Essay Wow!

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION 2

2 AN EXPLORATION OF THE BALANCE SCORECARD 4

3 IMPLEMENTING A BALANCE SCORECARD INTO COMPUTING SERVICES 6

3.1 FIGURE 1 - COMPUTING SERVICES BALANCE SCORECARD 2006 7

4 A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE BALANCE SCORECARD 11

5 CONCLUSION 13

6 RECOMMENDATIONS 14

7 REFERENCES 15

8 BIBLIOGRAPHY 15

9 APPENDIX 1 - DISCOVERY INFORMATION BALANCE SCORECARD - 2006 16

10 APPENDIX 2 - PERFORMANCE PLANNING DOCUMENT - SJB 2006 18

1 Introduction

What is a balance scorecard? Kaplan and Norton (1989) cited in Mooraj et al (1999, P.482) describe it as operational activities aligned to an organisations strategy and then translated in to meaningful objectives. This is then further translated in to effective performance measures that create a forward facing view of the strategy incorporating all areas of an organisation.

Kaplan and Norton (1992) discuss the implementation of the balance scorecard as a performance management tool and highlight several areas for consideration. It is not enough to set measures and hope they will be fulfilled. Senior and financial management must work together, involving all levels of an organisation to make it succeed. Unless employees can see the translation of high-level objectives into operational tasks and measures it will be difficult to gain commitment and motivation from staff. “What you measure is what you get” (Kaplan and Norton (1992) P.71). However this can only be true if employees understand what is expected of them.

AstraZeneca is a leading pharmaceutical company with around 66,000 employees worldwide. The company is dedicated to the research and development of products and healthcare for the prevention and cure of unmet medical needs.

Computing Services is a regional group of about 42 employees within the DI (Discovery Information) department. DI delivers IS/IT products and services to the internal Research scientific community (otherwise known as Discovery - customer base). The purpose of this department is to increase productivity by developing innovative solutions and services, which enable scientists to increase throughput and accuracy, therefore reduce the Drug Discovery timeline.

Discovery Information has to consider both Corporate IS (Information Systems) objectives and Discovery objectives in order to satisfy all stakeholders and create an effective long-term strategy. Corporate IS focus on IS compliance, security and commodity type services and technologies. Corporate IS aim to reduce the cost of IS/IT throughout the organisation through outsourcing and purchase rationalisation. However Discovery gains competitive advantage through innovative technology therefore require customer focus, specialist knowledge and skills, and tailored solutions.

Discovery Information captures demand from Discovery via a stakeholder group called the PPG (Portfolio Prioritisation Group). The PPG are a group of business representatives, often senior scientific managers, whose purpose is to select high value adding activities to be delivered by DI, reach consensus and prioritise appropriately. The DI strategy and planning team devise the departmental objectives inline with customer requirements and external influences.

Discovery Information introduced the balance scorecard in June 2005. The head of department asked two senior change managers to produce a balance scorecard that incorporated the department’s objectives with effective measures and targets. The balance scorecard was communicated to the department when it was posted on the weekly roundup electronic newsletter.

“DI Balance Scorecard now on-line - Ever wondered what our Objectives, Targets and Measures are? Your time in the darkness is over. More importantly, it will be updated during June and through the year” (WAZZAP Editor (7th June 2005) Newsletter).

The Balance Scorecard was not presented to staff, it was a secret until complete, and therefore until recently very few people have understood its purpose and how to contribute to it.

For the purpose of this report and to address the lack of clarity brought about by the departmental balance scorecard, a local balance scorecard, viewable on page 7 has been created specifically for Computing Services, showing lower level activities and operational improvement projects, linking in to the high-level objectives.

2 An exploration of the Balance Scorecard

The balance scorecard is a performance management tool that allows senior managers to not only view financial measures but operational measures also. It focuses on four perspectives; customer, finance, process and people and in doing so presents a balanced view of organisations measures. The balance scorecard shows the results of actions already taken (Kaplan and Norton, 1992).

The four perspectives take into consideration the three main stakeholder groups, shareholder, customer and employees, giving a holistic view of the strategy and the intended performance measures to benefit all groups (Mooraj et al, 1999).

“The balance scorecard forces managers to focus on the handful of measures that are most critical” (Kaplan and Norton (1992) P.73). Furthermore it is importance not to keep adding new measures as and when a good suggestion is made. Objectives should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timely), however the balance scorecard will not prevent nor guide managers away from making common mistakes by setting unrealistic objectives and measures, especially if they are to formulate the balance scorecard single handily (Kaplan and Norton, 1992).

The benefit of using a balance scorecard is in the visibility of all operational measures, enabling managers to see when one area has improved, that it has not at the expense of another (Kaplan and Norton, 1992).

The nature of the pharmaceutical industry means it is difficult to benchmark and compare services with competitors. There is very little information in the public domain and no collaboration at this level. Therefore customer perspective is important and ultimately drives Discovery Information’s vision and strategy.

Computing Services a sub group within DI, deliver specialised services, such as the Science Desk, a scientific computing and lab computing (instruments and robots) IT support service. To AstraZeneca’s knowledge no other Pharmaceutical company has a dedicated service like the Science Desk, therefore to identify service improvements and assess efficiency and effectiveness customer feedback is essential. The balance scorecard can display the vision, strategy, objectives and measures but it cannot easily say how efficient and effective something is.

Customer expectations are difficult to measure and can be unrealistic; being unable to benchmark using competitor information creates a risk. The risk that if a service has delivered consistently high levels of customer service it can generate a need for more, increasing customer expectations, beyond what is truly necessary. Normann (1991) agrees and explains customers are not always right, in fact they do not always know what they want or need from a service. They do however have a perceived idea of what the service should deliver and how. This is often not in their best interest.

Kaplan and Norton (1996) state that cause-and-effect relationships help to assess underlying success or issues within a strategy. By setting short-term goals and anticipating results and changes in perspectives it can act as an early warning tool to detect both positive and negative results. Kaplan and Norton (1996, P.84) give example of this when a company found a link between increased staff morale and the number of ideas generated by them; improvements were also identified in the fewer number of corrections they made.

When interviewing with the creator of the Discovery Information balance scorecard, the following point was made. “I did not start with the strategy and work from left to right as all the books say you should. I looked at customer demand, R&D strategy, considered what we do, where there are issues, and then tried to address these issues by thinking of measures and targets to improve performance using the four key elements. I then mapped the measures onto the relevant high level objectives.” (Interview: Senior Change Manager (3rd February 2006) DI, AstraZeneca).

Kaplan and Norton (1992, P.73) recommend, “Managers translate their general mission statement on customer service into specific measures that reflect the factors that really matter to customers.” Furthermore goals should cover time, quality and performance. The main objective of the balance scorecard is to align business operations with the overall strategy.

3 Implementing a balance scorecard into Computing Services

The purpose behind the Computing Services Balance Scorecard was to identify group and individual input to the high level objectives. The balance scorecard does not highlight individual contribution. Please turn to appendix 1 on page 15 to view the Discovery Information balance scorecard. This shows very high level objectives, measures and targets and needs interpretation for most employees to understand it. Atkinson et al (1997) cited in Mooraj et al (1999) states the balance scorecard has three failings when using a stakeholder approach to performance measurement. Firstly it does not show the contribution made by employees and external consultants, secondly it does not consider or make the community and environment the company is operating in visible, and thirdly it does not make allowances for 360 degree performance measurement i.e. it measures top down.

Since the creation of the balance scorecard things have moved on and roles have been created to address certain elements of the balance scorecard and to improve 360-degree feedback on strategic objectives and the indicators being used to measure achievement. The management system for strategic implementation, figure 3 - Kaplan and Norton (1996a, P.197) cited in Mooraj et al (1999, P.484) displays the cycle used to test strategy and vision and could be a useful tool to both formulate a balance scorecard and demonstrate how the balance scorecard was formulated to gain understanding and influence buy-in.

AstraZeneca’s focus is moving from operational excellence to customer intimacy. Likewise traditional financial measures and reports are less popular and CRM (Customer Relationship Management) is the new performance driver. “The traditional financial performance measures worked well for the industrial era, but they are out of step with the skills and competencies companies are trying to master today” (Kaplan and Norton (1992) P.71).

The Computing Services balance scorecard, using the Discovery Information scorecard for strategic guidance demonstrates clearly that customer perspective and internal business processes are most important to the organisation during 2006. Please turn overleaf to view the Computing Services balance scorecard for 2006.

Following on from the implementation of the balance scorecard for computing services, individual performance planning documents have been redeveloped to incorporate the balance scorecard reference code to highlight individual contribution to the overall objectives. Please view appendix 2 on page 17 to view the latest DI Performance Planning Document.

3.1 Figure 1 - Computing Services Balance Scorecard 2006

Discovery Information, Computing Services Group Objectives 2006

(DI BALANCE SCORECARD)

HIGH LEVEL OBJECTIVES SPECIFIC COMPUTING SERVICES OBJECTIVES MEASURES TARGETS

CUSTOMER C1 Deliver the agreed Portfolio of Discovery Information Projects & Services to our Customers Deliver programme of Infrastructure Projects Alignment of the Portfolio to Customer needs, prioritisation of local and regional project demand Stakeholder approval at Portfolio Prioritisation Group (PPG) level and local demand unit. Regional team prioritised using star system. Work Initiation Document (WID) system in place for all projects.

Deliver Change projects to enable regional growth and global integration of best practice. Science Desk, Lab Computing, Common Tools and Processes and Systems Development. Benefits completed for each project and tracked. Benchmarked service feedback before and after. Movement towards vision monitored, articulated and celebrated. 100 % of Projects achieve 2006 Business Case benefits. Vision mapping moves 50% closer. Feedback improves by x%

Deliver BAU services to meet customer requirements and expectations Effort placed into “priority” services. Customer advises services with most impact Effort shifted from low impact services to high impact

Ensure slick delivery of projects and services to Dx Provide PM support to services. Hold service reviews internally. Results published in CRM newsletters. Each service reviewed annually. 10% PM effort assigned to services

C2 Enhance our relationships and increase collaboration with our Investors / Customers / Consumers at all levels Complete Stakeholder Mapping exercise. Identify who needs what from Services and how we can provide this Identify, consult, evaluate and implement - produce communication plan for each stakeholder type Visibility of stakeholder types and processes. Each team member knows where to look for contacts and what each contact needs

Identify champions within Discovery to sell and support our services Analyse individual stakeholders, look at level of influence, affiliation and advocacy - target those who can sell messages and promote our services 10 champions targeted by end of year

Build relationships within Discovery Information - develop Stakeholder Lifecycle process which hits all groups Identify communication gaps for stakeholders, how can these be filled, who by. Identify content and approach for Discovery Information interactions with Discovery stakeholders, Suppliers and each other. Agreed stakeholder communication plan in place within DI by end of year. All services staff understand their role in that plan

C3 Deliver enhanced customer value through innovation and external collaborations Improve innovation within service delivery Introducing new innovations into services and/or projects that fulfil customer requirements. Log these with innovation meter. New innovations published in Customer Relationship Management (CRM) newsletter Each team targeted with 5 new innovations per year

C4 Deliver enhanced customer value through utilisation of the Scientific Platform Build Service Catalogue with Customers - design, detail, and access procedures. Customers need to know what is available to take advantage - list of activities, how you get them, how available they are and what they cost Phase 1 catalogue distributed April 2006, Phase 2 including application management - July 2006

Extend Catalogue to other areas led by customer opinion More value seen if services is just one of the “things on offer” - open catalogue to application teams supporting both foundation and exploitation. Find out what the customer wants and target those areas Needs analysis completed May 2006

Deliver Project Orientated support into RA’s Advertise and respond to requests, recruit scientists to support services (i.e. DATA and science desk), record all activity, manage expectations and target biggest area of biggest impact. Demand list in place and prioritised by impact - STAR system. Feedback loops in place and positive feedback received. Improved customer response and participation - benchmarked??

FINANCE F1 Align utilisation of Discovery Information resources to Portfolio delivery Ensure adequate correctly skilled resource aligned to activities Complete Skills Matrix and talent management grid - understand individual skill make-up. Identify skill gap against portfolio demand. All permanent staff in matrix for talent management Q1. Contract staff with skill groups categorised by end Q2. Review process for skill update in place Q2

Ensure staff only aligned to agreed prioritised activities Follow work initiation document (WID) process, ensuring all activity managers are aware of the process. Understand prioritisation of local demand All DxIx staff familiar with WID process, Becomes pre-cursor for Plan view entries. All staff allocated 100% in Plan view (Resource planning tool) Q2.

Identify alternative ways of resourcing portfolio requirements. Identify risk of engagement past 11 months. Investigate use of Fixed term contracts. Investigate secondment opportunities. Engage HR assistance to lobby for permanent headcount in BAU roles. Staff to contract ratio increased by 10% - current baseline 30%.

F2 Deliver the Discovery Information Budget Targets for Revenue, Capital and Headcount Understand services cost structure Identify costs of services within DxIx for catalogue. Costs revenue based only. Identify costs to business of specified Corporate IS and IBM costs - list of activities costs i.e. project management daily rate etc from suppliers. Enter into catalogue and publish Costing catalogue available Q4 2006

Identify who pays for what and document and publish. Supplier management role more pro-active, supplier engagement and analysis programme implemented. Statement of services available within and external to DxIx - along with supporting costs and contact names. Review process in place for changes.

F3 Deliver sustainable cost savings across Discovery Information Increase proportion of discretionary spend by reducing foundation maintenance costs Identify then consolidate system estate, continually evaluate technology advances, taking advantage of cheaper alternatives for maintenance. Take advantage of corporate initiatives, which fund activities. Utilise infrastructure effectively - buy not build. System review procedures in place Q3 2006. Decommission 3 systems, save maintenance costs of 3 servers. Fund 2 project activities from Corporate funds.

Gain revenue savings from contractor conversions Identify cases for cost savings via conversion, lobby leadership team with benefits case, and seek alternative funding and/or secondment money to fund. Achieve 2 conversions by end 2006

PROCESS PR1 Demonstrate ongoing performance improvement across Discovery Information Improve all services, Science Desk, Lab Computing, DATA, Project management, Service Management, following vision of science based support and operational efficiency. Complete individual change projects as per individual agreed vision statements. Leverage synergies from effective regional working as appropriate. Identify activities low impact low value to remove from catalogue. Focus effort on high value high impact. Service estate categorised by value. Movement into high value documented. Customer feedback received to support transition and acceptance of improvement. Implement metrics, which support change. New services support business evolution.

Benchmark services to demonstrate improvement areas. Visibility of Benchmarking process & outcomes Benchmarks in place for all services, processes in place for review.

PR2 Deliver the benefits of the Discovery Information Integration Programme to customers & employees. Complete delivery of the GIS&L Change Programme Ensure retention of all services until handover to the new organisation takes effect. Create handover plans and keep customers aware of timelines No negative impact on business during handover

Allow change facilitators to assist with change implementation, feed into change models and operating plans. Understand how the group can help, engage, plan and execute change plans ensuring personal and team support and service continuity. All teams engaged to some extent in change plans Q2/Q3. Full understanding of change plan - where activities move to and where staff will be repositioned. Mutual support behaviours visible.

PR3 Transform Discovery Information Operating Processes to improve decision-making Work with the change team to ensure clarity of operating procedures and articulation of these to customers Visibility & usage of Operating Processes For key areas by end Q2

PR4 Transform Discovery Information Capabilities to meet future customer requirements Work with the capability development plans, ensuring key capabilities for the delivery of services are identified and evolved. Identify key capabilities required, identify numbers of staff within each capability, capability gap and develop plans to build capability as appropriate and reduce gap. For key capabilities by end Q2

PR5 Maintain our Licence to Operate through compliance with AZ Policies & Principles for Finance, HR, Safety Health & Environment, IS Security, Quality Assurance, Regulatory Compliance, Copyright & Risk Management Comply with IS Security and Compliance instructions Understand our security and compliance requirements and create plan to ensure achievement. Create and follow quality instructions. Implement QMF principles into Services, standard process and templates. Zero negative impact on Discovery Information & our Customers. Compliance Plan in place Q3, Quality instructions according to QMF principles in place Q3.

Understand External influencers and influence to improve delivery to Discovery Complete supplier analysis, prioritise key supplier relationships, build relationships, identity shared initiatives and opportunities. Minimise impact of corporate initiatives by early warning systems and communication channels. Visible Supplier matrix with accountabilities and contacts. Improved communications and early warning processes. Faster turnaround in delivery for corporate projects and consumed services.

PEOPLE

Ensure all staff have clear roles, responsibilities, objectives and development plans with line-of-sight to Discovery Information Objectives Line up service objectives to DI high-level objectives. Ensuring staff can link their objectives back to balanced scorecard Team review of objectives, individual planning documents complete with individual and team objectives and measures Draft agreed for all staff by end Q1 2006, reviewed quarterly

2007 Objectives - preparation & planning Completed by end 2006

P2 Develop key skills in Discovery Information staff to fulfil the Discovery Information Capabilities Align skills to portfolio need and build skills to fill gaps Current skills map By end Q2

Skills catalogue available By end Q2

Individual skills development plans From mid-year

P3 Promote the Discovery Information values and behaviours Understand and behave in accordance to AZ values and behaviours Values & behaviours defined By end Q1

Visibility & understanding of the values & behaviours Across Discovery Information by end Q2

Role modelling of the values & behaviours by Discovery Information leaders Profiled in communications by end Q4

4 A critical analysis of the balance scorecard

Kaplan and Norton (1992) explain the importance of engaging management throughout an organisation and the staff in the development of a balance scorecard. Questionnaires can be an effective method of gaining feedback and a true picture of what employees really know about the balance scorecard and individual responsibility. If employees are consulted and the balance scorecard is clearly communicated, most will want to make it a success and some will champion it.

An executive at Metro Bank (cited in Kaplan and Norton (1996, P.80) said, “The balance scorecard is both motivating and obligating.” This is true if employees fully understand their responsibilities. Another company Kaplan and Norton refer to asked employees to develop their own objectives inline with the organisations and then produced mini balance scorecards, which employees could carry around with them as a constant reminder. The increase in visibility and constant assessment could create healthy competition between employees, however if not monitored carefully a culture of quantity rather than quality could be attained and motivation affected when reward is not achieved.

Discovery Information has not been effective in turning operational improvements in to financial benefits. Only recently have employees been moved from one project team to another and re-skilled in an attempt to make the department more agile and increase productivity. Prior to the balance scorecard and the ability to view all the measures and how they link together, it was seen that developing a new or more efficient business process for example was an achieved objective and therefore should be rewarded. Since the arrival of the balance scorecard a change in the performance and reward process has begun and will need to focus on overall performance if the efficiencies are to be seen through to the end. “Disappointing financial measures sometimes occur because companies don’t follow up their operational improvements with another round of actions” (Kaplan and Norton, 1991, P.78).

One company Kaplan and Norton studied set equally weighted reward for achievement against financial objectives over a set period of time, and gave an assessment of their performance around the customer, process and people elements of the scorecard. However it is an immature area and few results have been collated as to what the best way of handing the correlation between performance and reward is in conjunction with the scorecard (Kaplan and Norton, 1996).

Simons (1990) cited in Mooraj et al (1999, P.482) also criticises the scorecard for being an obstructive ’strategic control system’, and argues, “They do not understand fully the means by which strategic control has been achieved.” However the balance scorecard is an effective performance management tool in that it prevents managers from being overloaded with data and keeps agreed measures clear and concise. It also prevents managers from focussing solely on financial measures and reports to the detriment of operational measures (Mooraj et al, 1999).

5 Conclusion

The balance scorecard has potential to be an effective performance management system, and like all management systems it must be implemented carefully. Creating a balance scorecard without input from managers and employees throughout an organisation will hinder the completeness of the data and the take up rate. If employees cannot see how to contribute and what it means to them, they will not buy in to the process and will work against it.

Communication is essential to the success of the balance scorecard. The theory and process needs explanation and guidance to the user. If the strategy is designed effectively with regular milestones, the cause-and-effect relationships can have positive and motivational effects and create greater real-time results. Encouraging employees to anticipate relationships between different perspectives, using managements forecasts, will contribute to the monitoring of the strategy. Either it will test the strategy and raise early warning signs where anticipated results have not flourished, or it will identify measures that have not been followed through to gain financial savings or improvements, and if neither is true the measures should have been attained as predicted.

One argument encourages management to forget financial reporting and concentrate on the remaining three elements of the scorecard, customer perspective, internal business perspective and innovation and learning perspective. By concentrating on the operational measures, in time they will take care of the financial measures. “Improve operational measures like cycle time and defect rates; the financial results will follow” (Kaplan and Norton (1992, P.71). However they go on to say that the balance scorecard enables managers to effectively view all elements and measures, and liken the visibility the balance scorecard gives to the cockpit of an airplane, allowing multiple diagnostics concurrently, and that managers should not choose between the perspectives as all equally contribute to overall improved performance.

Atkinson et al (1997) cited in Mooraj et al (1999) criticises the balance scorecard for a lack of visible contribution, therefore making the tool a managers’ performance reward tool.

Using the management system for strategic implementation will sanity check strategy and vision using a 360-degree feedback mechanism, however it does not address reporting on measures attained. At a glance the scorecard looks reasonably simple to follow even if the objectives and measures are in business language common to the organisation. What are not clear are the report standards Kaplan and Norton recommend. It is clear that different organisations will have very different needs and measures, however to make the balance scorecard effective, guidance in what constitutes effective reporting in conjunction with the scorecard would be beneficial.

6 Recommendations

Discovery Information would have benefited earlier if the implementation of the balance scorecard had been widely communicated and explained the all employees. The change in the performance-planning document, to reflect the balance scorecard linkages came too late and again was sent out in a communication, advising people to start using the documents without much guidance.

If I were you make any recommendations I would advice Discovery Information to carry out a 360-degree assessment on the strategy and vision, and a cause-and-effect link exercise to create a clear understanding of the objectives and measures aligned to the strategy. This could be done as a workshop with several employees from different levels of the organisation, working with senior management to improve performance throughout the department.

7 References

Goldenberg. B (2005) Information at Your Fingertips. Customer Relationship Management, September 2005, P.24.

Interview: Senior Change Manager (3rd February 2006) Discovery Information, AstraZeneca

Kaplan. R.S & Norton. P (1992) The Balance Scorecard - Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, Issue January-February 1992, P.71 - 77.

Kaplan. R.S & Norton. P (1991) The Balance Scorecard - Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, Issue January-February 1991, P.78 - 79.

Kaplan. R.S & Norton. P (1996) Using the Balance Scorecard as a Strategic Management System. Harvard Business Review, Issue January-February 1996, P.75 - 85.

Mooraj. S et al (1999) The Balance Scorecard: a Necessary Good or an Unnecessary Evil? European Management Journal, Volume 17 No 5 October 1999, P.481 - 491.

Normann. R (1991, John Wiley) Service Management, third edition

8 Bibliography

Atrill and McLaney (2004) Accounting and Finance for Non-Specialists, Prentice Hall, Fourth Edition.

9 APPENDIX 1 - Discovery Information BALANCE SCORECARD - 2006

DISCOVERY INFORMATION BALANCED SCORECARD 2006 version 1.1

OBJECTIVES MEASURES TARGETS

CUSTOMER C1 Deliver the agreed Portfolio of Discovery Information Projects & Services to our Customers Alignment of the Portfolio to Customer needs Stakeholder approval

Value delivered by Projects 100 % of Projects achieve 2006 Business Case benefits

Value delivered by Foundation Services Baseline by end Q2

Value delivered by Exploitation Services Baseline by end Q2

C2 Enhance our relationships and increase collaboration with our Investors / Customers / Consumers at all levels Visibility of stakeholder engagement processes and outcomes By end Q2

Visibility & understanding of our Portfolio and contribution in all Customer groups By end Q2

C3 Deliver enhanced customer value through innovation and external collaborations Approach to identifying & funding innovation By end Q2

Number of innovations considered / implemented At least 2

Number of collaborations established At least 2

C4 Deliver enhanced customer value through utilisation of the Scientific Platform Alignment of the asset set to Discovery’s needs Baseline by end Q1

Costs & benefits of the Scientific Platform Baseline by end Q1

Collaboration with Corporate IS Baseline by end Q2

C5 Support the R&D Strategy for China Deliver an Information Strategy By end Q2

FINANCE F1 Align utilisation of Discovery Information resources to Portfolio delivery Visibility of resource utilization (people, finance, content) 100% coverage by end Q1

Responsiveness of resource utilization to Portfolio changes Baseline by end Q2

F2 Deliver the Discovery Information Budget Targets for Revenue, Capital and Headcount 2006 Revenue forecasting & outturn $ 112.7 M

2006 Capital forecasting & outturn $ 10.1 M

2006 Permanent FTE 502 FTE

2006 Total Productive FTE 653 FTE

F3 Deliver sustainable cost savings across Discovery Information Savings included in Revenue Budget $2.1M by end 2006

Savings included in Total Productive FTE 22 FTE by end 2006

Proportion of “discretionary” vs “non-discretionary” spend Baseline by end Q2

PROCESS PR1 Demonstrate ongoing performance improvement across Discovery Information Visibility of Performance Management process and outcomes At end Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4

Visibility of Benchmarking process & outcomes By end Q3

PR2 Deliver the benefits of the Discovery Information Integration Programme to customers & employees. Complete delivery of the GIS&L Change Programme Integration benefits defined By end January

Integration completed By end Q2

Integration benefits delivered By end Q3

GIS&L Change Programme completed By end Q2

PR3 Transform Discovery Information Operating Processes to improve decision-making Visibility & usage of Operating Processes For key areas by end Q1

Quality & speed of decision-making Improvements in key areas by end Q2

PR4 Transform Discovery Information Capabilities to meet future customer requirements Visibility & maturity of Capabilities For key capabilities by end Q1

Value delivered by Capabilities Improvements in key capabilities by end Q2

PR5 Maintain our Licence to Operate through compliance with AZ Policies & Principles for Finance, HR, SHE, IS Security, Quality Assurance, Regulatory Compliance, Copyright & Risk Management Effectiveness of compliance management Zero negative impact on Discovery Information & our Customers

PEOPLE P1 Ensure all staff have clear roles, responsibilities, objectives and development plans with line-of-sight to Discovery Information Objectives 2006 Objectives & Development Plans Agreed for all staff by end Q1 2006, reviewed mid-year and end-year

2007 Objectives - preparation & planning Completed by end 2006

P2 Develop key skills in Discovery Information staff to fulfil the Discovery Information Capabilities Current skills map By end Q1

Skills catalogue available By end Q2

Individual skills development plans From mid-year

P3 Promote the Discovery Information values and behaviours Values & behaviours defined By end Q1

Visibility & understanding of the values & behaviours Across Discovery Information by end Q2

Role modelling of the values & behaviours by Discovery Information leaders Profiled in communications by end Q4

10 APPENDIX 2 - Performance Planning Document - SJB 2006

Name: Sally-Jane Biddulph Function: Computing Services

Dept: DI Manager:

Project Leader (if appropriate): -

Interim Review Date(s): 2nd half of June Annual Review Date: January 2007-

Individual Objectives:

Aligned; Specific; Concise; Organisational Behaviours; Critical Actions; Necessary development actions; Agreed with Project Leader? Standards for each Objective:

Which are measurable in terms of impact or outcome: (time, quality, quantity, cost, what and how)

1. C2

Complete Stakeholder Mapping exercise. Identify who needs what from Services and how we can provide this

Identify champions within Discovery to sell and support our services

Build relationships within DI - develop Stakeholder Lifecycle process which hits all groups

Understand what IS&L needs to support Libraries in terms of a Global Helpdesk.

Visibility of stakeholder types and processes. Each team member knows where to look for contacts and what each contact needs

3 champions targeted by end of year

Agreed stakeholder communication plan in place within DI by end of year. All services staff understand their role in that plan

2. C3

Improve innovation within service delivery Each team targeted with 5 new innovations per year

o Customer feedback mechanism

3. C4

Build Service Catalogue with Customers - design, detail, and access procedures.

Identify areas to extend catalogue - new services

Support and Deliver Project Orientated support into RA’s

Phase 1 catalogue distributed April 2006

Needs analysis completed May 2006, Phase 2 catalogue distributed July 2006

Demand list in place and prioritised by impact - STAR system, June 2006.

Feedback loops in place and positive feedback received, 15% positive shift in opinion by end of year.

Improved customer response and participation - attendance at 85% August 2006

5 new RA projects supported throughout 2006 with a measure of reduced time to achieve their goals, by increased awareness, training or new applications and small development projects.

4. F1

Ensure adequate correctly skilled resource aligned to activities

Ensure staff only aligned to agreed prioritised activities

Identify alternative ways of resourcing portfolio requirements.

All permanent staff in matrix for talent management March 06.

Contract staff with skill groups categorised by end June 06.

Review process for skills update in place June 06

All DxIx staff familiar with WID process.

WID process becomes pre-cursor for Planview entries.

Staff allocated 90% in Planview by June 06.

Staff to contract ratio increased by 10% in Scientific Platform - current baseline across services 30%.

5. F3

Gain revenue savings from contractor conversions

Achieve 2 contractor conversion by end 2006

6. PR1

Improve Science Desk and DATA services following vision of science based support and operational efficiency.

Benchmark services to demonstrate improvement areas.

Possible Global Lead Role - Scientific Support Centre

PR2

Ensure retention of all services until handover to the new organisation takes effect.

Allow change facilitators to assist with change implementation, feed into change models and operating plans.

PR3

Work with the change team to ensure clarity of operating procedures and articulation of these to customers

PR4

Work with the capability development plans, ensuring key capabilities for the delivery of services are identified and evolved.

PR5

Comply with IS Security and Compliance instructions

Understand External influencers and influence to improve delivery to Discovery

Movement to focus on high value activities documented and made visible September 06

Customer feedback received to support transition and acceptance of improvement.

Implement metrics, which support change.

New services support business evolution.

Benchmarks in place for all services and processes in place for review December 06.

No negative impact on business during handover

All teams engaged to some extent in change plans Q2/Q3.

Full understanding of change plan - where activities move to and where staff will be repositioned.

Mutual support behaviours visible.

Operating processes are visible July 06

For key capabilities by end Q2

Zero negative impact on Discovery Information & our Customers.

Compliance Plan in place Q3, Quality instructions according to QMF principles in place Q3.

7. P2

Complete the change capability training programme (LEARN IT)

Build on and maintain the learning from the programme (BUILD ON IT)

Raise awareness of change concepts and the activities and offerings of the change programme.

Support individuals during change through coaching.

Develop a change facilitation operating model

Participate in each of the components of the change capability training programme

Training programme to be completed by end July 2006.

Individuals maintain a reflective learning log which identifies learning situations and behavioural changes required

Measure on individual basis through Optimising Performance.

Formulate buddy partnerships with at least one individual on the programme to maintain learning outside of the programme - action centred learning (optional)

Actively seek out opportunities to apply change learning

All change agents can cite 2 examples in 2006

Change materials created, communicated and readily available by end Q2.

o about programme activities and services

o about change concepts

o about Change Capability processes

Encourage attendance on Learning A Little Bit About change training events

o >10 people in department attend course in 2006

Canvas people’s awareness of change every 6 months (e.g. by talking to people, e-mail, survey or appointed reference group).

A coaching service/surgery is available

Change agents are used across the department

Requests for coaching are fully satisfied

Determine what we can offer, List of services in place by end Q2

Determine how to capture demand, Demand process in place by end Q2

Establish delivery processes, Processes in place by end Q2

8. P2

Align skills to portfolio need and build skills to fill gaps.

P3

Understand and behave in accordance to AZ values and behaviours

Skills matrix in place per capability- each staff member with IDP. Plan to bridge gap in place July 2006

Visibility of these within working environment, staff relate to them and can quote them June 2006

9. PR5

All staff:

To have no accidents and incidents. All staff to demonstrate awareness of the incident reporting procedure

To create a culture where SHE considerations are integrated into all site activities. Implement the well-being programme

To economise on the use of natural resources and work to minimise our impact on the environment. Achieve a further 80% reduction in electrical DSE left switched on outside normal working hours.

To improve awareness and personal management of SHE issues by assimilating and taking action on all site and departmental SHE communications.

To complete the Occupational Road Risk e-learning package, once available in Q4

(If regular home-worker) to complete a Home Working Risk Assessment (on SHE Web site), and discuss with their line manager.

Additionally for all people managers:

Maintain up to date SHE managers’ training

Monitor the delivery of the staff SHE objectives

Actively manage pressure on all individuals to avoid stress-related performance issues or illness

Perform risk assessments where required

Report at least 2 quality SHE incident reports (”near misses”).

All staff to spend at least 20 minutes away from their desk every workday lunch time.

Switch off DSE equipment when not being used

Carry out DSE assessment on own workstation(s)

Demonstrate actions taken in all three areas of S, H & E.

Complete a Self-Assessment Audit during 2006.

No infringements of behavioural SHE rules, e.g. driving behaviours

Occupational Road Risk completed before the end of the year, and resulting required actions planned

Achievement of the above measures within own group/team

Produce quarterly report of SHE performance (incl. incident reporting) for group/team

Early engagement with Occupational Health if issues arise

Interim Review Comments:

Successes; Difficulties; Extra work achieved; Business impact; Organisational Behaviours; Leadership Capabilities; Customer feedback; Learning; What could be done better and how? Feedback to Manager; Objectives withdrawn/changed; Is progress on track to meet Objectives; How is this performance currently viewed using ratings framework? Update this box at least 6-monthly in Interim review meetings.