Balanced Scorecard What was the situation for Saatchi & Saatchi in the mid 1990s? The management team adopted an approach that was primarily two-pronged: the financial perspective and the customer perspective. In terms of the financial perspective, what goals did the new leadership set for the company?

Saatchi & Saatchi had lost critical amounts of market share, because the company had overleveraged itself through numerous acquisitions. The goals that the new leadership of the company provided include: improving client relations (through personalized service), utilizing the creativity of employees and decentralizing operations. These different elements are important, because they would allow the firm to be able to deleverage some of the mergers and refocus on their core markets. Once this took place, it would increase the financial strength of the company, by reducing areas that were a drag on the firm. (Greenhalgh, 2004)

Analysis: How did the company categorize its different business units (agencies)? What strategies...

What were they?
They divided them into three different mini agencies that would be based on the overall number of employees working at a particular location (lead, drive and proper). Lead firms were divisions that served the smallest markets with less than 50 staff members. Drive agencies were in middle markets and had between 100 to 150 employees. Prosper divisions were in the largest markets (such as New York) and were given the majority of focus / resources. The best related customer perspectives were focusing on the individual needs of everyone and generating innovate ideas. (Greenhalgh, 2004)

Conclusion: Did the financial strategies make sense for each given unit? Why or why not? Did the acquisition by Publicis Groupe SA change the results of the BSC? Now that you have analyzed both "prongs," did the two approaches worked in synthesis or in conflict?

After utilizing the balance…