Organizational Culture and Performance Index

Organization Effectiveness

ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE &

PERFORMANCE INDEX

OCPI Performance Metric

The OCP Index

The OCPI provides a snapshot of employee perceptions of the organizational strength of their company and identifies areas most

in need of improvement.

The OCP Index

• The survey is both quantitative & qualitative.

• It identifies whether– companies are ready for stretch growth or

would benefit from organizational change.– the attitudes towards the organization are

healthy and consistent. • Results are used to identify priority

improvement areas so that any gaps can be closed

The OCP Index

• Survey is web-based and easy to complete.• Results can be segmented, so that actions are

directed to greatest improvement priorities. • Respondents make improvement suggestions.

• All responses are totally confidential to

encourage open and candid responses.• Surveys can be repeated to track progress.

The OCP Index

The OCPI measures four major categories of organizational strength.

– Enterprise– Resources– Knowledge– Deployment

• Customers• Competitor

s• Business• Market

• Planning• Strategy• Effectivenes

s• Implementat

ion

Resources

EnterpriseDeployment

Knowledge

High Performance

Culture

• People• Communications• Technology• Teamwork

• Structure• Culture• Leadership• Manageme

nt

High Performance Culture

• Employee Involvement• Competence Development

• Teamwork Commitment

The OCP Index

The OCP Index

There are three major components of the OCPI Report.

•OCPI Spider Diagrams•Detailed Results and Analysis•Verbatim comments.

OCPI – Spider Diagram

1

2

3

4

Structure

CorporateCulture

ExecutiveLeadership

Managerial Leadership

Communications

Technology

TeamworkCustomer

Knowledge

PlanImplementation

OrganizationalEffectiveness

Risk Management

BusinessKnowledge

CompetitiveKnowledge

ENTERPRISE

RESO

UR

CES

KNOWLEDGE

DEPLO

YM

ENT

1

1

1 2

2

2

3

3 4

4

4 3

Performance

Knowledge

Employees0CorporatePlanning

OCPI - Results

Avg.n

• Positive commitment to plan strategically 2.185

• Planning is taken seriously and well done 2.282

• Strong focus on major company issues 2.281

• There is consensus about what needs to be done 2.076

• Strategies are explained so that everyone understands1.687

• Broad employee particip’n in planning encouraged 1.683

• Resource allocations are aligned to the plans 2.069

Corporate PlanningAvg.

n• Org takes calculated risks to win customers 2.1

69• Important decisions based on impact analysis

and business case development 2.068

• The co. makes decisions and moves forward easily 1.982

• Strong project management capability 2.179

• Know how to escalate prob./issues for resolution 1.971

• Prepare contingency plans to anticipate problems 1.775

• Solution-oriented versus blame-oriented 2.181

Risk Management

Avg.n

• Organization manages the work to clear objectives 2.084

• Process improvements based on customer needs 2.185

• Ineffective or redundant efforts eliminated 1.969

• Efficiency maximized through use of technology 2.078

• People, knowledge & skills are effectively utilized 1.992

• Eff. at managing change to minimize disruption 1.979

• Sufficient resources applied to pressure points 1.973

Operational EffectivenessAvg. n

• Rigorously executes action plans and tracks results 2.175

• Remedial action is taken when plans are offside 2.176

• Flexibility is demonstrated to meet new priorities 2.286

• Staff are provided with help so that they succeed 2.195

• Organization rallies/cooperates to achieve results 2.184

• Employees are assessed by achievement of goals 2.088

• Important business decisions are made quickly 1.990

Plan Implementation

Overall Score 1.9 Overall Score 2.0

Overall Score 2.0 Overall Score 2.0

How could the effectiveness of the organization structure be improved?

STRUCTURE

Comments originating from Field Based Staff

• Strong geographical areas, Central commercial person within our region.

• In my opinion the areas of jobs, the function of professionals is not clear• Having a product manager dedicated to Europe only. The product

manager are travelling globally and cannot fulfill our local needs• A better poultry technical support in the field.• Reinforce technical department• Not enough knowledge of the organization• New roles are a bit confusing on how to gain team support. Different

people are compensated differently and that can affect how business is looked upon.

• More info• Clear communication• Should improve as open positions are filled• No need• Define responsibilities and reporting and improve stability (reduce turn

over of staff)• More information required from top to bottom, let us know what is

going on during all the changes• Bring some stability and certainty to proceedings• We should hire a person with enough experience on research &

development of new products for the industry. We also need a Technical Manager expert on pet nutrition since we have some additives in this area but we don´t have a global leader for it.

• Need for more focused marketing effort allowing for championing of product/solution to specific customer need

• Fill in openings. Align the organization. Remove double functions/responsibilities. Communicate clear structure.

• Further establishing the responsibilities of each employee

• Meetings-co-operation.• All of weakness (in step 6) have to be fixed.• Try to create equal structures in the different regions which have all

same structure, responsibilities, etc.• Define teams by regions (- Europe/Asia) and not by former company (-

Confidential Company countries). Use a single software to handle orders, sales, quality issues, technical documents, this would safe time, reduce mistakes and improve performance. Centralized sales support for commodity type products (Ultracid, Mold-Nil, Nutri-Gold, ...) to identify chances and improve margins. Stronger usage of local knowledge by regular round tables, seminars within the company or together with customers, Confidential Company people may act as specialists in foreign countries.

• Right people on right places and clear and faster decisions.• Clear communication platform. Keep it flat from top to bottom.• This is only possible to share more time with the related people.• Clear organogram backing clear published strategy of business• Feed additives is a growing but mature industry necessitating a classic

bureaucratic organizational structure with a clear and consistent strategy. Accountability for the results of decisions made and evaluation of decision implementation must be valued throughout the organization. An emphasis on overall organizational execution instead of sales activities alone with willingness and effort to "autopsy" successes as well as failures will lead to an environment able to facilitate improvements in effectiveness.

• More input from employees• Listen to the people in the field, use their comments and knowledge to

establish a clear focus towards the direction of the company for the (near) future. It feels 'detached'. Take out all 'me-too' products, focus on specialities, unique products and technical excellence which subsequently (massively) improve GM and profitability.

OCPI - Verbatims

Senior Management perceives the organizational strengths and weaknesses differently from the rest of the company. While there is similarity on four of the major sector strengths, Managerial Leadership is not seen as a particular strength by the rest of the company. Weaknesses are also different, and there is a complete mismatch on perceptions of Competitive Knowledge.

OCPI - Comparisons

OCPI - Comparisons

1

2

3

4

Structure

CorporateCulture

ExecutiveLeadership

Managerial Leadership

Employees

Communications

Technology

Teamwork

CustomerKnowledge

PlanImplementation

OrganizationalEffectiveness

Risk Management

PerformanceKnowledge

BusinessKnowledge

CompetitiveKnowledge

ENTERPRISE

RESO

UR

CES

KNOWLEDGE

DEPLO

YM

ENT

1

1

1 2

2

2

3

3 4

4

4 30Corporate

Planning

1

2

3

4

Structure

Corporate

Culture

ExecutiveLeadershi

p

Managerial Leadership

Employees

Communications

Technology

TeamworkCustomer

Knowledge

PlanImplementation

Organizational

Effectiveness

Risk Management

Corporate

Planning

PerformanceKnowledge

BusinessKnowledge

CompetitiveKnowledge

ENTERPRISE

RESO

UR

CES

KNOWLEDGE

DEPLO

YM

ENT

1

1

1 2

2

2

3

3 4

4

4 30

1

2

3

4

Structure

CorporateCulture

ExecutiveLeadership

Managerial Leadership

Employees

Communications

Technology

TeamworkCustomer

Knowledge

PlanImplementation

OrganizationalEffectiveness

Risk Management

PerformanceKnowledge

BusinessKnowledge

CompetitiveKnowledge

ENTERPRISE

RESO

UR

CES

KNOWLEDGE

DEPLO

YM

ENT

1

1

1 2

2

2

3

3 4

4

4 30CorporatePlanning

1

2

3

4

Structure

CorporateCulture

ExecutiveLeadership

Managerial Leadership

Employees

Communications

Technology

TeamworkCustomer

Knowledge

PlanImplementation

OrganizationalEffectiveness

Risk Management

PerformanceKnowledge

BusinessKnowledge

CompetitiveKnowledge

ENTERPRISE

RESO

UR

CES

KNOWLEDGE

DEPLO

YM

ENT

1

1

1 2

2

2

3

3 4

4

4 30Corporate

Planning

Total(2.1 or 69% of 3.0 HPO Score)

Americas(2.2 or 72% of 3.0 HPO Score)

Asia Pacific(1.8 or 60% of 3.0 HPO Score)

Europe / Middle East(2.0 or 67% of 3.0 HPO Score)

n=121

n=45

n=4

n=72

More Information

• [email protected]• @JRMHarvey• @boardroommtrcs• 905-709-4031