Description
In this description organizational change lessons from a turnaround.
MANAGEMENT
REVIEW
Organizational Change:
Lessons From a
Turnaround
By
William A. Schiemann
President
Wm. Schiemann & Associates, Inc.
Organizational Change:
Lessons From a
Turnaround
BY WILLIAM A. SCHIEMANN
hen William Crouse
took over as president
of Ortho Diagnostic
Systems Inc. (ODSI) in
1987, he knew this
Johnson & Johnson
subsidiary enjoyed a
solid reputation in the
markets it served,
occupied a niche with plenty of
opportunities, and possessed human
resources that were top-flight and
trim.
Still, most opportunities come with
challenges, and this was no
exception. Most organizations begin
with a focus. But as they grow they
branch out. They begin to reach for
peripheral opportunities. Activity
increases as does resource dilution.
The company loses its oomph.
ODSI was in danger of becoming
yet another victim of growth. In its
effort to serve its customers and
maintain market share, ODSI hit its
markets with a dizzying array of
products. Its customer base was
deep but too wide. Its salesforce
devoted as much attention to small
hospitals as it did to those with
greater potential. All of this pointed to
a lack of strategic focus, which
usually translates into higher
operating costs and profit margin
deterioration.
In addition, ODSI’s organizational
structure produced functional thinking
and rivalry. The culture was risk-
averse, turnover was high and morale
was low. Clearly, the company
needed to change in order to
maintain its leadership position
in the competitive diagnostic
segment of the global healthcare
marketplace.0
So change it did. The strategy
now is more focused, and
there’s a greater responsiveness
to customers and less
product/market clutter. Since the
transformation began, turnover
has been arrested, volume has
more than doubled, profits have
skyrocketed and morale has
improved. According to the latest
Johnson & Johnson “Credo
Survey” of ODSI employee
opinion, overall satisfaction with
ODSI has increased 24 percent
over the past two years,
communication has improved 26
percent, innovation is up 45
percent and employees’
assessment of management is
up 41 percent.
How was the turnaround
achieved? Through an eight-step
approach to organizational
transformation, which began with
setting vision and strategy, and
included diagnosing an
organization’s stucture, systems,
culture and capabilities for
strategic fit. Each of these four
elements were calibrated to align
with the strategy and with one
another. The process also
included developing action plans
and designing a tracking system
for monitoring and updating.
But effecting change is rarely
easy. In many instances it is not
even successful. In a recent Wm.
Schiemann & Associates Inc.
survey of Fortune 500 executives,
only half described recent change
efforts as successful. Employee
resistance to change was cited by
76 percent of respondents as the
major derailing factor. Others
included inappropriate culture, lack
of agreement and clear
communication on strategy and
direction, and the absence of
change leadership. Below are five
important lessons that should help
any executive meet the challenge
of organizational renewal.
Management gurus have been
preaching for years that
organizational change starts with a
clear vision—one articulated by the
CEO, who then goes forth to lead
the charge. At ODSI, a different
approach was taken.
When Crouse assumed the
presidency, the first thing he did
was nothing—except wander down
the hallways of the organization,
making stops at all levels and
functions, soliciting ideas, asking
questions and listening. “I learned
about the company and got to
know the people by speaking with
them about problems and
opportunities,” he recalls. “By the
end of the first three months, I
knew exactly what had to be
done.”
But Crouse felt that was not
BACK TO THE BASICS
This mission could be accom-
plished only if everyone
remained focused. Crouse's six-
month journey through the
organization taught him that
employees were caught in an
activity trap. They were bouncing
from one crisis to the next and
doing too many things. There
were too many customers, too
many marginal products and too
many small orders. There was a
sense that everyone was looking
for silver bullets to solve
problems, instead of striving to
maintain ODSI's leadership
position. To move forward, the
company had to go back to the
basics.
Although the mission provided
a good framework, it needed
greater specification. The top
management team developed a
business protocol that spelled
out how ODSI would conduct
business; how it would manage
and motivate the workforce;
substituted the top-down
textbook approach with a more
collaborative strategy-setting
model.
For many organizations,
strategy remains a vague
statement of corporate intent,
heavy on "rah-rah," but light on
specifics. It's hardly the stuff that
inspires employees to undertake
the trauma of change. At ODSI,
an effort was made to channel
people's anxiety over change by
focusing their energies on a
basic strategic mission. That
mission had to meet three
criteria: uniqueness (it had to set
ODSI apart from competitors);
altruism (it had to capture
employees' spirit and get them to
look beyond themselves); and
simplicity (it had to be easily
understood, remembered and
enacted). As the business
mission states, "ODSI provides
customers with fast, simple,
accurate means of diagnosing
patients and protects the safety
of the world's blood supply."
enough, so he spent another
three months talking with
virtually every employee. "I then
reported back to them saying,
'This is what you've told me
about the company, and here
are my conclusions based on
what you've told me. This is what
I think we should do; now, what
do you think?"'
Strategy then evolved from this
broadly based, back-and-forth
process of questioning and
testing conclusions. "Strategy is
not only about what you are
going to do, it's also about
getting people to buy in and
commit to what's going to hap-
pen and having them understand
their role in implementation,"
says Henry Cohen, ODSI's vice
president of human resources.
The evolutionary approach paid
off in terms of the quality of
thinking that went into the
strategy and the commitment to
it down through the ranks. It
worked because Crouse was
personally involved, and he
of focus groups and interviews
as an adjunct to the survey.
These focus groups probed
employees' opinions,
expectations and values.
Interviews were conducted with
each member of senior
management. Combined, these
tools provided a powerful and
objective way to critically assess
the culture, systems and
structure of the organization.
The survey and focus group
discussions helped confirm what
Crouse had learned in his
meetings with employees. They
also provided new insights into
key barriers to success. Beyond
this, the survey was a practical
way of assessing strategic intent
versus operational reality. It also
reinforced the feeling that the
change effort was broadly based
and that it came from within.
The survey results were first
communicated to the top
management team. "This is the
group that will manage the
resolution of major companywide
issues," explains Cohen. "We
conducted team-building
exercises to prepare the senior
executives. They understood
what the expectations were
regarding our strategy and the
results of the survey. They
understood the consequences
of not following through, and
they knew they had to take steps
to change the organization's
structure and culture."
The steps Cohen alludes to
had to be significant, since the
survey revealed a sizable gap
between the organization's
strategy and the four elements of
structure, systems, culture and
capabilities. The company
needed a back-to-the-basics
focus and needed to pay more
attention to priority customers.
This meant less-rigid boundaries
and a willingness to advance
new ideas and take risks. It
needed to reduce top-down
decision making, boost
teamwork and promote a
commitment to quality.
To achieve this, the results of
the survey were carefully
communicated to the entire
organization through a
succession of company-wide and
departmental meetings. The
gaps between strategy and oper-
ations were translated into a list
of issues with priorities. Narrower
divisional and departmental
issues were added, as
appropriate. An action plan was
implemented that encouraged
everyone to play a role in
resolving key issues and
contribute to the change
process.
Last year a second Credo
Survey was conducted that
indicated that progress had
been made. Once again, results
were communicated, and gaps
new decision-making patterns
that pushed responsibility down-
ward; and new structures that
promoted teamwork and focus.
Developing a clear, specific
sense of strategic direction and
thinking throughout the
organization was key to the
ODSI turnaround.
Many attempts to revitalize the
work environment flounder
because the top team treks up
the mountain to set strategy,
forgetting about the other
mountain—the organization, with
its structure, systems, culture
and people. It too must be scaled
and managed for change to
succeed.
Diagnosis often is treated as a
technical, number-crunching
exercise that provides some
information and an occasional
insight. But assessments are
more often filed away in desk
drawers than used for taking
action. The approach ODSI used
was more dynamic. While
Crouse's look-see was a highly
personal and useful way to
assess the prevailing order of
things, one person's per-
spective, even if he or she is the
CEO, is bound to be limited.
At the beginning of 1989, after
corporate strategy was set, ODSI
conducted a Credo Survey of its
employees. In addition, the
company asked Wm. Schiemann
& Associates to conduct a series
were converted to action items to
continue the renewal process
initiated four years ago.
ODSI’s approach to diagnosis
made it a lightning rod for change.
The Credo Survey approach
provided accurate information and
feedback. It was structured to
involve the entire organization. It
provided senior management with
a mechanism for modeling
teamwork and for those down the
line to work together to resolve key
issues. In addition, it provided a
forum for managers and
subordinates to have focused
discussion on key workplace
issues.
THE IMPORTANCE OF
ALIGNMENT
Organizations are complex
entities. There is no one lever one
can pull to change a company’s
behavior, especially one with a
global reach. Significant change
depends on how well an
organization’s structure, systems,
culture and capabilities are aligned
with its business strategy. Each of
these four elements must further
be aligned with primary customer
objectives to make an organization
a strong competitive force. A few
quick examples illustrate how
these elements were strategically
aligned at ODSI.
In terms of structure, the existing
functional approach did not support
ODSI’s new strategy of
concentrating on bloodbanking,
blood screening and
cardiovascular profiling. To align
the structure with the strategy, the
functional organization was sup-
plemented by three strategy teams
formed to provide single-minded
concentration on each core
business. The teams were headed
by a senior executive from ODSI’s
internal Board of Directors—the
company’s top management
group—and each team was
responsible for setting strategy and
driving the business.
To prevent the teams from be-
coming separate fiefdoms, each
reports quarterly to the Board of
Directors, where there is an in-
depth review of strategic and
operational issues.
Changing culture—the set of
shared values, beliefs and
expectations—is another tough
challenge. Culture is an
organization’s invisible and often
controlling hand. It is the way it
makes decisions, solves
problems and treats its people.
The worst way to change culture
is by “changing culture.” The
best way to proceed is to
present an organization with
opportunities that foster the
desired values.
ODSI’s strategy called for
generating a continuous stream
of new ideas, greater innovation
and more risk taking. One way to
unleash the creative potential of
the workforce came to be known
as “Idea Express,” an employee
suggestion program. It provided
a 25 percent incentive for any
idea that generated savings.
Awards were given to individuals
and teams. After one year, 450
ideas were suggested against a
planned estimate of 250. Net
savings came to $550,000, and
projected five-year savings
exceeded $7 million.
Idea Express, along with other
changes such as decentralized
decision making and greater use
of teams, has helped stimulate
innovation. From the increased
number of patent submissions to
the purchasing department’s
search for new supply
resources, there is a greater
willingness to think more
creatively.
In ODSI’s strategic alignment
the key word was focus. “You
can’t ask a company that’s
struggling to do more by merely
adding activities,” notes Cohen.
“Something must come off the
plate to free up the resources to
concentrate on what’s
important.” ODSI’s top team put
a scalpel to unproductive
activities, implemented business
segmentation strategies, set
priorities and sent the troops
marching off to hit the strategic
targets.
Getting the four elements
strategically aligned is never easy.
Keeping them aligned requires just as
much skill and attention. There is a
force that tends to pull them away
from the strategic center. ODSI
monitors this by setting milestones for
progress in each area, carefully
measuring progress and getting
feedback from employees.
Even in the best of circumstances,
change produces anxiety. And in
times of stress, communication
becomes vital. At ODSI, the central
lesson learned is the importance of a
multi-faceted approach and the
importance of high-touch
communications. A great number of
communication initiatives were
undertaken, from upgrading company
publications to circulating the minutes
of ODSI’s internal Board of Directors’
meetings to managers.
By far, the most effective means of
communicating the change message
was face-to-face encounters like
“town meetings,” companywide
meetings with senior management
and employee discussion groups.
The latter are regularly scheduled
sessions in which 15 employees
meet informally for two hours with a
member of the top team. “We tell
employees about the latest strategic
developments and what’s happening
with the strategy teams,” explains
Cohen. “We review operations and
do a quick financial review. We talk
about new initiatives and get
feedback and advice from
employees. We also ask for ideas
about how we can improve what
we’re doing. Nothing is off limits. It’s a
free-wheeling exchange.” To ensure
candor and follow-up, minutes are
taken, but names are not recorded.
If change is about learning, it is
also about communicating. The more
messages that can pass freely up,
down and around an organization’s
communication network, the greater
the likelihood that employees will
know where the organization wants to
go, where it is headed, and how they
can help it arrive at its destination. E
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Metrus Group, Inc.
953 Route 202
Somerville, NJ 08876
Tel: 908-231-1900
Fax: 908-231-1902
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: www.metrus.com
William A. Schiemann is founder and President of Metrus
Group, formerly Wm. Schiemann & Associates, Inc., with
headquarters in Somerville, NJ. Dr. Schiemann and his
associates have been helping clients design and implement
strategic measurement systems to align organizational
structure, processes, capabilities, and culture with business
strategy.
Dr. Schiemann is a sought-after speakers on management
issues and has written extensively on strategy, measurement
and change.
doc_886825961.pdf
In this description organizational change lessons from a turnaround.
MANAGEMENT
REVIEW
Organizational Change:
Lessons From a
Turnaround
By
William A. Schiemann
President
Wm. Schiemann & Associates, Inc.
Organizational Change:
Lessons From a
Turnaround
BY WILLIAM A. SCHIEMANN
hen William Crouse
took over as president
of Ortho Diagnostic
Systems Inc. (ODSI) in
1987, he knew this
Johnson & Johnson
subsidiary enjoyed a
solid reputation in the
markets it served,
occupied a niche with plenty of
opportunities, and possessed human
resources that were top-flight and
trim.
Still, most opportunities come with
challenges, and this was no
exception. Most organizations begin
with a focus. But as they grow they
branch out. They begin to reach for
peripheral opportunities. Activity
increases as does resource dilution.
The company loses its oomph.
ODSI was in danger of becoming
yet another victim of growth. In its
effort to serve its customers and
maintain market share, ODSI hit its
markets with a dizzying array of
products. Its customer base was
deep but too wide. Its salesforce
devoted as much attention to small
hospitals as it did to those with
greater potential. All of this pointed to
a lack of strategic focus, which
usually translates into higher
operating costs and profit margin
deterioration.
In addition, ODSI’s organizational
structure produced functional thinking
and rivalry. The culture was risk-
averse, turnover was high and morale
was low. Clearly, the company
needed to change in order to
maintain its leadership position
in the competitive diagnostic
segment of the global healthcare
marketplace.0
So change it did. The strategy
now is more focused, and
there’s a greater responsiveness
to customers and less
product/market clutter. Since the
transformation began, turnover
has been arrested, volume has
more than doubled, profits have
skyrocketed and morale has
improved. According to the latest
Johnson & Johnson “Credo
Survey” of ODSI employee
opinion, overall satisfaction with
ODSI has increased 24 percent
over the past two years,
communication has improved 26
percent, innovation is up 45
percent and employees’
assessment of management is
up 41 percent.
How was the turnaround
achieved? Through an eight-step
approach to organizational
transformation, which began with
setting vision and strategy, and
included diagnosing an
organization’s stucture, systems,
culture and capabilities for
strategic fit. Each of these four
elements were calibrated to align
with the strategy and with one
another. The process also
included developing action plans
and designing a tracking system
for monitoring and updating.
But effecting change is rarely
easy. In many instances it is not
even successful. In a recent Wm.
Schiemann & Associates Inc.
survey of Fortune 500 executives,
only half described recent change
efforts as successful. Employee
resistance to change was cited by
76 percent of respondents as the
major derailing factor. Others
included inappropriate culture, lack
of agreement and clear
communication on strategy and
direction, and the absence of
change leadership. Below are five
important lessons that should help
any executive meet the challenge
of organizational renewal.
Management gurus have been
preaching for years that
organizational change starts with a
clear vision—one articulated by the
CEO, who then goes forth to lead
the charge. At ODSI, a different
approach was taken.
When Crouse assumed the
presidency, the first thing he did
was nothing—except wander down
the hallways of the organization,
making stops at all levels and
functions, soliciting ideas, asking
questions and listening. “I learned
about the company and got to
know the people by speaking with
them about problems and
opportunities,” he recalls. “By the
end of the first three months, I
knew exactly what had to be
done.”
But Crouse felt that was not
BACK TO THE BASICS
This mission could be accom-
plished only if everyone
remained focused. Crouse's six-
month journey through the
organization taught him that
employees were caught in an
activity trap. They were bouncing
from one crisis to the next and
doing too many things. There
were too many customers, too
many marginal products and too
many small orders. There was a
sense that everyone was looking
for silver bullets to solve
problems, instead of striving to
maintain ODSI's leadership
position. To move forward, the
company had to go back to the
basics.
Although the mission provided
a good framework, it needed
greater specification. The top
management team developed a
business protocol that spelled
out how ODSI would conduct
business; how it would manage
and motivate the workforce;
substituted the top-down
textbook approach with a more
collaborative strategy-setting
model.
For many organizations,
strategy remains a vague
statement of corporate intent,
heavy on "rah-rah," but light on
specifics. It's hardly the stuff that
inspires employees to undertake
the trauma of change. At ODSI,
an effort was made to channel
people's anxiety over change by
focusing their energies on a
basic strategic mission. That
mission had to meet three
criteria: uniqueness (it had to set
ODSI apart from competitors);
altruism (it had to capture
employees' spirit and get them to
look beyond themselves); and
simplicity (it had to be easily
understood, remembered and
enacted). As the business
mission states, "ODSI provides
customers with fast, simple,
accurate means of diagnosing
patients and protects the safety
of the world's blood supply."
enough, so he spent another
three months talking with
virtually every employee. "I then
reported back to them saying,
'This is what you've told me
about the company, and here
are my conclusions based on
what you've told me. This is what
I think we should do; now, what
do you think?"'
Strategy then evolved from this
broadly based, back-and-forth
process of questioning and
testing conclusions. "Strategy is
not only about what you are
going to do, it's also about
getting people to buy in and
commit to what's going to hap-
pen and having them understand
their role in implementation,"
says Henry Cohen, ODSI's vice
president of human resources.
The evolutionary approach paid
off in terms of the quality of
thinking that went into the
strategy and the commitment to
it down through the ranks. It
worked because Crouse was
personally involved, and he
of focus groups and interviews
as an adjunct to the survey.
These focus groups probed
employees' opinions,
expectations and values.
Interviews were conducted with
each member of senior
management. Combined, these
tools provided a powerful and
objective way to critically assess
the culture, systems and
structure of the organization.
The survey and focus group
discussions helped confirm what
Crouse had learned in his
meetings with employees. They
also provided new insights into
key barriers to success. Beyond
this, the survey was a practical
way of assessing strategic intent
versus operational reality. It also
reinforced the feeling that the
change effort was broadly based
and that it came from within.
The survey results were first
communicated to the top
management team. "This is the
group that will manage the
resolution of major companywide
issues," explains Cohen. "We
conducted team-building
exercises to prepare the senior
executives. They understood
what the expectations were
regarding our strategy and the
results of the survey. They
understood the consequences
of not following through, and
they knew they had to take steps
to change the organization's
structure and culture."
The steps Cohen alludes to
had to be significant, since the
survey revealed a sizable gap
between the organization's
strategy and the four elements of
structure, systems, culture and
capabilities. The company
needed a back-to-the-basics
focus and needed to pay more
attention to priority customers.
This meant less-rigid boundaries
and a willingness to advance
new ideas and take risks. It
needed to reduce top-down
decision making, boost
teamwork and promote a
commitment to quality.
To achieve this, the results of
the survey were carefully
communicated to the entire
organization through a
succession of company-wide and
departmental meetings. The
gaps between strategy and oper-
ations were translated into a list
of issues with priorities. Narrower
divisional and departmental
issues were added, as
appropriate. An action plan was
implemented that encouraged
everyone to play a role in
resolving key issues and
contribute to the change
process.
Last year a second Credo
Survey was conducted that
indicated that progress had
been made. Once again, results
were communicated, and gaps
new decision-making patterns
that pushed responsibility down-
ward; and new structures that
promoted teamwork and focus.
Developing a clear, specific
sense of strategic direction and
thinking throughout the
organization was key to the
ODSI turnaround.
Many attempts to revitalize the
work environment flounder
because the top team treks up
the mountain to set strategy,
forgetting about the other
mountain—the organization, with
its structure, systems, culture
and people. It too must be scaled
and managed for change to
succeed.
Diagnosis often is treated as a
technical, number-crunching
exercise that provides some
information and an occasional
insight. But assessments are
more often filed away in desk
drawers than used for taking
action. The approach ODSI used
was more dynamic. While
Crouse's look-see was a highly
personal and useful way to
assess the prevailing order of
things, one person's per-
spective, even if he or she is the
CEO, is bound to be limited.
At the beginning of 1989, after
corporate strategy was set, ODSI
conducted a Credo Survey of its
employees. In addition, the
company asked Wm. Schiemann
& Associates to conduct a series
were converted to action items to
continue the renewal process
initiated four years ago.
ODSI’s approach to diagnosis
made it a lightning rod for change.
The Credo Survey approach
provided accurate information and
feedback. It was structured to
involve the entire organization. It
provided senior management with
a mechanism for modeling
teamwork and for those down the
line to work together to resolve key
issues. In addition, it provided a
forum for managers and
subordinates to have focused
discussion on key workplace
issues.
THE IMPORTANCE OF
ALIGNMENT
Organizations are complex
entities. There is no one lever one
can pull to change a company’s
behavior, especially one with a
global reach. Significant change
depends on how well an
organization’s structure, systems,
culture and capabilities are aligned
with its business strategy. Each of
these four elements must further
be aligned with primary customer
objectives to make an organization
a strong competitive force. A few
quick examples illustrate how
these elements were strategically
aligned at ODSI.
In terms of structure, the existing
functional approach did not support
ODSI’s new strategy of
concentrating on bloodbanking,
blood screening and
cardiovascular profiling. To align
the structure with the strategy, the
functional organization was sup-
plemented by three strategy teams
formed to provide single-minded
concentration on each core
business. The teams were headed
by a senior executive from ODSI’s
internal Board of Directors—the
company’s top management
group—and each team was
responsible for setting strategy and
driving the business.
To prevent the teams from be-
coming separate fiefdoms, each
reports quarterly to the Board of
Directors, where there is an in-
depth review of strategic and
operational issues.
Changing culture—the set of
shared values, beliefs and
expectations—is another tough
challenge. Culture is an
organization’s invisible and often
controlling hand. It is the way it
makes decisions, solves
problems and treats its people.
The worst way to change culture
is by “changing culture.” The
best way to proceed is to
present an organization with
opportunities that foster the
desired values.
ODSI’s strategy called for
generating a continuous stream
of new ideas, greater innovation
and more risk taking. One way to
unleash the creative potential of
the workforce came to be known
as “Idea Express,” an employee
suggestion program. It provided
a 25 percent incentive for any
idea that generated savings.
Awards were given to individuals
and teams. After one year, 450
ideas were suggested against a
planned estimate of 250. Net
savings came to $550,000, and
projected five-year savings
exceeded $7 million.
Idea Express, along with other
changes such as decentralized
decision making and greater use
of teams, has helped stimulate
innovation. From the increased
number of patent submissions to
the purchasing department’s
search for new supply
resources, there is a greater
willingness to think more
creatively.
In ODSI’s strategic alignment
the key word was focus. “You
can’t ask a company that’s
struggling to do more by merely
adding activities,” notes Cohen.
“Something must come off the
plate to free up the resources to
concentrate on what’s
important.” ODSI’s top team put
a scalpel to unproductive
activities, implemented business
segmentation strategies, set
priorities and sent the troops
marching off to hit the strategic
targets.
Getting the four elements
strategically aligned is never easy.
Keeping them aligned requires just as
much skill and attention. There is a
force that tends to pull them away
from the strategic center. ODSI
monitors this by setting milestones for
progress in each area, carefully
measuring progress and getting
feedback from employees.
Even in the best of circumstances,
change produces anxiety. And in
times of stress, communication
becomes vital. At ODSI, the central
lesson learned is the importance of a
multi-faceted approach and the
importance of high-touch
communications. A great number of
communication initiatives were
undertaken, from upgrading company
publications to circulating the minutes
of ODSI’s internal Board of Directors’
meetings to managers.
By far, the most effective means of
communicating the change message
was face-to-face encounters like
“town meetings,” companywide
meetings with senior management
and employee discussion groups.
The latter are regularly scheduled
sessions in which 15 employees
meet informally for two hours with a
member of the top team. “We tell
employees about the latest strategic
developments and what’s happening
with the strategy teams,” explains
Cohen. “We review operations and
do a quick financial review. We talk
about new initiatives and get
feedback and advice from
employees. We also ask for ideas
about how we can improve what
we’re doing. Nothing is off limits. It’s a
free-wheeling exchange.” To ensure
candor and follow-up, minutes are
taken, but names are not recorded.
If change is about learning, it is
also about communicating. The more
messages that can pass freely up,
down and around an organization’s
communication network, the greater
the likelihood that employees will
know where the organization wants to
go, where it is headed, and how they
can help it arrive at its destination. E
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Metrus Group, Inc.
953 Route 202
Somerville, NJ 08876
Tel: 908-231-1900
Fax: 908-231-1902
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: www.metrus.com
William A. Schiemann is founder and President of Metrus
Group, formerly Wm. Schiemann & Associates, Inc., with
headquarters in Somerville, NJ. Dr. Schiemann and his
associates have been helping clients design and implement
strategic measurement systems to align organizational
structure, processes, capabilities, and culture with business
strategy.
Dr. Schiemann is a sought-after speakers on management
issues and has written extensively on strategy, measurement
and change.
doc_886825961.pdf