Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Chapter Seven
CROSS CASE ANALYSIS:
DISCUSSIONS AND FINDINGS
Contents
7.1. Comparison of the Status of BSC Implementation ...................................... 254
7.2. Comparison of the Challenges – The Leaders’ Perspective ......................... 256
7.3. Comparison of Challenges – The Employees’ Perspective .......................... 259
7.4. Comparison of the Challenges – The Facilitators’ Perspective .................... 263
7.5. Common Challenges for BSC Implementation ............................................ 266
7.6. Root Causes of the Challenges to BSC Implementation .............................. 267
7.7. Concerns at Individual and Organisational Levels ....................................... 270
7.8. Differentiating Key Success Factors ............................................................ 270
7.9. BSC Implementation Challenges in the Context of PSU ............................. 275
7.10. Summary of Factors Driving Employee Buy-in for BSC ............................. 278
7.11. Enabling Factors for Enhanced Employees Performance ............................ 279
7.12. Summary ....................................................................................................... 280
254
Chapter Seven
CROSS CASE ANALYSIS:
DISCUSSIONS AND FINDINGS
This chapter compiles the findings of the cases studies in Chapters 4, 5, and 6 and makes a
comparative analysis of the challenges from the perspectives of employees, leaders and
facilitators. The analysis examines the context of each case and the determinants that
impact the process of BSC implementation. Further investigation highlights the factors that
are not too evident, but are the root causes of these concerns. These factors are discussed at
both individual and organisational levels.
Since the study was carried out in a PSU, the challenges and success factors specific to the
PSU context are highlighted. The analysis reveals the necessary attributes in a facilitator,
drivers of employee buy-in and the factors that motivate employees to commit their efforts,
all of which result in successful implementation.
7.1. Comparison of the Status of BSC Implementation
Comparative study of all the six cases shows that BSC implementation could be termed as
successful (as defined and discussed in Chapter 2) in two departments- ECR-ISD and
WCR-EMD. Implementation in WCR, Aviation and E&P may be termed to have been
partially successful. ECR may require still more efforts to institutionalise BSC.
The case of E&P was of particular interest as the planning was done in line with BSC, but
implementation and reviews were independent of BSC. The leader’ ability to engage his
team exceeded BSC requirements. The team achieved SBU objectives. This case
underlined the importance of leadership. Table 7.1 gives a comparative representation of
the BSC implementation in all cases.
255
Table 7.1
Comparison of the Status of BSC Implementation
SN STATUS E&P AVT ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
I Pre-Implementation Stage : BSC Awareness and Buy-in
1 Awareness about the BSC
Concept
2 Leaders Buy-in
3 Employee Buy-in
II BSC Implementation Stage: BSC Designing, Cascading, Aligning and Reviewing
1 Designing Strategy Map &
BSC Template
2 Cascading
3 Alignment with Vision &
Strategy
4 BSC Review
III Post BSC Implementation – Sustenance Stage
1 Adapting BSC to Modified
Strategy
2 Integrating BSC as an
Ongoing Management
Process
A number of factors, including the context of each case, impacted the degree of success of
BSC implementation. The teams that successfully implemented BSC and experienced
transformation were both small in size and had team heads who were able to maintain close
relations with all their team members. The facilitators’ provided appropriate and timely
support and motivation to these teams. On the other hand, in spite of its small sized team,
E&P did not get satisfactory support from its facilitator.
In all the teams, the head took the ownership of implementation upon him. The leaders also
took the initiative to educate their team members as well as to institutionalise the processes
P P N S S S
S S N P S S
P P N P S S
S P P S S S
N P N P S S
P S P P S P
P P P S S N
P P N P S N
P P S S S S
256
that were necessary for BSC implementation. They ensured proper cascading of BSC and
engaged the employees in the strategic pursuits. Employees in these teams described
several positive transformations that were the outcomes of BSC implementation.
7.2. Comparison of the Challenges – The Leaders’ Perspective
The concerns of the senior and middle management were broadly classified in seven main
categories with a total of 33 sub-categories of challenges as shown in Table 7.2. These
were separated out from the 222 codes giving leaders perspective on challenges, success
factors and outcomes of BSC implementation. While some challenges were common, some
others were specific to the case.
Table 7.2
Comparison of the Challenges from the Leaders’ Perspective
Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
I Developing an Appropriate SBU/ Department Business / Support Strategy
1 Understanding Macro
Business Scenario
2 Identifying Strategic
Objectives
3 Identifying Strategic
Competencies
4 Business Foresight
5 Resource Availability
II Translating Strategy into Actionable Objectives & Strategy Implementation
6 Understanding and
Designing Scorecards
7 Competence and
Commitment of the BSC
Facilitator
8 Involvement and Support of
BSC Facilitator
M M M L L M
H L M M M M
H L H M M M
H L M M M N
H N L L L N
H H N N N N
H H N N N N
L L L L L N
257
Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
9 Dissemination and Cascading
of Scorecards
10 Bringing Alignment to
Become Strategy Focused
11 Strategic Networking
III Structural Inadequacies of BSC
12 Validating Causal
Relationships
13 Finding BSC Framework Not
Enough for Achieving
Objectives
IV Inspiring and Engaging the Leaders and Employees in the Pursuit of Business
Results
14 Personal Involvement –
Leaders’ Own Buy-In for
Strategy and BSC
15 Managing Employee Buy-In
16 Instilling Hope and
Optimism
17 Appealing to Intrinsic
Motivation
18 Developing and Nurturing
Relationships
19 Developing Positive Work
Environment
20 Institutionalising Work
Systems
21 Employee Placements
22 Transfers
23 Objectivity in Performance
Reviews
H M M H M H
M L H H H H
M M M M L M
H M M L H N
M H H L M N
L M M M M M
H L L L L M
L H M M H H
H H H M M M
H M M M M H
H N N N N H
L L H L L N
M M M M N N
H M M M M N
H M M N N N
258
Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
24 Coaching and Mentoring
Leaders and Employees
25 Ensuring Value Based
Management
26 Political Interferences
V Developing Internal Business Capabilities
27 Proactive Learning Initiatives
linked with Strategy to Build
People Competencies
28 Adopting New Technologies
Proactively
VI BSC Reviews
29 Ongoing Parallel Reviews
30 Avoiding BSC Format for
Reviews
VII Change Management
31 Structures and Policies
32 Being a PSU
33 Managing Resistance to
Change
High Challenge Moderate Challenge Low Challenge No Challenge
Though the leaders in each case faced different sets of challenges that were specific to their
contexts, a few sets of challenges were common across the SBUs. E&P was at the
inception stage and leaders faced the challenges of understanding the complexities of their
business and identifying the high leverage areas and developing strong business alliances.
This was not the case with the other SBUs and teams. But they differed in the manner by
which they interacted with their employees and got them engaged in the strategic pursuit.
N H M L
M L M M L H
M M M M L L
H L M M M M
M N H H N N
M M M M M N
H H M H N N
H L H M H N
L M H H H N
M H H H H N
H H H H N N
259
In the case of E&P and Aviation, obtaining facilitator’s support was a challenge whereas
the refineries did not face this problem. Refineries acknowledged that the facilitators took
the initiative to obtain employee buy-in and extended support during the implementation
process.
BSC reviews were conducted only in the refineries and their implementation teams. The
leaders admitted that ensuring that the reviews were consistent and qualitatively sound was
a challenge and needed considerable patience and understanding. Further, BSC
implementation necessitated changes in work routines and, though not very obvious, there
was resistance to change. Managing and overcoming the resistance was a challenge.
Smaller teams managed and resolved these issues better.
A common challenge faced by nearly all the leaders was motivation. It was necessary to
address concerns of employees who were dissatisfied with their performance ratings and
felt that they were not being fairly treated. Addressing this issue sympathetically and
motivating them to work for the team was a difficult task for the leaders.
Another commonly quoted challenge was interdepartmental conflicts and alignment of
support functions. These issues were rooted in an organisational culture that did not
recognise interdependency. This cultural aspect was a big barrier to alignment. Technically,
although the scorecards and processes were shown as aligned, they were practically
ineffective.
7.3. Comparison of Challenges – The Employees’ Perspective
The inputs received from the several in-depth interviews, group interviews and focused
group discussions led to total 204 codes with many overlaps considering all six cases.
While collating the findings, all the challenges were grouped in 6 major categories with a
total of 36 sub-categories as tabulated in Table 7.3.
260
Table 7.3
Comparison of the Challenges from the Employees’ Perspective
Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
I Understanding of the BSC Concept , Strategy Maps and BSC Template
1
Understanding BSC
perspectives - Putting
Thoughts in the BSC
Format
2 Identification of
Strategic Objectives
3 Quantifying Intangibles
4 Forced Irrelevant
Objectives & Targets
II Leaders’ Competence, Commitment and Involvement
5 Technical Expertise at
Senior Positions
6
Leaders’ Engagement
Levels-(Discussing
Vision, Strategy and
Initiatives with
Employees)
7 Supervisor Prioritising
on Personal Goals
8
Faith in Leadership –
(Perception of Leaders’
Accountability and
Transparency )
9
Leaders’ Seriousness
About Using BSC –
BSC Just a Formality
III Facilitators’ Competence, Commitment and Involvement
10 Facilitators’
Competence
11
Facilitators’
Commitment and
Support
H M M M M M
H H H M M M
L N N M M M
L
L
L
N
N
N
N
N
H
N
N
L
N
N
N
N
N
N
L N H N N M
L H L N N M
H N N N N N
H H L M H H
H N N N N H
261
Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
12
Facilitators’ Knowledge
of Business
Complexities
IV Overall Alignment
13 Alignment of the
Organisation Structure
14
Alignment of Support
Functions / Other
Functions
15
Alignment of Policies:
Employee Performance
Management System
(EPMS)
16
Alignment of Training
& Development
Initiatives
17 Alignment of Budget
and Resources
18 Alignment of Rewards
and Incentives
V Review Related Challenges
19 Data and Information
Availability
20 Time Constraints
21 IT or BSC Software
22
Representation of
Operational
Complexities
23
Comprehensive
Representation of all
Work Done
24 Consistent Performance
Feedback
VI Cultural and Other Organisation Specific Challenges
25 Communication
H L L N L M
L N M M M M
N M M M M M
N M M M M M
N L H H L N
N M M M M M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
N L H L N L
L H H H H H
H H H M H H
L H H H H H
262
Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
26 Information Sharing
27 Decision Making
28 Conflict Resolutions
29 Work Systems
30 Employee Morale
31
Dissemination of BSC
to Non-management
Staff
32 Perception about
Organisational Care
33
Perception about Top
Management
Sponsorship
34 Perception about
Supervisor Dominance
35 Ownership and
Responsibility
36 Role Clarity
High Challenge Moderate Challenge Low Challenge No Challenge
Employees in E&P and Aviation observed that the non-availability of support from the
BSC facilitator was a challenge. This problem was not faced by the employees in other
SBUs. As a result, awareness and understanding of the concepts was relatively less in E&P
and Aviation. In EMD and the refineries, the challenge Understanding of the BSC Concept ,
Strategy Maps and BSC Template was felt mostly by the employees who had risen through
the ranks. These employees were usually of an age that was higher than the team average.
Their capability and motivation for learning was also low.
The existing work culture was also a deterrent. Slow decision making, lack of proper
communications and coordination posed a challenge. The first line of supervisors faced
N H M L
N
N
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
N
H
H
L N N L M
L N N N M
L L H N M
M
M
M
L L M M
N L M M M
M
M
M
H L H M M M
N N N N M M
N H N M M M
N H N H M M
263
challenges of engaging the non-managerial staff (who were unionised workmen). They
refused ownership and accountability and very few of them worked sincerely. Thus, the
major common challenges were:
1- Understanding and designing of the scorecards
2- Quantifying intangibles
3- Alignment among functions and teams
4- Aligning the EPMS based on bell curve with BSC
5- Aligning rewards and incentives strictly with BSC
6- Conflict resolution
7- Non-involvement of workmen (unionised staff i.e. labour and clerical staff) in BSC
implementation process.
7.4. Comparison of the Challenges – The Facilitators’ Perspective
The study of inputs provided by the 6 facilitators from BSC team and four scorecard
managers resulted in 102 codes which referred to the challenges, outcomes and
methodology of BSC implementation. The comparative study indicated that the
competence, commitment and support extended by the facilitator plays a significant role in
the successful implementation of BSC. However, unless the initiative is taken by the
respective leaders, the facilitator can’t really do much. The onus of implementation lies
with the leaders.
Table 7.4 shows the challenges from the perspective of facilitators for different SBUs and
teams. Challenges pertaining to the structure, role clarity and absence of suitable BSC
software were some of the challenges experienced by all the facilitators.
264
Table 7.4
Comparison of the Challenges from the BSC Facilitators’ Perspective
SN Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
I Team Structure and Size
1 Size of the Team
2 Work Load
3 Location of the Team
4 Reporting of the BSC Team
5 Hierarchical Issues
II Role Clarity of BSC Team
6 Accountabilities of the BSC
Team
7 Role and Accountabilities of
Scorecard Managers
III Competency Development
8 Training of Scorecard
Managers
9 Training of Facilitators on
BSC Concept and
Implementation
10 Competencies to Conduct
Training and Workshops
11 Knowledge of Business
Complexities
IV Commitment and Ownership
12 Commitment of BSC
Facilitator
H
L
H
L
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H H H H M M
H H L H L N
M M M M M M
N H H H H H
L M M M M H
L
L
L
L
L
N
L
N
L
N
L
N
L L L L M M
M M M M M M
H H N N N N
265
SN Challenging Factors E&P AVTN ECR WCR ECR-
ISD
WCR-
EMD
13 Commitment of SBU Heads
14 Leaders’ and Employee Buy-
in
V Cultural Factors
15 Communications
16 Enforcement of Decisions
17 Culture of Appeasing the
Boss
18 Willingness for the Change
VI BSC Review
19 Reviewing Abilities of the
Leaders
20 BSC Software for
Information Collation
21 Time and Data Constraints
VII Employee Transfers
22 Integrating New Incumbents
into BSC
23 Change in Leadership
Approach to BSC
High Challenge Moderate Challenge Low Challenge No Challenge
Challenges that were quoted by almost all the facilitators were:
1- In relation to their work load and the locations they had to cover, their team did not have
sufficient numbers.
N H M L
N N N M M M
L L N L M H
N L M M M M
L L L N L M
L H H H H H
L L N N
L L L N N
M H
H
L L M M L N
H L M N N M
N N N M M H
N N H N N H
266
2- Hierarchy was a hurdle, especially when they were required to coach or guide officers
and managers who were much senior to them. It was more difficult in situations where
the leaders showed a lack of interest and initiative.
3- Another major concern was that the role and accountabilities of the scorecard managers
were not clearly defined and implemented.
4- Although SBU heads and leaders talked good about BSC in meetings, no one really
seemed to take the ownership for successful implementation of BSC. SBU heads
expected BSC facilitators to take initiative for implementation. BSC team did take
initiative but felt that their role was restricted to creating awareness, explaining the
concepts and offering implementation support and guidance. In the opinion of the
facilitators, the process owners - in this case, the SBU heads - were responsible for
implementation and its outcomes.
5- Facilitators expressed that not having a BSC software was a major constraint. It would
have made real time data and information available to top management and all
concerned. This limitation significantly impacted the quality of BSC reviews.
7.5. Common Challenges for BSC Implementation
Closer examination of the challenges highlighted by the top leadership team, functional and
team heads, the employees and implementation facilitators show several similarities in the
major themes of challenges. Figure 7.1 depicts these groups of common challenges.
267
Figure 7.1
Common Themes for Challenges to BSC Implementation
7.6. Root Causes of the Challenges to BSC Implementation
A deeper examination of organisation’s history and culture as well as some psychological
factors provides an understanding of the factors that were at the root of these challenges
(yet not too evident). A summary of these hidden cultural and structural factors is given in
Table 7.5.
Understanding and
Designing of BSC
Cascading and
Diffusion of BSC
BSC Reviews /
BSC Software
Competence of Employees,
Leaders and Facilitators
Transfers
BSC Not Applicable to
Unionised Staff
Commitment, Initiative
and Ownership for BSC
Implementation
Overall Alignment
EPMS Synchronisation
PSU Constraints Common
Challenges
268
Table 7.5
Underlying Issues to BSC Implementation Challenges
SN ISSUES IMPACT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGY
AND BSC
1 Resistance to Change -
From Complacency to
Dynamism
Oil PSUs enjoyed a monopoly status for several decades.
The Government controlled the pricing of final products
through a system of cross subsidies and oil bonds to the
PSUs to compensate for the losses. There was no
competition. With changes in the business scenario and
Government policies, oil PSUs are now faced with
competition. Implementing BSC demanded customer focus,
strategic thinking, and sustained efforts to improve internal
processes and developing new capabilities. It was a change
for the organisation and there was (mostly passive)
resistance to change.
2 Strategy Team at Loss
with BSC
The Corporate Strategy and Planning (CSP) considered their
role to be limited to bringing out the strategy documents.
They felt they would not have to follow up on the
implementation process and left the implementation to the
SBU heads. From the beginning, the facilitator team did the
follow-up. Gradually the team of facilitators limited its role
to awareness about BSC and assisting in designing and
cascading of scorecards. For reasons unknown, there was no
scorecard for the strategy team. The strategy and BSC teams
worked independent of each other and reported to different
functional directors without any coordination between them.
3 Individual Successes
over Team Successes
Promotions were the only way by which the employees
considered themselves to be growing in the organisation.
The prevailing culture encouraged employees to work for
their personal advancement. This resulted in organisational
objectives becoming of secondary importance.
4 Conflicts, Blames
Indecisiveness, Lack of
Ownership and Initiative
There was a lack of collaboration and coordination among
SBUs, functions and teams. The impression that one could
get was that they worked in separate silos. There was no
system to resolve the inevitable conflicts. Whenever
interdependency matters came up the tendency was for
people to blame each other. The BSC team got the teams
and SBUs together and developed SLAs between SBUs and
departments. However, people showed the tendency to
return to the old way of working. More often than not, it
gave the impression that the teams were not ready to take
the initiative and work towards getting things done. They
269
SN ISSUES IMPACT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGY
AND BSC
seemed to want to limit their ownership and accountability
to the minimum possible.
BSC and SLAs brought in clear accountabilities and
required them to take initiative. In the given culture, there
was resistance to this arrangement. Nevertheless, some
people demonstrated higher level of commitment and
accepted accountability and took initiative.
5 Discrepancy Between
What is Said in Meetings
and What Actually Got
Done
It was also generally accepted that what was talked about in
the meetings was not necessarily to be implemented. There
was also the tendency to question the wisdom of the
decisions taken in the meeting. The meetings had limited
credibility. Only those issues that were pursued by the office
of chairman and directors were considered important and
were attended to.
6 Short Tenures of
Directors and Chairman
The short tenure of leaders in the top management team was
also a challenge. Typically, they have two to four year
tenure in these positions. The initiatives taken by them
might not get completed during their tenure. Their
successors might see matters differently and introduce new
ideas. Thus, there is always an element of uncertainty about
what the organisation will be like after three years.
7 EPMS Incoherent with
BSC
The existing EPMS incorporated strict government
guidelines on moderation of individual performance scores.
This often conflicted with the BSC system which calls for
scoring the employee performance against the achievement
of predefined objectives and rewarding appropriately. If the
performance ratings were going to be moderated anyway,
employees lose faith in BSC.
8 Employee Grievance
Handling
EPMS seemed to be the single biggest cause of
dissatisfaction among employees. It created an all pervasive
sense of injustice by the organisation. The organisation did
not have a mechanism or system for addressing such issues.
There were grievance handling cells but these were
ineffective. It led to employees not fully getting engaged
with organisational goals, but staying focused on their
personal goals.
270
7.7. Concerns at Individual and Organisational Levels
The set of concerns as discussed above, are rooted in both micro- and macro- levels. At the
organisational level, they usually pertain to organisational culture, structure and systems;
and at the individual level, the challenges are on account of factors pertaining to
employees’ beliefs, values, and other such psychosomatic reasons. Table 7.6 depicts these
factors at individual and organisational levels.
Table 7.6
BSC Implementation Concerns at the Root of Individual
And Organisational Level Challenges
ROOT CAUSE FOR CHALLENGES
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL ORGANISATIONAL LEVEL
1 Mental Models 1
Leadership lacking in Ownership,
Initiative and Commitment 2 Previous Conditionings
3 Beliefs 2
Culture Lacking in Values, Justice,
Camaraderie and Discipline 4 Values
5 Resilience 3 Managerial Executive Abilities
6 Emphasis on Personal Gains
7 Ego and Professional Rivalry
4
Organisation Structure and
Systems, particularly the Employee
Performance Management System 8 Nature of Passing the Buck
7.8. Differentiating Key Success Factors
A comparative study of all the six cases showed that every case had some degree of
success. Some benefits were definitely experienced. Even though all the objectives could
not have been achieved, some important BSC objectives were certainly fulfilled. The two
teams - ECR-ISD and WCR-EMD - had registered better success by achieving the
maximum number of objectives. These teams also experienced significant transformations.
ECR–ISD not only successfully implemented BSC, it even exceeded the targets it had set
for itself. The following differentiating key success factors were seen with reference to
these two cases of successful implementation:
271
1. Leaders’ Conviction: The head of ECR–ISD department fully believed in the concept
of BSC and was sure about the benefits of implementation. He took the initiative to
make his team understand and implement BSC. He sought the support of the facilitator
to organise workshops and implementation support whenever needed. Therefore, the
complete ownership of ensuring BSC implementation was taken by the team head.
2. Facilitator Support: The interest and commitment of the team was a motivation for the
facilitator who devoted time and energy to help make the implementation a success in
these teams.
3. Awareness, Understanding and Buy-in for BSC Implementation: The ISD team was
small and young (average age less than thirty five years). The ISD team members
believed in their leader and accepted BSC after initial cynicism. They remained focused
on the objective throughout the implementation period.
An interesting phenomenon to note here is that team profile of EMD was exactly
opposite. It had high average age and team members were not so well qualified. Still
EMD achieved substantial success in BSC implementation. The common factor here
was ‘employee buy-in’. The team head and facilitator could convince the team members
on the expected beneficial outcomes. The facilitator inculcated the understanding of
BSC in a simple and lucrative manner. Once convinced, employees took interest in
learning and at times simply followed the path showed by the team head.
4. Ownership and the Initiative of the Team: The team set itself stretch targets and came
up with innovative ideas. The notion that they were working for excellence generated
enthusiasm and commitment. A sense of purpose and meaning got into their work.
5. Budget and Resource Availability: The team justified all resource requirements with
sufficient data. For this reason, they did not face problems of budget sanctions and
purchase approvals. They also managed their budgets efficiently to implement their
initiatives and fulfil training needs.
6. Training and Capacity Building: With BSC framework in place, it became easy to
justify and arrange the necessary training and development for the team. The
272
employees agreed that all team members were given the opportunity to upgrade their
domain skills and knowledge. This was a sentiment shared by all teams.
7. Operational and Strategic Reviews: ISD team held review meetings over breakfast
to discuss performance status against agreed targets every Monday. The monthly and
quarterly BSC reviews assessed if the team was meeting strategic objectives.
Similarly, the EMD team had weekly department meeting for operational reviews and
quarterly reviews of strategy implementation. Thus, there was a balance of operational
and strategic reviews. The process of data collection and compilation was made simple
by instituting systems and easy to use excel templates.
8. Performance Feedback to Employees: During the BSC reviews, team members
could themselves assess their performance and make a comparative analysis of
individual performances. The team leader regularly discussed areas which each team
member needed to develop.
9. Personal Relationship with the Team Heads: Personal relationships were important.
Often, the team leader’s relationship with his team was necessary to overcome
dissatisfaction and de-motivation over the perceived injustices in performance
appraisals.
10. Collective Accountability: All members participated in the review meetings. The
meetings were informal, yet focused on specific agenda. The discussions were more on
issues and targets and not on personal achievements.
11. Value-Based-Management: In both E&P and ISD, the team leader had a humane
approach. They encouraged everyone to participate in the discussions, valued their
ideas and treated them with respect. In return, team members respected and trusted
him. There was stress free environment and people could focus on achieving
performance objectives.
The importance of the commitment and competence of facilitator is obvious from the fact
that in all cases of success, this was the common feature. In the case of E&P, the SBU head
was highly committed to strategy implementation but they could not really do well with
BSC implementation because of the unavailability of support from BSC facilitators.
273
Similarly, Aviation SBU could have performed better in implementation had there been
continuous support from facilitator as the buy-in of leaders and employees was already
there.
The case of ECR shows, how in the absence of a committed and agile leadership, BSC
implementation could move forward. WCR’s experience emphasises the importance of the
approach of leadership to the situation.
The key success factors can be depicted as shown in Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.2
Key Success Factors for BSC Implementation
The most important factor that emerges in BSC implementation is strategy– focus and
engaged employees. BSC implementation was eventually successful only when the leaders
could get their employees engaged and remain strategy– focused. This is evident from the
cases of ECR-ISD and WCR-EMD. The leaders in these cases adhered strictly to the
implementation procedure. This approach automatically resulted in changes in the ways
they worked. Attention was given to reviews, performance feedback, training and
development etc. which helped in keeping the employees engaged. The leadership style and
values defined the manner in which such things were done.
Value Based
Management
Relationship
Bonds
Collective
Accountability
Regular
Performance
Feedback
BSC Reviews
Capacity
Building
Resource
Availability
BSC Buy-In
Leaders’
Conviction
Facilitators’
Support
BSC Buy-In &
Understanding
Success
Factors
These differentiating success factors can be further classified at three different levels, i.e.
organisational, leadership and individual as shown in Figure 7.
observed in the cases of successful implementation of BSC.
Key Success Factors at Organ
Thus, this comparative
competent BSC implementation facilitators (BSC Team), committed and agile leadership,
strategy– focused and engaged employees, and the importance of ‘values’ that are held by
individuals and the organ
Organizational
•Culture of Ownership & Accountability
•Capability Building of Employees & Organization (LO)
•Consistent Strategic & Operational Reviews
•Policies and Systems Aligned with Strategy
•Aligned Structure
•Quality of Manpower
•Availability of Budget and Resources
274
These differentiating success factors can be further classified at three different levels, i.e.
adership and individual as shown in Figure 7.3
observed in the cases of successful implementation of BSC.
Figure-7.3
Key Success Factors at Organisational, Leadership and Individual Levels
comparative study brings out the importance and impact of committed and
competent BSC implementation facilitators (BSC Team), committed and agile leadership,
focused and engaged employees, and the importance of ‘values’ that are held by
individuals and the organisation in ensuring successful implementation of BSC.
Organization (LO)
Aligned Structure
Leadership
•Is Committed
•Is Strategy Focused
•Is Business Savvy Decisions
•Is Resourceful
•Is Noble, Wise & Just
•Enables Team Camaraderie
•Empowers Employees
•Develops and Nurtures Relationships
•Gives Performance feedback & Coaches Employees
Individual
•Values -work, Discipline & Gratitude
•Synchronization b/w Personal & Organizational Aspirations
•Awareness and Focus on Vision, Strategy and His Team’s Goals
•Considers his Job Meaningful and Valuable
•Updates Requisite Skills & Competencies
•Ownership & Collective Accountability
•Initiatives & Innovative Thinking
These differentiating success factors can be further classified at three different levels, i.e.
3. These factors were
tional, Leadership and Individual Levels
the importance and impact of committed and
competent BSC implementation facilitators (BSC Team), committed and agile leadership,
focused and engaged employees, and the importance of ‘values’ that are held by
suring successful implementation of BSC.
Individual
- Honesty, Hard work, Discipline & Gratitude
Synchronization b/w Personal & Organizational Aspirations
Awareness and Focus on Vision, Strategy and His Team’s Goals
Considers his Job Meaningful and Valuable
Updates Requisite Skills & Competencies
Ownership & Collective Accountability
Initiatives & Innovative Thinking
275
7.9. BSC Implementation Challenges in the Context of PSU
As discussed in the literature review, the context of PSUs differs widely from private sector
organisations. The PSU culture is unique to PSU and the study found that it poses
enormous challenges to BSC implementation. This was evident from the interviews of
directors, leaders and employees. Although the interviews would begin with a denial of
problems, the challenges and issues would surface during discussions. Top management
was not free from political pressures and interference. For example, UPCL was bound by
government guidelines in the selection and allocation of work to vendors. There were also
instances when work had to be given to contractors who demanded work based on their
influence in the ministry.
UPCL management has to abide by the targets set by the ministry. There was no scope for
questioning. Under pressure to show performance, managements resorted to shortcuts
regardless of the operational risks.
The directors felt that managing the employee performance management system was a
challenge in itself. There was a conflict between performance rating based on the
individual scorecard and the bell-curve which was the norm in PSUs. They were of the
opinion that the two must be synchronised.
Some PSU specific constraints that were evident in this study are being discussed here:
1. DPE guidelines required the assessment of employee performance to fit on a bell-curve.
Moreover, PRP was disbursed according to the employee’s position on the bell-curve.
While the organisation followed BSC, the ratings were further modified by a moderation
committee in order to ensure the employee performance fits on the bell-curve. This
conflicted with the BSC philosophy of performance assessment. The resulting
dissatisfaction in employees becomes an impediment to BSC implementation.
2. Immediate monetary rewards were not given to employees and PRP was generally
viewed as not being fair. There were other rewards schemes such as ‘Outstanding
Achievement’ and ‘UP-Icon’ etc. All these schemes were operated from the corporate
276
level. It was not easy for the team heads or even the SBU heads to devise ways to
immediately reward outstanding performance.
3. Senior managers did not have the flexibility to hire and retain talent or fire
underperformers. PSU rules did not allow such discretionary hiring and firing. Hiring
employees at middle and senior levels was not common even though DPE guidelines
give increased flexibility and power to CPSEs.1 Senior management is now allowed to
create and abolish positions, and appoint personnel at all levels except to the board. The
PSUs, however, have yet to put this provision to day-to-day use.
4. The team heads did not have a say in the composition of their teams. Besides, employee
transfers were an essential feature of the organisation. The employees were usually
transferred after three to four years. Though the objective behind these transfers is
laudable and helps in overall development of employees, it also has certain demerits.
When an employee knows that he has limited tenure in each assignment, he tends to
prioritise on objectives that yield personal results in the short term. Long term objectives
are often ignored.
There is also the tendency to blame the work of the predecessors, and undo some of
their good initiatives that may be in practice. New incumbents to a position tend to ask
for a change in the existing scorecards. The process of educating the new incumbents,
getting their buy-in had to be done all over again.
5. Being a PSU, bureaucracy and politics play influential roles in its working. Referring to
the governmental constraints. There is a need to develop a culture of discipline and
professionalism.
6. Job Security is taken for granted in PSUs and government services in India. Thus, while
there is not much incentive to work hard, there is also no deterrent to sluggish working.
It is not uncommon to devote their attention to personal matters during working hours
with the full knowledge that they will not be taken to task.
1 Chapter -7. Delegation of Enhanced Financial Powers to CPSEs. PUBLIC ENTERPRISES
SURVEY 2009-2010, Vol. – 1,
www.dpe.nic.in/sites/upload_files/dpe/files/sur0708/vol1ch8.pdf
277
7. Systems and procedures are in place, but they are person driven. Accordingly,
performance depended a lot on the values and motives of the leaders as well as the
employees. A culture of discipline and professionalism is required to ensure that the
systems are followed and work gets done efficiently.
8. Government guidelines mandate that other government agencies/ organisations must be
given preference in awarding contracts as vendors. Delays in execution by such vendors
were the norm and could not be attributed to the vendors. It was a challenge to get such
vendors/ contractors aligned to the strategy of UPCL.
9. Sometimes the actions of the vigilance department, even if they are in the organisation’s
interest, block initiative and put the employees in defensive state of mind. One team
leader had advised his team to be very cautious in their actions and not do anything that
might invite scrutiny. Getting caught in vigilance cases has demoralising effect. But
another leader highlighted the positive side. It was true that there are constraints. But
oversight agencies like the vigilance departments actually strengthen the system.
Figure 7.4 shows these PSU specific constraints.
Figure 7.4
BSC Implementation Challenges in the PSU Context
EPMS –Bell Curve
Synchronisation
Constraints of
Financial Rewards
Transfers
Vigilance Phobia
Discipline &
Professionalism
Bureaucracy
Political Interferences
Personal Agendas over
Organisational Objectives
PSU
Constraints
278
To summarise, it can be said that the culture of the PSU places constraints and pose a big
challenge to BSC implementation that essentially requires a performance oriented dynamic
culture. The structure, systems and the culture in PSUs need an overhaul before a
reasonable degree of success can be achieved.
7.10. Summary of Factors Driving Employee Buy-in for BSC
Employee buy-in for the success of BSC implementation is essential and cannot be
overemphasised. The study also examined the motivating factors that enabled the buy-in.
1. Supervisor’s Commitment to Implement BSC: A committed supervisor invariably
educated his subordinates on BSC concept. He would make his expectations clear about
implementation and work on educating his subordinates on the concepts and benefits of
BSC. Such efforts usually led to the employee’s buy-in. With a majority having
accepted the need for implementation, the sceptics would have no option but to fall in
line. Conversely, employees cannot be expected to achieve anything significant without
a committed supervisor.
2. Employee’s Desire to Bring in Positive Changes in Work Environment: Employees
felt that applying BSC could actually bring about positive changes in their work
environment. The BSC tool gave clarity to their role and responsibilities and empowered
them to work towards a common organisational goal.
3. Expectation of a Fair and Objective Assessment of Performance: BSC was regarded
as a useful tool for fair and objective assessment of employee performance against
predefined targets. The employees hoped that BSC would eliminate bias and the other
shortcomings of the existing EPMS.
4. Employees Inspired by the BSC Facilitator: The facilitator presented the ‘big picture’
of the organisation and showed how individual roles and performance influenced the
organisation’s growth and survival. To make employees feel that they were an important
part of the organisation was considered the facilitator’s biggest achievement.
5. Benefits that Accrued from BSC Implementation: The benefits of successful
implementation were shared with others in the organisation. This encouraged other
279
leaders and employees and strengthened their commitment to work for success in their
areas.
7.11. Enabling Factors for Enhanced Employees Performance
The factors that enabled and motivated employees to give their best performance were:
1. Team Members and Working Environment: A cohesive team, good interpersonal
relations and amicable work environment encouraged the employees and enabled them
to give their best performance.
2. Work Systems and Resource Availability: Clearly defined systems facilitated smooth
functioning without conflict of interest. Timely availability and adequate resources
facilitated the implementation process as the employees could focus on their work
without worrying about issues over which they had no control.
3. Personal Rapport with Supervisor / SBU head: Good working relationships in an
atmosphere of mutual respect give a sense of security and belonging. Better the
relationship, the better the sense of connectedness.
4. Meaningfulness of the Work: The feeling that they added value gave the employees a
sense of pride.
5. Career Progression: Many employees were open in their admission that they were
motivated by the prospect of promotions and the resulting financial gain.
6. Empowerment: The employees were empowered to prioritise and given the freedom in
their methods to achieve targets. This also made them accountable for their own
performances which became a motivating factor.
7. Personal ‘Values’: A majority of the employees mentioned that, notwithstanding good
working environment and systems, it was their personal values that drives them to
continue giving their best performance to the organisation they work for.
8. Fair and Just Treatment by the Organisation: Employees feel motivated to work for
an organisation if they perceive it to be ‘just and fair’ in its treatment of the employees.
They expected their performance to be appreciated and valued. Justice, fairness, respect,
280
transparency and accountability are qualities that the employees expect in the
organisation.
9. Organisation that Cares: Employee responses show that they are motivated to work in
an organisation that ‘cared’ for its people. ‘Care’ is understood as coaching/ guidance
from the boss and seniors, getting the required training to perform better, and
development for professional capability and personal growth, employee and family
friendly policies, and organisational support by way of medical, housing and other
entertainment and welfare related policies. Employees also expect a genuine concern of
the supervisor to resolve problematic issues, and their support and encouragement. They
want to feel important, respected and empowered.
10. Feeling of Security: An important organisational attribute which motivates the
employees is able leadership. Employees felt that a capable leadership will take into
consideration that employees are important stakeholders and thus it is a business
imperative that their interests are not compromised. Growth in business, market
recognition and improvement in other business indicators are important motivating
factors.
7.12. Summary
Comparative case analyses in this chapter indicate that there are only a few challenges that
vary when looked at from different perspectives of top management, leaders facilitators
and employees. Leadership, culture, capabilities of the employees, leaders and facilitators
and their engagement are pivotal to successful BSC implementation. The context of the
organisation, in this case the PSU context, also impacts BSC implementation. The root
causes for most of these challenges can be traced to the individual human values, beliefs
and behaviour. At organisational level, they are rooted in culture, leadership and
managerial executive abilities. The challenges and the success factors discussed in this
chapter are the basis of the hypothesis discussed in the following chapter.
