Booz Allen Case - Group10
Booz Allen Case - Group10
Booz Allen Case - Group10
Submitted by:
Group 10
Sourav Roy MP16036
Ramakrishna mp17033
Naresh kumar MP17038
Brajesh Singh MP17011
Booz Allen knew they needed change according to the conversation Dickie and
Varasano had. They knew their challenge was not producing content as they are
constantly coming up with bright ideas and new concepts but installing processes
that select the most important new ideas and then roll them out though their partners
to a large set of clients. They needed process to test the ideas and communicate
them, and incentives for partners to use them. Dickie and Varasano realised that
even if they achieve their goal, they need to not isolate themselves in their comfort
In the Booz-Allen&Hamilton case, it is evident that the type of change that the
reflected that the firm was better at helping clients learn how to innovate than they
were at managing their own innovative processes and decided it was time for a
change when he stated that “the shoemaker could do with a new set of shoes”. The
organization went from a structure where there were few incentives to share
Before change, learning tended to occur at the individual and client team level
as knowledge was not readily accessible in the firm. This changed when Booz-Allen
took the first step of change in 1987 by implementing a strategic change that was
individuals” then the implementation of the Vision 2000 which launched three major
alterations and fine tuning to change that requires us to reorient and re-create the
consuming and can be challenging to lead effectively as they have greater impact on
individuals who must reorient themselves like in the case of the Booz-Allen &
Hamilton where a new strategy was implemented to increase both transparency and
trust and give the partners a more powerful means of influencing the behavior of
their members. This new strategy meant partners in the firm had to re-create
themselves which they were not comfortable with as they did not welcome these
changes and led to them departing from the firm as they could not adapt from the
It is important to understand when one should begin changing and where it becomes
obvious there is need for change as described by sigmoid curve. The curve depicts
Booz. Allen & Hamilton incurred a successful increase in growth during initial
reason in the steady growth of Booz Allen was the strategy to implement any
services and concepts needed to help clients improve their performance. In order to
sustain in market and continue to grow the competitor’s tried to evolve their business
model around that of BA&H. After this point (point B), the profit margins get
squeezed thereby slowing down the growth rate because of competition. At point B
of sigmoid curve, reflects the stage at which change is introduced even when system
prior which the organization was an affiliation of individual partners. The idea was not
independent model, but still the company followed its initial growth curve. Then in
1994, a new strategy called ‘Vision 2000 (V2K)’ was launched by BA&H being one of
reason to their significant growth. This could be termed as point B change as per
sigmoid curve because following the implementation of V2K the firm was growing at
25% annual rates and profitability per partner. The organization was able to sustain
the initial growth curve after point B, generating $10 million to $20 million per year
which was not common in market. The change should have been implemented
earlier to point B by Booz. Allen. As stated by Frank Varasano, ‘If they had
implemented KOL before beginning Toledo, they would have had 40% platform
instead of 20%. The reason being KOL gave access to knowledge of practices used
with previous clients of BA&H clients. It provided the leverage to learning the
practices that BA&H client teams used earlier which improved the clients serving
BA&H is a knowledge-based industry, and they have a long history and dominant
partners while the new entrants in the market built their practices around particular
products. Even though the management realized they needed change in the current
system, they only concentrated in sharing knowledge and making them more visible.
They failed to build or adapt new processes to capture market. Other companies
developed ideas that BA&H had and built its reputation around it. Their sourcing and
re-engineering strategies were adopted by other companies and they spent large
they did not follow it. After KOL, the staffs spent time in searching previous client
team works and rarely searched for new ideas. Many partners showed innate
reluctance to apply ideas that needed refinement or change instead they followed a
culture of conservatism.
Going by Booz Allen values to build and sustain a preeminent, worldwide consulting
growth and for contribution within the firm and in larger arena of family, clients and
community, they should not only implement change but also embrace new ideas and
use them freely in the organization as this will not only be beneficial to them now but