1) Henkel conducted employee surveys in 2003 and 2004 using the Denison Organizational Culture Survey to assess cultural drivers of success. 2) The results showed areas for improvement in strategic direction, values, and cross-divisional cooperation. Managers developed over 470 action plans to address issues. 3) Business units and countries that developed specific action plans targeting key issues saw significant score improvements, while those with few plans saw little change or decreases. Developing plans at specific levels had the greatest impact.

1. Volume 2, Issue 3, 2007
casestudy
Turning Results into Action: Action Planning at Henkel
What makes a company successful? How can were regarded as
attitude, conduct and actions be molded into a insignificant and later
coherent, performance-enhancing corporate culture survey results revealed
that delivers success to shareholders, stakeholders an impression that not
and customers? These are important questions much had happened, and
for any company but for Henkel, the answers to employees became
these questions are particularly important because discouraged from participating in future surveys.
of the large role that corporate culture plays within In addition, it became increasingly apparent that
Henkel’s operations. Founded in 1876, “Henkel surveying employee satisfaction, while having
- A Brand like a Friend” is a Fortune Global 500 inherent value, did not facilitate an understanding of
company headquartered in Dusseldorf, Germany. the factors that drive the success of a corporation or
With more than 52,000 employees worldwide, it is its cultural character. Henkel needed to know more
a leader in three strategic business areas that are than merely the level of satisfaction of its employees.
dedicated to making people’s lives easier, better Henkel needed to answer two questions: What
and more beautiful: 1) Home Care, 2) Personal drives success? What cultural elements need to be
Care, and 3) Adhesives, Sealants, and Surface improved in order to improve performance?
Treatment. In over 125 countries, people trust
Henkel’s brands and technologies. From Dial® soap The search for a suitable system to measure the
to Purex® laundry detergent and Duck® brand cultural drivers of success within a corporation
duct tape, Henkel brands are part of everyday life. led Henkel to the Denison Organizational Culture
Although the Henkel of 2007 is a far cry from its Survey (DOCS). Henkel was looking for a culture
origins as a family-owned business, it continues tool that used benchmarks as an integral part of
to be significantly influenced by family roots. The its employee surveys and could be executed with
significance of the culture that has developed relative ease and within short intervals. Additionally,
over the decades is clearly expressed in the firmly Henkel realized that the company as a whole would
established corporate principle: “We preserve the need to adopt a proactive approach to address the
tradition of an open family.” problems identified in the survey and that it would
be necessary to create concrete action plans.
An integral part of Henkel’s success has been
the value they have placed on the attitudes In 2003, all management levels in Henkel completed
and opinions of their employees. Employee the DOCS -- a population around 7,500 worldwide.
surveys have been a regular feature within the There were several clear messages from the results.
Henkel corporate environment since the 1980s; First, they showed a perceived lack of knowledge of
previous projects assessed employees’ attitudes, the Henkel strategy. In addition, Henkel managers
satisfaction, and identification with the company. were not sufficiently aware of the Vision and Values
These initiatives provided useful information for of the Henkel Group. The results also indicated
Henkel, but over time, problems arose within that Henkel employees wanted closer cooperation
their employee survey efforts. The survey efforts across departmental boundaries.
addressed so many different issues that employees
developed high expectations for extensive and Managers received the results for their departments
tangible change. The changes that were introduced to share with their employees. This allowed them
All content © copyright 2005-2008 Denison Consulting, LLC. All rights reserved. l www.denisonculture.com l Page 1

2. to identify potential areas for further improvement with Customer Focus, and 9% were involved with
and to develop action plans. Henkel recommended Teamwork and Cooperation.
feedback and discussion beginning with the
following questions: The second survey, conducted in November 2004,
showed many improvements. Results for Henkel
- What are the predominant patterns in the survey overall showed improvements in all areas except
results? Team Orientation (see Figure 1). The significant
- How do these results fit with your own perception improvements in Mission reflected the intensive
of the organization? discussions held after the first survey and the
- What conclusions might be drawn from the data intense communication of the Henkel Vision in the
with respect to our strategic objectives? business sectors. Significant improvements also
- What are the specific deficiencies that need to be occurred in Coordination & Integration and Creating
addressed so that we may achieve our goals and Change.
targets?
The benefit of action planning was also illustrated
Feedback workshops were organized in order to by improvements in different parts of the organiza-
discuss the survey results and action plans were tion. For example, Business Unit 1 was low in two
created to address the changes and improvements Mission indexes (i.e., Strategic Direction & Intent,
suggested by the survey. Specifically, the groups Vision) and Consistency indexes (i.e., Coordination &
discussed reasons for the low scores in the Integration, Core Values). Specific action plans were
various areas, drew their conclusions and, where developed and recorded for several different coun-
appropriate, recommended action steps to address tries and departments within this unit. Within each
these issues. Approximately 470 action steps were of these countries and departments, action plans for
created to address the problem areas identified Business Unit 1 targeted anywhere from one to five
by the DOCS. Of these 470 action steps, 47% areas for improvement including Core Values, Coor-
were involved with Henkel’s Strategy, Vision and dination and Integration, Vision and Mission. Most
Values, 25% were involved with Cross-divisional and of these action plans further specified around three
Henkel Overall
Cross-functional Cooperation, 19% were involved
Henkel Overall courses of action that would be taken to improve
Figure 1 = Henkel Overall 2003 to 2004
20032003 2004
2004
2003 2004
External Focus
External Focus External Focus
External Focus
82 82 83 83
54 54
57 57 44 44 57 57 61 61 66 66
NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
50 NA NA 63 63 59 59
50 44 44 NA NA
Beliefs NA NA
Beliefs and and Beliefs NA NA
Beliefs and and
Flexible
Flexible Assumptions Stable Flexible
Stable Flexible Assumptions Stable
Stable
Assumptions Assumptions
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
NA 39 39 47
73 75 75 47
73 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA
NA
64 64 63 63 63 63 72 72
67 67 54 54 70 70 59 59
Internal Focus
Internal Focus Internal Focus
Internal Focus
N =N4531
N = 4531
= 4531 NN 6972
= = 6972
N = 6972
All content © copyright 2005-2008 Denison Consulting, LLC. All rights reserved. l www.denisonculture.com l Page 2

3. each area, for example, “enact cross-di- Figure 2 = Business Unit 1
visional job rotation” and “holding weekly Business Unit 1
Gap Report
current affairs meetings”. Defining action-
2003 2004
100 75 50 25 0 25 50 75 100
able plans within many different countries Involvement
and departments had an effect on driving Empowerment 68 20 88
change for the broader business unit as Team Orientation
Capability Development
54
82 8
23 77
90
a whole (See Figure 2). As a result, Unit 1 Consistency
saw a large improvement in their scores Core Values 39 38 77
from 2003 to 2004, especially in Core Agreement 66 25 91
Coordination & Integration
Values and Coordination and Integration.
39 38 77
Adaptability
In contrast, Business Unit 2 recorded few Creating Change 71 18 89
plans after the 2003 survey and conse- Customer Focus 78 13 91
quently saw little change, and in some Organizational Learning 87 7 94
cases, even decreased in scores on the Mission
2004 survey (see Figure 3). This reinforced Strategic Direction & Intent
Goals & Objectives
46
61 27
37 83
88
the importance of recording and develop- Vision 40 42 82
ing specific action plans targeted to the
level of the organization where you want Figure 3 = Business Unit 2 Percentile Score
Bar on left indicates this group
has a higher percentile score
Bar on right indicates this group
has a higher percentile score
Percentile Score
for group on left
Business Unit 2 for group on right
to drive change. 09-Oct-07 Gap Report 2003 2004
100 75 50 25 0 25 50 75 100
The effects of action planning could also Involvement
Empowerment
be seen at the country-level. Country A
48 17 65
Team Orientation 43 28 15
developed country-level action plans that Capability Development 76 9 85
focused on vision, values, and strategy Consistency
which resulted in a 76% increase in scores Core Values
Agreement
42
59
11
5
31
64
in 2004 (see Figure 4). However, while a Coordination & Integration 54 50 4
large number of action plans were defined Adaptability
for the broader geographic region (which Creating Change 74 8 66
included Country B along with three other Customer Focus
Organizational Learning
62
78 2
28 90
80
countries), no plans were identified at the Mission
country-level for Country B which resulted Strategic Direction & Intent 34 16 18
in a decrease in Country B’s scores in Goals & Objectives 40 18 58
Vision
2004 (see Figure 5).
38 14 24
Figure 4 = Country A Bar on left indicates this group
has a higher percentile score
Bar on right indicates this group
has a higher percentile score
Taken together, these findings suggest
Percentile Score Percentile Score
for group on left
Country A for group on right
Gap Report
that it is important to incorporate ac-
09-Oct-07 2003 2004
100 75 50 25 0 25 50 75 100
tion planning within the survey process Involvement
to bring about positive, tangible change. Empowerment 64 28 92
The results of the 2004 survey indicate Team Orientation
Capability Development
63
58
22
25
85
83
that the greatest improvements between Consistency
the 2003 and 2004 surveys were in those Core Values 55 34 89
departments or levels that specifically Agreement 26 57 83
targeted a few key areas for improvement
Coordination & Integration 32 53 85
and identified a few courses of action that
Adaptability
Creating Change 52 36 88
would be taken to drive change. Those Customer Focus 66 19 85
levels of the organization that did not Organizational Learning 72 15 87
record specific action plans generally did Mission
not change to the same degree. It also Strategic Direction & Intent
Goals & Objectives
12
52 38
80 92
90
appears that more was gained by devel- Vision 9 79 88
oping action plans at specific levels of
Bar on left indicates this group Bar on right indicates this group
has a higher percentile score has a higher percentile score
Percentile Score Percentile Score
for group on left for group on right
All content © copyright 2005-2008 Denison Consulting, LLC. All rights reserved.
09-Oct-07 l www.denisonculture.com l Page 3

4. the organization than when action Figure 5 = Country B
plans were developed at broader Country B
Gap Report
organizational levels. Using 100 75
2003
50 25 0 25
2004
50 75 100
Business Unit 1 as an example, Involvement
when action plans were developed Empowerment 63 16 47
at specific levels within the Team Orientation 52 8 44
Capability Development
organization (e.g. Unit 1: Spain, Unit
39 19 20
Consistency
1: UK) not only did those specific Core Values 40 2 38
levels improve, but the effects of Agreement 60 12 48
these plans also seemed to bubble- Coordination & Integration 35 8 43
up and drive change at broader Adaptability
organizational levels. However, the Creating Change 45 11 34
Customer Focus 18 14 32
effect does not appear to go both Organizational Learning 64 14 50
ways. Action plans developed at Mission
broader organizational levels (e.g. Strategic Direction & Intent 48 18 30
an entire geographic region) did Goals & Objectives 46 13 33
Vision
not seem to trickle-down to impact
38 0 38
more specific levels (e.g. countries Bar on left indicates this group Bar on right indicates this group
within that region). improvement over time, Henkel began using The Denison Action
Percentile Score
for group on left
has a higher percentile score has a higher percentile score
Percentile Score
for group on right
Planner: A Dynamic Tool for Implementing Change, after the
09-Oct-07
Aside from these broad conclusions 2006 survey. The Denison Action Planner is designed to translate
about the action planning process, survey results into action by ensuring that the important aspects
Henkel also learned the value of of the action planning process are easily recorded, monitored
systematically tracking the action and summarized. A Web-based tool, the Denison Action Planner
planning process. In order to allows for easy communication and collaboration throughout the
improve action planning throughout change process from initial brainstorming to selecting areas of
the organization, Henkel needed a focus, and tracking the implementation of actionable items. Using
better understanding of the things action planning best practices, this tool helps ensure that the
that worked and didn’t work. Not change process is successful and allows organizations to better
only was it necessary to improve understand how to make the process a success in the future.
upon how action plans are tracked
Related Resources
but also to track how or if plans
were implemented, what the
This case study is based on: Deni-
timeframes were, how the change
son, D. R. & Schlue, R. (2007).
process was communicated and
Managing Corporate Culture at
who was involved.
Henkel: Applying the Denison Orga-
nizational Culture Survey. Gütersloh,
Driven by a desire to ensure that
Germany: Bertelsmann Stiftung
all areas of the organization see
Contact Information Copyright Information
Denison Consulting, LLC Copyright 2005-2008 Denison Consulting, LLC
121 West Washington, Suite 201 All Rights Reserved.
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 Unauthorized reproduction, in any manner, is prohibited.
Phone: (734) 302-4002 The Denison model, circumplex and survey are trade-
Fax: (734) 302-4023 marks of Denison Consulting, LLC.
Email: research@denisonconsulting.com Version 1.0, October 2007
All content © copyright 2005-2007 Denison Consulting, LLC All rights reserved. l www.denisonculture.com l Page 4