The War for LeadersHow to prepare for battle

Contents

The War for Leaders 1

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

The problem that is not going to go away 2

The top 20 companies 4

The seven practices that make the difference 8

Commitment to leadership development 10

Preparation is the key to winning the war for leaders 14

Th e situation is the same in Europe. Even though the evidence for a leadership drought is overwhelming, many major companies are still not prepared to meet the challenge. In the words of Hay Group’s Mary Fontaine “this is not a tsunami that will take us by surprise, it is like a Hurricane Katrina, which we can see coming but are woefully unprepared for.”

Without the generation that has steered many of them to success, major organizations could soon be embroiled in a scramble for the people with the right leadership qualities. Moreover, the still expanding populations of the developing world will not provide the answer. Th eir economies are booming and demand for leaders is outstripping supply there too. Corporate raiders from the West may fi nd their cheque books are being matched by big business in the East.

Organizations that are not developing their own leaders now will be forced to recruit from outside. Handled with care this can be a productive strategy but it carries higher risks and encourages a promiscuous job culture lacking in loyalty. With an ever shrinking pool of talent to choose from, the stakes – and the costs – will be even higher.

Even with the looming deadlines, many organizations are leaving it late to develop a healthy supply of leaders. Yet good practices abound and organizations who have invested in leadership development are seeing a handsome return on their investment.

But who is getting it right? Which organizations are developing more, better leaders faster? Hay Group’s survey for 2006, in partnership with Chief Executive magazine, sheds light on the

The problem that is not going to go away

The baby boomer generation is about to retire en masse. Some 75 million workers in the US will retire in the next fi ve to 10 years and with them 50 per cent of the CEOs of major organizations. The available talent to replace them will need to be picked from the next generation of just 45 million.

The War for Leaders

3

looming leadership drought. It ranks the top companies for leadership and identifi es what they are doing that the rest are not.

Th e survey underscores many of the fi ndings from 2005. Th e companies with the best quality leadership are those that are concentrating on developing their own talent. In particular the top 20 are focusing their eff orts on identifying and managing the talents of high potential candidates – the population on whose shoulders much organizational leadership is going to fall. With fewer “high potentials” to go round they are going to be a very valuable asset indeed.

Th e top 20 are no diff erent to the remaining companies when it comes to the frequency of practices they provide for mid-level and senior-level managers. However where they diff er is in the amount of eff ort they concentrate on the high potential individuals they have identifi ed. In actively managing their

high potentials the top 20 companies are more likely to:

have a formal process in place for identifying individuals who are likely to assume leadership roles in the futureprovide career tracks for high potential professionals or individual contributors that are separate from those for high potential leadersprovide formal programs that are designed to accelerate the leadership development of high potentials – the provision of stretch assignments – developmental job rotations which take them out of their comfort zoneinclude marketing as an organizational function from which they get their high potentialsfi ll mid-level positions with internal candidatesfi ll senior positions with internal candidatesPromote CEOs from within.

The companies with

the best quality

leadership are those

that are concentrating

on developing their

own talent.

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

The War for Leaders

Leaders in a variety

of roles were also

asked to rate their

peer companies on the

quality of their talent

management.

The top 20 companies

2006 Top 20 Best Companies

for Leaders

2005 Top 20 Best Companies

for Leaders

1 General Electric (4) 1 Procter & Gamble

2 Procter & Gamble (1) 2 PepsiCo

3 PepsiCo (2) 3 IBM

4 Citigroup 4 General Electric

5 Johnson & Johnson (5) 5 Johnson & Johnson

6 HSBC Holdings 6 Dell

7 BASF (13) 7 Microsoft

8 Home Depot (8) 8 Home Depot

9 IBM (3) 9 JPMorgan

10 Coca-Cola 10 Motorola

11 Dell (6) 11 Pfi zer

12 Microsoft (7) 12 FedEx

13 Novartis 13 BASF

14 Verizon Communications (14) 14 Verizon

15 Nestlé 15 BAE Systems

16 Lockheed Martin 16 Johnson Controls

17 GlaxoSmithKline 17 Siemens

18 Amgen 18 BP

19 Hewlett-Packard 19 L’Oréal

20 BAE Systems (15) 20 Colgate-Palmolive

Hay Group surveyed 1,279 leading companies worldwide. Of those, 564 companies completed the survey. Th e ranking was compiled by asking companies how well they rated the eff ectiveness of leadership development in their own organization and whether they felt they had enough of the right kind of leaders to take their business forward. Leaders in a variety of roles were also asked to rate their peer companies on the quality of their talent management.

Finally a number of leading executives from global search fi rms and academics specializing in leadership, were asked a variety of questions about the best companies for leadership development.

Th e 2006 survey was more comprehensive than that of 2005 and generated an even higher level of response – a sure sign that this is an issue that is beginning to attract attention beyond the HR department.

5

One study noted that

general managers

who created high

performing, energizing

climates outperformed

those who created

neutral or de-

motivating climates,

delivering margins

double their size.

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

Nearly half the companies from last year failed to make the list this year. Partly this is due to the 2006 survey providing a more competitive fi eld of participants, but it may also refl ect the desire of major organizations to institute more formal leadership development – which in turn is refl ected in better results. So although the names may have changed an unwavering commitment to leadership development amongst the world’s top companies remains much the same.

Do demographics matter?Does it matter that there are going to be 30 million less workers in the US – and a similar drop in Europe – from which to draw the next generation of leaders? After all, we are only talking about a handful of CEOs. Surely there must be enough great leaders in those millions? Unfortunately the pool of talent is shrinking proportionally with the overall loss of workforce – making it hard to fi nd quality.

Th e Corporate Leadership Council reports that 97 per cent of organizations report signifi cant leadership gaps and 40 per cent of them say that the gaps are acute. Th e National College of School Leaders has announced that the UK is running out of head teachers. Th e American Medical Association is concerned that 60 per cent of the CEOs of America’s largest healthcare systems may retire in fi ve years. In the US a total of 50–75 per cent of senior management is eligible for retirement by 2010 including 50 per cent of CEOs. If they cannot be replaced by leaders of suffi cient quality, where does that leave business or the education sector?

Boom time in the East, but not

for leadersIn sheer population terms the developing countries of the East might seem to provide a solution. However leaders are not in limitless supply there either. Populations may be rising but the exploding economies of the East mean that demand for leaders is high there too. According to Th e Economist “senior managers in India and China are particularly scarce.”

In Bangalore, the outsourcing capital of the world, wage infl ation is climbing by 20 per cent per year and job turnover is 40 per cent. Th en there is the question of quality. Several Indian companies have had to bring in Western CEOs: the Tata Group, for example, has put Raymond Bickson, a Hawaiian, in charge of its hotel business. So corporate raiders from the West using their fi nancial fi repower may fi nd they face a battle to hold on to their own talent.

Who needs good leaders? In terms of productivity, more than 60 years of Hay Group research shows that good leadership makes a signifi cant diff erence to bottom line performance. One study noted that general managers who created high performing, energizing climates outperformed those who created neutral or de-motivating climates, delivering margins double their size.

Th is opinion is clearly shared by the top 20 companies in the survey. Th ey had more leaders than the average, were happier with their quality and more committed to leadership development.

Th e result of more motivated workers is demonstrated nowhere more clearly than in the bottom line itself. Th e fi ve year annualized returns of the 20 top companies are signifi cantly greater than those of the rest in the S&P 500.

Leadership itself has risen in value too. Th e value of “intangible assets,” which include everything from skilled workers to patents to brand, has ballooned from

20 per cent of the value of companies in the S&P 500 to 70 per cent today. Leadership now forms a substantial part of those intangible assets and top companies value it accordingly: the Corporate Leadership Council Survey 2006 states 60 per cent of employers see high potential employees as 50 per cent more valuable than the average, and 15 per cent see them as 100 per cent more valuable.

The War for Leaders

The result of more

motivated workers

is demonstrated

nowhere more clearly

than in the bottom

line itself.

4.074%

0.544%

S&P 50020 Best Companies

Annualized returns of top 20 companies versus S&P 500

Source: Research Insight, Dec. 2006

7

Companies are taking

longer to fill jobs with

suitable candidates

already and say they

have to make do

with below standard

employees.

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

Reap the reward of growing

your ownWhat is clear is that it is better to develop your own leaders. Recruiting from outside is always a risky strategy, recruits may not be as well aligned with their new corporate culture as internal candidates and may not fi t in. As the Harvard Business Review puts it: “top performers who join new companies… are unusually slow to adopt fresh approaches to work, primarily because of their past successes, and they are unwilling to fi t easily into organizations…”

In addition to the risks posed by trying to integrate an outsider, organizations increasingly fi nd themselves engaged in bidding wars for the best candidates. So not only may your organization pay over the odds for the leadership you acquire, it is highly probable that the cost may not be refl ected in a better bottom line.

Moreover, once you have hired your “stars” there is no guarantee they will stay – it seems loyalty is no longer what it was. Th e concept of loyalty suff ered a body blow in the hire and fi re culture of the dotcom boom. It left a lasting impression: a 2003 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management suggested that 83 per cent of workers were extremely or “somewhat” likely to search for a new job when the economy recovered.

Organizations that identify and invest in their own supply of leaders can look forward to more loyal leaders who are

a better fi t with their organizational culture and who are more likely to deliver results. However it is not going to happen overnight and the deadline posed by the retiring baby boomer generation is a tight one. Take a company like BASF which is dedicated to a culture of leadership development: it sources 90 per cent of its leaders from within – which in itself generates loyalty – and reports a success rate of 98 per cent in terms of how happy they are with the quality of those leaders.

Cultivating a leader takes timeHay Group research shows that it takes around 10 years to develop the skills needed for a senior leadership role. Th at is a very long timeframe if your CEO is one of the 50 per cent set to retire in fi ve years – particularly if your organization does not have any formal leadership program in place.

Companies are taking longer to fi ll jobs with suitable candidates already and say they have to make do with below standard employees. In a survey of some 4000 hiring managers, Washington’s Corporate Executive Board were told that the average quality of candidates had declined by 10 per cent since 2004 and the average time to fi ll a vacancy had increased from 37 days to 51 days. More than one-third of the managers said that they had hired below average candidates “just to fi ll a position quickly.” If you have cultivated your own leaders you are in a position to identify appropriate candidates for positions before the need arises.

The War for Leaders

The seven practices that make the difference

2006 best practices 2005 best practices

1 Having leaders at all levels who

focus on creating a work climate

that motivates employees to

perform at their best.

1 Having leaders at all levels who

focus on creating a work climate

that motivates employees to

perform at their best.

2 Ensuring that the company and

its senior management make

leadership development a top

priority.

2 Ensuring that the company and

its senior management make

leadership development a top

priority.

3 Providing training and coaching

to help intact leadership teams,

as well as the individual leaders,

work together more effectively.

3 Providing training and coaching

to help intact leadership teams,

as well as the individual leaders,

work together more effectively.

4 Rotational job assignments for

high potentials.

4 Providing job-shadowing

opportunities for managers in

mid-career.

5 External leadership development

programs for mid-level managers.

5 Ensuring that high potentials

receive objective 360-degree

assessments and feedback on

their leadership ability early on.

6 Web-based self-study leadership

modules for mid-level managers.

6 Ensuring that mid-level managers

get enough time to take part in

leadership development activities

early in their careers.

7 Executive MBA programs for mid-

level managers.

So what are the top 20 companies doing to ensure, in Mary Fontaine’s words, “more, better leaders, faster”? What are the practices that set them apart from their rivals? What can other companies do to arm themselves in the war for leaders?

9

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

Th e seven key practices identifi ed by this year’s survey were prevalent right across the FORTUNE 500 companies surveyed. What varied was the degree of commitment to those practices or the degree of emphasis placed upon them by diff erent organizations.

Essentially the top 20 companies were those who not only had more leaders but who were also happier with the number and the quality of their leaders. Th e practices that are identifi ed as those that develop eff ective leadership have not changed much since last year’s survey. Th ey are still soundly based on research that shows that leadership development depends on direct involvement by the CEO and interventions at team and individual levels.

Across the 1,279 companies that were studied, these seven practices combined accounted for 74 per cent of the variance in having the right number and the right kind of leaders. Th at is a substantial percentage when you consider what is at stake: a better bottom line, more valuable “intangible assets” and a more productive workforce.

If you are going to do anything, adopt these practicesTh e top three practices have not changed since last year’s survey. Th ey are the same across industries and across regions and they are more than likely to be in the top three next year. Hay Group’s Mary Fontaine says “if organizations are going to do anything then they should defi nitely do the top three. A motivating work climate, a commitment to leadership development and training for teams account for over 60 per cent of

what predicts a company is going to have the right number and the right quality of leaders.”

A motivating work climateDeveloping a successful leadership climate requires organizations to intervene at the individual, team and organization level. It is no good expecting individuals to make a diff erence if there is no support for them throughout the organization.

Never was this more true than for the role of the CEO. CEOs of the top companies devote a considerable amount of time and energy making leadership work. Th ey are hands-on people who make sure everyone is on strategy. As CEO of PepsiCo Roger Enrico was fond of saying “I spend 80 per cent of my time trying to get people aligned around something.”

Not that alignment has to mean conformity. Leaders can embrace eccentricity or maverick behavior within a team as long as the energy is all fl owing in the same direction. Th at is what the top CEOs do – they get involved and make sure their leadership program is delivering their company strategy.

AG Lafl ey of Procter and Gamble spends a half to a third of his time on leadership development.

Wayne Colloway of PepsiCo reported spending two thirds of his time identifying leadership talent for the future.

Lou Gerstner and now Sam Palmissano of IBM spend at least two solid weeks doing nothing but reviewing high potential leaders.

The War for Leaders

Commitment to leadership development

Training for leaders and teams – developing your high

potentials

Hay Group’s fi ndings revealed that the top 20 organizations are likely to have separate career tracks for high potential professionals as well as formal programs designed to accelerate the development of high potentials.

In fact the top 20 concentrate more single-mindedly on their high potential candidates than the rest. A detailed analysis of each practice shows that, compared to other companies, there are three leadership development practices the top 20 companies focus more frequently on their high potentials than either mid-level or senior-level managers:

coaching by a trained internal coachmentoring by another senior manager/executiverotational job assignments.

Th is year’s research also highlighted three specifi c activities focused on mid-level managers. Th e top 20 companies invest in external leadership development programs, web-based self-study and executive MBA programs to generate the greatest supply of quality leaders.

Th ese three activities added another six per cent to the ability to predict whether a company would have an adequate supply of good quality leaders. To put that in perspective, another 38 practices

identifi ed by the survey added a mere eight per cent to the total variance. So although many of these practices may have some validity there is a real law of diminishing returns outside the top seven.

Identifying high potentialsTh ose people within an organization who have the potential to lead are an increasingly valuable asset. Yet how do you identify someone with high potential? How do you nurture and develop their potential? How do you avoid developing a star player who does not have the potential to be a leader?

Many organizations are capable of identifying those who are brilliant in their current roles. However a star player can turn out to be a disaster as a leader. So how do organizations assess potential?

Th e best organizations are more likely to have a formal process for identifying high potentials. Th ey will not rely on line manager nominations; rather, they collect and debate benchmarking data which enables them to select according to best in class.

According to Erin Lapp, Hay Group’s global head of talent, “to measure potential, organizations need to be clear and objective about both the current abilities of their people and the actual requirements of future role, whether it is the next promotion for the person, or a longer term ‘leadership’ role.”

11

Growth factors are

deep-seated traits that

affect a person’s ability

to develop over time.

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

Organizations should take into consideration what Lapp identifi es as ‘growth factors’ and “derailers”.

Growth factors are deep-seated traits that aff ect a person’s ability to develop over time. A growth factor, where present in abundance, attracts little in the way of criticism Hay Group has identifi ed four that act as a catalyst to the long term growth of leaders.

Beyond the boundaries thinking – the ability to address issues conceptually, think strategically and creatively, as well as to translate complex concepts into reality.

Curiosity and eagerness to lead – the desire to take on diff erent and challenging assignments and so gain new skills and knowledge to apply in other areas.

Social understanding and empathy – the desire and ability to understand others, not just what they say, but the meaning and feeling behind the words, so as to motivate and infl uence.

Emotional balance – a sense of emotional resilience and realistic optimism. Such managers and executives bounce back from adversity, are not overwhelmed by diffi cult situations, but keep others positive and motivated.

In contrast, derailers are aspects of the person that interfere with their growth and performance. Th ese factors can be an inability to listen, lack of self-control, depression, sulking and self-centeredness. Alternatively, they can be created by the organization.

Organizations unwittingly derail the careers of their best employees through, for example, moving a high potential individual too quickly from role to role, eliminating the possibility of learning from the experience and their mistakes.

However identifying growth factors and derailers is only part of the story with regard to identifying and fulfi lling potential. It is important to be clear about the level of work you anticipate for a high potential. Also the specifi c type of role at that level for example, operations, policy or commercial. Having researched these role types, their success criteria vary considerably and account for why, for example, a star CFO or COO sometimes fails when given the CEO job.

We have identifi ed fi ve key ways to get better business results from the management of potential:

Know what you need from people. Look at your strategy; defi ne the behaviors, qualities and roles necessary to execute it. Focus your selection and development on those behaviors, qualities and roles.

Identify long term potential through growth factors – not just job-specifi c abilities, or past performance.

Potential – for what? Distinguish between long term leadership potential and short term job-specifi c potential.

Fulfi lment of potential. Promoting high potentials or rotating them through assignments is not enough; they need care and development to ensure their promise is fulfi lled.

The War for Leaders

Create enabling systems for eff ective talent management. Processes should help fi nd hidden gems. Th ere should be mechanisms that inject objective data into the decision making processes supporting the best deployment of talent.

Hay Group has published a whitepaper on high potentials, “Potential – for what?” visit haygroup.com/research.

Job rotationsOne signifi cant change from the practices of the top 20 companies identifi ed last year is the shift from job shadowing for middle management to job rotation for those staff identifi ed as high potentials. Th e top 20 believe that it is more eff ective to expose their high potential candidates to a broader range of hands on experience than it is to invest time in a larger number of middle management learning roles without any real responsibility. Leaders will not be developed in a silo culture. Th ey simply will not have the perspective needed to be leaders.

Job rotation or “stretch assignments” – the opportunity to work in other functions across the business – can provide a breadth of experience or “perspective.” Yet they are not in themselves developmental experiences. To be truly eff ective, they should provide the individual with a framework which indicates what he or she is supposed to learn from the experience. In addition, suffi cient time should also be allowed for the individual to learn from the role and from his or her mistakes.

The relevance of the

marketing functionBreadth of perspective is also one of the reasons why marketing is now one of the functions more frequently represented within leaders of the top 20. Hay Group’s fi ndings revealed that top 20 companies are more likely to source high potentials from the marketing function. Th is may be because best practice organizations are more market focused and value leaders with that background. It might also be because good marketing people have strong conceptual abilities. Marketers also have a much better understanding of the brand values that form part of the intangible assets, worth so much to a company these days.

Gain leaders without losing moneyTh e learning for other organizations that aspire to a greater number of better leaders must be to see where resources are being wasted. Th ere are some practices from the 2005 survey that no longer make the grade: job shadowing, web-based self-study and executive MBA for senior managers.

Th ese activities have to take place at the right time in a career to have any real benefi t – so sending a senior manager on an external MBA is too late to give him the experience he should have already – experience that the top 20 now expect high potential candidates to gain through job rotation for example. Th ey do not add value when they take place too late in a career.

13

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

In 2005, outdoor activity based programs and paper based self-study for all levels of management did not add value to the creation of more quality leaders. In this year’s survey, these two activities were deemed to be actually detrimental to the supply of good leaders. Engaging in these practices uses resources with little or no return on investment. Interestingly the incidence of outdoor based courses for middle managers increases the further East you go – as if this is a cultural legacy the East aspires to as the West gives it up.

Different regions, differing practicesIt is not just an undue love of outdoors courses for middle management that diff erentiate the regions, more meaningful diff erences occur. While the developed countries show no diff erence from the overall best seven practices identifi ed in the survey, the developing countries had four best practices that set their top companies apart:

creating a good work climate that motivates employeesproviding training and other activities to help leadership teams work together more eff ectivelyproviding additional developmental activities for mid-level managers mentoring by another senior manager/executive for mid-level managers.

While the fi rst two practices overlap with those for developed countries and these accounted for the majority of their superiority, they did not include the

practice that topped the list in the West – “having leaders at all levels who focus on creating a work climate that motivates employees to perform at their best”. Th e third and fourth practices did not feature in the top seven in the West and are more concerned with developing mid-level managers – a practice that the West seems to be leaving behind in favor of a more targeted approach at high potentials.

Different industries, varying successGiven that the time to fi ll executive jobs has already doubled from three months to six months and that it takes between nine and 12 years to develop a leader, speed is of the essence with a leadership shortage just around the corner. Some industries are clearly better at identifying and developing their leaders than others.

In the key area of identifying high potentials and providing formal development programs, the travel and telecommunications industries identify high potentials almost a year faster than the average. Th e consumer products industry runs formal programs most frequently.

Typically it takes an industry three years to identify someone with high potential. Th e transportation and chemical/oil industries take the longest to identify high potentials, up to two years longer than the average. Th e consumer products and travel/hospitality/service industries were best at actively managing the careers of high potentials. Th e consulting and public/not-for-profi t industries ranked lowest.

The War for Leaders

Preparation is the key to winning the war for leaders

Time may be slipping away but the steps that organizations can take to lay down formal leadership development programs are defi ned and implementing them will start to yield results quickly.

With over 60 years in tackling leadership issues, Hay Group has created many proprietorial techniques that will take organizations from a more haphazard approach to leadership to a buttoned down and productive leadership pipeline. If time really is tight and outside hires are a necessity, Hay Group has experience in minimizing the risks.

Th e top three practices or activities identifi ed by the Hay Group survey account for 68 per cent of the diff erence between the top 20 companies and the rest. However in terms of concentrating resources and creating a supply of leaders, the fourth makes a signifi cant diff erence and is the one practice outside the top three that is worth singling out for special attention.

Great leaders exist in every generation. It is just a question of fi nding them and when you have found them of keeping hold of them. Given that the writing has

been on the wall for some time now, it is a sobering thought that in Hay Group’s joint survey with Human Resources magazine they found only 20 per cent of CEOs are confi dent that their talent management processes can deliver the executives needed to win in the future. Th at leaves an awful lot of organizations facing a future that is as uncertain and haphazard as their current leadership development.

However the future need not be so uncertain. Even hiring from outside can be done with more confi dence of success given the right strategy. An even more dependable source of the right people to take your organization forward is to implement a well thought through leadership development program. With the right advice and by looking at what the top 20 companies are doing better, it is possible to produce a supply of fi rst class leaders who will be the next generation of household name CEOs.

15

©2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved www.haygroup.com

Africa Cape TownPretoriaSandown

Asia Bangkok BeijingChennaiHong KongJakarta Kuala LumpurMumbaiNew Delhi SeoulShanghaiShenzhenSingaporeTokyo

Europe Athens BarcelonaBerlin BilbaoBirminghamBratislavaBristolBrusselsBucharestBudapest DublinFrankfurtGlasgow

HelsinkiIstanbulKievLilleLisbonLondon LyonMadridManchesterMilanMoscowOsloParisPrague RomeStrasbourgStockholmViennaVilniusWarsaw WindsorZeistZurich

Middle EastDubaiTel Aviv

North America AtlantaBoston CalgaryCharlotteChicago

DallasEdmontonHalifaxKansas CityLos AngelesMexico CityMontrealNew York MetroNorwalkOttawaPhiladelphiaReginaSan FranciscoSan Josè (CR)TorontoVancouverWashington DC Metro

Pacifi c AucklandBrisbaneCanberraMelbournePerthSydneyWellington

South America BogotaBuenos AiresCaracasLimaSantiagoSao Paulo

If you would like to know more about how Hay Group can prepare your organization for the war

on leaders, contact us now.

Mary Fontaine

t +1 617 425-4531 e mary_fontaine@haygroup.com

Signe Spencer

t +1 617 425-4508 e signe_spencer@haygroup.com

Chris Watkin

t +44 (0) 20 7856 7310 e chris_watkin@haygroup.com

Hay Group is a global management consulting fi rm that works with leaders to

transform strategy into reality. We develop talent, organise people to be more

eff ective and motivate them to perform at their best. Our focus is on making

change happen and helping people and organizations realize their potential.

We have 2000 employees working in 88 offi ces in 47 countries.

For more information please contact your local offi ce through

www.haygroup.com.