valuable, then it’s a competitive parity. If it’s none, then it can be regarded as a competitive disadvantage.

Value Chain Analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

The Value chain analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A helps in identifying the activities of an organization, and how these add value in terms of cost reduction and differentiation. This tool is used in the case study analysis as follows:

• The firm’s primary and support activities are listed down.
• Identifying the importance of these activities in the cost of the product and the differentiation they produce.
• Lastly, differentiation or cost reduction strategies are to be used for each of these activities to increase the overall value provided by these activities.

Recognizing value creating activities and enhancing the value that they create allow Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A to increase its competitive advantage.

BCG Matrix of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

The BCG Matrix is an important tool in deciding whether an organization should invest or divest in its strategic business units. The matrix involves placing the strategic business units of a business in one of four categories; question marks, stars, dogs and cash cows. The placement in these categories depends on the relative market share of the organization and the market growth of these strategic business units. The steps to be followed in this analysis is as follows:

• Identify the relative market share of each strategic business unit.
• Identify the market growth of each strategic business unit.
• Place these strategic business units in one of four categories. Question Marks are those strategic business units with high market share and low market growth rate. Stars are those strategic business units with high market share and high market growth rate. Cash Cows are those strategic business units with high market share and low market growth rate. Dogs are those strategic business units with low market share and low growth rate.
• Relevant strategies should be implemented for each strategic business unit depending on its position in the matrix.

The strategies identified from the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A BCG matrix and included in the case pdf. These are either to further develop the product, penetrate the market, develop the market, diversification, investing or divesting.

Ansoff Matrix of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

Ansoff Matrix is an important strategic tool to come up with future strategies for Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A in the case solution. It helps decide whether an organization should pursue future expansion in new markets and products or should it focus on existing markets and products.

• The organization can penetrate into existing markets with its existing products. This is known as market penetration strategy.
• The organization can develop new products for the existing market. This is known as product development strategy.
• The organization can enter new markets with its existing products. This is known as market development strategy.
• The organization can enter into new markets with new products. This is known as a diversification strategy.

The choice of strategy depends on the analysis of the previous tools used and the level of risk the organization is willing to take.

Marketing Mix of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A needs to bring out certain responses from the market that it targets. To do so, it will need to use the marketing mix, which serves as a tool in helping bring out responses from the market. The 4 elements of the marketing mix are Product, Price, Place and Promotions. The following steps are required to carry out a marketing mix analysis and include this in the case study analysis.

• Analyse the company’s products and devise strategies to improve the product offering of the company.
• Analyse the company’s price points and devise strategies that could be based on competition, value or cost.
• Analyse the company’s promotion mix. This includes the advertisement, public relations, personal selling, sales promotion, and direct marketing. Strategies will be devised which makes use of a few or all of these elements.
• Analyse the company’s distribution and reach. Strategies can be devised to improve the availability of the company’s products.

Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Blue Ocean Strategy

The strategies devised and included in the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case memo should have a blue ocean strategy. A blue ocean strategy is a strategy that involves firms seeking uncontested market spaces, which makes the competition of the company irrelevant. It involves coming up with new and unique products or ideas through innovation. This gives the organization a competitive advantage over other firms, unlike a red ocean strategy.

Competitors analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A

The PESTEL analysis discussed previously looked at the macro environmental factors affecting business, but not the microenvironmental factors. One of the microenvironmental factors are competitors, which are addressed by a competitor analysis. The Competitors analysis of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A looks at the direct and indirect competitors within the industry that it operates in.

• This involves a detailed analysis of their actions and how these would affect the future strategies of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A.
• It involves looking at the current market share of the company and its competitors.
• It should compare the marketing mix elements of competitors, their supply chain, human resources, financial strength etc.
• It also should look at the potential opportunities and threats that these competitors pose on the company.

Organisation of the Analysis into Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Study Solution

Once various tools have been used to analyse the case, the findings of this analysis need to be incorporated into practical and actionable solutions. These solutions will also be the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case answers. These are usually in the form of strategies that the organisation can adopt. The following step-by-step procedure can be used to organise the Harvard Business case solution and recommendations:

• The first step of the solution is to come up with a corporate level strategy for the organisation. This part consists of solutions that address issues faced by the organisation on a strategic level. This could include suggestions, changes or recommendations to the company's vision, mission and its strategic objectives. It can include recommendations on how the organisation can work towards achieving these strategic objectives. Furthermore, it needs to be explained how the stated recommendations will help in solving the main issue mentioned in the case and where the company will stand in the future as a result of these.
• The second step of the solution is to come up with a business level strategy. The HBR case studies may present issues faced by a part of the organisation. For example, the issues may be stated for marketing and the role of a marketing manager needs to be assumed. So, recommendations and suggestions need to address the strategy of the marketing department in this case. Therefore, the strategic objectives of this business unit (Marketing) will be laid down in the solutions and recommendations will be made as to how to achieve these objectives. Similar would be the case for any other business unit or department such as human resources, finance, IT etc. The important thing to note here is that the business level strategy needs to be aligned with the overall corporate strategy of the organisation. For example, if one suggests the organisation to focus on differentiation for competitive advantage as a corporate level strategy, then it can't be recommended for the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Study Solution that the business unit should focus on costs.
• The third step is not compulsory but depends from case to case. In some HBR case studies, one may be required to analyse an issue at a department. This issue may be analysed for a manager or employee as well. In these cases, recommendations need to be made for these people. The solution may state that objectives that these people need to achieve and how these objectives would be achieved.

The case study analysis and solution, and Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case answers should be written down in the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case memo, clearly identifying which part shows what. The Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case should be in a professional format, presenting points clearly that are well understood by the reader.

Alternate solution to the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A HBR case study

It is important to have more than one solution to the case study. This is the alternate solution that would be implemented if the original proposed solution is found infeasible or impossible due to a change in circumstances. The alternate solution for Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A is presented in the same way as the original solution, where it consists of a corporate level strategy, business level strategy and other recommendations.

Implementation of Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Case Solution

The case study does not end at just providing recommendations to the issues at hand. One is also required to provide how these recommendations would be implemented. This is shown through a proper implementation framework. A detailed implementation framework helps in distinguishing between an average and an above average case study answer. A good implementation framework shows the proposed plan and how the organisations' resources would be used to achieve the objectives. It also lays down the changes needed to be made as well as the assumptions in the process.

• A proper implementation framework shows that one has clearly understood the case study and the main issue within it.
• It shows that one has been clarified with the HBR fundamentals on the topic.
• It shows that the details provided in the case have been properly analysed.
• It shows that one has developed an ability to prioritise recommendations and how these could be successfully implemented.
• The implementation framework also helps by removing out any recommendations that are not practical or actionable as these could not be implemented. Therefore, the implementation framework ensures that the solution to the Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A Harvard case is complete and properly answered.

Recommendations and Action Plan for Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A case analysis

For Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A, based on the SWOT Analysis, Porter Five Forces Analysis, PESTEL Analysis, VRIO analysis, Value Chain Analysis, BCG Matrix analysis, Ansoff Matrix analysis, and the Marketing Mix analysis, the recommendations and action plan are as follows:

• Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A should focus on making use of its strengths identified from the VRIO analysis to make the most of the opportunities identified from the PESTEL.
• Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A should enhance the value creating activities within its value chain.
• Reinventing Performance Management at Deloitte A should invest in its stars and cash cows, while getting rid of the dogs identified from the BCG Matrix analysis.
• To achieve its overall corporate and business level objectives, it should make use of the marketing mix tools to obtain desired results from its target market.

Baron, E. (2015). How They Teach the Case Method At Harvard Business School. Retrieved from https://poetsandquants.com/2015/09/29/how-they-teach-the-case-method-at-harvard-business-school/

Bartol. K, & Martin, D. (1998). Management, 3rd edition. Boston: Irwin McGrawHill.

Free Management E-Books. (2013a). PESTLE Analysis. Retrieved from http://www.free-management-ebooks.com/dldebk-pdf/fme-pestle-analysis.pdf

Gupta, A. (2013). Environment & PEST analysis: an approach to the external business environment. International Journal of Modern Social Sciences, 2(1), 34-43.

Hambrick, D. C., MacMillan, I. C., & Day, D. L. (1982). Strategic attributes and performance in the BCG matrix—A PIMS-based analysis of industrial product businesses. Academy of Management Journal, 25(3), 510-531.

Hill, C., & Jones, G. (2010). Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach, Ninth Ed. Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning.

Hussain, S., Khattak, J., Rizwan, A., & Latif, M. A. (2013). ANSOFF matrix, environment, and growth-an interactive triangle. Management and Administrative Sciences Review, 2(2), 196-206.

IIBMS. (2015). 7 Effective Steps to Solve Case Study. Retrieved from http://www.iibms.org/c-7-effective-steps-to-solve-case-study/

Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue ocean strategy. If you read nothing else on strategy, read thesebest-selling articles., 71.

Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2010). Principles of marketing. Pearson education.

Kulkarni, N. (2018). 8 Tips to Help You Prepare for the Case Method. Retrieved from https://www.hbs.edu/mba/blog/post/8-tips-to-help-you-prepare-for-the-case-method

Lin, C., Tsai, H. L., Wu, Y. J., & Kiang, M. (2012). A fuzzy quantitative VRIO-based framework for evaluating organizational activities. Management Decision, 50(8), 1396-1411.

Nixon, J., & Helms, M. M. (2010). Exploring SWOT analysis – where are we now?: A review of academic research from the last decade. Journal of Strategy and Management, 3(3), 215-251.

Panagiotou, G. (2003). Bringing SWOT into Focus. Business Strategy Review, 14(2), 8-10.

Pickton, D. W., & Wright, S. (1998). What's swot in strategic analysis? Strategic Change, 7(2), 101-109.

Porter, M. E. (2001). The value chain and competitive advantage. Understanding Business Processes, 50-66.

Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance (Vol. 2). New York: Free Press.

Porter, M.E. (1979, March). Harvard Business Review: Strategic Planning, How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy. Retrieved July 7, 2016, from https://hbr.org/1979/03/how-competitive-forces-shape-strategy

Rastogi, N., & Trivedi, M. K. (2016). PESTLE Technique–a Tool to Identify External Risks in Construction Projects. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), 3(1), 384-388.

Rauch, P. (2007). SWOT analyses and SWOT strategy formulation for forest owner cooperations in Austria. European Journal of Forest Research, 126(3), 413-420.

Warning! This article is only an example and cannot be used for research or reference purposes. If you need help with something similar, please submit your details here .

9417 Students can’t be wrong

PhD Experts

The expert fixed all questions in an explained content. Thank you for the suitable prices!

They were available 24/4 and I wanna appreciate the live chat with the expert. Besides, they answered all my questions in a timely manner. Thanks!

Alesia Salvatore

When I found this service, I decided to give it a try. The customer support was very professional and guided me about every step. I had communication with the writer and he was very cooperative. The assignment was fine. Thanks a lot!

Grace Bernard

Friendly service and overall good experience! Finally, I found a service that I can recommend to my fellows. I'm grateful for discounts and authentic paper!

Calculate the Price

(approx ~ 0.0 page), total price €0, next articles.

• Process Improvement In Textile Wet Processing A Case Study From The Indian Small Scale Sector Case Analysis
• .Beetle Beats: Finding A SOUND Market For ADT Case Analysis
• Alibaba Building A Social Sustainability Ecosystem For E Commerce Case Analysis
• Colberts Inc. (A) Case Analysis
• Smart Beta Exchange Traded Funds And Factor Investing Case Analysis
• Elite The Digital Mattress Company Case Analysis
• Spotify: Face The Music (update 2018) Case Analysis
• WebTeb (A): A Very Palestinian Dilemma Case Analysis
• WebTeb (B): A Very Palestinian Dilemma Case Analysis
• Innovium 2018 Case Analysis

Previous Articles

• Relax (Boston): Innovating And Growing An Entrepreneurial Business Case Analysis
• Note On Creating A Viable Venture A Global Perspective Case Analysis
• Padhy Leather: Minimizing Commercial Risk Through A Letter Of Credit Case Analysis
• Unilever South Africa: Contextual Leadership Of Culture For Inclusive Growth Case Analysis
• Canopy Growth Corporation: Canada First And The World Next Case Analysis
• The National University Hospital: Overcrowding In The Emergency Department Case Analysis
• Facebook Confronts A Crisis Of Trust Case Analysis
• Casper Sleep Inc. (B): Growth Strategy Case Analysis
• A School Is "a Building That Has Four Walls...with Tomorrow Inside": Toward The Reinvention Of The Business School Case Analysis
• Brand W: Strategizing For Omni Channel Retail Case Analysis

Be a great writer or hire a greater one!

Academic writing has no room for errors and mistakes. If you have BIG dreams to score BIG, think out of the box and hire Case48 with BIG enough reputation.

Our Guarantees

Zero plagiarism, best quality, qualified writers, absolute privacy, timely delivery.

Interesting Fact

Most recent surveys suggest that around 76 % students try professional academic writing services at least once in their lifetime!

Allow Our Skilled Essay Writers to Proficiently Finish Your Paper.

We are here to help. Chat with us on WhatsApp for any queries.

Customer Representative