Case | HBS Case Collection | 1993 (Revised from original version)

General Electric: Compliance Systems

Abstract

After General Electric (GE) is indicted in 1985 for defrauding the Department of Defense, Chairman John F. Welch takes dramatic steps to prevent a recurrence. This case documents the new systems and procedures that are put in place to ensure that all GE employees are aware of the boundaries of acceptable behavior. Closes with a discussion of the benefits and costs of Welch's approach. A follow-up to General Electric: Valley Forge (A--H). Facts and Figures on Defense Procurement is intended to be used as supplementary reading in teaching this case.

Keywords: Policy; Contracts; Business or Company Management; Communication; Business History; Behavior; Boundaries; Management Style; Cost Management; Electronics Industry;

Format: Print

22 pages

Purchase

Citation:

Simons, Robert L. "General Electric: Compliance Systems." Harvard Business School Case 189-081, June 1993. (Revised from original January 1989 version.)

This case illustrates the importance of choosing a primary customer as the basis for organization design. Cross Country Group managers adjusted resource allocation, organization design and performance measures over time to transform Cross Country Group from an opportunistic family business into a sophisticated industry leader. Cross Country (renamed Agero in 2011) operated call centers that coordinated with thousands of small, independent towing companies—Cross Country's "service provider network"—to deliver roadside assistance services, such as vehicle towing and tire changes, to motorists covered by automakers' warranties and insurers' policies.

The case describes Cross Country's evolution from 1972 to 2012 in three phases. This allows students to, at various stages, grapple with defining Cross Country's business (what business is it, and should it be, in?) and its primary customer (vehicle makers and insurers? motorists? service providers?). The answers to these questions have important implications for organization design.

From 1972 to 1998, founder Sidney Wolk built the business through personal relationships with clients. A passionate entrepreneur, his approach to growth—secure customers first, figure out how to make money later—was remarkably successful, if sometimes chaotic. Facing an increasingly commoditized marketplace, in 1998 Wolk hired professional managers who implemented formal performance management systems and invested in sophisticated data analytics. From 1998 to 2007 (phase two), these investments allowed Cross Country to quantify service providers' impact on motorist satisfaction, monitor service providers' performance, and introduce programs to strengthen top-performing service providers' loyalty to Cross Country. Concurrently, the company undertook a two-step organization redesign to focus more resources on service providers (the new primary customer?), improve market-focused innovation and increase client satisfaction. In phase three, from 2008 to 2012, Cross Country entered the high-tech telematics/connected-vehicle business, invested in additional innovations to strengthen its service provider network, and rebranded itself as "Agero." Wolk and his team believed Cross Country had "more driver information than any other company." The case ends with key decisions for the future.

As business leaders worry about the decline of American competitiveness, business schools are responding by changing their curriculums. But are the topics and approaches taught in today's business schools part of the solution or part of the problem? In this paper, I explore the possibility that four trends in current MBA curriculums—theory creep, mission creep, doing well by doing good, and the quest for enlightenment—are teaching students to be uncompetitive in today's global markets. If this hypothesis is true, I argue that business school curriculums should be re-centered around the tough choices needed to compete—and to win.

The general manager of Luotang Power, a coal-fired power plant located in central China, reviews annual results before a meeting with the board of directors. He thought the company performed well during the year and both plant availability and fuel economy had improved over the previous year. However, the positive performance does not show in the financial results and he must investigate before presenting to the board. He considers performing a variance analysis to better understand plant performance compared to the previous year. He also examines the contractual arrangement the plant has with the provincial power company for a minimum purchase of electricity to supplement regional demand. The company had been successful at selling excess electricity to the power plant but over the past 12 months, demand has decreased. Students must complete a quantitative analysis of the plant's performance and prepare recommendations to improve reporting and evaluation of the plant's performance. This case can be used in an introductory managerial accounting course to explore variance analysis and incentives in contracts.

General Information

Academic Programs

Alumni

Faculty & Research

Recruit

Resources

Faculty & Research

General Electric: Compliance Systems

Abstract

About the Author

More from the Author

Contact

Related Links

Resources