You are on page 1of 13


The Congruence Model past experiences and personal assumptions.

Consequently, the “mental model” any leader
A Roadmap uses to analyze organizational problems will
inevitably influence the design of a solution
for Understanding and, by extension, its ultimate success.
Organizational Performance
Although there are countless organizational
The critical first step in designing and leading models, our purpose here is to describe one
successful large-scale change is to fully particular approach–the congruence model
understand the dynamics and performance of organizational behavior. We’ve found the
of the enterprise. It’s simply impossible to congruence model to be particularly useful
prescribe the appropriate remedy without first in helping leaders to understand and analyze
diagnosing the nature and intensity of an their organizations’ performance. This
organization’s problems. approach has been developed and refined
over nearly three decades of academic research
Yet, all too often, senior leaders– particularly and practical application in scores of major
those who have just recently assumed their companies. It doesn’t provide any pat answers
positions or joined a new organization– react or pre-packaged solutions to the perplexing
precipitously to a presenting set of symptoms. issues of large-scale change. Instead, it is a
They quickly spot apparent similarities useful tool that helps leaders understand the
between the new situations they face and interplay of forces that shape the performance
problems they’ve solved in the past, and leap of each organization, and starts them down
to the assumption that what worked before the path of working with their own people to
will work again. design and implement solutions to their
organization’s unique problems.
The imperative to act is understandable but
often misguided. Leaders would be well In this paper, we’ll describe the congruence
advised to heed the advice of Henry Schacht, model and suggest how it can provide a
who successfully led large-scale change as starting point for large-scale change. It has
CEO of both Cummins Engine and Lucent proven to be useful in so many widely varying
Technologies: Stop, take a deep breath, give situations because it meets the test of any
yourself some time, and “get the lay of the successful model: It simplifies what is inher-
land” before leaping to assumptions about ently complicated, reduces the complexity
what should be changed, and how. of organizational dynamics to manageable
proportions, and helps leaders not only to
That’s easier said than done. Without a understand, but also to actually predict, the
comprehensive roadmap – a model – for most important patterns of organizational
understanding the myriad performance behavior and performance.
issues at work in today’s complex enterprises,
leaders are likely to propose changes that How the Model Developed
address symptoms, rather than causes. The
real issues that underlie an organization’s The organizational model most of us carry in
performance can easily go undetected by our head is the age-old pyramid-shaped table
managers who view each new, unique set of of organization that typified institutions as old
problems through the well-worn filter of their as the Roman Legions. That model was fine

© 2003 Mercer Delta Consulting, LLC. All rights reserved.

These materials or parts thereof shall not be reproduced in any
form without written consent of Mercer Delta Consulting, LLC. 1

back when the pace of institutional change some form of output (see Figure 1). In addition,
was measured in decades, even centuries. both have the capacity to create and use
Even through the first half of the 20th century, feedback; in other words, they can use their
organizations changed so slowly that their output to alter their input and refine their
essence could be captured in neat patterns internal processes.
of lines and boxes.
However, it wasn’t until the mid-1970s that
But in recent decades, the rapidly accelerating systems theory found wide acceptance among
pace of change has made that static model students of organizations. Building upon the
obsolete. The old model merely documented important work of earlier theorists (Daniel Katz
hierarchical arrangements; the new models and Robert Kahn, Jay Lorsch and Alan Sheldon,
have to capture the dynamics of fluid relation- and John Seiler), David Nadler and Michael
ships. The old model provided a reasonably Tushman at Columbia University developed a
clear snapshot of a moment in time; today, simple, pragmatic approach to organization
we need real-time, streaming video. dynamics based on systems theory. At roughly
the same time, Harold Leavitt at Stanford
This new approach to understanding organ- University and Jay Galbraith at MIT were
izations really started in the 1960s, when simultaneously grappling with the same
researchers at the Harvard Business School issues. Nadler and Tushman’s efforts led to the
and the University of Michigan began exploring development and refinement of the approach
the similarities between naturally occurring now known as the congruence model.
systems and human organizations. They
discovered some striking parallels. In very The congruence model suggests that in order to
basic terms, both take input from their fully understand an organization’s performance,
surrounding environment, subject it to an you must first understand the organization as
internal transformation process, and produce a system that consists of some basic elements:

Figure 1: The Basic Systems Model

Input Transformation Output




Figure 2: Key Organizational Input


Definition All factors, including Various assets the The patterns of

institutions, groups, organization has access past behavior, activity,
individuals, events, to, including human and effectiveness of
etc., outside of the resources, technology, the organization that
boundaries of the capital, information, may have an effect
organization being etc., as well as less on current organiza-
analyzed, but having tangible resources tional functioning.
a potential impact on (recognition in the
that organization. market, etc.).

Critical What demands does What is the relative What have been the
Features the environment quality of the major stages or phases
make on the different resources of development of
of the organization? that the organization the organization?
Input for has access to?

To what extent does To what extent are What is the current

the environment resources fixed, as impact of historical
put constraints opposed to flexible factors such as:
on organizational in their configuration? Strategic decisions?
action? Acts of key leaders?
Crises? Core value
and norms?

■ The input it draws from both internal and Basic Organizational Components
external sources
■ The strategy it employs to translate its vision
into a set of decisions about where and how An organization’s input includes the elements
to compete, or, in the case of a government that, at any point in time, constitute the set of
agency, the public policy results it wants “givens” with which it has to work. There are
to achieve three main categories of input, each of which
affects the organization in different ways
■ Its output–the products and services it creates
(see Figure 2).
in order to fulfill its strategic objectives
1. The environment: Every organization exists
■ The critical transformation process through
within – and is influenced by – a larger envi-
which people, working within the context
ronment, which includes people, other
of both formal and informal arrangements,
organizations, social and economic forces,
convert input into output
and legal constraints. More specifically, the
The real issue is how the interaction of these environment includes markets (clients or
components results, for good or ill, in some customers); suppliers; governmental and
level of performance. So it’s important to be regulatory bodies; technological, economic,
clear about the nature of each component and and social conditions; labor unions; competi-
its role in the organizational system. tors; financial institutions, and special-
interest groups. The environment affects
organizations in three ways:


- It imposes demands. For instance, Resources may also include less tangible
customer requirements and preferences assets, such as the organization’s reputation
determine the quantity, price, and quality among key outside groups – customers,
of the offerings the organization can investors, regulators, competitors, etc.– or
successfully provide. its internal organizational climate.

- It imposes constraints ranging from capital 3. History: There is considerable evidence that
limitations or insufficient technology the way an organization functions today is
to legal prohibitions rooted in government greatly influenced by landmark events that
regulation, court action, or collective- occurred in its past. In order to reasonably
bargaining agreements. predict an organization’s capacity to act now
or in the future, you must understand the
- It provides opportunities, such as new market crucial developments that shaped it over
possibilities resulting from technological time – the strategic decisions, behavior of
innovation, government deregulation, or the key leaders, responses to crises, and the
removal of trade barriers. evolution of values and beliefs.

Every organization is directly influenced by The history of Xerox is a case in point. In

its external environment; to put it even the 1950s, Xerox approached industry
more emphatically, nearly all large-scale giants – IBM, GE, RCA– looking for a partner
change originates in the external environ- to help it produce, sell, and distribute its
ment. The privatization of state-owned revolutionary new copier. No one was inter-
industries in Europe and the United Kingdom, ested, so Xerox was forced to work on its
for example, significantly altered the way own. Ironically, the result was one of the
they operate. To move from monopolies to most successful product launches in history.
a competitive landscape, utility companies The lesson from the company’s seminal
were forced to change the ways they deal victory, which influenced its business strategy
with customers and employees. for decades, was that partnering was for
other companies, not for Xerox.
In the United States, the market’s saturation
with expensive servers and mainframes on The historical lesson at Corning Inc. was
the high end, and intense competition from just the opposite. Since its earliest days,
low-cost producers of desktop computers on when Corning Glass Works teamed up
the other, drove IBM’s dramatic makeover with Thomas Edison to produce the first
into an integrated service provider. And major commercially viable light bulbs, the company
changes in the laws governing interstate has fueled its growth through a variety of
banking led to widespread acquisitions of creative collaborations with other companies
local financial institutions by major banks around the globe. Those mergers, partner-
whose operations had previously been limited ships, and joint ventures provided Corning
to their home state or region, prompting with new technologies in evolving growth
major strategy changes across the industry. businesses as well as access to new markets
for its existing products. Clearly, two very
2. Resources: The second source of input is
different histories led directly to two very
the organization’s resources, including the
different strategic philosophies.
full range of accessible assets– employees,
technology, capital, and information.


Figure 3: The Organization as a Transformation Process

Input Transformation Output


Environment Performance
Resources Strategy The Organization Performance

History Individual

Strategy ■ Value capture: How do I retain, as profit, a

portion of the value I deliver to customers?
Every company faces two levels of strategic
issues. The first is corporate strategy, involving ■ Strategic control: How do I protect my
portfolio decisions about which businesses the profits from competitor imitation and
company ought to be in. For government and customer power?
not-for-profit organizations, “corporate strategy”
■ Scope: What activities in the value chain
often reflects a combination of the legislative
must I engage in to remain relevant to
mandate, which defines the public-policy
customers, to generate high profits, and to
objectives the organization has been created
create strategic control?
to address, and organization-specific priorities.
The second level involves business strategy, Output
a set of decisions about how to configure the
organization’s resources in response to the The ultimate purpose of the enterprise is
demands, threats, opportunities, and constraints to produce output – the pattern of activities,
of the environment within the context of the behavior, and performance of the system
organization’s history. Together, these choices at the following levels (see Figure 3):
constitute what our colleagues at Mercer
Management Consulting describe as a “business
■ The total system: The output measured
design,” which includes five strategic elements: in terms of goods and services produced,
revenues, profits, shareholder return, job
■ Customer selection: Who are my customers, creation, community impact, policy or
and why do I choose to serve them rather service outcomes, etc.
than any others?
■ Units within the system: The performance
■ Unique value proposition: Why do my and behavior of the various divisions,
customers buy from me? departments, and teams that make up
the organization


■ Individuals: The behavior, activities, and components: the work; the people who perform
performance of the people within the the work; the formal organizational arrange-
organization ments that provide structure and direction to
their work; and the informal organization,
In our organizational model, “output” is a sometimes referred to as culture or operating
broad term that describes what the organiza- environment, that reflects their values, beliefs,
tion produces – how it performs, and how and behavioral patterns.
effective it is. It refers to the organization’s
ability not only to create products and services The real challenge of organizational design is
and achieve results but also to achieve a certain to select from a range of alternatives the most
level of individual and group performance appropriate way to configure the organizational
within the organization. components to create the output required by
the strategy. To do this, it is essential to under-
The Organizational Transformation Process stand each organizational component and its
relationship to the others (see Figure 4).
The heart of the model is the transformation
process, embodied in the organization, which ■ The work: We use this general term to describe
draws upon the input implicit in the environ- the basic and inherent activity engaged in by
ment, resources, and history to produce a set the organization, its units, and its people in
of output. The organization contains four key furthering the company’s strategy. Since the

Figure 4: Key Organizational Components

Input Output
The emerging arrange-
ments including
structures, processes
relationships, etc.

Work Formal
The basic and inherent
Strategy work to be done by The formal structures,
the organization and processes, and systems
its parts that enable individuals
to perform tasks

The characteristics
of individuals in
the organization


performance of this work is one of the primary ■ The informal organization: Co-existing along-
reasons for the organization’s existence, any side the formal arrangements are informal,
analysis from a design perspective has to start unwritten guidelines that exert a powerful
with an understanding of the nature of the influence on people’s collective and individual
tasks to be performed, anticipated work flow behavior. The informal organization encom-
patterns, and an assessment of the more complex passes a pattern of processes, practices,
characteristics of the work – the knowledge or and political relationships that embodies
skills it demands, the rewards it offers, and the values, beliefs, and accepted behavioral
the stress or uncertainty it involves. norms of the individuals who work for the
company. It is not unusual for the informal
Consider retail chains Harvey Nichols and organization to actually supplant formal
Wal-Mart. Both are engaged in furthering structures and processes that have been
their retailing efforts, each through markedly in place so long that they have lost their
different competitive strategies. Wal-Mart relevance to the realities of the current work
focuses on low cost and has processes environment.
designed to lower expenses and maintain
low prices. The U.K.’s Harvey Nichols, on
the other hand, caters to a more affluent The Concept of Fit
consumer base, offering customers a unique
The final element in the congruence model is
shopping experience with merchandise and
the concept of fit. Very simply, the organization’s
sales force positioned accordingly. Despite
performance rests upon the alignment of each
their differences, each engages in the basic
of the components–the work, people, structure,
work processes inherent in store-based
and culture– with all of the others. The tighter
consumer retailing.
the fit – or, put another way, the greater the
■ The people: It’s important to identify the congruence– the higher the performance.
salient characteristics of the people responsible
Russell Ackoff, a noted systems theorist, has
for the range of tasks involved in the core
described the phenomenon this way: Suppose
work. What knowledge and skills do they
you could build a dream car that included the
bring to their work? What are their needs
styling of a Jaguar, the power plant of a Porsche,
and preferences, in terms of the personal
the suspension of a BMW, and the interior of a
and financial rewards they expect to flow
Rolls Royce. Put them together and what have
from their work? What are their perceptions
you got? Nothing. They weren’t designed to go
and expectations about their relationship
together. They don’t fit.
with the organization? What are their
demographics, and how do they relate to The same is true of organizations. You can
their work? have stellar talent, cutting-edge technology,
■ The formal organization: This is made up streamlined structures and processes, and a
of the structures, systems, and processes high-performance culture– but if they aren’t
each organization creates to group people designed to mesh with each other, you’ve
and the work they do and to coordinate got nothing.
their activity in ways designed to achieve
Indeed, the congruence model suggests
the strategic objectives.
that the interaction between each set of
organizational components is more important


Figure 5: Determining Degree of Fit


Individual – Formal To what extent individual needs are met by the organizational arrangements; to what extent
Organization individuals hold clear or distorted perceptions of organizational structures; to what extent
individual and organizational goals converge.

Individual – Work To what extent the needs of individuals are met by the work; to what extent individuals have skills
and abilities to meet work demands.

Individual – Informal To what extent individual needs are met by the informal organization; to what extent the informal
Organization organization makes use of individuals’ resources, consistent with informal goals.

Work – Formal Whether the organizational arrangements are adequate to meet the demands of the work; whether
Organization organizational arrangements tend to motivate behavior consistent with work demands.

Work– Informal Whether the informal organization structure facilitates work performance; whether it hinders or
Organization promotes meeting the demands of the work.

Formal Organization– Whether the goals, rewards, and structures of the informal organization are consistent with those
Informal Organization of the formal organization.

than the components themselves. Put another responsibility whenever possible, and trust in
way, the degree to which the strategy, work, the wisdom of playing it safe, then merely
people, formal organization, and culture are shuffling the boxes on the table of organization
tightly aligned will determine the organization’s won’t get the job done. The work, the people,
ability to compete and succeed (see Figure 5). and the formal structures might be right, but
the prevailing culture will keep getting in the
For example, consider two components: the way – a situation that will require some major,
work and the people. When the skills, knowledge, long-term changes. Without all the right pieces
and aptitude of the individuals involved match in place, performance will suffer.
the job requirements of the work at hand, you
can reasonably expect a relatively high degree In normal situations, managers constantly
of performance. make adjustments to maintain fit among the
various organizational components. However,
Now let’s assume that a restructuring has reas- companies periodically experience turbulence
signed people doing related work to different as the external environment exerts powerful
parts of the organization, separating them into forces – breakthroughs in technology, major
tightly bound units that lack sufficient processes changes in public policy, or the emergence
for sharing information and coordinating activity. of new players who alter the very basis of
In that case, the formal organization will competition, for example. During these
inevitably hinder performance, even if the periods, simply maintaining the alignment
right people are separately doing the right work. of the organizational components will be
insufficient, and in many cases, may well lead
Taking the argument one step further, assume
to disaster. These situations call for radical,
that the work at hand requires considerable
or discontinuous, change, which sometimes
autonomy, real-time decisions, and occasional
involves the profound overhaul of most, if
risks. However, if people have been conditioned
not all, of the organizational components.
over time to seek shelter in anonymity, evade


The transformation of one of our clients– a Analyzing the Organization’s Problems

global high-tech company– provides a classic
example of a complex organization that suc- The congruence model is more than an
cessfully “worked the model.” After decades interesting way of thinking about organizational
of industry dominance, the company suffered dynamics. Its real value lies in its usefulness
precipitous losses in market share and earnings as a framework–a mental checklist, if you will–
as foreign competitors surged ahead with new for identifying the root causes of performance
technology, low prices, and superior quality. gaps within an organization. As suggested
A renewed emphasis on quality enabled our earlier, it provides a very general roadmap and
client to avert a crisis, but there was clearly a starting point on the path to fundamental
a need for a new strategic vision. enterprise change. It provides the conceptual
framework for a change process that involves
The vision they ultimately developed was right gathering data on performance, matching actual
on target, but it wasn’t enough. The company performance against goals, identifying the
was still overly bureaucratic, slow to bring causes of problems, selecting and developing
technological innovations to market, and out action plans, and, finally, implementing and
of touch with customers’ needs. Quite simply, then evaluating the effectiveness of those plans.
the organization was incapable of deploying
the new strategy. Our experience has led us to develop a general
approach to using the congruence model for
The first step to remedy this was a redesign of solving organizational problems. It includes
the formal structure. But once again, only one the following steps:
component of the organization had changed;
the others– primarily the people and informal 1. Identify the symptoms. In any situation,
organization– were seriously out of alignment. initial information may reveal symptoms of
To be effective, the company needed managers poor performance without pinpointing real
to play new roles that were out of sync with problems and their causes. Still, this informa-
the traditional culture. That required an tion is important because it focuses the
intense search– both inside and outside the search for more complete data.
company– for unconventional managers who
could “break the mold.” 2. Specify the input. With the symptoms in
mind, the next step is to collect data concern-
Ultimately, the company succeeded – thanks, ing the organization’s environment, its
in large part, to a detailed conceptual roadmap resources, and critical aspects of its history.
that emphasized the importance of congruent Input analysis also involves identifying the
relationships between all of the organizational organization’s overall strategy – its core mis-
components. They also maintained high sion, supporting strategies, and objectives.
performance by deliberately managing the
alignment of their organizational components. 3. Define the output. The third step is to analyze
The structure and the work support the strategy, the organization’s output at the individual,
and the operating environment now supports group, and organizational levels. Output
and advances people suited to the work and analysis involves defining precisely what
the structure. output is required at each level to meet
the overall strategic objectives and then
collecting data to measure precisely what
output is actually being achieved.


4. Determine the problems. The next step is relatively obvious problems to more
to pinpoint specific gaps between planned extensive data collection. In addition, this
and actual output and to identify the associ- step requires predicting the consequences
ated problems – organizational performance, of various actions, choosing a course of
group functioning, or individual behavior, for action, implementing it, allowing time for
example. Where information is available, it the process to run its course, and evaluating
is often useful to identify the costs associated the impact.
with the problems or with the failure to fix
them. The costs might be in the form of Constantly be on the lookout for inappropriate
actual cost, such as increased expenses, or fit among all of the internal components of
of missed opportunities, such as lost revenue. the organization – the strategy, the work, the
formal and informal organizations, and the
5. Describe the organizational components. people. Poor fit among any of the organizational
This is where analysis goes beyond merely components – between people and their work
identifying problems and starts focusing requirements, between formal structures and
on causes. It begins with a data collection culture, and so on–can produce huge problems.
process on each of the four major compo-
nents of the organization. A word of caution: Nor can you assume that by changing one or
As we mentioned earlier, some of the most two components of the model, you will cause
serious problems are the result of changes the others to fall neatly into place. Profound
in the external business environment. So it’s change, in short, means working through the
important to consider strategic issues before entire model.
focusing too narrowly on organizational
causes for problems; otherwise, the organiza- Benefits of the Model
tion is in danger of merely doing the wrong
thing more efficiently. One of the congruence model’s major benefits
is that it provides a graphic depiction of the
6. Assess the congruence. Using the data that organization as both a social and technical
have been collected, the next step is to assess system (see Figure 6). Looking at the illustra-
the degree of congruence among the various tion of the model, think of the horizontal
organizational components. axis – the work and the formal organization–
as the technical-structural dimension of the
7. Generate hypotheses about problem causes.
operating organization. The vertical axis– the
This stage involves looking for correlations
people and the informal organization – make
between poor congruence and problems
up the organization’s social dimension. You
that are affecting output. Once these problem
can’t ignore either axis. In terms of congruence,
areas have been identified, available data are
everything has to fit.
used to test whether poor fit is, indeed, a key
factor influencing output and a potential Another way to think of those two dimensions
leverage point for forging improvement. is in computer terms. In recent years, the term
“hardware” has become synonymous with the
8. Identify the action steps. The final stage
technical-structural dimension of the organi-
is to identify action steps, which might
zation, while the term “software” has become
range from specific changes aimed at


Figure 6: The Congruence Model

Input Output

Environment System

Strategy Work Organization
Resources Unit

History Individual

shorthand for the social aspects that shape most successful strategy will be one that
the values, behavior, and performance of an accurately reflects your exclusive set of
organization’s people. The metaphor has environmental realities, and the most effective
become so widespread because it works so way for you to organize is to ensure that the
well – and underscores the central notion that organizational components both support
in both organizational and computer architecture, execution of your strategy and are congruent
it is the proper fit between the key compo- with each other and the unique aspects of
nents that ultimately drives performance. your organization. It is a contingency model
of how organizations operate and, as such, is
A second benefit of the congruence model is adaptable to any set of structural and social
that it avoids strapping intellectual blinders on circumstances.
managers as they think their way through the
complexities of change. The congruence model Third, this model helps you understand the
doesn’t favor any particular approach to organ- dynamics of change, because it allows you to
izing. On the contrary, it says: “There is no one predict the impact of change throughout the
best structure. There is no one best culture. organizational system. Major change almost
What matters is ‘fit.’” This model does not always originates in the external environment.
suggest that you try to copy your competitor’s It next shows up in comparisons of output to
strategy or structure or culture. It says your expectations, when people either experience
or anticipate changes. That leads to a review of


strategy– what are we going to do to regain or References

extend our competitive advantage? Inevitably,
Katz, D. and Kahn, R.L. The Social Psychology of
this means changes in work and the formal
Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1966.
organization – which is where many compa-
Lorsch, J.W. and Sheldon, A. “The individual in the
nies stop, without undertaking the difficult but
organization: A systems view” in J.W. Lorsch and P.R.
critical job of reshaping the culture. Lawrence (eds.). Managing Group and Intergroup Relations.
Homewood, Ill.: Irwin-Dorsey, 1972.
Finally, it’s important to view the congruence Nadler, D.A. Champions of Change: How CEOs and Their
model as a tool for organizing your thinking Companies Are Mastering the Skills of Radical Change.
about any organizational situation, rather than San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
as a rigid template to dissect, classify, and Nadler, D.A. and Tushman, M.L. Competing by Design:
compartmentalize what you observe. It’s a way The Power of Organizational Architecture. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1997.
of making sense out of a constantly changing
kaleidoscope of information and impressions – Seiler, J.A. Systems Analysis in Organizational Behavior.
Homewood, Ill.: Irwin-Dorsey, 1967.
to return to our earlier metaphor, it’s a way
to think about organizations as films rather Slywotzky, A.J. and Morrison, D.J. Profit Patterns: 30 Ways
to Anticipate and Profit from Strategic Forces Reshaping Your
than snapshots. You can’t look at a complex Business. New York: Times Business, 1999.
organization as a static pattern of photos,
capturing a narrow scene as it existed at one
point in time, all neatly pasted in a scrapbook.
Instead, it’s a dynamic set of people and
processes, and the biggest challenge is to
digest and interpret the constant flow of
pictures– the relationships, the interactions,
the feedback loops , all the elements that
make an organization a living organism. In the
end, it is those dynamics that make change
at once so fascinating and so challenging.

About Mercer Delta
Mercer Delta Consulting, LLC works with CEOs
and senior executives on the design and leadership
of large-scale change. In our work with the leaders
of major enterprises around the world, we support
successful change through our expertise in:

Organizational Architecture
Executive Leadership
Executive Team Development
Leadership Assessment and Development
Executive Succession
Change Management
Strategic Communication
Organizational Research
Corporate Governance
Collaborative Strategy Development
Merger and Acquisition Integration
Culture Change

To obtain further information about Mercer Delta

or to request additional publications, please
contact us at the telephone numbers below or

Visit our website at

Boston 617.242.3930
Chicago 312.902.7598
London 44.20.7343.9500
New York 212.403.7500
Philadelphia 215.982.4500
San Francisco 415.273.1200
Toronto 416.868.2800

Copyright © 2003
Mercer Delta Consulting, LLC
All rights reserved