© Michael Selby, 2010, , 415.446.5531 The Company-Wide Balanced ScoreCard Demo Navigation features...

© Michael Selby, 2010, www.scorecardpartners.com, 415.446.5531

The Company-Wide Balanced ScoreCard

DemoNavigation features work only in Slide Show (full screen) mode. If you are in Normal View, go to View, Slide Show

(In Office 2007, click Slide Show, From Beginning). Then click the Menu Button.

Note: To escape Slide Show, hit the Escape Key

Menu


ScoreCard Demo Menu:

1. What is a Balanced ScoreCard?

2. ScoreCard Demo

3. How to Choose the Right Metrics:A. Strategy MappingB. Achilles Heel AnalysisC. Strategic Employee Analysis

4. ScoreCard Development Roadmap

5. “The Plumbing”: Technical Issues

6. Contact Us


A Balanced ScoreCard is both a Tool and a Process:

The Tool: Your ScoreCard reports all key drivers of your strategic success. It lets you know if performance in each critical area is at the level you expect, and shows you trends for each major business driver.

The Process: For the Exec Team, the ScoreCard is the centerpiece of your month-end review process. It is also used with your extended management team, employees, and Board to educate them on key performance issues.

Menu

What is a Balanced ScoreCard?


FinancialFinancial Market/CustomersMarket/Customers

Operational ExcellenceOperational Excellence

BayMed Balanced BayMed Balanced ScoreCardScoreCard

People & CulturePeople & Culture

112 112

# 112.2# 112.1# 112

Gross Margin

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

### 4864

# 5,000# 4,864# ###

FreeCash FlowYTD in $K

Tgt.>

Act.

27 27

# 27.0# 27.4# 27

EBITDA

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

138 138

# 137.3# 137.5# 138

Overall Revenue YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

25 25

# 24.1# 25.5# 25

Standard vs. Actual Costs

In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

34 34

# 33.0# 34.0# 34

Inventory On Hand

In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

0 0

0 10.0%0 11.0%0 0

Repeat Bsns: Rev. Growth

YOY In %

Tgt.>

Act.

15

15

# 12# 15# 15

New Business Partnerships

# Viable (Grn & Yel)

Tgt.

Act

0 0

0 10.0%0 10.4%0 0

Rev. Growth New Customers

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

31 31

# 27.10# 30.74# 31

New Product Rev. Growth

In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

32 32

# 20# 32# 32

Customer Complaints

In #'s

Tgt.<

Act.

4 4

4 4.004 3.944 4

Customer Satisfaction5 Point Scale

Tgt.>

Act.

53 53

# 60.0# 53.3# 53

Marketing Lead Value/Cost

Ratio

Tgt.>

Act.

42 42

# 41.5# 42.4# 42

Sales Quota Performance

QTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

130 130

# 22# 130# 130

R&D Days SlippageIn # Days

Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 85%1 89.4%1 1

Call Cntr Issues

Resolvd 1st CallIn %

Tgt.>

Act.

1 1

1 90.0%1 88.1%1 1

On-Time Shipments

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4 4

4 4.54 3.84 4

Raw Materials and OEM

Inventory Turns

Tgt.>

Act.

0 0

0 10%0 10.4%0 0

Cost of Quality

As % of COGS

Tgt.<

Act.

774 774

# 769# 774# 774

Headcount Snapshot

# @ Month End

Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 90%1 74%1 1

Incentive Pay Strategic EE's 30% Over Base

Tgt.>

Act.

7 7

7 07 57 7

Product Dvpt Team InitiativeAvg. Days Late

Tgt.<

Act.

0 0

0 25.0%0 18.6%0 0

Internal Mobility

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4.02

4

4 4.004 4.024 4

New Hire Survey

5 Point Scale

Tgt.

Act

4 4

4 3.774 3.674 4

Pulse Survey Last 4 Surveys

5 Pt. Scale

Tgt.>

Act.

Menu

This is the ScoreCard Dashboard of our hypothetical BayMed Products company. Each of the Red/Yellow/Green Icons describes some measure of performance. Click on an Icon to take you to its corresponding Drill Down Slide. Once there, click on “Dashboard” to return. Go ahead, try clicking the green “Overall Revenue” Icon in the upper left of the screen. Then click “Dashboard” to return.

© Michael Selby, 2010, www.scorecardpartners.com, 415.446.5531 Dashboard

Products Svcs/OEM

YOY $M 9.3 4.5

Plan 25.3 26.3 27.5 28.5 29.7 30.7 31.8 32.8 33.9 34.9 36.0 37.0 YOY % 11.3% 10.8%

Revenue YTD, through May, 2010

Overall Revenue by Month

16.915.6

19.417.7

21.5

8.38.9

9.010.1

10.025.324.5

28.4 27.9

31.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 Dec-10

Re

ve

nu

e in

$M

Products Services/OEM Total Plan

Revenue Mix, YTD

91.2 92.081.9

46.3 45.3

41.8

137.5 137.3

123.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

YTD '10 YTD Plan YTD '09

Re

ve

nu

e $

M

Products Svcs/OEM






112 112

# 112.2# 112.1# 112

Gross Margin

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

### 4864

# 5,000# 4,864# ###


Tgt.>

Act.

27 27

# 27.0# 27.4# 27

EBITDA

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

138 138

# 137.3# 137.5# 138


Tgt.>

Act.

25 25

# 24.1# 25.5# 25


In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

34 34

# 33.0# 34.0# 34

Inventory On Hand

In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

Menu

The Dashboard divides into 4 quadrants, or “perspectives”. The Financial perspective reports Revenues, Gross Margins, EBITDA, Operating Expense, Net Operating Income, Free Cash Flow, and any other Financial Data you choose. (hit spacebar)






0 0

0 10.0%0 11.0%0 0


YOY In %

Tgt.>

Act.

15

15

# 12# 15# 15



Tgt.

Act

0 0

0 10.0%0 10.4%0 0


In %

Tgt.>

Act.

31 31

# 27.10# 30.74# 31


In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

32 32

# 20# 32# 32

Customer Complaints

In #'s

Tgt.<

Act.

4 4

4 4.004 3.944 4


Tgt.>

Act.

Menu

The “Market/Customers” perspective reports repeat business with existing customers, new customers, new business partners, how recent releases are performing, customer complaints and customer satisfaction. (hit spacebar)






53 53

# 60.0# 53.3# 53


Ratio

Tgt.>

Act.

42 42

# 41.5# 42.4# 42


QTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

130 130

# 22# 130# 130


Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 85%1 89.4%1 1

Call Cntr Issues


Tgt.>

Act.

1 1

1 90.0%1 88.1%1 1

On-Time Shipments

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4 4

4 4.54 3.84 4


Inventory Turns

Tgt.>

Act.

0 0

0 10%0 10.4%0 0

Cost of Quality

As % of COGS

Tgt.<

Act.

Menu

“Operational Excellence” reports the core competencies which you have to execute well to win customer loyalty. Core Competencies vary by company and industry. “BayMed” tracks sales execution, marketing effectiveness, product development speed, manufacturing and customer support excellence. (hit spacebar)






774 774

# 769# 774# 774

Headcount Snapshot

# @ Month End

Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 90%1 74%1 1


Tgt.>

Act.

7 7

7 07 57 7


Tgt.<

Act.

0 0

0 25.0%0 18.6%0 0

Internal Mobility

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4.02

4

4 4.004 4.024 4

New Hire Survey

5 Point Scale

Tgt.

Act

4 4

4 3.774 3.674 4


5 Pt. Scale

Tgt.>

Act.

Menu

“People & Culture” looks at the workforce, reporting workforce growth, internal mobility and competency development, strategically vital employees, hiring quality, and employee engagement. (Hit spacebar)






112 112

# 112.2# 112.1# 112

Gross Margin

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

### 4864

# 5,000# 4,864# ###


Tgt.>

Act.

27 27

# 27.0# 27.4# 27

EBITDA

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

138 138

# 137.3# 137.5# 138


Tgt.>

Act.

25 25

# 24.1# 25.5# 25


In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

34 34

# 33.0# 34.0# 34

Inventory On Hand

In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

0 0

0 10.0%0 11.0%0 0


YOY In %

Tgt.>

Act.

15

15

# 12# 15# 15



Tgt.

Act

0 0

0 10.0%0 10.4%0 0


In %

Tgt.>

Act.

31 31

# 27.10# 30.74# 31


In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

32 32

# 20# 32# 32

Customer Complaints

In #'s

Tgt.<

Act.

4 4

4 4.004 3.944 4


Tgt.>

Act.

53 53

# 60.0# 53.3# 53


Ratio

Tgt.>

Act.

42 42

# 41.5# 42.4# 42


QTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

130 130

# 22# 130# 130


Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 85%1 89.4%1 1

Call Cntr Issues


Tgt.>

Act.

1 1

1 90.0%1 88.1%1 1

On-Time Shipments

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4 4

4 4.54 3.84 4


Inventory Turns

Tgt.>

Act.

0 0

0 10%0 10.4%0 0

Cost of Quality

As % of COGS

Tgt.<

Act.

774 774

# 769# 774# 774

Headcount Snapshot

# @ Month End

Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 90%1 74%1 1


Tgt.>

Act.

7 7

7 07 57 7


Tgt.<

Act.

0 0

0 25.0%0 18.6%0 0

Internal Mobility

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4.02

4

4 4.004 4.024 4

New Hire Survey

5 Point Scale

Tgt.

Act

4 4

4 3.774 3.674 4


5 Pt. Scale

Tgt.>

Act.

Menu

Now you get to have some fun. Navigate your own way through the ScoreCard by clicking on any Dashboard Icon that interests you. When you are complete, click “Menu” for other options.






112 112

# 112.2# 112.1# 112

Gross Margin

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

### 4864

# 5,000# 4,864# ###


Tgt.>

Act.

27 27

# 27.0# 27.4# 27

EBITDA

YTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

138 138

# 137.3# 137.5# 138


Tgt.>

Act.

25 25

# 24.1# 25.5# 25


In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

34 34

# 33.0# 34.0# 34

Inventory On Hand

In $M

Tgt.<

Act.

0 0

0 10.0%0 11.0%0 0


YOY In %

Tgt.>

Act.

15

15

# 12# 15# 15



Tgt.

Act

0 0

0 10.0%0 10.4%0 0


In %

Tgt.>

Act.

31 31

# 27.10# 30.74# 31


In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

32 32

# 20# 32# 32

Customer Complaints

In #'s

Tgt.<

Act.

4 4

4 4.004 3.944 4


Tgt.>

Act.

53 53

# 60.0# 53.3# 53


Ratio

Tgt.>

Act.

42 42

# 41.5# 42.4# 42


QTD In $M

Tgt.>

Act.

130 130

# 22# 130# 130


Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 85%1 89.4%1 1

Call Cntr Issues


Tgt.>

Act.

1 1

1 90.0%1 88.1%1 1

On-Time Shipments

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4 4

4 4.54 3.84 4


Inventory Turns

Tgt.>

Act.

0 0

0 10%0 10.4%0 0

Cost of Quality

As % of COGS

Tgt.<

Act.

774 774

# 769# 774# 774

Headcount Snapshot

# @ Month End

Tgt.<

Act.

1 1

1 90%1 74%1 1


Tgt.>

Act.

7 7

7 07 57 7


Tgt.<

Act.

0 0

0 25.0%0 18.6%0 0

Internal Mobility

In %

Tgt.>

Act.

4.02

4

4 4.004 4.024 4

New Hire Survey

5 Point Scale

Tgt.

Act

4 4

4 3.774 3.674 4


5 Pt. Scale

Tgt.>

Act.

Menu


Financial Financial MetricsMetrics

DashboardMenu

© Michael Selby, 2010, www.scorecardpartners.com, 415.446.5531 Dashboardx Bsns Unitx Region

Products Svcs/OEM

YOY $M 9.3 4.5

Plan 25.3 26.3 27.5 28.5 29.7 30.7 31.8 32.8 33.9 34.9 36.0 37.0 YOY % 11.3% 10.8%

Revenue YTD, through May, 2010

Overall Revenue by Month

16.915.6

19.417.7

21.5

8.38.9

9.010.1

10.025.324.5

28.4 27.9

31.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 Dec-10

Re

ve

nu

e in

$M

Products Services/OEM Total Plan

Revenue Mix, YTD

91.2 92.081.9

46.3 45.3

41.8

137.5 137.3

123.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

YTD '10 YTD Plan YTD '09

Re

ve

nu

e $

M

Products Svcs/OEM

Overall Revenues are broken into Products and Services/OEM. Total Revenues appear above the stacked bars. In the chart on the right, we compare YTD Revenues This Year vs. Last and vs. Plan. You can see Revenues by Business Unit or Region by clicking the buttons at the bottom. (click this box to make it disappear)

© Michael Selby, 2010, www.scorecardpartners.com, 415.446.5531 DashboardOverallx Region

Revenue by Business Unit, through May, 2010

YTD Actual 55.02 YTD Plan 54.83 Annual Plan 149.59 YTD Actual 33.65 YTD Plan 36.20 Annual Plan 98.77

YTD Actual 30.36 YTD Plan 27.77 Annual Plan 75.76 YTD Actual 50.6018.51 YTD Plan 18.54 Annual Plan

Multi-Plex

10.28.6

12.110.3

13.8

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual Plan

BayMed Products

6.3 6.5 6.8 6.9 7.2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual Plan

BayMed Services

5.5 5.46.1 6.4

6.9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual Plan

OEM Business

3.34.0

3.44.2

3.6

0

1

2

3

4

5

6


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual PlanBayMed is structured into 4 Business Units: 2 major product groups, a Consulting Services group, and an OEM business. Here you see Revenues from each unit, vs. each Business Unit’s Plan. (click this box to make it disappear)

© Michael Selby, 2010, www.scorecardpartners.com, 415.446.5531 Dashboardx Bsns UnitOverall

30.5811.00 YTD Plan 11.24 Annual Plan

40.95 Annual Plan 111.82

YTD Actual 26.41 YTD Plan 30.22 Annual Plan 82.44 YTD Actual

Revenue by Region, through May, 2010

YTD Actual 58.87 YTD Plan 54.94 Annual Plan 149.89 YTD Actual 41.26 YTD Plan

North America

10.8 10.512.2 11.9

13.5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual Plan

Europe

7.6 7.48.5 8.4

9.4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual Plan

Asia Pacific

4.9 4.75.5 5.3

6.0

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual Plan

Rest of World

2.0 2.02.3 2.2

2.5

0

1

1

2

2

3

3

4


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual Plan

By region, we can see that our North American and European business is ahead of Plan, and that Asia Pacific and Rest of World are behind Plan. (click this box to make it disappear)


Rev $M 70.6 76.7 78.6 79.7 78.2 59.3 Actual $M 43.0 47.1 48.6 49.6 48.4 36.3COS $M 13.5 15.3 16.3 17.2 15.0 10.4 Plan $M 42.8 46.3 47.8 48.9 48.3 36.2

Gross Margin and Operating Expense, through May, 2010

Gross Margin

57.061.4 62.2 62.5 63.2

48.9

80.8%80.0%

79.2%78.4%

80.8%

82.4%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Q1,'09 Q2,'09 Q3,'09 Q4,'09 Q1,'10 Q2,'10 Q3,'10 Q4,'10

Gro

ss

Ma

rgin

in $

M

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

Gro

ss

Ma

rgin

%

GM $M GM % GM % Plan

Operating Expense

100.5%

101.6% 101.6%101.4%

100.2%100.3%

96%

98%

100%

102%

104%

Q1,'09 Q2,'09 Q3,'09 Q4,'09 Q1,'10 Q2,'10 Q3,'10 Q4,'10

Op

Ex

as

% o

f P

lan

OpEx as % of Plan Plan = 100%

S er vices

0

1

1

Q1 ,'1 0

#R E F ! #R E F !

OE M

0

1

1

Q1 ,'1 0

#R E F ! #R E F !

Menu

We now begin looking at the drivers of profitability, beginning with Gross Margins (in $M and in %) and OpEx. The ScoreCard reveals that OpEx has been consistently over Plan, but has recently improved. (click to disappear)


R&D MftgSales/Mktg

Cust.Sppt.

G&A R&D MftgSales/Mktg

Cust.Sppt.

G&A

Var $K (327) 813 (277) (219) 124 (348) 971 (281) (224) 93

QTD YTD

Op Ex by Department and EBITDA, through May, 2010

EBITDA

14.0 14.313.7

12.9

14.8

12.6

19.9%

18.6%

17.4%

16.1%

18.9%

21.2%

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Q1,'09 Q2,'09 Q3,'09 Q4,'09 Q1,'10 Q2,'10 Q3,'10 Q4,'10

EB

ITD

A in

$M

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

EB

ITD

A %

Actual EBITDA % Plan %

OpEx by Department

-6.4%

3.9%

-6.8%

-8.5%

3.7%

-2.9%

2.0%

-3.0%

-3.8%

1.2%

-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

Op

Ex

as %

of

Pla

n

Variance %

S er vices

0

1

1

Q1 ,'1 0

#R E F ! #R E F !

OE M

0

1

1

Q1 ,'1 0

#R E F ! #R E F !

DashboardMenu

Here we break out OpEx by Department, and also show EBITDA. We can see that the problems with OpEx come from Mftg and G&A, and that nevertheless EBITDA is above Plan. (click to disappear)


Q1'09 Q2'09 Q3'09 Q4'09 Q1,'10 Q2,'10 Q3,'10 Q4,'10 Q1'09 Q2'09 Q3'09 Q4'09 Q1,'10 Q2,'10 Q3,'10 Q4,'10 Q1'09 Q2'09 Q3'09 Q4'09 Q1,'10 Q2,'10 Q3,'10 Q4,'10

YTD Actual $M 4.12 4.86 YTD Actual $M 3.01 3.57 YTD Actual $M 9.14 16.03YTD Δ vs. Plan 37% -3% YTD Δ vs. Plan 43% 2% YTD Δ vs. Plan 2% 7%

Free Cash Flow, through May, 2010Free Cash Flow

2.31

1.38

2.54

1.51

4.12

0.75

2.00

3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

Fre

e C

ash

Flo

w $

M

Actual $M QTD Plan Q Plan $

Change in Working Capital

1.68

0.99

1.85

1.09

3.01

0.56

1.40

2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Ch

ang

e in

Wo

rkin

g C

apit

al $

M


Capital Expenditure

2.39 2.51 2.63 2.76

9.14

6.88

6.00

9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Cap

ital

Exp

end

itu

re $

M


Inventory

1.88 1.86 1.84 1.82 1.77 1.73

1.80 1.79 1.80 1.79

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

Inve

nto

ry $

M

Actual $M Plan

Accounts Receivable

0.66 0.67 0.68 0.68 0.70 0.72

0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Acc

ou

nts

Rec

eiva

ble

$M

Actual $M Plan

Accounts Payable

0.38 0.37 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.35

0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

Acc

ou

nts

Pay

able

$M

Actual $M Plan

DashboardMenu

Cash Flow is critical to any business. Tracking it’s key drivers helps ensure it’s control. (click to disappear)


Model Cost Actual Cost Gain(Loss) Model Cost Actual Cost Gain(Loss) Model Cost Actual Cost Gain(Loss) Model Cost Actual Cost Gain(Loss)

Overhead 1,135,033 1,248,536 -113,503 713,730 785,103 -71,373 288,859 317,745 -28,886 271,746 298,921 -27,175

Indirect Labor 2,837,582 2,837,582 0 1,855,699 1,784,326 71,373 808,805 722,147 86,658 625,017 625,017 0Material 5,107,647 6,015,674 -908,026 3,425,906 3,425,906 0 1,494,605 1,440,256 54,349Direct Labor 2,270,066 2,270,066 0 1,141,969 1,570,207 -428,238 1,790,925 1,790,925 0 326,096 326,096 0COGS T'tl 11,350,328 12,371,857 -1,021,529 7,137,304 7,565,542 -428,238 2,888,589 2,830,817 57,772 2,717,464 2,690,289 27,175

Standard Vs. Actual Costs by Business Unit, YTD through May, 2010

Multiplexes BayMed Products BayMed Services OEM

S er vices

0

1

1

Q1 ,'1 0

#R E F ! #R E F !

OE M

0

1

1

Q1 ,'1 0

#R E F ! #R E F !

20% 20.0%16%

22.0%

62% 62.0%

12% 12%

45%53.0%

48%

48.0%

55% 53%

25%

25.0%

26%

25.0%

28% 25.0%23%

23%

10%

11.0%

10%

11.0%

10%11.0%

10% 11%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Model Actual Model Actual Model Actual Model Actual

% o

f C

OG

S

Direct Labor Material Indirect Labor Overhead 100% Line

DashboardMenu

For each of our Business Units, we have a cost model, which, if met, helps ensure profitability. This chart helps us understand the key drivers of Cost of Sales. (click to disappear)


18.12 17.50 10.42 10.00 5.49 5.50Current Value $M Plan Value $M

$ Value of Inventory through May, 2010

Current Value $M Plan Value $M Current Value $M Plan Value $M

BayMed Products BU

5.6 5.8 6.0 6.2 6.0

2.62.7

2.8 2.8 2.8

1.51.5

1.6 1.6 1.6

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20


Val

ue

in $

M

MultiPlex BU

11.211.712.111.911.8

3.73.9

4.14.0 4.0

2.3

2.4

2.52.4 2.4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20


Val

ue

in $

M

OEM BU

1.6 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.7

1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1

2.72.9 2.8 2.7 2.7

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

J F M A M J J A S O N DV

alu

e in

$M

Finished Goods Work In Process Raw Materials 2009

DashboardMenu

This final slide in our Finance quadrant helps us understand how well we are controlling inventory costs. While our OEM inventory levels are at Plan, we are over our cost targets in both the MultiPlex and Products BU’s. (click to disappear)


Customer/ Customer/ Market Market MetricsMetrics

DashboardMenu


$K

Hosp Corp Amer

Tenet Health Corp

Cath Health

Init.

Sutter Health

Methodist

Hosp

Cath HC

West

Univ HC Svcs

Kindrd HC

Comm Hth

Systms

Saint Brnbs

HC

Sentara Life-Point

Select Medical

Advnts Health

Kaiser Perm

Sanfrd Health

Kettrng HC Net

YTD '09 1,779 1,816 1,623 1,421 1,466 1,900 1,329 851 1,170 1,225 1,036 845 821 884 665 443 40% Change 3.3% -3.2% 6.9% 12.2% 4.5% -19.8% 3.3% 53.7% 8.3% -4.4% 4.5% 17.7% 3.3% -9.9% 8.3% 22.9% 4.5%

$K

Hosp Corp Amer

Tenet Health Corp

Cath Health

Init.

Sutter Health

Kaiser Perm

Cath HC

West

Univ HC Svcs

Sentara Life-Point

Methodist

Hosp

Colin Med

Criti-kon

Datex Ohmed

Med-tronic

Siemns Med.

YTD '09 8,037 4,048 4,929 4,465 4,143 4,018 4,804 3,762 3,576 2,257 2,760 2,500 2,320 1,500 840% Change 3.7% 63.1% 21.7% 12.0% -4.4% -17.0% 35.6% 21.0% 1.3% 13.9% 20.7% 1.5% -5.3% 11.1% 20.8%

YTD Repeat Business YOY, through May, 2010

BayMed Products

1,837 1,757 1,734 1,595 1,532 1,525 1,373 1,307 1,267 1,171 1,083 995 848 797 720 545 4490

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

YT

D R

even

ue

in $

KYTD May, '10 YTD May, '09

8,3376,603 6,001

5,0023,962 3,334

6,5134,554 3,621

2,571 3,332 2,537 2,197 1,666 1,0150

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

YT

D R

even

ue

in $

K

Multi-Plex OEMBayMed Services

DashboardMenu

Key to revenue growth is repeat business with existing customers. Here we track Year Over Year sales to our top customers in each of our 4 Business Units. (click to disappear)


Customer

Colin Med

Bair-Hugger

Bovie DetectoSiemns

Med.Respir-onics

DragerTutt-

nauerZoll

MedicalSkytron

P. Bennett

Mos Tenure 17 13 10 7 17 13 10 10 17 13 101H vs 2H 36.5% -2.6% -50.4% 35.8% 5.1% -44.1% -4.1% 45.6% -26.2% -3.5% 45.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Customer

Zeiss Medical

NellcorMar-

quetteSteris Penlon Phillips Pedigo Maquet Abaxis AFGA Almana

APC Cardio

BioMed Systems

Mos Tenure 17 13 10 7 13 10 7 17 13 10 17 131H vs 2H 5.1% -3.0% 54.8% -32.7% 11.2% -5.3% 56.4% 0.0% -33.7% 55.0% -1.6% 0.0% 58.9% 14.9% -40.6% 0.0%

Major New Business Revenues, through May, 2010(for Customers 6-18 Months Tenure; 1st Half vs. Last Half of Tenure)

MultiPlex OEMBioMed Services

BayMed Products

143

108

87

55

118

95

72 67

94

7356

195

106

43

74

124

5369

98

69 7181

0

50

100

150

200

250

Rev

enu

e in

$K

1st half 2nd half

35

496

320

134

354

242

160 144

298

217

121

229

157

36

481 495

90

394

229250

95

461

213193

263

93

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Rev

enu

e in

$K

DashboardMenu

Also key to growth is our ability to attract, and then grow, business with new customers. Here we look at our largest new customers (6-18 months old), comparing revenues from the first half of their tenure to the last half. Hopefully, it’s growing! (click to disappear)


Impact 2010Partner/Product Name

OwnerType of Oppy

Plan 2010 $K

Forecast 2010 $K

Oppy >2010 $K

Status

Colin Med OEM Ptnr 2,147 2,147 >$10,000 y

MPX-017 y

Critikon Joint Vntur 1,500 1,500 7,500 y

Research Agreement y

Datex Ohmed Acquire 40 1,160 >$10,000 g

RC-7000 g

Med-tronic Joint Vntur 900 900 3,500 g

Immuno-B4 g

Siemns Med. OEM Ptnr 500 500 >$10,000 y

Dialysis MiniLab y

Respironics IP Purchase 750 750 >$20,000 y

RC-7000 y

Valley Lab IP Purchase 200 200 >$5,000 y

MPX-023 y

Welch Allyn Joint Vntur 700 1,000 >$15,000 y

P2 y

Zoll Medical OEM Ptnr 4,300 4,300 >$15,000 y

Immuno-B4 y

Zeiss Medical Acquire >$10,000 r

Dialysis MiniLab r

Penlon Medical Joint Vntur >$10,000 y

MPX-032 y

Ritter-Midmark OEM Ptnr >$10,000 r

Immuno-B4 r

HP IP Purchase >$5,000 y

RC-7000 y

Nellcor Acquire >$20,000 g

Agreement g

Marquette Joint Vntur >$10,000 g

Multiple projects g

Baxter OEM Ptnr >$10,000 g

MPX-047 g

Berchtold Acquire >$30,000 g

Multiple projects g

Passed Ops committee. Update timelines in proposal and proceed through supply chain

Bill J

New Business Partnership Opportunities, through May, '10

Waiting for feedback on our proposal - once it is in, move to contract on basis of current draftSent draft with sections marked that need to be changed. Chasing feedback

Awaiting feedback on contract (delay because Corp Legal concerned)

Comments

Alison P

Bill J

Aaron P

Update proposal and identify the best people at Siemens to present it to

Prepare proposal for order and present once data from initial QA are available (July)Meet with new person at Valley

Meet with Kyle at Welcy Allyn to get clarity of situation and near term demand.Start pushing for new order in July to have in place for seamless transition into Sept

Send multiple proposals and follow up

Stay close for expected end of qualification end of May

Close contract by mid June

Discussion on hold until MSA is signed (expected by end of June at the very latest)Follow up on term sheet sent end of April and on status of QA results in June

On hold - follow up with R-M now that Immunox system was published to still be in R-M pipelineFollow up on opportunity and press release

Opportunity Defined (RFP)

Proposal Delivered

Workplan/ Term Sheet Agreed On

Draft Agreement

Sent

Contract Signed

Aaron P

Bill J

Close contract by mid June

Brian S

Alison P

Alison P

Aaron P

Aaron P

Bill J

Future Impact

Alison P

Brian S

Brian S

Bill J

Alison P

3 Mos Ago Current Month

DashboardMenu

Key to BayMed’s success are Business Partnerships – in product development, in shared IP, as OEM partners, and as possible acquisitions. Here we track progress, beginning with defining the opportunity, and ending with a signed contract. (click to disappear)


Revenue from Targeted New Products, through May, 2010

MPX-017

1.741.81

1.921.972.06

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Actual $M Target $M

RC-7000

0.780.810.860.880.92

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

2

2


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Dialysis MiniLab

1.121.17

1.241.271.33

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

2


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Immuno-B4

0.770.81

0.85 0.870.92

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Boxter A5

0.810.84

0.890.920.96

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2


Rev

enu

e in

$M

Silvon 2

0.410.42

0.450.460.48

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7


Rev

enu

e in

$M

DashboardMenu

Every product development company has revenue hopes for it’s new releases. Do these releases grow according to plan? This chart tells us how realistic our revenue assumptions were. (click to disappear)


Shpmnt Accuracy 6 Mos

2 Mos

Shpmnt Timing 6 Mos

2 Mos

Eqpt Perfrmance 6 Mos

2 Mos

Documentation 6 Mos

2 Mos

Pricing 6 Mos

2 Mos

Sales Honesty 6 Mos

2 Mos

Cust. Service 6 Mos

2 Mos

Tech Support 6 Mos

2 Mos

32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Customer Complaints, Through May, 2010

Overall, by Month

18

20

18

20

32

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


# o

f C

om

pla

ints

Total Target < 20

By Category

6%

8%

2%

0%

11%

12%

13%

12%

23%

27%

9%

12%

34%

27%

2%

4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Category as % of Total

DashboardMenu

Of course, BayMed tries to keep major customer complaints to a minimum. Here we see not only the raw numbers, but complaints by type, and whether each type is getting worse or better. (click to disappear)


Order Accuracy

Order Speed Arrival Condition

Ease of SetUp

Clear Documntat'n

Call Center Access

Issue Resolved

Customer Courtesy

Overall Functioning

Overall Experience

Order Accuracy

Order Speed Arrival Condition

Installation Speed

Clear Documntat'n

Call Center Access

Issue Resolved

Installer Courtesy

Overall Functioning

Overall Experience

Customer Satisfaction Ratings Through May., '10

Registration Card Surveys

Overall Rating: 3.94 # Responses Last 3 Months: 54

New Installations

Overall Rating: 3.75 # Responses Last 3 Months: 14

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

C al l V ol umes

0

1

1

2

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

3.95

4.02

3.70

3.90

4.24

4.20

3.95

4.30

3.17

3.30

3.95

4.02

3.70

3.90

4.24

4.20

3.95

3.17

3.30

4.30

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Previous 3 Months Most Recent 3 Month Target: 4.00

3 .0

3 .5

4 .0

4 .5

5 .0

3.75

3.82

3.52

3.71

4.03

3.99

3.75

4.09

3.01

3.14

3.75

3.82

3.52

3.71

4.03

3.99

3.75

3.01

3.14

4.09

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

3 .0

3 .5

4 .0

4 .5

5 .0

DashboardMenu

BayMed tracks customer satisfaction in two ways: (1) When customers return registration cards for new products they have purchased, and (2) When our installation engineers install major new equipment. We compare the most recent 3 months to the previous 3 to see if we’re improving. (click to disappear)


Operational Operational Excellence Excellence

MetricsMetrics

DashboardMenu


NoAm-East

NoAm-Cntrl

NoAm-West

Latin Amer.

EUR-West

EUR-East

East Asia ROW Model

NoAm-East

NoAm-Cntrl

NoAm-West

Latin Amer.

EUR-West

EUR-East

East Asia ROW

NoAm-East

NoAm-Cntrl

NoAm-West

Latin Amer.

EUR-West

EUR-East

East Asia ROW

Total $M 163 155 185 86 178 105 195 90 T'tl $M 28.3 23.9 25.2 13.2 18.1 7.7 21.5 7.4

NoAm-East

NoAm-Cntrl

NoAm-West

Latin Amer.

EUR-West

EUR-East

East Asia ROW Model

NoAm-East

NoAm-Cntrl

NoAm-West

Latin Amer.

EUR-West

EUR-East

East Asia ROW

112% 109% 104% 107% 94% 85% 95% 88%

28.8%

CTW Resellers

Sond Inc

Radive GmbH

3,728,876

3,442,039

3,155,202

2,868,366

22.0%

17.0%

Sales Effectiveness, through May, 2010

% QTD Target

Resellers

Name YTD Revenue

% House Leads Closed

TriStar 6,310,405

Xilent GmbH

5,449,895

2,294,693

1,434,183

Appenware

Cypron Design

Inets Corp

28.0%

20.0%

18.0%

27.0%

24.0%

Gesundbnd GmbH 2,390,387 Curacen 2,027,770 Kaiser Perm 1,390,0363,028,121ChinLauTop Deals Pending

Catholic HC West 2,789,372 2,249,382 TulagenMethodist HC 2,549,039

HelioArcSW Ministries AtlantaCare

1,249,0311,187,0782,187,429

Brazilen LTDPramed

1,789,0211,548,688

Pipeline (Sales Activity)

23.6 21.0 24.911.8 17.0 7.9 18.4 6.6

15.0 12.3 12.9

6.612.3

4.812.0

5.5

12.6 11.714.7

6.810.6

6.6

13.8

4.9

28.423.1

29.5

16.7

27.2

16.4

38.0

13.7

83.486.7

102.8

44.4

110.5

69.6

112.7

59.6

0

50

100

150

200

In $

M

Closed-6 Mo. Written Quote Sales AnalysisQualified Leads Raw Leads

Conversion Rates (Sales Efficiency)

52% 53% 52% 49% 51% 45% 40% 45% 42%

82% 85% 83% 80% 81%72%

66%73% 68%

62% 60% 58%56% 57%

50%45%

51%47%

27% 32% 31%29% 30%

27%24%

27%25%

Co

nv

ers

ion

%

Written Quote Sales AnalysisQualified Leads Raw Leads

Pipeline Value (Sales Effectiveness)

7.9 6.4 6.33.3

5.51.9

5.42.3

5.75.0 5.8

2.8

3.4

1.8

4.6

1.4

7.6

5.86.5

3.9

4.4

2.0

6.4

1.8

7.1

6.76.6

3.1

4.7

2.0

5.1

1.9

28

25

29

14

20

9

22

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

In $

M

Written Quote Sales Analysis Qualified LeadsRaw Leads Target

Quota Performance

8.377.27 8.23

3.995.08

2.12 1.82

5.55

7.476.64

7.89

3.74

5.40

2.49

5.81

2.08

11.8010.49

12.46

5.90

8.52

3.93

9.18

3.28

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

In $

M

QTD Actual QTD Tgt Q-End Target

Revenue by Source

10% 12% 14% 14% 17% 17% 18% 18% 18%

20% 19% 18% 17% 14% 12% 10% 8% 7%

20% 25%33% 40% 47% 53% 58% 65% 69%

50% 44%35% 29% 22% 17% 14% 9% 6%

Co

nve

rsio

n %

SelfGen-New SelfGen-Rpt House-New House-Rpt

DashboardMenu

The top 3 charts track (a) the raw $ value of business in the pipeline, (b) the probability of closing that business based on previous conversion rates, and (c) the resulting “real” pipeline value (a x b). Below, we see quota performance, as well as other key sales data. (click to disappear)


Salivan2

MPX-017

Nov-08 Dec-08

Direct Mail

Replies

Trade Pubs

Replies

Trade Shows

Blast Email

Replies

Web-Direct

Replies

Google AdWord Replies

Direct Mail

Replies

Trade Pubs

Replies

Trade Shows

Blast Email

Replies

0.5 8.4

Prospecting

(Phone)

Referrals from

Partners

Prospecting

(Phone)

Referrals from

Partners

Web-Direct

Replies

Google AdWord Replies

Value $M (# Qual Leads x

Valu/Lead)

Enviro-Lab

RC-7000

Dialysis Minilab

1.8 1.1 2.9 4.04.4 3.8

Silvon 3.5

Product Name

BoxterA3

24 Hr.Tri-Bon

TRS-3010

AsthmaPak

Jul-08 Sep-08

Immuno-B4

Boxter A5

May-09 Jul-09 Aug-09

Marketing Effectiveness, through May, 2010

Sep-08 Nov-08 Feb-09 Apr-09Launch May-08

Lead Generation, Last 3 Mos.

195

69 27123

83 33 56 89

487

248

122

875

321

88155

318

22

55

19

68

22

33

53

44

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

# L

ead

s

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Val

ue/

Qu

al.

Lea

d $

K

# Qualified Leads # Raw Leads Pot. Value/Qual. Lead

Lead Value/Cost Ratio, Last 3 Mos.

.4 1.2 .8 .8 .2 1.1 .9 .4

22.4

55.2

18.7

68.3

21.5

33.1

52.5

44.459

44

23

81

111

30

56

103

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Co

st &

Val

u/Q

ual

ifie

d L

ead

$K

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Rat

io V

alu

e/C

ost

Cost/Qual. Lead Pot. Valu/Qual. Lead

Ratio Actual Ratio Target

Cost Efficiency of Last 12 Product Launches

12.3

8.7

4.5

15.6

13.2

18.7

7.4

5.2

15.3

19.0

7.8

11.3

4.9

2.6 0.9 2.33.4

5.6

2.7 1.4 2.4 2.1 1.73.4

2.53.3

5.0

6.7

3.83.3

2.8

3.8

6.3

9.1

4.5

3.3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Mk

tg S

pe

nd

vs

. R

ev

en

ue

$

M

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Ra

tio

Re

ve

nu

e /

Mk

tg

Sp

en

d

1st 9 Mo. Rev. $M Mkt. Launch Spend Ratio

DashboardMenu

In Marketing, we are interested in # of qualified leads by source, and the ratio between value of each lead and it’s cost. At bottom is a chart showing our most recent 12 product launches, and the ratio between 1st 9 mo. Revenue vs. Marketing launch expense. (click to disappear)


Boxter A7 Orig Launch Current Launch

Feasibility Report

Complete

Phase 2 Approval

Fully Functional Prototype

Regulatory Submissions

Complete

Technical Report

Complete

Phase 3 Approval

Initial Run Passes QA

Test

Transfer Lots Made/Tested

9/15/10 9/15/10

Date Completed 11/1/09 12/15/09 2/15/10 2/28/10 3/31/10 4/15/10 6/30/10 7/31/10

1 Mo. Ago 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0Now 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

Days Late 0 15 14 0 0 0 1000 1000

RC 8000 Orig Launch Current Launch

Feasibility Report

Complete

Phase 2 Approval



Complete

Technical Report

Complete

Phase 3 Approval


Test


11/30/10 12/31/10

Date Completed 11/15/09 12/31/09 3/15/10 4/30/10 5/31/10 5/31/10 8/31/10 10/31/10

1 Mo. Ago 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0Now 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

Days Late 0 0 59 61 46 31 31 31

TRS 3020 Orig Launch Current Launch

Technical Report

Complete

Phase 3 Approval


Test


Design Validt'n Rpt Complete

Phase 4 Approval

Market Pre-Launch

Complete

Device Mstr Record

Complete8/15/10 11/1/10

Date Completed 9/16/09 10/3/09 11/30/09 1/15/10 3/1/10 4/12/10 6/1/10 7/1/10

1 Mo. Ago 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0Now 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

Days Late 2 3 45 75 104 130 120 122

HIV MiniLab Orig Launch Current Launch

Business Case Complete

Product Req'rments

Drafted

Feasibility Report

Complete

Phase 2 Approval



Complete3/15/11 8/15/10

Date Completed 3/1/10 3/1/10 4/15/10 5/1/10 7/1/10 8/15/10

1 Mo. Ago 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0Now 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0

Days Late #N/A #N/A 0 0 0 0 1000 1000

Diabetes AB Orig Launch Current Launch

Design Validt'n Rpt Complete

Phase 4 Approval

Market Pre-Launch

Complete

Device Mstr Record

Complete

Regulatory Approval Received

Phase 5 Approval

1/1/11 1/1/11

Date Completed 10/15/09 12/1/09 1/1/10 3/15/10 4/30/10 5/31/10

1 Mo. Ago 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0Now 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

Days Late 0 0 0 0 0 0 #N/A #N/A

Feasibility Development Transfer and Scale Up

Product Development Schedules, through May 31, 2010

Feasibility Development Transfer and Scale Up

Development Transfer and Scale Up Launch

Feasibility Development

Transfer and Scale Up Launch

Menu

In Engineering, it’s all about meeting our milestones on major products in development. This chart shows recent and upcoming milestones, where we stand now vs. 1 mo. ago, and days early/late for each milestone. (click to disappear)


# Cm't 20 20 25 25 28 # Cm't 220 210 180 100 173# OT 18 17 21 23 25 # OT 214 198 145 89 144

# Cm't 120 120 97 85 115 #K Cm't 453 450 392 275 393# OT 113 100 88 78 103 #K OT 448 405 333 244 345

On-Time Shipments and Service by Business Unit, through May, 2010

YTD OT % 89.8% YTD OT % 90.4%

YTD OT % 88.1% YTD OT % 89.5%

Multiplexes

90.0 85.0 84.0 92.0 89.3

90.0

0

20

40

60

80

100


On

-Tim

e %

BayMed Products

97.3 94.380.6 89.0 83.2

95.0

0

20

40

60

80

100


On

-Tim

e %

OEM

98.9 90.0 84.9 88.7 88.0

90.0

0

20

40

60

80

100


On

-Tim

e %

BayMed Service Contract Milestones

94.283.3 90.7 91.8 89.6

90.0

0

20

40

60

80

100


On

-Tim

e %

Actual Target

DashboardMenu

In Manufacturing, we have three slides. This first slide looks at order fulfillment timeliness: do we meet our delivery commitments? We track both Product Orders as well as Service Contract milestones. (click to disappear)


3.180.12

Net Active Value $M 3.06

Gross Inventory Value $MExcess and Obsolete $M

Gross Inventory Value $M 0.98Excess and Obsolete $M 0.01

Inventory Turns Through May, 2010



Gross Inventory Value $MExcess and Obsolete $M

10.450.48

Raw Materials & OEM

3.0 4.0 3.5 3.8 4.00

1

2

3

4

5


Inve

nto

ry T

urn

sActual Target

Work In Progress

5.0 7.5 6.0 6.7 7.40

2

4

6

8

10

12


Inve

nto

ry T

urn

s

Finished Goods

0.4 0.5 1.0 1.3 1.40.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0


Inve

nto

ry T

urn

s

DashboardMenu

In Manufacturing, we have three slides. This second slide looks at Inventory Turn rates in each of our three “value-add” levels. (click to disappear)


1.150.28 Current Mo ($M) 0.23 YTD ($M)

0.13 YTD ($M) 0.41

Current Mo ($M) 0.04 YTD ($M) 0.21 Current Mo ($M) 0.05 YTD ($M)

YTD ($M) 2.81

Cost of Quality, through May, 2010

Current Mo ($M) 0.68 Current Mo ($M) 0.22 YTD ($M) 0.75 Current Mo ($M)

Total

7.28.9

6.7

9.610.4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Q C

ost

as

% o

f C

OG

S

Actual Target

Sustaining Engineering

1.62.0

1.7

2.7

3.4

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0


Inventory Accuracy

0.50.9

1.21.6

2.1

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5


Scrap

0.9

0.60.5 0.6

0.7

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2


Q C

ost

as

% o

f C

OG

S

Rework

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8 0.8

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2


Warranty

3.2

4.4

2.5

3.93.6

0

1

2

3

4

5

6


DashboardMenu

This third manufacturing slide looks at the cost of poor quality in Total, and by each of 5 key drivers. Note that quality cost is expressed as a % of COGS – we want NOT to exceed 10%. Note the problem areas of Sustaining Engineering and Inventory Accuracy. (click to disappear)


Calls K#'s 113 110 115 118 114 Calls K#'s 113 110 115 118 114# Resolv'd 100 83 101 87 102 <30" K#'s 101 98 103 108 103

Calls K#'s 113 110 115 118 114Aban K#'s 10.9 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8

Call Center Statistics, through May, 2010

% Issues Resolved on First Call8

8.6

%

76

.0%

88

.1%

73

.9%

89

.4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


# C

alls

/Mo

nth

% Answered Within 30 Seconds

89

.5%

89

.7%

90

.0%

91

.2%

90

.3%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%


% w

/in

30"

% Abandoned

9.7

%

8.9

%

8.5

%

8.3

%

8.6

%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%


% A

ban

do

ned

Average Talk Times

2:1

5

2:3

3

2:3

7

2:2

4

2:1

7

0:00

0:30

1:00

1:30

2:00

2:30

3:00


Tim

e in

Min

ute

s &

Sec

on

ds

TargetActual

DashboardMenu

Our most serious goal in the Call Center is to resolve the customer’s issue on their first call. We also measure answering speed, abandonment rate and average talk times. (click to disappear)


People & People & Culture Culture MetricsMetrics

DashboardMenu


Ac

tg/F

in.

Ad

m/H

R

Cu

stS

vc

En

g

IT

Mft

g

Mk

tg

Mtr

ls

Q.A

.

Sa

les

To

tal

Ac

tg/F

in.

Ad

m/H

R

Cu

stS

vc

En

g

IT

Mft

g

Mk

tg

Mtr

ls

Q.A

.

Sa

les

To

tal

Actual 24 62 55 116 38 256 50 42 62 69 774 0-30 1 1 1 2 1 2 8AOP 22 63 50 107 43 258 49 41 65 71 769 31-60 1 2 1 1 1 6

61-90 2 1 2 5>90 1 1 2

Ac

tg/F

in.

Ad

m/H

R

Cu

stS

vc

En

g

IT

Mft

g

Mk

tg

Mtr

ls

Q.A

.

Sa

les

To

tal

Ac

tg/F

in.

Ad

m/H

R

Cu

stS

vc

En

g

IT

Mft

g

Mk

tg

Mtr

ls

Q.A

.

Sa

les

To

tal

14 1322 18

Headcount Snapshot, through May, 2010

NewReplacement

InvoluntaryVoluntary

Headcount as % of AOP

109.

1%

98.4

%

110.

0%

108.

4%

88.4

%

99.2

%

102.

0%

102.

4%

95.4

%

97.2

%

100.

7%

85%

90%

95%

100%

105%

110%

115%

Hea

dco

un

t as

% o

f A

OP

New & Replacement Hires YTD

13

1

4

1

8

2 21

1

1

5

1

2

1

20

2

4

6

8

10

12

Hir

es b

y D

epar

tmen

t

Replacemt New

Terminations, YTD

1 14

1

10

122

1

1

4

12

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Ter

ms

by

Dep

artm

ent

Voluntary Involuntary

% Overage Open Reqs (>60 Days)

27%

40% 38% 39%33%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%


% R

eqs

>60

Day

s O

ld

Actual % Acceptable Level Target

Menu

In this Headcount snapshot, we look at actual headcount as a % of annual operating plan (AOP). We also look at hiring speed, and the number of hires and terminations. (click to disappear)


Live Read Live Read Live Read Live Read Live Read Live Read Live Read Live Read Live Read Live Read

Acutal # 35 64 17 71 15 10 18 214 18 144 22 112 14 12 23 39 18 35 162 666 # Eval'd 20 59 48 84 26 228 38 37 57 39 636Target # 36 72 18 72 18 18 20 240 20 160 40 120 15 12 30 40 20 42 197 734 # EE's 24 62 55 116 38 256 50 42 62 69 774

Actg/Fin.

Adm/HR

CustSvc

Eng IT Mftg Mktg Mtrls Q.A. Sales Total

Acutal # # Lateral 3 12 10 13 2 31 5 5 6 3 90Target # # Vertical 1 8 6 7 1 18 2 4 4 3 54

# EE's 24 62 55 116 38 256 50 42 62 69 774

Eng ITCross-Selling

ProductKnwldge

MultiTierSelling

Project Mgmt

ProcessMapping

Cust'merReq'rmnt

Leader-ship

Mgmt.Basics

Sr. Mgt. Seminar

Actg/Fin.

People Trained in Key Programs, YTD

Actg/Fin.

Adm/HR

CustSvc

Eng IT Mftg Mktg

Sales TotalTotal

Mftg Mktg Mtrls Q.A.Adm/

HRCustSvc

Mtrls Q.A. Sales

19 51 46 67 24 195 37

Co-Wide % 72%

31 49 37

50

Co-Wide Actual 556 Co-Wide Target 774

Employee Development and Mobility, through May, 2010

42 62 6924 62 55 116 38 256

9789

9499

83

56

90 89 90 90

55

93 93100

77

9890

83 8291

0

20

40

60

80

100

% E

mp

loye

es C

om

ple

tin

g

Live Training Readings Target: 100%Performance Evals in Last 12 Mos.

83%95%

87%72% 68%

89%76%

88% 92%

57%

82%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% E

E's

Eva

luat

ed

% w Dvpt Plans Target

Development Plans Updated in Last 12 Mos.

79% 82% 84%

58% 63%76% 74% 74% 79%

54%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% E

E's

Eva

luat

ed

% w Dvpt Plans Target

Internal Mobility Last 12 Mos.

13%

19% 18%

11%5%

12% 10% 12% 10%4%

12%

4%

13%11%

6%

3%

7%

4%

10%

6%

4%

7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

% M

ob

ility

% Lateral % Vertical Target

Menu

Key to a competent workforce is their training in strategically vital programs, appraising their performance, developing their skills, and ensuring their internal mobility into new and challenging positions. (click to disappear)


R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total# 4's & 5's 29 7 3 15 26 10 5 95 #w DvpPln 25 7 3 12 24 9 5 85 # 360'd 21 5 3 12 20 9 3 73# EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114

R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total# w >30% 29 5 3 17 18 9 3 84 # Met Mntr 26 3 2 7 18 9 5 70 #w R'plmnt 19 3 2 12 26 7 3 72# EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114

R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN Total31 7 3 17 41 10 114

116 41 9 124 360 62 77427% 17% 33% 14% 11% 16% 15%

5628%

Strategically Critical Employees, for the Month of May, '10

STRATEGIC POSITIONS# Strategic PositionsTotal Positions% Strategic Positions

HR

% Strategic EE's Rated 4 or 5

94%100% 100%

88%

63%

100% 100%

83%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% R

ate

d 4

or

5

% with Development Plans In Place

81%

100% 100%

71%

59%

90%100%

75%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% w

/ D

vpt.

Pla

ns

% Receiving 360° Evaluations

68% 71%

100%

71%

49%

90%

60% 64%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% R

ecei

vin

g 3

60's

% Eligible >30% Incentive Pay

94%

71%

100% 100%

44%

90%

60%

74%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% E

lig

. >

30%

In

cen

tive

.

% Met w/ Mentors Last 2 Mos.

84%

43%

67%

41% 44%

90%100%

61%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% M

et w

/ M

ento

rs% w/ Available Internal Replacement

61%

43%

67% 71%63%

70%60% 63%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% w

/ In

t. R

epla

cem

nt

DashboardMenu

BayMed devotes particular attention to the most critical 15% or so of it’s employees. For more on this, please go to “Strategic Employee Analysis” on the Menu. (click to disappear)


PDP Intiative

Joe Brownley

Date Complete (Future) 1/15/10 2/1/10 2/15/10 3/1/10 4/1/10 4/15/10 5/15/10 6/15/10 7/31/10

1 Month Ago

Now

Days Late (Ahead) 5 15 0 0 -5 10 5 ""Comments

Product Team Elixir Tappan FDA Merc HyperBow Roadster Merc 2

Cust. Support Deliverables

Approved

Documentation Plan Template

Approved

Product Development Process Improvement Initiative, through May 31, 2010

First Training Held on April 10; poor attendance from Marketing and Manufacturing; 2nd Session to be held on June 10

Bsns Case Template Approved

Comp. Analysis Template Approved

Feature/Function Template Approved

Exit criteria for All PDP Steps

Approved

Training for All Applicaable Mgrs

& EE's


& EE's

Mftg. Deliverables

Approved

Product Dvpt Process Training YTD

30

12

6

03 3

30

15

12

3

12

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

EngEE's

EngMgrs

MktgEE's

MktgMgrs

MftgEE's

MftgEE's

YT

D C

om

ple

tio

ns

Actual Target

Product Team Staffing Levels

12

10 109

10

8

12

10 109

10

8

3

1

3

2

2

1

3

1

3

2

2

1

2

1

2

2

2

0

2

1

2

2

2

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act

# S

taff

on

Tea

m

Eng Mktg Mftg

DashboardMenu

BayMed has had a particular issue with product team deliverables and with fully staffing it’s product development teams. For more on remedying this issue, see the “Achilles Heel Analysis”, on the menu. (click to disappear)


SURVEY ITEMEng/

ITSales Marketing/

Cust ServiceMftg/QA/Materials

Acctg/Fin/Admin/HR

Team prepared for my arrival 4.0 3.6 3.8 3.9 3.8Benefits/ee programs meet expectations 4.0 4.1 4.2 3.7 3.3Know who to ask re: processes/projects 4.1 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.9My training plan exists 3.1 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.7Mgr & I have established my goals 3.9 4.1 3.6 4.2 4.1Mgr interested in me as a person 4.1 4.6 3.9 3.8 3.9I see how my goals fit w/ team's goals 4.1 4.1 3.9 4.2 4.3My job is as was described in interviews 3.9 4.6 3.9 3.9 4.1I know/can approach mgmt team folks 4.3 4.6 4.1 4.2 4.4Overall, this is a great place to work 4.5 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.5

# Surveys 10 3 2 14 6

SURVEY ITEMEng/

ITSales Marketing/

Cust ServiceMftg/QA/Materials

Acctg/Fin/Admin/HR

Position filled in acceptable timeframe 3.5 4.1 2.4 3.4 3.3I had high quality candidates to recruit from 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.0 3.8Recruiting/Sign On/Relocation $ adequate to attract 3.9 4.1 3.9 3.5 3.7OnBoarding process gave EE valuable Gen. knowledge 4.2 3.6 4.3 4.0 3.9New EE's tech skills as strong as I had hoped 4.0 3.1 4.3 4.4 3.7Interpersonal/Org. skills as strong as I had hoped 4.5 3.6 3.8 4.1 4.0Starting Salary set at right level compared to peers 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.4 3.7New EE ramped up learning curve as fast as I had hoped 4.2 4.1 4.3 4.0 4.2EE will be fully competent in this position in 12 months 3.3 4.1 3.8 4.5 3.3EE has met or exceeded my expectations 2.4 3.6 4.1 3.8 3.8

# Surveys 8 3 2 11 5

EMPLOYEE SURVEY

MANAGER SURVEY

New Hire Surveys, Last 6 Months

Menu

BayMed wants to ensure that new employees integrate quickly into the company, and that their managers are satisfied with the hiring process. We survey both new hires and their managers after 90 days. Look at the red horizontal patterns to see where the problems are. (click to disappear)


Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 TotalMftg/QA

M'trlsEng/

ITSales/

Mktg/CSHR/Fin/Admin

GreenIs = >

My manager values me as a person 4.0 4.1 4.2 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.0

My work challenges me 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.0 3.9 4.0 4.0

I feel high sense of urgency in my work 3.9 4.1 4.1 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.2 4.0 4.7 4.0

I'm fairly rewarded for the work I do 3.3 3.5 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.7 3.7

Co-workers value contribution I make 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.0 4.0 3.8

I can achieve my career ambitions 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.5 4.3 3.7

Management has a clear vision 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.7

I'm at "leading edge" of knowledge in my profession 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.0 3.7

I'm empowered to decide how best to do my work 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.7

There are good financial incentives to stay here 3.0 3.5 3.4 2.9 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.7

People here look forward to coming to work 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.8 3.6 4.0 3.7

My employee benefits are attractive and unique 3.2 3.7 3.6 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.8 3.1 4.3 3.7

I feel a sense of ownership in this company 3.3 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.7 3.5 3.7

I get the chance to have fun at work 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.8 3.8 4.1 3.9 4.3 4.0

All in all, this is a great place to work 3.7 4.0 4.1 3.8 3.9 3.9 4.2 3.9 4.3 4.0

# Surveys Returned 73 83 66 64 286 117 41 50 3

3.61 3.75 3.76 3.56 3.67 3.69 3.76 3.69 3.92 3.773Total Score

Pulse Survey Results, Last 4 Surveys

Division-Wide Data Totals By Function

Menu

BayMed wants to create a stimulating work culture, with knowledgeable, engaged employees. Our “pulse survey” checks one-twelfth of the workforce each month. The horizontal yellow & red rows reveal where our challenges are. (click to disappear). This is the last slide of the demo, so you may want to click Menu for other options.


Strategy Mapping

Menu

Strategy Mapping is the first of three methods used to identify key metrics for our ScoreCard. (hit spacebar)


1. 1. Successfully Launch MPX 3000Successfully Launch MPX 3000

Finance• ‘10 Sales: US=$5M; EUR=$3M; Asia=$2M; Op. Margins=35%• ‘10 Budget, 1.x/2.x revs=$6.5M, (+5%), tracked x function

Menu

A key element of our strategy is to successfully launch a MAJOR new product. Since this product is a cornerstone for our future, we set specific Finance quadrant goals for it ($10M in Sales, Op. Margins of 35%, and an operating budget of $6.5M, tracked by department. (hit spacebar)




Customer/Markets• Orders from >10 Top U.S. and >8 Top European Customers• Installation Failures <10%; 80% res.<8 hrs.; 100%<72 hrs.

Menu

We’re looking for market BREADTH across the US and Europe, and want to ensure customer satisfaction with our installations. (hit spacebar)





Operational Excellence• Order fulfillment: 90% <1 week; 100% <2 weeks • QA funct. test at pre-ship <.5% functionality failures, 10% sample

Menu

We want to meet orders for this product on time, and we want all functionality to work, once installed. Notice how specific each bullet point is. (hit spacebar)





Operational Excellence• Order fulfillment: 90% <1 week; 100% <2 weeks • QA funct. test at pre-ship <.5% functionality failures, 10% sample

People & Culture• Sales Force (100%) trained in Product Knowledge prior to launch• All Sales/Prod Team reqs filled <60 days

Menu

Finally, we want all our Sales Force trained in the product BEFORE it’s released, and all Sales and Product Team reqs filled (no holes in the team!). Note how, for this strategic initiative, we identify ScoreCard metrics in each of the four quadrants. This is Strategy Mapping. (click to disappear, and then click menu)


Achilles Heel Analysis

Menu

Achilles Heel Analysis is the second of three methods used to identify key metrics for our ScoreCard. (hit spacebar)


Possible Achilles Heels

• Poor Product Development Discipline

• Low Customer Orientation/Little Market Familiarity

• Little Awareness of Business Strategy/ Key Competitors

• No Measurement or Education in Core Processes

• . . . and in your company???

Menu

Every company has core processes it must be good at. If it isn’t good at a core process, that’s an Achilles Heel for the company. For BayMed, poor Product Development Discipline is an Achilles Heel (hit spacebar)


Achilles Heel #1: Poor Discipline in Product Development Process (PDP)

• Product Teams are Engineering-centric; Mktg, Mftg come too late into the process

• Cross Functional Deliverables Between Engineering, Marketing, and Manufacturing Poorly Defined

• Poor Accountability re: Early Deliverables (Business Case, ROI Analysis, Competitive Analysis)

• Projects Don’t Meet Their Milestones; Internal Partners not Prepared with Their Pieces

Menu

A cross functional team from Engineering, Marketing and Manufacturing identifies key aspects of the PDP Process that need improvement (hit spacebar)


PDP Intiative

Joe Brownley

Date Complete (Future) 1/15/10 2/1/10 2/15/10 3/1/10 4/1/10 4/15/10 5/15/10 6/15/10 7/31/10

1 Month Ago

Now

Days Late (Ahead) 5 15 0 0 -5 10 5 ""Comments

Product Team Elixir Tappan FDA Merc HyperBow Roadster Merc 2

Cust. Support Deliverables

Approved

Documentation Plan Template

Approved

Product Development Process Improvement Initiative, through May 31, 2010

First Training Held on April 10; poor attendance from Marketing and Manufacturing; 2nd Session to be held on June 10

Bsns Case Template Approved

Comp. Analysis Template Approved

Feature/Function Template Approved

Exit criteria for All PDP Steps

Approved


& EE's


& EE's

Mftg. Deliverables

Approved

Product Dvpt Process Training YTD

30

12

6

03 3

30

15

12

3

12

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

EngEE's

EngMgrs

MktgEE's

MktgMgrs

MftgEE's

MftgEE's

YT

D C

om

ple

tio

ns

Actual Target

Product Team Staffing Levels

12

10 109

10

8

12

10 109

10

8

3

1

3

2

2

1

3

1

3

2

2

1

2

1

2

2

2

0

2

1

2

2

2

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act Plan Act

# S

taff

on

Tea

m

Eng Mktg Mftg

Menu

From this analysis, we decide to track (a) the development of PDP Templates, (b) PDP Training, and (c) Product Team Staffing, as metrics for our ScoreCard. (click to disappear, then click Menu)


Strategic Employee Strategic Employee AnalysisAnalysis

Menu

Strategic Employee Analysis is the third of three methods used to identify key metrics for our ScoreCard. (hit spacebar)


Strategic Themes, FY’10

1. Successfully Launch Two New Hi-Potential Products (On-Time; $10M 1st Yr. Rev./each)

2. One or Two Successful Acquisitions

3. Achieve $30M Revenue in Eastern Europe

4. Implement LEAN Manufacturing

5. Implement “Strategic Employee” Initiative

Menu

We begin by identifying five Strategic Themes for 2010. (hit spacebar)


Strategically Critical Employees• R&D: Project Team Leaders & Key Tech. Leads on

Breakthrough Products

• Mktg: Product Mgrs in Recent or About-To-Be Releases

• Bsns Dvpt: Leaders for Key Acquisition Candidates

• Sales: Mgrs & Reps Responsible for New Territories/ Niches

• Mftg: Process-Reengineering Team Leaders and New Equipment/Technologies Central to Strategic Themes

• Finance: Leader of Acquisition or Strategically Vital Accounting Initiative

• HR: Leader of Strategic Competency Project, Strategic Pay, or Strategic Employee Identification Project

Menu

For each of these strategic themes, we identify key employees directly responsible for the achievement of each strategy. We identify a pool of about 15% of the workforce. (click to disappear; then hit spacebar to advance)


R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total# 4's & 5's 29 7 3 15 26 10 5 95 #w DvpPln 25 7 3 12 24 9 5 85 # 360'd 21 5 3 12 20 9 3 73# EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114

R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN HR Total# w >30% 29 5 3 17 18 9 3 84 # Met Mntr 26 3 2 7 18 9 5 70 #w R'plmnt 19 3 2 12 26 7 3 72# EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114 # EE's 31 7 3 17 41 10 5 114

R&D Mktg BsDev Sales Mftg FIN Total31 7 3 17 41 10 114

116 41 9 124 360 62 77427% 17% 33% 14% 11% 16% 15%

5628%

Strategically Critical Employees, for the Month of May, '10

STRATEGIC POSITIONS# Strategic PositionsTotal Positions% Strategic Positions

HR

% Strategic EE's Rated 4 or 5

94%100% 100%

88%

63%

100% 100%

83%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% R

ate

d 4

or

5

% with Development Plans In Place

81%

100% 100%

71%

59%

90%100%

75%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% w

/ D

vpt.

Pla

ns

% Receiving 360° Evaluations

68% 71%

100%

71%

49%

90%

60% 64%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% R

ecei

vin

g 3

60's

% Eligible >30% Incentive Pay

94%

71%

100% 100%

44%

90%

60%

74%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% E

lig

. >

30%

In

cen

tive

.

% Met w/ Mentors Last 2 Mos.

84%

43%

67%

41% 44%

90%100%

61%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% M

et w

/ M

ento

rs% w/ Available Internal Replacement

61%

43%

67% 71%63%

70%60% 63%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% w

/ In

t. R

epla

cem

nt

Menu

For these strategic employees (~15% of workforce), we ensure (a) that those positions are filled with highly rated employees, (b) who have development plans in place, (c) who receive 360° evaluations, (d) who have a chance of earning 30% above base pay if they achieve their goals, (e) who have mentors, and (f) for whom we have internal replacements. This is what we’re willing to do to ensure our strategic success. (click to disappear, then click Menu)


ScoreCard Development Roadmap

Step 1: Metrics Selection

1. Exec. Interviews• Bsns Issues, SC

wants• Strategic Initiatives• ID X-Func. Team

3. Choose Metrics• List Possible Metrics• Revu for Balance• Exec Team Chooses

4. Spec Metrics• I.D. Owners, Data-Providers• Define Data-Sets• Design Slides

6. Build ScoreCard• Create Dashboard• Import Charts• Review w/ Execs

5. Build Excel Files• Create/Revu Drafts• Build Files w/ Real Data• Train Data Providers

Step 2: Design & Build

8. Exec Team Use• Coach CEO• Present @ 1-2

Exec Team Mtgs.

9. Company-Wide Use• Extended Mgmt.

Team• All Hands Meeting

Step 3: Initial Use

2. Strategy Mapping• I.D. Achilles Heels• I.D. X-Func. Collab.• I.D. Feasible Metrics

Menu

Here is a high-level roadmap of the 3 month process of ScoreCard Development. Company VP’s choose the metrics and give major input on slide designs. VP’s name data providers from each function who provide the data. The external consultant leads the entire project, designing the slides, building the files, and training the data providers. (click to disappear, and then click Menu)


Metric

Leader

Finance

Metric

Leader

Sales

Metric

Leader

Mktg.

Metric

Leader

Eng.

Metric

Leader

Mfg.

Metric

Leader

QA

Metric

Leader

Cust Sppt

Metric

Leader

HR

ScoreCard Master File

Executive Team

PowerPoint File:

email

The “Plumbing”The “Plumbing”

Excel Files:

Metrics

1-4

Metrics

5-6

Metric

7

Metric

8

Metrics

9-12

Metrics

13-14

Metric

15

Metrics

16-19

Shared ServerShared Server

Menu

An Excel file tracks data for each metric. A slide from each Excel file electronically links to the PowerPoint file (which you have been reviewing in this demo). Data exists in a variety of databases (finance, manufacturing, HR). Data from these databases can be electronically dumped into the Excel files. It’s the consultant’s job, working with data providers, to expedite this process. (click to disappear, then click Menu)


For More Information, For More Information, Contact:Contact:

Michael SelbyMichael SelbyScoreCard PartnersScoreCard Partners

(415) 446.5531(415) [email protected], [email protected], or

Visit us on the web atVisit us on the web atwww.scorecardpartners.comwww.scorecardpartners.com

Menu

© Michael Selby, 2010, , 415.446.5531 The Company-Wide Balanced ScoreCard Demo Navigation features...

Documents

Transcript of © Michael Selby, 2010, , 415.446.5531 The Company-Wide Balanced ScoreCard Demo Navigation features...