What challenges are you experiencing in getting your management team to use employee data to reduce cost? Improve the employee/employer relationship? Let's get a conversation started!
Seems to me, until management (department/project managers) are held accountable for "workforce activity and maintenance costs" as part of their annual performance appraisal (versus "accounting and HR budgeted costs"), they really don't need much data. They just need to stay "within their traditional budgets"...HR will handle and be responsible for all that "HR stuff....recruiting, orientation, training, etc."
However, if a division/department head were required to maintain his workforce at an "Index" rating of say...6.2 or improve that rating to 5.5 during the next fiscal year, I think you'd see a demand for more relevant and timely workforce management data and insights (intelligence).
For example; if a division's/department's turnover goes up, and ALL the associated expenses of that turnover increase (overtime, training, recruiting, lost production/productivity, collateral expense incurred in adjoining departments/operations, etc.) are charged against that division/department's budget/performance appraisal...then I think you'd see a clammoring for management date to detect/better manage workforce performance and their cost drivers.
Until overall workforce performance is graded and accounted for, pro-rated and added to the division/department heads responsibilities and performance appraisal criteria, you'll have "same old, same old"....and workforce performance and productivity remains an intellectual discussion.
Seems to me it starts upstairs in the COO's and CFO's office where they need to look at things from an "Operational-True Activity Cost" perspective, versus the distorted "Production Cost-Seperate HR Costs" perspective.
The good news....organizations that try this out could discover 5 perhaps 25% operating cost savings that could then be applied to becoming more competitive or growing the enterprise. Kinda like finding a $100 dollar bill you didn't know you had in your sock drawer.
Comments
Workforce "Activity Costs"
Seems to me, until management (department/project managers) are held accountable for "workforce activity and maintenance costs" as part of their annual performance appraisal (versus "accounting and HR budgeted costs"), they really don't need much data. They just need to stay "within their traditional budgets"...HR will handle and be responsible for all that "HR stuff....recruiting, orientation, training, etc."
However, if a division/department head were required to maintain his workforce at an "Index" rating of say...6.2 or improve that rating to 5.5 during the next fiscal year, I think you'd see a demand for more relevant and timely workforce management data and insights (intelligence).
For example; if a division's/department's turnover goes up, and ALL the associated expenses of that turnover increase (overtime, training, recruiting, lost production/productivity, collateral expense incurred in adjoining departments/operations, etc.) are charged against that division/department's budget/performance appraisal...then I think you'd see a clammoring for management date to detect/better manage workforce performance and their cost drivers.
Until overall workforce performance is graded and accounted for, pro-rated and added to the division/department heads responsibilities and performance appraisal criteria, you'll have "same old, same old"....and workforce performance and productivity remains an intellectual discussion.
Seems to me it starts upstairs in the COO's and CFO's office where they need to look at things from an "Operational-True Activity Cost" perspective, versus the distorted "Production Cost-Seperate HR Costs" perspective.
The good news....organizations that try this out could discover 5 perhaps 25% operating cost savings that could then be applied to becoming more competitive or growing the enterprise. Kinda like finding a $100 dollar bill you didn't know you had in your sock drawer.