Morgan stanley case

The case talk about the two imp. people of the organization. There is very interesting facts in the case, which helps to take decisions in future.

1. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
1 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t





DOON BUSINESS SCHOOL


ROB PARSON PAUL NASR


SUBMITED TO: - SUBIMITED BY:-
Dr. Vasudha Sharma Geetika Rawat
Jyotsna Rawat
Anusha Dubey
Aman Abhishek
Enashree Kundu
Soumitra Acharya
Akash Parth Sarthi

2. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
2 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We are glad to express our extreme thank and feeling of deep gratitude, indebtedness and reverence to our
esteemed professor, Dr.Vasudha Sharma, who has always show exemplary keenness and interest in the
process of Research Assignment Work. Her valuable guidance, timely suggestion and constant treachery
inspiration made it possible for us to complete present shape and due date.

The completion of this Research Assignment Report is the result of valuable guidance, constructive
suggestion, keen interest and eminent professor of Dr.Vasudha Sharma (Professor of Doon Business
School).



PLACE: DEHRADUN
DATE: 27
th
Apr. 2016

3. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
3 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



ABOUT COMPANY




Morgan Stanley is an
American multinational financial
services corporation headquartered in
the Morgan Stanley Building, Midtown
Manhattan, New York City. Morgan Stanley
operates in 42 countries and has more than
1300 of fices and 60,000
employees. According to the Scorpio
Partnership Global Private Banking
Benchmark the company had 1,454 USD Bn
of assets under management (AuM) in 2014,
an increase of 17.5% on the 2013 figure.
The corporation, formed by J.P. Morgan &
Co. partners Henry S. Morgan (grandson of
J.P. Morgan), Harold Stanley and others,
came into existence on September 16, 1935,
in response to the Glass-Steagall Act that
required the splitting of commercial and
investment banking businesses. In its first
year the company operated with a 24%
market share (US$1.1 billion) in public
offerings and private placements. The main
areas of business for the firm today
are GlobalWealthManagement, Institutional
Securities, and Investment Management.

4. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
4 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



ABOUT CASE
The case is about a young banker named Rob Parson, who was hired for a very challenging job of market
coverage professional by the Paul Nasr, a senior managing director in Capital Market Services at Morgan
Stanley for his outstanding performance and energetic attitude. Nasr promised him to promote to the
position of managing director. Rob Parson did very well and with his efforts, he pushed Morgan Stanley
from 10
th
position to 3
rd
within a very short span of time. With his efforts, he expanded the market share
from 2% to 12.5%, which was an evidence of his outstanding and influential performance. Unfortunately,
Rob Parson failed in building good relations with his peers and colleagues, which was of great importance
for the firm. At Morgan Stanley, team work was of much more importance than individual work and the
employees were not allowed to breach the rules of the firm for achieving a particular goal. In the situation,
Rob Parson broke too many eggs to achieve his goals and objectives which greatly affected his relationships
with his peers and colleagues.
Rob Parson’s performance evaluation is on its course and it became difficult for Paul Nasr to promote Rob
Parson because of many negative views. At Morgan Stanley, a 360-Degree performance evaluation process
was implemented where the professionals were evaluated by the superiors, colleagues and subordinates.
Though, Rob Parson did very well in bringing clients to the firm but he had poor relations with his
colleagues and subordinates and everyone had commented negatively during his performance evaluation.
Rob Parson activities and qualities are not in agreement with the organization’s mission and culture. In the
self-assessment exercise, he did concede that he is not exactly suited to the organizations’ culture, and he
would require some time to completely adjust. Thinking seriously about all these points, it comes down to
what is critical for the organization, its society, the mission and the qualities set for itself or the fleeting
money related profit.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Paul Nasr has to take decision to recommend Rob Parson for the promotion to the position of managing
director. If yes, then what would be the implications of this decision on the overall organization’s policies?
If no, then what would be the reaction of Rob Parson, it could be possible that Morgan Stanley loses such
a competent and top performer. The main problem for Paul Nasr was to take a fair decision while dealing
in a sophisticated manner with Rob Parson so that he could get his point. The root cause of the issue was
the difference between Rob Parson’s thoughts and the corporate culture of the company. He doesn’t show
respect towards his coworkers, does not have any cooperation aptitudes, and do not consider the importance
of employee development, as he believes that he is the sharpest of every one of them. Parsons fundamental
vision was through his magnificent execution in the Capital Market Services to create great results and to
manufacture well and long haul association with his and the organization’s customers and he is doing the
job effectively. It could be possible that Rob Parson would be a victim of self-sabotage, where people
unconsciously undercut themselves due to the challenging nature of their job or due to some other reasons.
An aggressive feedback regarding a person’s unconscious behavior could affect his/her confidence and self-
dignity.

5. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
5 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




VISION AND MISSION OF MORGA N STANLEY

 “ONE FIRM FIRM” is the vision of morgan Stanley , which means
"The talent and passion of our people are critical to our success. Together, we
share a common set of values rooted in integrity and excellence.”
 And the mission statement of Morgan Stanley “Our goal is to be world best investment
bank and firm of choice for our clients, our people, and our shareholders. Which means

• Lead with integrity
– Do the right thing
– Respect others and appreciate diverse points of view
– Make decisions based on merit
– Be open and direct in telling people what you think
• Put clients first
– Act in their best, long-term interests
– Build trust while you build our franchise
• Win in the marketplace
– Pursue excellence
– Be agile and entrepreneurial
– Embrace risk but manage it aggressively
– Question convention and seek out creative solution
• Think like an owner
– Take personal responsibility for our success
– Make decisions and be accountable
– Work as one firm, delivering all our resources to our client
• Keep your balance
– Enjoy a life outside of work
– Be socially responsible
– Never lose your sense of humour

6. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
6 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



ROB PARSON’s Summary

 Rob Parson was a young enthusiastic investment banker with ten years of working
experience, who was hired by Paul Nasr as a Market coverage professional at Morgan
Stanley.
 All throughout his ten years on professional experience in the investment market Parson
has gained a deep insight of the capital market and banking sector and therefore built a
strong relationship with all the big players in the market. He did his 2 year MBA from
University of southern California within a year.
 Parson was approached by Paul Nasr to join Morgan Stanley to which he was doubtful at
first to join as he knew he didn’t fit the typical Morgan Stanley type.
 Parson started his career, his first job was at a commercial bank where he had training
and landed up in saving and loaning business.
 Parson joined Morgan Stanley as coverage professional and where he found that the firm
was not doing well enough and that the firm was very consensus.
 He believed that he possessed more deep knowledge about the market than any other
individual at Morgan Stanley and therefore he followed his own ways to get business deal
in.
 Rob Parson was hostile in his behaviour and lacked team player’s skills and could be
insincere at times as observed by his colleagues.
 However Parson was the Star performer at the firm and brought in tremendous business
that created a good deal of profit for the company.
 Rob Parson made things happen that wouldn’t otherwise happen, he had a great ability to
cross-sell and a very energetic approach towards business, therefore he was an
outstanding contributor at Morgan Stanley.

7. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
7 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



SWOT ANALYSIS

STRENGTH:
o Strong intrapersonal skill.
o Good decision maker.
o Built good relation with client in financial sector.
o Excellent marketing knowledge.

WEAKNESS:
o Poor interpersonal skills.
o Carries Holler than thou attitude
o Mistreats his colleagues and underestimate them.

OPPORTUNITY:
o Working with Morgan Stanley

THREAT:
o Hostile environment.
.

8. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
8 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t





PAUL NASR’s Summary

Paul Nasr was a highly regarded banker. After becoming president of Morgan Stanley, Mack
explicitly sought people who would “shake up the culture”. In a Major coup, he recruit Paul
Nasr. Paul Nasr had nearly 20 years of experience and was credited with building a formidable
capital market business. Nasr soon assumed a leadership role in capital markets services for
Morgan Stanley. He is the only person who appointed Rob Parson into the Morgan Stanley.

SWOT ANALYSIS

STRENGTH:
o 20 years of experience before joining Morgan Stanley.
o Considered as highly regarded banker.
WEAKNESS:
o Always treated Rob gently with kid gloves.
o Less experienced in Morgan Stanley.
OPPORTUNITY :
o Leadership.
o Delivering the capital market services to the banks and insurance.
THREAT:
o Fear of losing Rob Parson.
o Fear of group members that Paul is acting as protector or as a God Father.

9. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
9 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




Mintzberg’s Managerial Role

10. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
10 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




Paul Nasur into Mintzberg’s Managerial Role:


INTRAPERSONAL Aspect:
Paul was neither a good Mentor nor a better Manager. He failed to give timely feedback to
Rob Parson. Which led to Parson’s failure in adapting to the organization’s Environment
so easily.



INFORMATIONAL Aspect :
Nasur failed to give the right feedback at the right time that led to the Ultimate failure of
Rob Parson. In fact he was a total failure in informing the Higher Authority about the
problems Parson was actually facing and continuously went on neglecting his flaws.



DECISIONAL Aspect:
Paul could not take the right decisions at the right time. Had he been able to do so, Rob
would not be facing such problems to communicate with his colleagues and adapt with the
Organization’s culture in a year. Finally he could not keep his promise in promoting Rob
Parson to the post of Senior Managing Director in one year.

11. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
11 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




Rob Parson into Mintzberg’s Managerial Role:

INTRAPERSONAL Aspect:
Rob Parson was very intelligent and focused enough to bring business to the Organization
by building good and friendly relationships with the clients. So, he received good feedbacks
from them in time of his Promotion to the post of Senior Managing Director of Morgan
Stanly.



INFORMATIONAL Aspect:
Parson was lacking in the Interpersonal skills and because of this he was incapable of
following the People factor and the Firm’s Vision and Mission “One Firm Firm”. He was
unable to easily adapt to the Environment of the organization.



DECISIONAL Aspect:
Rob Parson was an expert in fetching business for the organization and the biggest secret
behind this factor was his self-motivation and drive. He needed no extra support from
outside to take any kind of decisions for his performance in finding the second position for
Morgan Stanly from that of the tenth position in Global Stock Broking and Investment
Firm.

12. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
12 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




Star Performer

In an organization, a star performer is the person who not only strategizes to do their
own work effectively but also is able to work with other people of the organization
efficiently.
Being a Star performer starts with being self-aware since it’s only when you are
aware of your own thoughts, emotions, motivations, capabilities that you can control
them. And it’s only after you understand yourself that you can begin to understand
and thereby influence others.
Basic traits showcased in a star performer are:
 Initiative
 Networking
 Self-knowledge
 Kindness
All in all it can be said that a star performer is a person possessing emotional
intelligence. It leads the person to influence, team leadership, political awareness,
self-confidence, self-regulation, empathy and achievement drives. A good person
seeking self-knowledge and taking responsibility for his/her whereabouts.

13. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
13 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




Why was Rob Parson a Star Performer?


Rob Parson was a star producer in the division of Morgan Stanley Capital
markets. He was recruited from a competitor last year and caused a
significant income since joining the firm. He was a sole responsible for
the impeccable success of Morgan Stanley by bringing it to
3rd
position
from 12
th
during its inception. Rob parson was known for its arrogant and
inappropriate behavior with his subordinates which makes him a very
difficult person to work with. But beside this he was a goal oriented person
as well as specialized in his field of investment banking which allows him
to bring businesses for the Morgan Stanley and created a strong
relationship with reputed organization, investors and bankers. He was the
one who created a holistic environment in the organization and derive an
idea of lending the Morgan Stanley franchise to other which can generate
huge margin of profit for Morgan Stanley.

14. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
14 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




FEEDBACK


Feedback occurs when outputs of a system are routed
back as inputs as part of a chain of cause-and-
effect that forms a circuit or loop. The system can then
be said to feed back into itself. The notion of cause-
and-effect has to be handled carefully when applied to
feedback systems:

"Simple causal reasoning about a feedback system is difficult because the first
system influences the second and second system influences the first, leading to a
circular argument. This makes reasoning based upon cause and effect tricky, and it
is necessary to analyze the system as a whole.

15. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
15 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t




IMPORTANCE OF FEEDBACK

To provide comprehensive developmental feedback so that employees could continue to
improve their skills in four areas: a) Market/professional skills; b) Management and
leadership effectiveness; c) commercial orientation; and d) teamwork/one firm
contribution.

Feedback can improve performance: - Feedback is often mistaken for criticism. In
fact, what is viewed as negative criticism is actually constructive criticism and is the best
find of feedback that can help to formulate better decisions to improve and increase
performance.


Feedback is effective listening: - whether the feedback is done verbally or via a
feedback survey, the person providing the feedback needs to know they have been
understood (or received) and they need to know that their feedback provides some value.

Feedback can actually motivate the employees to perform better. Employees like to feel
valued and appreciate being asked to provide feedback that can help formulate business
decisions. And feedback from client, suppliers, vendors, and stakeholders can be used to
motivate to build better working relations.


Feedback is a tool for continued learning: - invest time in asking and learning about
how others experience working with your organisations. Continued feedback is important
across the entire organisations in order to remain aligned to goals, create strategies, and
develop products and services improvements and much more.

16. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
16 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t





360 degree- appraisal is a system or process in which employees receive confidential
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL: A Performance Appraisal is the assessment of individuals’
performance in the systematic way. It is a developmental tool used for all round development of
the employee and the organization.

Uses of 360 degree feedback:
 Self-development and individual counselling
 Part of ‘organized’ training and development
 Team building
 Performance management
 Strategic and organization development
 Validation of organization and other initiatives

Process of Performance Appraisal:
Process involves the obtaining feedback from the manager’s key contacts. Theses would
normally include:
 Peers- day to day behaviour
 Direct reports- how results are achieved
 Customers- quality of service and problem solving
 Superior- results and work outcomes
How feedback is obtained: by using a questionnaire which asks participants to rate the individual
according to observed behaviors- usually managerial or business specific competencies.

17. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
17 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t






PROS & CONS of Performance Appraisal:
When an employee is recruited, he has to undertake certain
responsibilities and the company has also set certain
standards for him to excel. To check how he has
undertaken his job and responsibilities and measures his
productivity.
The main principle behind Performance Appraisal is that
when an employer receives feedback from multiple people
regarding his overall performance. He receives a complete
picture of how effective he is at work and what needs to be done to develop him personally and
professionally. So that he can meet the standards set for him by the company.

18. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
18 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



Rob Parson – 360 Degree Appraisal
Morgan Stanley, a leading U.S. Investment Bank, was attempting to transform its work
environment to one that fosters teamwork but promotes innovation as well. This vision was
developed under the leadership of the new president John Mack and his executive team. President
Mack was looking for people to “shake up the culture.” With heavy resistance, he recruited Paul
Nasr to be the Senior Managing Director in Capital Market Services. Paul was a highly regarded
banker with over twenty (20) years of experience. He knew that one of Morgan Stanley’s weak
areas was Capital Market Services, an area where he had been successful in the past. Paul also
knew that it would take more than a traditional corporate banker to penetrate this market. That
person must be energetic, aggressive and innovative. That’s why he recruited Rob Parson. Rob
developed relationships with the important players in the banking and insurance industries and a
strong reputation. Rob is not easily discouraged or intimidated and knows what it takes to get the
job done. His drive and ambition allows him to connect with his clients but sometimes distances
him from his co-workers.
The internal environment at Morgan Stanley was one of teamwork, employee development,
dignity and respect. Morgan Stanley had developed a way of building consensus rather that
individualism. They have developed a process of conducting business where everyone is included
in the decision making. Anyone who fails to follow procedures or questions the process is
considered a nonconformist. The external environment demanded immediate results. This arose
from the nature of the Capital Markets Services and clients that demanded quick answers and while
threatening to take their business elsewhere.

Initially, Rob Parson and Paul Nasr engaged in a Psychological Contract during recruitment. Paul
needed someone to take on a challenging job and Parson wanted the opportunity to be creative as
well as the chance to achieve a promotion to managing director. Parson was concerned about the
cultural diversity that he would experience at Morgan Stanley due to his management style and
personality characteristics. Parson is a Type “C” manager because he’s interested in his own
opinion rather than those of others. The majority of the time he was right. When he was, it made
his co-workers feel undermined which created animosity. Role conflict originated with the
President, John Mack. First, Mack developed a culture that fosters teamwork, then he actively
sought people to shake things up. Paul Nasr in turn, hired Rob Parson, an aggressive individual
who’s not necessarily a team player, to fill a position that required his unique personality
characteristics. Paul then appeared to be concerned about a performance evaluation that describes
those characteristics and how they don’t fit the Morgan Stanley culture. Rob seemed to be exactly
what they needed and wanted but now he isn’t…the culture didn’t change nor did Rob’s
personality. How can they expect employees to modify their behavior to fit the environment when
the company’s hiring practices don’t support it.

19. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
19 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t


One theory in effect is the expectancy theory. Parson was only interested in producing results
which he expected would result in his promotion to managing director. There is evidence of
McClelland’s Learned Needs theory in that Parson likes to take responsibility for solving
problems; he set moderate goals by going to the smaller firm; and he wanted continued feedback
from Paul regarding his performance. Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory of motivation is also present.
Parson’s dissatisfaction (extrinsic) factor was company procedures and his satisfaction (intrinsic)
factor was responsibility, possibility of growth, and advancement.
Morgan Stanley did a great job in describing the work environment in their vision and in
articulating how each position must contribute to that vision in the job descriptions. However, I’m
not sure if Paul did a good job in stressing this to Rob during recruitment. I would keep the 360
degree evaluation system because it provides a more detailed analysis of each employee’s
performance. However, everyone shouldn’t be evaluated on the same criteria and the evaluation
shouldn’t be the only factor in determining promotions. A Principal shouldn’t be evaluated using
the same criteria of a managing director or an associate. Also, a principal in the capital market
services division shouldn’t be compared to a principal in another division. In both cases, the job
requirements are different. Next, I would couple the performance evaluation, client satisfaction
and significant results to determine promotion. One downfall of using only the 360 degree
evaluation is that animosity can sometime cloud a fair and impartial judgement by co-workers.
I would articulate what type of work environment I expect in the Capital Market Services Division
to everyone within the division and how this supports the firm’s vision. I would articulate what
type of management characteristics I would expect to see within the division. Rob appeared to
have the expertise of a managing director which would explain why his peers might have difficulty
working with him. But there’s more to being a managing director than just expertise. It also entails
the articulation of departmental vision and leading by example which Parson has difficulty doing.
I would recommend Rob for promotion but in the evaluation and development summary I would
clearly state Rob’s shortcomings and how he could improve. Finally, I would meet with Rob to let
him know what is expected of him.
Rob Parson was a star producer in Morgan Stanley's Capital Markets division. He had been
recruited from a competitor the prior year and had generated substantial revenues since joining the
firm. Unfortunately, Parson's reviews from the 360-degree performance evaluation process
revealed that he was having difficulty adapting to the firm's culture. His manager, Paul Nasr, faces
the difficult decision of whether to promote Parson to managing director. Nasr must also complete
Parson's performance evaluation summary and conduct Parson's performance review. However,
his approach towards his clients were so good that he finally succeeded in building strong Personal
as well as Intrapersonal relationships with them that helped him to fetch and bring business to the
Organization.

20. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
20 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



















RATING CHART

21. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
21 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t


Geetika Rating

Downward/colleague criteria. Direct
manager
score
Downward
average
score
Colleagu
e average
score
1. Professional Skills
a. Market and product knowledge
b. Analytical /Quantitative/Problem
Solving Skills.
c. Creativity
d. Initiative & Commitment
e. Judgment & Decision Making
f. Versatility
g. Oral Communication Skills
h. Written Communication Skills
i. Professionalism

4.0

3.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
NA
3.5

4.5

4.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
NA
3.5

4.0

3.5
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.5
NA
3.8
2. Commercial Orientation
a. Relationship Management.
b. Cross-selling/ selling.
c. Commercial instincts/Revenue
Contribution
d. Enhance PBT/Expense Control
e. Adherence to Firm Policies/ Limits
f. Deal execution/ Project Management

3.5
4.0

4.0
3.5
3.0
4.0

3.0
3.5

4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3. Management Skills
a. Globe Business Management
b. Leadership & Management of
People
c. Evaluation, Development & Coaching
d. Management of Diverse Workforce
e. Management of Firm’s Resources
f. Time Management
g. Planning

------------
2.5
NA
NA
3.5
4.5
3.0

3.5
2.5
NA
NA
3.8
4.0
3.0

NA
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4. One firm contribution
a. Team Player skills
b. Contributes to MS and External
related community

2.5

------------

2.0

NA

3.5

NA
Arithmetic Average ---------
Overall rating : 3.13

22. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
22 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t


Anusha Rating

Downward/colleague criteria. Direct
manager
score
Downward
average
score
Colleague
average
score
1. Professional Skills
a. Market and product knowledge
b. Analytical /Quantitative/Problem
Solving Skills.
c. Creativity
d. Initiative & Commitment
e. Judgment & Decision Making
f. Versatility
g. Oral Communication Skills
h. Written Communication Skills
i. Professionalism

3.5

3.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.0
3.0
NA
3.5

4.5

4.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
NA
3.5

4.0

3.5
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.5
NA
3.8
2. Commercial Orientation
a. Relationship Management.
b. Cross-selling/ selling.
c. Commercial instincts/Revenue
Contribution
d. Enhance PBT/Expense Control
e. Adherence to Firm Policies/ Limits
f. Deal execution/ Project Management

3.0
4.0

4.0
3.5
3.5
4.0

3.0
3.5

4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3. Management Skills
a. Globe Business Management
b. Leadership & Management of People
c. Evaluation, Development & Coaching
d. Management of Diverse Workforce
e. Management of Firm’s Resources
f. Time Management
g. Planning

------------
2.5
NA
NA
3.5
4.5
3.0

3.5
2.5
NA
NA
3.8
4.0
3.0

NA
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4. One firm contribution
a. Team Player skills
b. Contributes to MS and External
related community

2.5

------------

2.0

NA

3.5

NA
Arithmetic Average ---------
Overall rating : 2.90

23. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
23 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t


Jyotsna Rating

Downward/colleague criteria. Direct
manager
score
Downward
average
score
Colleague
average
score
1. Professional Skills
a. Market and product knowledge
b. Analytical /Quantitative/Problem
Solving Skills.
c. Creativity
d. Initiative & Commitment
e. Judgment & Decision Making
f. Versatility
g. Oral Communication Skills
h. Written Communication Skills
i. Professionalism

4.5

4.0
4.0
4.5
3.5
4.0
4.0
NA
4.0

4.5

4.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
NA
3.5

4.0

3.5
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.5
NA
3.8
2. Commercial Orientation
a. Relationship Management.
b. Cross-selling/ selling.
c. Commercial instincts/Revenue
Contribution
d. Enhance PBT/Expense Control
e. Adherence to Firm Policies/ Limits
f. Deal execution/ Project Management

3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0
3.0
3.0

3.0
3.5

4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3. Management Skills
a. Globe Business Management
b. Leadership & Management of People
c. Evaluation, Development & Coaching
d. Management of Diverse Workforce
e. Management of Firm’s Resources
f. Time Management
g. Planning

3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
4.0
3.5

3.5
2.5
NA
NA
3.8
4.0
3.0

NA
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4. One firm contribution
a. Team Player skills
b. Contributes to MS and External
related community

3.0

------------

2.0

NA

3.5

NA
Arithmetic Average ---------
Overall rating : 3.22

24. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
24 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t


Enashree Rating

Downward/colleague criteria. Direct
manager
score
Downward
average
score
Colleague
average
score
1. Professional Skills
a. Market and product knowledge
b. Analytical /Quantitative/Problem
Solving Skills.
c. Creativity
d. Initiative & Commitment
e. Judgment & Decision Making
f. Versatility
g. Oral Communication Skills
h. Written Communication Skills
i. Professionalism

4.0

3.5
4.5
4.5
3.5
4.0
4.0
NA
4.5

4.5

4.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
NA
3.5

4.0

3.5
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.5
NA
3.8
2. Commercial Orientation
a. Relationship Management.
b. Cross-selling/ selling.
c. Commercial instincts/Revenue
Contribution
d. Enhance PBT/Expense Control
e. Adherence to Firm Policies/ Limits
f. Deal execution/ Project Management

3.5
4.0

4.5
3.5
3.0
4.0

3.0
3.5

4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3. Management Skills
a. Globe Business Management
b. Leadership & Management of People
c. Evaluation, Development & Coaching
d. Management of Diverse Workforce
e. Management of Firm’s Resources
f. Time Management
g. Planning

3.5
4.0
NA
NA
3.5
4.0
4.5

3.5
2.5
NA
NA
3.8
4.0
3.0

NA
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4. One firm contribution
a. Team Player skills
b. Contributes to MS and External
related community

2.0

------------

2.0

NA

3.5

NA
Arithmetic Average ---------
Overall rating : 3.42

25. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
25 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



Aman Rating

Downward/colleague criteria. Direct
manager
score
Downward
average
score
Colleague
average
score
1. Professional Skills
a. Market and product knowledge
b. Analytical /Quantitative/Problem
Solving Skills.
c. Creativity
d. Initiative & Commitment
e. Judgment & Decision Making
f. Versatility
g. Oral Communication Skills
h. Written Communication Skills
i. Professionalism

4.0

3.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
NA
3.5

4.5

4.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
NA
3.5

4.0

3.5
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.5
NA
3.8
2. Commercial Orientation
a. Relationship Management.
b. Cross-selling/ selling.
c. Commercial instincts/Revenue
Contribution
d. Enhance PBT/Expense Control
e. Adherence to Firm Policies/ Limits
f. Deal execution/ Project Management

3.5
2.5

4.0
4.0
3.0
3.5

3.0
3.5

4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3. Management Skills
a. Globe Business Management
b. Leadership & Management of People
c. Evaluation, Development & Coaching
d. Management of Diverse Workforce
e. Management of Firm’s Resources
f. Time Management
g. Planning

4.0
2.5
2.7
2.0
3.0
3.5
4.0

3.5
2.5
NA
NA
3.8
4.0
3.0

NA
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4. One firm contribution
a. Team Player skills
b. Contributes to MS and External
related community

2.5

------------

2.0

NA

3.5

NA
Arithmetic Average ---------
Overall rating : 3.41

26. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
26 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t


Soumitra Rating

Downward/colleague criteria. Direct
manager
score
Downward
average
score
Colleague
average
score
1. Professional Skills
a. Market and product knowledge
b. Analytical /Quantitative/Problem
Solving Skills.
c. Creativity
d. Initiative & Commitment
e. Judgment & Decision Making
f. Versatility
g. Oral Communication Skills
h. Written Communication Skills
i. Professionalism

4.0

4.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.5
NA
3.5

4.5

4.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
NA
3.5

4.0

3.5
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.5
NA
3.8
2. Commercial Orientation
a. Relationship Management.
b. Cross-selling/ selling.
c. Commercial instincts/Revenue
Contribution
d. Enhance PBT/Expense Control
e. Adherence to Firm Policies/ Limits
f. Deal execution/ Project Management

3.5
4.0

2.5
2.0
3.0
3.5

3.0
3.5

4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3. Management Skills
a. Globe Business Management
b. Leadership & Management of People
c. Evaluation, Development & Coaching
d. Management of Diverse Workforce
e. Management of Firm’s Resources
f. Time Management
g. Planning

3.5
4.0
2.5
2.0
3.0
3.5
3.0

3.5
2.5
NA
NA
3.8
4.0
3.0

NA
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4. One firm contribution
a. Team Player skills
b. Contributes to MS and External
related community

2.5

------------

2.0

NA

3.5

NA
Arithmetic Average ---------
Overall rating : 3.45

27. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
27 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t


Akash Rating

Downward/colleague criteria. Direct
manager
score
Downward
average
score
Colleague
average
score
1. Professional Skills
a. Market and product knowledge
b. Analytical /Quantitative/Problem
Solving Skills.
c. Creativity
d. Initiative & Commitment
e. Judgment & Decision Making
f. Versatility
g. Oral Communication Skills
h. Written Communication Skills
i. Professionalism

4.0

3.5
3.0
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
NA
3.5

4.5

4.0
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
NA
3.5

4.0

3.5
3.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
3.5
NA
3.8
2. Commercial Orientation
a. Relationship Management.
b. Cross-selling/ selling.
c. Commercial instincts/Revenue
Contribution
d. enhance PBT/Expense Control
e. adherence to Firm Policies/ Limits
f. Deal execution/ Project Management

3.0
4.0

4.0
2.5
3.0
4.0

3.0
3.5

4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
3. Management Skills
a. Globe Business Management
b. Leadership & Management of People
c. Evaluation, Development & Coaching
d. Management of Diverse Workforce
e. Management of Firm’s Resources
f. Time Management
g. Planning

NA
2.5
NA
NA
3.5
3.5
3.0

3.5
2.5
NA
NA
3.8
4.0
3.0

NA
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
4. One firm contribution
a. Team Player skills
b. Contributes to MS and External
related community

2.5

------------

2.0

NA

3.5

NA
Arithmetic Average ---------
Overall rating : 3.00

28. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
28 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



Rating Graph





3.38
3.67
1.92
2.5
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Professional SkillsCommercial OrientationManagement SkillsOne Fim Contribution
Geetika Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score
3.11
3.67
1.92
2.5
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Professional SkillsCommercial OrientationManagement SkillsOne Fim Contribution
Anusha Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score

29. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
29 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t







3.61
3.41
2.64
3
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Professional SkillsCommercial OrientationManagement SkillsOne Fim Contribution
Jyotsna Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score
3.64
3.75
2.89
2
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Professional SkillsCommercial OrientationManagement SkillsOne Fim Contribution
Enashree Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score

30. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
30 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t







3.68
3.41
3.1
2.5
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Professional SkillsCommercial OrientationManagement SkillsOne Fim Contribution
Aman Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score
3.81
3.14
3.07
2.5
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Professional SkillsCommercial OrientationManagement SkillsOne Fim Contribution
Soumitra Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score

31. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
31 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t







3.61
3.41
1.79
2.5
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Professional SkillsCommercial OrientationManagement SkillsOne Fim Contribution
Akash Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score
3.48 3.49
2.47 2.5
3.5
3.33 3.3
2.5
4.08
3.71
3.95 4
PROFESSIONAL SKILLS COMMERCIAL
ORIENTATION
MANAGEMENT SKILLS ONE FIM CONTRIBUTION
Group Rating Graph
Direct Manager ScoreDownward Average Score Colleague Average Score

32. Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley (A)
32 | P a g e V i s i o n Q u e s t



SHOULD ROB PARSON BE PROMOTED or NOT ?

Yes, Rob Parson should be promoted, because:-

 As Rob Parson took the company to the 3
rd
position in the market from 12
th

position in a very short span of time.

 He has strong market knowledge and relationships with the important
players in the banking and insurance sector.

 He was a very hard worker, though he lacks in his interpersonal skills, but
he has excellent intrapersonal skills.

 He has the ability to increase the revenue and market share of the
company.

 The motive of the company was ‘profit maximization’ and parson stands
on company’s motive.

 According to the company’s norm ‘Up or Fire’ which means either Parson
should be promoted or fired.