|  |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Printable Version
E-mail to a Friend
APA | MLA | |
Running head: PROBLEM SOLUTION: GENE ONE
Problem Solution: Gene One
MBA 520/Transformational Leadership
Problem Solution: Gene One
Gene One is a $400 million biotechnology company which seeks to become a publicly traded company within three years. They first must establish what the current situation is before they know where they are going and where they want to be. These are the first topics of discussion: situation analysis, stating the current problem faced by Gene one and then an end state vision. Secondly, to achieve all the details listed in the previous sentence, an analysis of alternate solutions and the associated risks provides information to devise a solution. The third and final topics of discussion include the formulation of a viable solution for Gene One followed by an implementation plan and the evaluation plan to measure the success.
Situation Analysis
Evaluating an analysis of the current situation faced by Gene One is an important step to meeting an end vision. This part is identifying all the cards the organization has in its current deck of executable resources. By first identifying the current issues and the opportunities these predicaments present, Gene One can then utilize this information to begin the process of addressing the problems to be discussed later. Additionally, identifying the stakeholders and their perspectives gives consideration to ethical dilemmas which will also aid this company in realizing their end state by creating a checks and balances, aiding leadership in achieving the optimal solution.
Issue and Opportunity Identification
There are several issues which led to the current situation and problem challenging Gene One. The first problem is emotions. Several members of the leadership team became emotionally involved during a few tough decisions to potentially remove some key members of the organization. John Kirby, the Executive Director Board member, recommended the removal of the marketing officer. During his argument he mad a few good points, unfortunately they were overshadowed by his personal recommendation of a friend as a replacement. Other use of emotions became evident when Teri Robertson, Chief Technology Officer and member of the original startup team, felt Michelle Houghton, Chief Financial Officer, became involved in her business of technological research. These are to examples where managing emotions become necessary. When emotions rise during conversation, they can quickly distract the involved parties from the issue and shift the focus and time from real world problems to an irrelevant and potentially greater problem. “Employees are usually expected to manage their emotions in the workplace. Emotional labor refers to the effort, planning, and control needed to express organizationally desired emotions during interpersonal transactions.” say McShane and Von Glinow. They further state “When interacting with co-workers, customers, suppliers, and others, employees are expected to abide by display rules. These rules are norms requiring employees to display certain emotions and withhold others.” (McShane & Von Glinow, 2004, Ch 4, p. 116). What this means is when in a working environment it is every employees responsibility to manage their emotions to maintain a professional and safe atmosphere during interpersonal communication. Despite John recommending his friend out of emotion, there is an opportunity to be gained; the fact that a more experienced person could be hired to manage this function. It may not be that friend but another qualified person inside or outside the organization
Another concern identified is the lack of effective teamwork. Trust and cohesiveness are at the top of the barrier of this teamwork effectiveness. Don Ruiz, the CEO, continually mentioned the need to have the team focus on teamwork, unity of effort, and buy-in of the new direction. He did this in an attempt to form the team into a tight cohesive unit to ease the transition towards the IPO. Unfortunately, the leadership team immediately began to point out shortcomings with other team members. This turned into a finger pointing act attempting to degrade the ability of key members. Moreover, several team members were not too sure of the new plan to go public. Rather than embrace the new plan, those members were more comfortable with seeking resignations. Although this is not conducive to achieving the desired vision, there is a chance to build a cohesive team and once the team comes together and accepts the changing vision of the company, the more effective the team will be at other problems that arise as a result of the change. “Cohesiveness-is process whereby “a sense of ‘we-ness’ emerges to transcend individual differences and motives.” Members of a cohesive group stick together.” (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2003, Ch 13, p. 459). This “sticking together” is key to achieving the desired vision. Cohesiveness is one means to building an effective team. Building trust is the other barrier to the team fully becoming effective. A few team members have little faith in the abilities of other department heads. Not that there is an integrity issue, rather there is a lack of trust in qualifications to perform the necessary steps to transform to a publicly traded company. However, because of possible distrust, individuals do express the cause, allowing alternate suggestions to arise and give possible useful ideas or recommendations.
The final issue identified is the commitment to the organization. Although members of the leadership team have a strong commitment to the organization, it quickly turned to skepticism and distrust when Don laid out the plans to go public. As stated above, John wanted to have Charles removed to replace him with a friend, Michelle was unsure of Teri and her abilities, and Teri was ready to turn in her resignation as well as her top scientist. In spite of this, the potential opportunity here is, by not getting the organizational commitment in the future of Gene One, this could weed out individuals who truly don’t want to be a part of a publicly traded company.
Stakeholder Perspectives/Ethical Dilemmas
Although there are many stakeholders and each of them have a certain level of risk, each of them still have a certain level of rights. For example, all of the employees do not have a right to a job but they do have the right to be treated fairly. The employees need to be told what the plans are regarding the move to go public. Although Don may be unsure or unwilling to tell the employees about the plans until plans are established, as soon as he was told by the board he could move forward, this would have been an opportune time to notify the employees (of course he should notify after the discussion with the senior leaders first). The senior leaders, being employees of the company, have the right to guide the company in a new direction. They do have high ethics in that they are interested in making the world a better place and intend on doing so by improving the company. The only conflicting rights are those of the senior leaders. As mentioned above a few of the leaders want to replace others and that conflicts with the ethics of the situation considering some of the leaders in question helped to establish the company and get it where it is today.
The company, although it is not a human being, it is a company and under the law, it is an entity of its own and has a right to survive. It is because of this it should be considered before decisions about the company’s direction are made. Gene one is an inanimate object, but it has a vested interest in bettering the environment based on the culture of the founders
The shareholders are another stakeholder. They have a right to know they are investing in a viable company. It is the responsibility of all the senior leaders to ensure they take all the necessary steps to implement and enforce measures to present the least risk at the IPO. There is an inherent risk a shareholder takes when investing in a company, they don’t have right to have a guarantee of success only the right to know what they are investing in and that includes companies taking steps to be successful and forthcoming with information.
Problem Statement
Gene One Aspires to grow and be a publicly traded company. To achieve this, the company must seize several opportunities to include leadership changes, build effective teams, and establish an organizational culture that lends to organizational commitment to the plan and corporation. Gene One will become a publicly traded company through various internal changes.
End-State Vision
Gene one will seek to constantly improve itself and the environment through smart and pioneering practices. Through groundbreaking research, Gene One will be propelled to a multi-billion dollar, publicly traded company, yet never forgetting the commitment to creating innovative and environmentally friendly technology
Alternative Solutions
Gene one has set a goal to go public within three years. To achieve this Initial Public Offering (IPO), there are several things that need to occur to meet the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission or SEC. The company must set up a respectable independent board, they must create an organization which is capable of improving shareholder wealth, and establish SEC appropriate financial and operational practices. To accomplish this, the CEO has established a few guidelines to include researching the SEC policies, creating an appropriate board, and increase revenues by introducing new technologies. Additionally, several members are considering leaving or suggesting changes to the senior leadership to include founding members.
Two companies, Microsoft and Electronic Data Systems (EDS), utilized two different approaches towards their IPO and are both extremely successful companies. “According to a recent large survey, more than 70 percent say that business executives have a responsibility to take into account the impact their decisions have on employees, local communities, and the country.” (McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M., 2004). It is because of this that companies and the SEC take IPO’s very seriously to include decisions about corporate leadership. Many feel companies should keep the founders of corporations at least until after the initial IPO. (Bains, 2007). EDS retained their founder; Ross Perot remained the president and CEO for 11 years after the IPO yet raised record revenues during and after the change in president and CEO positions. Conversely, Microsoft made changes three years prior to their IPO much like Gene One is exploring. Again these changes were very successful for Microsoft. The founders stepped down and allowed other experienced personnel to take over while they stepped back to provide oversight in other positions.
EDS
Electronic Data Systems or EDS was founded by H. Ross Perot in 1962. EDS was formed to provide electronic data processing services to companies who were having trouble recruiting personnel with technical expertise. Ross Perot was an IBM salesman who saw this difficulty companies were having in the technology arena. He made the initial pitch to his company about his idea to provide these services. When IBM shot him down, he believed so much in this service he resigned to start his own business. Currently EDS is a successful publicly traded company. However, this corporate mammoth was not without problems after the Initial Public Offering or IPO in 1968. Just three years after the IPO and an all time high $160 per share, stocks began to fall prompting a change in leadership. (Electronic Data Systems Corp, 2007)
Ross Perot hired Morton H. Meyerson, eventual president and CEO, to tackle the problems faced by EDS. Initially, stocks continued to fall to an all time low of $15.00 per-share, $1.50 lower than the initial IPO. This change in leadership did spark a hue change and led to the corporate mammoth it is today. The company made this change in leadership for a reason: To combat deteriorating revenues. Morton Meyerson had a vast amount of experience he brought to the company. This experience translated to more money and growth for EDS. In 1974 the company signed up eight credit unions propelling the company to $100 million in revenue. Several years later, 1976, they landed several additional contracts to include a $41 million contract. In 1979, Meyerson was named president and CEO of EDS. Currently EDS is a worldwide company which is a leader in global technology services. “EDS delivers a broad portfolio of information technology and business process outsourcing services to clients in the manufacturing, financial services, healthcare, communications, energy, transportation, and consumer and retail industries and to governments around the world.” (Electronic Data Systems Corp, 2007). Its total revenue for 2006 was over $21 billion with the highest contract signings for new business since 2001. (EDS, 2006)
Microsoft
Long before the startup of Microsoft, Bill Gates and Paul Allen both realized the potential of personal computing lye within the software that operates these systems. These two individuals started a small business and grew it to a huge and extremely successful corporation. Microsoft started in 1975 as a partnership and introducing its first product “Microsoft” BASIC. 1976 the name “Microsoft” becomes a registered trade name, Paul Allen resigns from Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry Systems to join Microsoft full time. Bill Gates and Paul Allen share the “partner” title until 1977 when Gates becomes president and Allen become vice president. In 1981 Microsoft becomes incorporated and Gates assumes the additional duty of chairman of the board. Three years prior to moving towards their IPO, there were some significant leadership changes. Several positions changed hands during this reorganization of senior leader positions. (Microsoft, 2007).
In 1983, Paul Allen resigns as vice president and remains on the board of directors, James Town resigns as chief operations officer (COO), and John Shirley, previously of the Tandy corp., is announced as president and COO. At the Tandy corp., Shirley had a variety of positions sales, merchandising, manufacturing and international operations. Shirley was hired by Microsoft for his business expertise to guide Microsoft through the creation of Windows and the IPO. Gates remained as the chairman of the board and became the executive vice president, responsible for all development activities. For informational purposes, Microsoft revenues reached $50.07 million. (Microsoft, 2007).
The above are two completely different examples of what Gene One could potentially use to position itself at the time of the IPO. The entire solution comes down to a simple decision: Should the company replace transform the leadership now prior to the IPO and establish them as the IPO team or keep the current team as is and they become the IPO team and replace them later. In either situation, there are opportunities and difficulties associated with the decision to keep or replace leadership prior to the IPO. What ever the choice is, leadership must make the decision now to build upon the team they have or replace and begin to build a new team before the IPO.
Analysis of Alternative Solutions
There are four goals Gene One wishes to reach and they were rated based on level of importance. Each of them is a stepping stone towards the next goal. The first goal is to go with the Initial Public Offering (IPO), the second, create an SEC compliant organization, the third, realize 40% growth annually and the fourth goal is to create two new technologies within the next three years. The first goal is rated as a five since this is the ultimate goal and without it, there would be no need for the other goals. The second, SEC compliancy, is also rated at a five since it the IPO depends on meeting the SEC rules and regulations. The third, although important, does not keep the first two goals from being realized so it is rated as a four and the final goal is rated as a three since it does not affect the first two goals and does not keep the organization from finding other means to realize the desired 40% growth.
There are several alternatives Gene One can use to achieve their primary goal of an IPO. The highest rated alternative, as a 4.0, was to hire additional employees. This is a necessary step towards realizing the prime directive since they will need to hire an independent board, additional researchers, and marketing personnel. The second and third alternative was to replace the CEO and replace other leadership, which rate rated as a 3.0 and 2.82. The rational is discussed later in further detail, however, this replacement lends placing the current CEO as an independent board member, meeting the SEC requirement as well as meeting the IPO need by replacing the CEO with a “experienced professional.” Replacing other leadership accomplishes the same. The final alternative solution is to secure loans. This was rated at 2.71 because the additional funding works towards achieving the new technology goal. Funding is needed for research and therefore is a necessary tool for future technology which aides in the third goal of 40% growth.
Risk Assessment and Mitigation Techniques
In any decision making process, there are always risks associated with each decision since no one knows the future, they can only predict. As mentioned above, there are four alternative solutions and each of them has a certain level of risk and potential consequences. To replace the CEO and other leadership might be a bad thing, however, this carries a medium level risk since CEO’s and other senior leaders are replaced frequently by other organizations and outcomes vary; the trick is hire the right man, or woman, for the job. To mitigate the risk associated with this change, board members can monitor performance by establishing milestones and monitor quarterly financial statements. Another alternative is to hire additional staff to aid the various departments during the expected growth. This is a low risk because only because the chance of over hiring and reducing expected profits is low. The organization only needs to hire personnel as growth is realized, conduct manning surveys to find the right mix of personnel to tasks to avoid over hiring. Another means to mitigate hiring problems is to again monitoring financial statements. A potential consequence of over hiring could delay the IPO and keep the company from meeting the end state vision. The final alternative solution is a low risk as well. Gene One needs funding to conduct research to meet the desired 40% growth and so on and so on. Securing a loan or loans is an effective means of gathering additional funding for research. The consequences could mean corporate failure, default on loans and a myriad of other problems; nevertheless, to mitigate this risk, the company could sell any existing patents or research to repay loans.
Optimal Solution
As stated above in previous paragraphs, Gene One has several approaches it can take to achieve the desired end goal. The optimal solution for this can be found by combining some or all of the alternative solutions. The correct combination is to secure loans, hire additional members, and replace that one or two leaders that do not desire to be a part of the IPO. Replacing the CEO and other leaders is a possibility, however, examples were given above where one organization, prior to the IPO, replaced the CEO along with other leaders and the other didn’t. In this case, the CEO and other senior members are best left where they are. They have been the foundation of this organization and are best equipped to meet the needs of the organization. Should they replace them, the organization runs the risk of failure. By leaving them in place, they are no worse off than when they started. With this decision, Gene One may not meet the IPO; nonetheless there are worse things than not meeting your goal, like not having a job. In a nutshell, leave the leadership where they are and see how they perform. If they fail to perform, replace them and put them on a board or other capacity, much like Bill Gates did as described earlier, so they still have corporate involvement. William Bains states, “Some management theory and most venture capital operating practice suggests that removing the new venture team members soon should correlate with success, and particularly that removing the founders should enhance company progress.” (Bains, 2007). This information is a compelling reason to replace Gene One’s Leaders, except Bains further states, “The evidence, however, suggests exactly the opposite. Retaining founders in a significant role '' as executives or Board members '' is correlated with enhanced success outcomes for the company in its early stages.” (Bains, 2007). In fact investors perceive changes in leadership as replacing problems within the organization. (Bains, 2007). It is because of this, leadership should remain in their current capacity at least until after the IPO.
Securing loans is a normal way to raise capital and should be no different for Gene One. This has a low risk associated with it and it funds the needed research to allow Gene One to market and realize the 40% annual growth they want to achieve for the IPO. Finally, hiring additional employees should only be done after conducting an employment ratio to ensure only the amount of needed employees to the amount of work to meet the Laws of Diminishing Returns. With that stated, additional staff, such as researchers and marketers, is necessary to meet the expected growth of Gene One.
Implementation Plan
Now that a solution has been selected, there is a need to establish timelines. These timelines are established in an effort to move forward with progress, establish responsibility and track the success or failure of the plan. Michelle is the CFO and is responsible for all matters dealing with the IPO and garnering funding for research. This includes developing the SEC plan within three months, implementing that plan within six months, and securing funds for research within two months; funding is an ongoing process so subsequently funding for future research is necessary. Any leadership changes, the hiring of staff, and the creation of the independent board will fall on the shoulders of Greg. Any leadership changes will need to be accomplished within one year. This is allows for the pain of changes to settle and minimize the impact of the changes on the IPO. Creating the new board will also be accomplished within one year for the same reasons as the leadership changes. The hiring of additional employees needs to start immediately to support the new board and technology department. This hiring is an ongoing process with no time line other than to hire as necessary. Teri or her replacement will create one new technology within one year and the second with two years to allow marketing to initiate the process of selling products thereby creating revenue. This is crucial in Gene One attaining the 40% annual growth. Charles will create a strong marketing plan within 6 months. Again this is part of the growth plan and will require coordination with Michelle for funding and Teri for marketing new technologies. Don being the CEO is responsible for the entire plan but will need to assist with leadership changes, the compliancy plan, and the creation of the new board.
Evaluation of Results
After the implementation of the plan evaluation of progress is the eventual next step. Timelines are created as milestones or checkpoints to provide leadership with a overall progress of each goal. The initial IPO and desired 40% annual growth increase will require a close eye. To measure the success, a quarterly report of financials and compliancy is necessary. This allows leadership to make adjustments to the plan where changes are necessary. As Far as technology creation, employees should always keep leadership informed of progress; a formal report is required to track progress. This allows flexibility in research but allows leadership to step in as required to provide resources where they are needed. Finally, Michelle has the SEC plan. This can be established in a three phase timeline. The initial plan design is phase one, implementation is phase two and phase three is the tracking and changes of the SEC compliancy plan.
Challenges are sure to rise, this plan is intended to be flexible enough to allow changes throughout the process. The goal is to go public within three years, however it is more important to be in a position to go public and if it takes longer than three years, the company is still in a better position than rushing the plan. This plan is quantitative in nature, in that it measures progress through financial and performance based tracking.
Conclusion
Gene One, a biotechnological company, wishes to change its current culture and transform to a larger and publicly traded company. A systematic process was necessary to arrive at a viable and useful solution to their quandary. There were several problems identified throughout this discussion which were addressed. These problems were identified during the statement of the current situation. The following step communicated was the end state vision or where Gene One wants to be. Once beginning and end points are established, a roadmap between the two points was drawn. Along this roadmap, alternative solutions and risks were declared and evaluated to aid the organization in deciding upon a final direction. The choice was a simple one, leave leadership where it is, hire other employees to assist with future growth and secure loans to support research. The remainder topics of discussion resides in the implementation plans and evaluation plans to measure the success.
References
Bains W. (April 2007). When should you fire the founders? Journal of Commercial
Biotechnology. Vol 13. No 3 Pg 139-149, May 2007. Retrieved on August 16, 2007 from EBSCO Host.
EDS 2006 Annual Report. Retrieved on August 16, 2007 from http://www.eds.com/investor/
annual/2006/index.aspx
Electronic Data Systems Corp.: Early History. Retrieved on August 16, 2007 from
http://ecommerce.hostip.info/pages/385/Electronic-Data-Systems-Corp-EDS-EARLY-HISTORY.html
Kreitner & Kinicki (2003). Organizational behavior: Teams and Teamwork for the 21st Century.
New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. (2004). Organizational behavior: Introduction to the fireld
of organizational behavior. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. (2004). Organizational behavior: Organizational Culture. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
Microsoft: Microsoft Company 15 September 1975. Retrieved on August 16, 2007 from
http://www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.htm
Microsoft 2006 Financial Highlights. Retrieved on August 16, 2007 from http://www.microsoft.
com/msft/reports/ar06/flashversion/10k_fh_fin.html
Table 1
Issue and Opportunity Identification
|Issue |Opportunity |Reference to Specific |Concept |
| | |Course Concept | |
| | |(Include citation) | |
|During the Gene One scenario, one member wanted to |The opportunity to be |Employees are usually expected to |Managing Emotions |
|have another individual removed to hire a friend. He |gained here is the fact |manage their emotions in the | |
|became emotionally involved to the point he let |that a more experienced |workplace. Emotional labor refers | |
|judgment get in the way of expected norms. Don, the |person could be hired to |to the effort, planning, and | |
|CEO, pointed out the fact that he was surprised he |manage this function. It|control needed to express | |
|would suggest that someone get fired who was |may not be that friend |organizationally desired emotions | |
|instrumental in the company’s success. Don even said |but another qualified |during interpersonal | |
|maybe he is too attached and that he would have to |person within or outside |transactions.20 When interacting | |
|think about the situation; he quickly refocused the |the organization. |with co-workers, customers, | |
|conversation back to business. | |suppliers, and others, employees | |
| | |are expected to abide by display | |
|Managing emotions is an important part of keeping the | |rules. These rules are norms | |
|workplace professional and tensions low thereby | |requiring employees to display | |
|allowing the teams to focus and spend time on mission | |certain emotions and withhold | |
|accomplishment. | |others. (McShane & Von Glinow, | |
| | |2004, Ch 4, p. 116) | |
|In the Gene One scenario, Don, the CEO, continually |The opportunity here to |Cohesiveness-A process whereby “a |Effective Teamwork |
|mentioned the need to have the team focus on teamwork,|build a cohesive team is |sense of ‘we-ness’ emerges to |(Cohesiveness) |
|unity of effort, and buy-in of the new direction. He |the fact that once the |transcend individual differences | |
|did this in an attempt to form the team into a tight |team comes together and |and motives.” Members of a | |
|cohesive unit to ease the transition towards the IPO. |accepts the changing |cohesive group stick together. | |
| |vision of the company, |(Kreitner & Kinicki, 2003, Ch 13, | |
|To form an effective team cohesiveness is an important|the more effective the |p. 459) | |
|part because until the team forgets about |team will be at other | | |
|individuality, they will be ineffective when working |problems that arise as a | | |
|towards their goals. |result of the change. | | |
|The Gene One Team has little trust in the abilities of|If there is no trust, |Trust-Reciprocal faith in others’ |Effective teamwork |
|the other department heads. Not that there is an |this does allow for |intentions and behavior. (Kreitner|(Trust) |
|integrity issue, rather there is a trust in abilities |alternate suggestions to |& Kinicki, 2003, Ch 13, p. 457). | |
|to perform under the new vision of a publicly traded |arise and give possible | | |
|company and the means it takes to get there. |useful ideas. | | |
|Again, in the Gene One scenario the scenario mentioned|An opportunity to realize|The employee’s emotional attachment|Organizational |
|how one employee wanted another long time employee |here is by not getting |to, identification with, and |Commitment |
|fired. Don didn’t want that to happen because of his |the buy in of the future |involvement in a particular | |
|commitment to her and the organization. With the |of Gene One, this could |organization. (McShane & Von | |
|leadership in a stable position, the transition for |weed out the one who |Glinow, 2004, Ch 4, p. 126) | |
|the IPO is easier. Additionally, it mentioned in the |truly don’t want to be a | | |
|scenario that multiple employees had been there since |part of the new company. | | |
|the beginning and felt a great commitment to the | | | |
|organization. | | | |
Table 2
Stakeholder Perspectives
|Stakeholder Perspectives |
| | |
|Stakeholder Groups |The Interests, Rights, and |
| |Values of Each Group |
|Employees |Have a right to be treated fairly and to be informed of the company’s new |
| |direction |
|The Company |Has a right to survive as an organization. Should be considered before |
| |decisions about the company direction is made. Although this is an |
| |inanimate object, the company has a vested interest in bettering the eco |
| |system based on the culture of the founders |
|Share Holders |Share holders have a right to know they are investing in a stable company.|
| |They have a valid interest in the success of the company |
|Senior Leaders |Have a right to move the company in a new direction. Are interested in |
| |making the world a better place and doing so by improving the company. |
Table 3
Analysis of Alternative Solutions
[pic]
Table 4
Risk Assessment and Mitigation Techniques
|Risk Assessment and Mitigation Techniques |
|Alternative Solution |Risks and Probability |Consequence and Severity |Mitigation Techniques |
|Hire Other Employees |over hire |Delay IPO |Conduct manning analysis. |
| |cut into expected proffits |Not meet end state goal |Check performance through financial |
| |LOW | |statements |
|Replace CEO |Delay IPO |Not meet End vision |Closely monitor Financial statements |
| |Lose money |Delay IPO |Develop performance milestones |
| |Not realize growth | | |
| |MEDIUM | | |
|Replace other leadership |Delay IPO |Not meet End vision |Closely monitor Financial statements |
| |Lose money |Delay IPO |Develop performance milestones |
| |Not realize growth | | |
| |MEDIUM | | |
|Secure Loans |Delay IPO |Bankrupt |Sell patents if necessary to repay |
| |Lose Money |Lose company |loans |
| | |Default on loan | |
Table 5
Optimal Solution Implementation Plan
|Deliverable |Timeline |Who is Responsible |
|SEC Compliancy Plan |3 Months |Michelle |
|Make leadership changes |1 Year |Greg, Don |
|Implement Compliancy Plan |6 Months |Michelle, Don |
|Create new board |1 Year |Don, Greg |
|Create 1 new technology |1 Year |Teri or her replacement |
|Create Funds for Tech Research Support |2 Months |Michelle |
|Create/Implement Strong Marketing Plan |6 Months |Charles |
|Hire new employees to assist with new expected |Ongoing based on production reports and need |Greg |
|growth | | |
|Create the 2nd new technology |2.5 Years |Teri or her replacement |
Table 6
Evaluation of Results
|End-State Goals |Metrics |Target |
|Within three years present the Initial Public|Create timeline with necessary steps to |Report quarterly on timeline until IPO |
|Offering (IPO) |achieve IPO | |
|40% Annual Growth Increase |Check performance by production numbers |Departments report production numbers |
| | |quarterly |
|Expand their technology base |Create new technology |2 new technologies every 3 years report |
| | |monthly on progress |
|Establish SEC compliant organization |Layout and implement plan |Establish three phase timeline and report |
| | |quarterly on progress |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
