1. Begin with a brief introduction to the environment fromwhich your organization’s problem has developed. Essentially, you are providinga background or context for the reader to properly understand the problem thatyour organization is facing
2. Identify a significant problem in your organization’scurrent environment and/or strategy, based on the performance evaluation fromPart 1 of the project. Discuss how this problem is affecting both theorganization and the organization’s stakeholders (employees, shareholders,community, environment, etc.). Be sure to provide appropriate financial and/ornonfinancial measures to support the validity of this problem.
3. Determine at least 3 potential solutions (decisionalternatives) to the organizational problem that you have identified. Discusseach solution, and the potential effects it could have on the organization andits stakeholders.
4. Graphicallyexpress the decision alternatives in a payoff table.
5. Graphically express the decision alternatives in a decisiontree. The first three items above should be covered in 4-5 double-spaced pages. Include the payoff table and decision treeafter these pages (the graphics do NOT count towards the 4-5 pages).
Note: Refrain from making any recommendations for the organizationat this stage. You will be doing that in Part 3 of the project. At this stage,simply identify the problem and the available decision alternatives. Again, besure to proofread as this project will be evaluated both for content andprofessionalism.
João Paulo Coelho (BOAH 2401) XXXXXXXXXXOctober 04, 2010Citibank: Performance EvaluationIn 1996, Citibank was an emergent banking institution attempting to increase its market share in the competitive Los Angeles area. In order to do so, the bank’s strategy was to focus slightly less on their financial growth, and much more on providing “a high level of service to its customers”. Management viewed this paradigm shift as “critical to the long term success of the franchise”.To implement these changes, a new Citibank employee performance assessment scorecard was created, briefly tested and quickly implemented. Though I believe it was a much improved and broader way to gauge individual performance, there was certainly room for improvement. The scorecard was composed of financial, strategy implementation and control goals which had the advantage of clearly, objectively and transparently measure a manager’s work. These measures were readily accessible though the general accounting system, and left little (if any) room to argue over a manager’s performance. However, all three measures focused primarily on the upcoming quarter(s) and how those numbers compared quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year, making them a short-term or “lagging” indicator of success. The remaining measures on the assessment scorecard (customer satisfaction, people, and standards) were all noticeably subjective, yet viewed as sound long-term indicators and therefore crucial in evaluating the foundation of the future success of the organization. Obviously, the customer is (and will always be) the most important part of the equation, as it is customer business that allows banks to conduct theirs. People and standards measures are both especially significant measures, as they address the character, personality and perceived image of individuals, management and the organization as a whole.A more specific analysis of the assessment scorecard is as follows:Financial...