The Balanced Score Card of General Electric Company - Essay Example

General Electric Case Study Table of Contents Introduction 3 Question 3 Question 2 6 SWOT analysis 8 The Balanced Score Card 9 Question 3 11 Management styles 11 13 Conclusion 13 Reference List 15 Bibliography 18 Introduction This paper is based on the internal and external analysis of the company General Electric and the necessary information has been gathered from a case study. The case study discusses the business activities of the company over the years and how the organisational structure has changed over time. Two prominent characters Jack Welch and Jeffrey Immelt have appeared in the case study. Both of them have different managerial styles and have been reflected in the firm’s activities. General Electric (GE) is an American company which was founded in 1892 with the merger between two companies: Thomas Edisons Electric Light Company and Thomas Houston Company. GE is currently one of the major multinational conglomerates that hold its position among the top 10 valuable brands in the world. The company operates with several biasness units such as power and water, energy management, transportation, oil and gas, aviation and health care (Forbes, 2015). The company also operates in the capital management segment. GE has also earned the rank of 26th largest companies in U.S in terms of gross revenue, among the Fortune 500 companies. The products manufactured by the company include electrical distribution, electric motors, Aircraft engines, energy, financial products, lighting, locomotives, weapons, wind turbines, etc (General Electric, 2015). Question 1 This section discusses the core competencies and capabilities of GE that has resulted in the success of the company. The company has been able to leverage its resources and competencies to generate value. Firm Infrastructure Strong infrastructure owing to the financial strength. Several business units leading to diversified business portfolio Global presence Human resource management Highly skilled employees. Motivation through challenging tasks. Employee development programs (General Electric, 2015) Technological development Engaging in extensive research and development to ensure that the company is progressing towards technological advancements. Two of the employees of the company have been awarded Nobel Prize for technological development (Reuters, 2015). Procurement GE has involved in several vertical integrations which as a result has allowed the company to procure its own raw materials. The firm also have a robust supply chain management that help the company to procure high quality raw materials (Bolstorff and Rosenbaum, 2007) Inbound Logistics Operations Outbound Logistics Marketing and Sales Services The raw materials are transported from several supplier firms and overseas plants all across the world. The operations of the company include several manufacturing operations across different business units. The manufacturing plants bear the highest technological advancement to facilitate better and faster production lines. The outbound logistics involve, transportation of finished goods form the manufacturing plants to the immediate customers (Fisher, 2006) The marketing and sales including worldwide selling of GE products. The marketing activity also includes marketing communication such as television commercials, magazine ads and corporate branding activities. GE always makes sure that the customers are offered the best in the class services so as to create high quality assurance and strong brand image. GE has successfully utilized its resources to generate value for the organization and for the target customers as well. The resource management of the company has been described below. Tangible: The tangible assets of GE amount to a total of $546,067 million. This suggests that the company holds huge assets portfolio which has an average return of 2.69% over the past 13 years. The tangible asset of the company includes the manufacturing plants and properties which facilitate seamless running of the company’s business (Morning Star, 2015). Intangible assets: The intangible assets of the company include the good will and brand image that offers high quality assurance along with a strong corporate image to attract the shareholders and investors. The company has been operating for more than a century; this as a result has allowed the company to gain a significant leverage of brand identity and creating distribution channels (General Electric, 2009; Kaplinsky, 2000). Capabilities: Over the years GE has widened its capabilities by expanding its business operations through several acquisitions. These acquisitions have allowed the company to operate in a large number of industrial sectors such as health care, financial services, water processing technologies, oil and gas, etc. As a result the company currently holds wide portfolio of products and services which gives it a strong competitive position in the industry. Core Competency: The core competency of GE lies in its expertise in manufacturing high quality electrical equipments and aircraft engines. GE is the biggest infrastructure company and is valued at $100 billion. The company focuses on superior technology and innovation to develop new products and services (Morning Star, 2015; Keller, 2014). The case study reveals that up to the year 2009, GE has undergone several changes in its business operations and they have changed certain aspects of the company such as the HR, Branding, Core Competencies, etc. The HR practices of the company have been marked as a significant determinant of the change in the company’s management of the human resources. The management decided to change the way the employees were treated by the higher management (Immelt, 2012). They created a more open environment where the employees are treated with more respect and in a friendly attitude. This as a result created a work friendly environment that motivated the employees (Terpstra, 2000). The employees were not pushed with strict deadlines but they were given proper achievable targets that are based on individual performance levels. These radical changes in the human resource management have opened up new ways to foster strategic and organizational development (case study). The branding of the company indicates that it stands as a major infrastructure company. The company decided to stand out as an entity with streamlined business activities. Despite of the several business units GE wanted to have only two major segments Capital Finance and Infrastructure. GE’s brand image was designed to be centred on three basic identities, Technology, Customer Focus and Integrated Solution and Global Presence (GE, 2015a; Walters and Rainbird, 2004). The company has been best known to leverage its technological advancement to deliver high value to the customers. The firm also invests a significant amount in its research and development activities that allows the company to gain a competitive advantage over the rivals (GE, 2015b). The customer centric approach and offering integrated solutions for them has eventually improved the brand preference of the customers. GE also has a wide global presence which as a result leads to access to a large customer base and particularly in the emerging markets of China, Middle East, India and Brazil (case study). Question 2 Over the next five years after 2009, GE has designed its business activities in such a manner that the company can accelerate its growth and improve its overall brand image. After a series of market environmental mishaps the company faced severe down turn. In order to assess the firm’s internal and external status a PEST analysis is needed. Political: The political scenario of a region largely impacts the activities of a firm, particularly if it operates in multiple foreign locations (Henderson and Evans, 2000; Holbach, 2009). The unstable relationship between the French and the American government has lead to the bitter outcome of the business collaboration between GE and Alstrom. The proposition of Alstrom’s acquisition by GE created a difference in agreement between the governments. The French government intervened and as a result the business deal remained incomplete (Carnegy, 2014). The left wing ideologies has created significant storm against the US president’s decision of keeping Jeffrey Immelt, the CEO of GE, as his advisor. The primary reason behind this turmoil is that the company is channelling its resources outside of US and at the same time it has also been alleged that it did not pay any taxes despite of its worldwide profit of more than $14 billion. This as a result created political turmoil and the proposition of firing Immelt from his advisory post has affected the stocks of the company (Ikenson, 2011). General Electric has been looking forward to expand in to the emerging market, owing to the high growth prospects in the green energy sector. However, Immelt mentioned that the even though expansion in to China can prove to be lucrative for the company, but “China is increasingly hostile towards to foreign multinationals”. This political perception of China can make it difficult for GE to conduct its business in China (Schumpeter, 2010). Economic: The economic factor determines the affordability of the customers and it largely impacts the operational activities of the firms (OBoyle, 2011). GE faced a severe downturn after the financial crisis of 2008-09. This as a result has lead to loss of revenue and falling share prices (The Economist, 2014). The economic factor at certain times becomes unpredictable for the company and they mostly incur losses. In order to face the aftermath of the global financial crisis America has decided to boost the overseas sales of GE’s turbines and generators. This as a result will help to improve the economic conditions of the home country and at the same time it has also improved the financials of the company (Kocieniewski, 2011). Social factors: The social factors indicate the behaviour of the customers, which varies from across national borders and is dynamic nature (Lussier and Achua, 2009; Peng, 2013). Collapse of Enron had changed mentality of the customers and they started to look at capital investments as a potential risk. As a result they shareholders stated to sell out their shares. This as a result created a wide spread impact on the major multinational firms including GE (Bloomberg, 2001). The social structure of America suggests that the people are open to change and warm heartedly welcome technological advancements (CIA, 2015). This indicates that the customers are suitable for the technological products manufactured by the company. The overall consumption electricity of America is 3.883 trillion kWh per year (CIA, 2015). This as a result has increased the demand for green energy production of GE. Technological factors: GE has always been known as a technology firm who emphasizes on constantly developing innovative technologies and adds value for the customers. The technological expertise of the company has acted as a competitive advantage of the firm. GE invests almost 6% of its revenue in research and development, so that the company can gain a first mover advantage in a particular product market (case study). The PEST analysis of the company clearly indicates that the firm has faced significant challenges from the external environment. The external challenges are caused by a series of incidents that its impact on the operations of the company. Starting from the attack on the twin towers to the Enron’s collapse to the 2008-09 financial crises, all of these incidents had severely downgraded the financial performance of GE (study). These incidents had increased the amount of bad debts and the company was forced to cut off its dividends. Certain business units did not perform in the desired manner, so the company had to shut down those operations, which include the plastics operation and NBC broadcasting business. Even though the company had several business operations that offered a wide range of income source, but the management realized that the performance of one business unit is affecting the performance of other units (GE, 2015b). SWOT analysis Strengths Weakness Democratic leadership style of Immelt, which improved the overall performance of the firm (GE, 2015a). Robust infrastructure Global presence Constant technological advancements Streamlined business operations. Focus on customer’s needs. The profitability of the firm can be reduced by the unstable international economy. Unstable energy industry Opportunities Threats Global technological advancements leading to the development of new sectors. Prospective opportunity in the IT industry. Development of green and renewable energy Increased competitiveness in the global business environment. The Government intervention in the financial sector (General Electric, 2009). The SWOT analysis indicates that the leadership skills of Immelt have helped the company to struggle its way out of the financial down turn of the company. The strategic decisions made by him have changed the working environment of the firm which as a result has increased the overall performance of the employees. The employees are highly motivated to work under Immelt (Immelt, 2012). The company has a strong financial structure to support multiple business operations and to progress towards sustainable growth. The company holds several technological patents which allow the firm to maintain its competitive position in the industry. GE also holds a wide global presence which reduces the risk of going bankrupt, since the loss at one market can be compensated by the profit in another. However, major financial crises cannot be averted in all situations, particularly if it has its impact all over the world (Terpstra, Foley and Sarathy, 2012). The higher management has also decided to streamline the company’s business portfolio, by closing off the non performing business units. The sharp focus on the changing customer needs and seeking forward to efficiently meet them, has allowed the company to gain the customer preferences (Barrett and Mayson, 2008). However, the firm also faces certain risk of threats from the increased competiveness in the industry and also from the over dependence on the financial sector. At the same time it can also be stated that the company holds prospective future opportunities owing to the rapidly developing technology industry and infrastructure. The firm can also enter in the information technology sector, which can prove to be lucrative for GE (Adair, 2010). The Balanced Score Card The balanced score card introduced by Kaplan (2012) is utilized to assess the performance of the company based on four parameters, financial, internal business processes, learning and growth and customer. Figure 1: Balanced Score Card Source: (Bose, 2010) The balanced score card not only focuses on the quantitative approach of financial measurement, but it also assesses certain qualitative aspects as well, such as customer, internal business, learning and growth. Customer: GE’s business activities are focused on the customers’ needs and its business activities are focused on delivering the highest possible value for the customers. The customer’s needs and preferences are constantly changing. Thus in order to get a clear overview of the consumer behaviour and their changing pattern, the company has decided to constantly keep an eye on the market environment. Financial: The financial performance of the company can be reflected by its annual report, which indicates that the revenue generation of the firm has decreased from 2009 to 2011. In 2009 the company recorded revenue of 156.8 billion USD, which decreased to 150.2 billion USD the next year and in 2011 GE made revenue of 147.3 billion USD. This indicates that the company’s financial performance has degraded from 2009 and onwards (Morning Star, 2015). Looking at the stock prices of the company it can be stated that despite of the decrease in the revenue generation of the company it has managed to attract the share holders. This can be justified by the fact that the company had sold of its non performing business units which as a result lead to increase in future growth prospects. Internal Business: The internal business activities of the firm can be underpinned by two major business segments, infrastructure and capital finance. However, although the company has a lot of business operations, but in order to simplify its operations, the company has segregated the existing business portfolios in to the two segments. Learning and growth: The company constantly learns to develop its business operations so that it can cope up with the increasingly competitive global business market. GE emphasizes on the improvement of product development by investing in the R&D department. The company hires highly skilled employees who are capable of adding value to the company and ensure its future growth (Alexander, 2008). Question 3 Difference in management styles between the two CEOs of GE, Jack Welch and Jeff Immelt have been discussed in this section. Table one Jack Welch Jeff Immelt Focus on shareholder value Focus on stakeholder value From the case study it has been revealed that Welch holds a traditional notion of strongly focusing on the shareholders’ value. He prioritizes on attracting the shareholder by focusing on the short term returns which may not be favourable for the company in the long term perspective. Welch held the perception that the primary focus of the company should be focused on the shareholders’ returns. On contrary Immelt focuses on improving the performance of the company by focusing on streamlining business activities. Immelt believed that the shareholders’ value should be the outcome of the business performance of the firms. If the employees are focussed on improving the long term performance of the firms, then the firm will not have to worry about the shareholders’ returns, which will come automatically. He believed that this approach to shareholder’s value creation will offer long term sustainability for the firm. Management styles Jack Welch Jeff Immelt The management styles of Welch are extremely goal oriented. He prefers to set goals that may be extremely tough or impossible to achieve for the employees. He redesigned the hierarchical ladder and expected the subordinates to deliver high performance under high work pressure. The employees and the manager both were accountable for delivering the desired result in the stipulated time. His management style was more direct and confrontational. On contrary Immelt is more calculative and set goals that are can be practically achieved by the employees. He redesigned the management strategies by creating a more effective hierarchical order that will help to achieve the organizational objectives easily. Table two Management style 1 Management style 2 Management style 3 Management style 4 Directive: Close control over the employees. Expects blind folded loyalty. Motivates by discipline and intimidation. Authoritative: Offers unambiguous guidance to the employees. Motivates by persuasion. Effective in managing conflict. Participative: Accepts input from all the employees of the organization. Fosters team work. Motivates by rewarding team members. Coaching: Focuses on maintaining developing strengths and competencies of the employees. Effective in overall skill development (Edelenbos, Van Buuren and Klijn, 2013). Table three Leadership style 1 Leadership style 2 Leadership style 3 Autocratic leadership: The leader is takes all the decision. Not answerable to the subordinates for his actions. Uses intimidation to drive outcomes (Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001) Democratic Leadership: The leader takes input from the subordinates. Believes in equality and justified treatment of employees. Motivates employees to foster desired outcome (Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). Bureaucratic Leadership: The leader follows strict rules and regulations. Any violation may lead to penalty or punishment (Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). Summary The management approach of Welch is highly transactional in nature. He looks for immediate return for investment. Welch prefers to put extremely high work pressure on his employees, this as a result leads to de-motivation and fear. On contrary the management style of Immelt indicates that he focuses on improving the organizational performance by setting realistic goals for the employees and by motivating them. It can be stated that there are significant difference in the management styles of the both the CEOs, in terms of their perception of organizational success. Welch believed that the success of the organization meeting the shareholders’ expectations, whereas Immelt believed that improving the performance of the organization is the true reflection of its success. In today’s VUCA, the approach of Immelt is more suitable. This is because keeping the performance of the firm at an optimal level imperative to its long term sustainability. Moreover, in the increasingly competitive environment a firm must have a constantly developing approach that will help it to cope up with the rivals. The volatility of the industrial environment also makes the approach of Immelt more appropriate. Highly motivated employees with high employee engagement help the firm to achieve organizational goals more easily, thereby facilitating higher competitive advantage. Conclusion GE is one of most popular companies in the world. The company has seen a lot of ups and downs and along with a lot of leadership and managerial practices. Over the years the company went through a lot of changes and have managed to adapt to the changing business market scenario. The company faced severe downturn in the early decade owing to a series of incidents that reduced the profitability of the firm and also reduced its stock prices. The company has managed to overcome all odds and regained its former glory courtesy of the managerial decisions made by Immelt. Immelt changed the managerial style from the scratch and successfully pulled the company out of the poor financial performance. His leadership style also played major role in improving the business activities of the films. The democratic leadership style that he followed helped to motivate his employees even better. Thus it can be concluded Immelt has successfully secured sustainability for the company. Reference List Adair, J., 2010. Strategic Leadership: How to Think and Plan Strategically and Provide Direction. 5th ed. London: Kogan Page. Alexander, C., 2008. Market risk analysis. Chichester, England: Wiley. Allen, D., 2009. Leadership and Teamwork Essays. 6th ed. London: McGraw-Hill Education. Barrett, R and Mayson, S., 2008. The founding fathers on leadership. 4th ed. London: McGra-Hill Higher Education. Bloomberg, 2001. The Fall of Enron. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 May 2015] Bolstorff, P. and Rosenbaum, R., 2007. Supply chain excellence. New York: AMACOM Carnegy, H., 2014. GE deal ‘victory’ for role of French state in economy. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 May 2015] CIA, 2015. North America: United States. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 May 2015] Eagly, A. H., and Johannesen‐Schmidt, M. C., 2001. The leadership styles of women and men. Journal of social issues, 57(4), pp. 781-797. Edelenbos, J., Van Buuren, A., and Klijn, E. H., 2013. Connective capacities of network managers: a comparative study of management styles in eight regional governance networks. Public Management Review, 15(1), pp. 131-159. Fisher, D., 2006. GE turns green (General Electric). Strategic Direction, 22(2). Forbes, 2015. General Electric. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] GE, 2015a. Fact Sheet. [online] Available at: [Accessed 27 May 2015]. GE, 2015b. Jeff Immelt, CEO. [online] Available at: [Accessed 27 May 2015]. General Electric, 2009. 2009 Annual Report. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] General Electric, 2015. Business Core Competency. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] Henderson, K. M., and Evans, J. R., 2000. Successful implementation of six sigma: benchmarking General Electric Company. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 7(4), pp. 260-282. Holbach, L., 2009. International management Leadership. 6th ed. New York, London: Routledge. Ikenson, D., 2011. The Unholy Marriage Of GE And President Obama At The Altar Of Industrial Policy. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] Immelt, J. R., 2012. The CEO of General Electric on sparking an American manufacturing renewal. Human Resource Management International Digest, 20(6). Kaplan, R. S., 2012. The balanced scorecard: comments on balanced scorecard commentaries. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 8(4), pp. 539-545. Kaplinsky, R., 2000. Spreading the gains from globalisation. Brighton, Eng.: Institute of Development Studies. Keller, D., 2014. Leadership of international schools: Understanding and managing dualities. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. Kocieniewski, D., 2011. G.E.’s Strategies Let It Avoid Taxes Altogether. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] Lussier, R. N. and Achua, C. F., 2009. Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill development. London: Cengage Learning. Morning Star, 2015. General Electric Co. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] OBoyle, T. F., 2011. At any cost: Jack Welch, General Electric, and the pursuit of profit. New York: Vintage. Peng, M., 2013. Global strategy. Connecticut: Cengage learning. Reuters, 2015. General Electric Co. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] Schumpeter, 2010. Immelt blasts China. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] Terpstra, V., 2000. The millennium and international marketing. International Marketing Review, 17(1), pp.15-18. Terpstra, V., Foley, J., and Sarathy, R., 2012. International marketing. Napierville: Naper Press. The Economist, 2014. A hard act to follow. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 28 May 2015] Walters, D. and Rainbird, M., 2004. The value chain. Bradford: Emerald Group Pub. Bibliography Adair, J., 2011. Effective Communication: The Most Important Management Skill of All. 5th ed. London: Prentice Hall. Boone, L. E. and Kurtz, D. L., 2012. Contemporary Marketing, 7th ed. New York: Kaplan Publishing. Bose, C., 2010. Modern Marketing – Principles & Practice. 5th ed. Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning. Bowman, D. and Gatignon, H., 2010. Market Response and Marketing Models, 4th ed. London: Routledge. Bradley, F., 2008. International marketing strategy. 6th ed. London: Financial Times, Prentice Hall. Cant, M., 2009. Marketing Management. 3rd ed. New York: Free Press. Carrigan, M., Marinova, S. and Szmigin, I., 2005. Ethics and International Marketing: Research Background and Challenges. 5th ed. London: Prentice Hall. Enis, B., 2009. Marketing principles. 4th ed. Boston: Pitman Publishing. Ferrell, O. C. and Hartline, M., 2010. Marketing Strategy. 5th ed. Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning. Fifeld, P., 2007. Marketing strategy: the difference between marketing and markets. 5th ed. Oxford: Elsevier. Fill, C. and Hughes, G., 2009. Marketing communications. 4th ed. London: McGra-Hill Higher Education. Read More