Morgan Stanley: Leadership, Performance, and HR Case Study

This case study examines Morgan Stanley's efforts to transform its organizational culture by implementing a 360-degree performance evaluation system. The analysis focuses on the strategic objectives of the company, particularly the emphasis on integrity, innovation, and teamwork. The case explores the challenges faced by the company, including inconsistencies in performance ratings and the need for improved feedback mechanisms. The role of Paul Nasr in managing Rob Parson is analyzed, highlighting the importance of leadership styles and mentorship. The study concludes with HR recommendations regarding the promotion of Rob Parson, emphasizing the need for clearly defined performance management systems, objective-setting, and ongoing feedback to align employee performance with organizational goals. The document also includes references to relevant academic literature.

Running head: MORGAN STANLEY
morgan stanley
[Document subtitle]
[DATE]
[Company name]
[Company address]

MORGAN STANLEY 1
Answer 1: The strategic Objective at Morgan Stanley was the transformation of the
organizational working environment towards the framework that promoted absolute integrity,
innovation and teamwork. To attain this objective, the president of the company John Mack and
his team of executives identified that a change in culture was necessary regarding the
compensating policies and the evaluation techniques of the staff. They introduced a 360 degree
evaluation system of performance which allowed the professionals in the organization to get
themselves evaluated by the peers, subordinates and superiors. As per the case study, the
system’s advantages are numerous as the employees, subordinates, peers and supervisors are
different in their appraisal capability of different performance dimensions which lead to different
interpretation of employee performance and behavior according to various standards. Thus, the
motive behind the 360 degree evaluation system of performance is to provide the staff and
employees a better consideration of the weaknesses and strengths which allow them to recognize
their dimensions of work which are required for the development of professionalism.
The vision statement of company seems to be firm as it articulates clearly how the ability of the
employees must be harnessed and polished to aid the organization enforce the vision. However,
whether the strategic utility of the appraisal of the performance was considered by Morgan
Stanley is not yet clear even if the plan of communication was created for managing the change
initiative and if training at appropriate level was provided for staff, managers and the raters being
assessed for the feedback or evaluation. The organization clearly emphasized the development
and teamwork of the ability of employees to the fullest by developing clear titles of job by
measuring career hierarchy and staging. 360 degree evaluation system of performance was
proposed as a change element for the culture of organization on the basis of compensation and
evaluation of employees’ performance with an aim of motivating the employees which may

MORGAN STANLEY 2
further lead to alignment of performance with organization’s objectives and goals of cross
selling, cooperation and teamwork.
The Rob Parson’s yearly evaluation of performance Data Packet depicted that there was no
consistency of his ratings with competencies in requirement of subsequent development. For
instance, an employee in the division of investment banking offered and provided strong
comments and arguments that were completely personal instead of professional aspects. This
discrepancy in the feedback of the raters suggests that there is a space for improvement with the
evaluation of techniques of 360 degree along with the on the job training sessions for the raters
and those who are being assessed. Additionally, the process of feedback is not completely
comprehensive which leaves many stakeholders stay away from this process. For instance, the
component of direct input from customer is not included in the process which in the case of Mr.
Parson’s, is an important component while rating the aggregate performance (Amabile, et al.,
2011). In Morgan Stanley’s Case, few positive aspects while accepting this system of
management are apparent. More involvement and dedication by the senior management is
required to link the tool of performance management towards the organizational transformation
initiative which will focus on the Morgan Stanley to become number one firm.
Answer 2: Paul Nasr being the manager of Rob played a key role to make Rob a successful
worker. In this case, success is assessed by external outputs like high number of business) and
outcomes like high share in market for Morgan Stanley. Since both of them had worked together
previously, they had mutual trust and respect for each other. After Mr. Nasr joined the company,
he immediately recruited Rob Parson which led to professional interaction between the two and
the rest of the members observed them in imagined or real terms of favoritism.

MORGAN STANLEY 3
The 20 years of industrial experience of Mr. Nasr and his close relation with Rob led him use a
hands-off approach to manage Rob Parson. This style of management was well chosen by Mr.
Nasr as under this approach, Rob was able to thrive as he had background of entrepreneurship
along with the numbers he had posted. Identifying that there can be some issues which are
internal because of the lack of team work by Rob Parson, Mr. Nasr took mentoring sessions
personally to offer the guidance and he felt a need to give the treatment of “kid gloves” to Rob
Parson as he feared that because of aggressive sessions, he may lose him (Gabarro, et al., 1995).
There were many things which Mr. Nasr would have done differently. For instance, he must have
examined the culture of organization better to observe if Rob is the correct fit for organization.
Mr. Nasr must have be more prepared and ready to not insinuate that Rob may get a position of
Managing Director. He must also be clear over the measurement of performance and the key
indicators of performance for the position.
The main challenge faced by Mr. Nasr was the disconnection in the two company’s conflicting
goals and objectives. On one side, he faced the pressure to improve the share of market in the
industry that required quick decision making and analysis. On the other side, he was working to
create a culture of one firm within the current silos that was prevalent at the Morgan Stanley.
Answer 3: the recommendation of HR manger should be to not promote the Parson to the post of
Managing Director at present time. The most relevant information which is available with the
HR director is the comments from the tool of 360 degree feedback and the subsequent comments
from the managing director. It is irrelevant to say whether the tool was defective or not. The
traits of the behavior as observed of rob do not fall in congruence with the organization’s or the
position of managing director. Rob should stay with organization. Rob Parson is completely

MORGAN STANLEY 4
known about the area of performance he must improve if he wants to acquire the managing
director’s role which may promote him to that position (Ortiz Pizzaro, et al., 2016).
The assessment of performance and system of management must be altered in the mentioned
ways:
 The system needs to be clearly defined and there should be proper training given to all
the managing directors about its use. Various options of performance management
system exist amongst which the approach of Management by objectives which
incorporate objective standards and 360 feedback work the best.
 Clearly measurable objectives of performance must be set for the employees and those
objectives must be tied with the goals of the organization.
 Ongoing feedback regarding the objectives must be provided to all the employees about
the performance. Subjective views and qualitative comments must be provided
altogether.
 A proper channel of training must be established for the employees as without it the
development may not occur in the employees and the efforts of objective and goals
setting are lost potentially.

MORGAN STANLEY 5
REFERENCES
Amabile, T. M., & Kramer, S. J. (2011). The power of small wins. Harvard Business
Review, 89(5), 70-80.
Gabarro, J. J., & Hill, L. A. (1995). Managing Performance. Note 9.
Ortiz Pizarro, A., Stein, G., & Cuadrado, M. (2016). Business Culture in the Incorporation of a
New Executive.