Image 23 is out and it has some really exciting features in it. I think from a capability entension point of view this is the best image yet released. Key features introduced are:

1. Discussion service – This is something I saw in fusion and I really loved it. This is like an internal social engine where HR topics can be discussed and shared in private or public setting. For example an employee can share his goal and request best ways to attain it or someone can share a quick tip on how to complete a particular transaction. I need to still review it but this can be a game changer for support and collaboration.

2. CAF – Common Analytic Framework – This is probably most exciting. If I am reading it correctly, this means we finally have a framework for self service reporting which is at par with other products in market. So no more figuring out the PS queries. If implemented correctly, this will put PeopleSoft light years ahead of any competition. It will provide unparallel range of reporting products. More to come..

3. Onboarding – Finally we have an onboarding tool in PS. This will now bridge the gap between TAM and HR. Excited to see how configurable it is but if it is based on activity guide then it holds lot of promise.

4. Fluid life events – Another functionality that clients have been eagerly looking for.

There is much more … Explore it on your own or contact us at seema.badaya@peoplesoftaware.com if you want to learn more.

Recently I came across the question on what is the total direct/indirect cost drivers for customization. Here are a few I have realized with my experience:

Cost of upgrade – This is the most obvious. Customizations make straight up upgrade impossible. Companies have to do their internal fit/gap analysis and development work to keep customizations. This can be a lengthy and expensive process. Customizations are sticky as they become part of your business process and interfacing systems and hence it can also amount to a huge cost to get rid of them.

Cost of portability – This did not use to be a big reason before. when there was not a whole lot of competition in the software space but with SAAS this is coming up as a big cost item. Vendors can create ETL solutions to move data from one product to another if the original product is vanilla. This can reduce transformation time and cost to huge extent. Customizations limit any such portability as customizations are very ingrained with how one does his/her own business. Most of the time it’s these large number of customizations that prevent companies from quickly moving on to the next generation platforms.

Training: When people are hired to work in HR department or when they use MSS or ESS then training and using knowledge from prior jobs become easy. People can be quickly brought up to speed and enabled to use system. Delivered UPK learning can be installed and Oracle courses can be utilized to cut training cost.

Development: lot of development $ are needed to maintain and tweak customizations on AMS contracts too. I calculate it roughly 30 items per developer. The higher the number of customization bigger is the maintainance group.

Infrastructure: Custom code is generally done bad and hence cause a lot more infrastructure need. For ex a company created this employee profile page for all hr users as a start page where they search for an employee and then jump into various transactions for him. A good idea but they took requirements from all different department and populated information on that page from 10 different component on load. This caused serious performance issues over time and a bad experience.

Impead integration: Building on the point stated below, it’s not just the porting that is hit due to customization, it’s also interfacing with other best of breed products. I worked on integration with a vendor for benefit management and I asked them why don’t you have plug-ins build to integrate with Peoplesoft as so many of their clients are on Peoplesoft. They replied it’s because everyone has customized it so much that they put the requirements on us to change things on our side with each implementation.

Return on investment: Buying an ERP and then not able to use it fully due to customizations is bad for the investment made in it but customization done right are also very important otherwise you waste a lot of time on front end and back end to process manually or adhocly. I worked on a workday project where manager and employee processes were really improved from PeopleSoft 9.1 but core users had to do a lot of work on spreadsheets and access database at the front end and tail end of comp processes. The IT $ saved soon changed into HRIS and HR department $ spent.

One benefit of doing consulting work is that you get to see a lot of different organizations, at different stages of maturity, from outside. One thing that only interest me in the organization is various ways organizations go on to motivate and improve performance of its employees. Nascent companies use many unstructured methods developing feeling of entrepreneurship and collaboration. Mature companies use structured methods to develop honor and specialization. A good motivation program is very intricately involved with a good performance management system. There are three pillars to a good performance management program:

1. Goal Management – Biggest complaint that the employees have regarding performance evaluation is that they are not clear on what is expected out of them by the management and also how their efforts are contributing to the success of the organization. Employees show a lot of commitment and perform exceptionally well when goals and criteria of evaluation are made clear to them. Hence clear goals that align with overall company objectives is one of the most important contributor to employees performance,

2. Development – Compensation is a small part of overall employee motivation and satisfaction. Improvement of critical skills, ability to learn from industry finest and career progression are found to be most important factors for employee motivation. Hence, companies should make sure to utilize all available development sources such as formal learning, on job training, rotational and global assignment etc to develop employees competencies.

3. Performance Review – All said and done, it is important to track how all these efforts have finally paid off by performing annual or semi annual evaluation. Evaluation can provide two important set of information. It can let you know if your staff is adequately skilled to perform the challenges faced by your department and it also let you know the effectiveness of the various programs you have put in place for the above two areas. Hence not only evaluate your employees but evaluate yourself too. Just following industry best practices might not be enough because every business is different.

So next time you implement a performance management program, keep these three pillars in mind,

Presenting ” PeopleSoft 9.2 Talent Management – Drive Business Strategies with a Complete Integrated Solution” at RECONNECT in Chicago, IL. Please come and connect on Thursday July 24th.

Various studies have been conducted in recent past depicting how critical talent management has become for organizations. Last three clients that I worked at had talent management as the key strategic goal for next 5 years. Huge investments in terms of time & money is made so every manager can make informed decision to attract and retain talent. Even with all these processes it is very challenging to figure out if the company has the required talent pool, whether that pools capabilities are on accent or decent and where does it stand with respect to industry best. Here is where I thought about HCPQ (Human Capital Performance Quotient). HCPQ is way to reduce performance management complexities and see the picture beyond the obvious. Here are the necessary steps: 1. Filter out the ambiguity – To do this everything that is not performance related but attached to performance (such as pay, succession etc) is filtered out. Managers are asked to rate employees with respect to current and next position. These ratings are not influenced in terms of team (forced ranking) or current goals. Ratings are done quick and often (on a quarterly or semi yearly basis). This exercise should be separate from regular performance management cycle. 2. Score on non linear scale – Ratings defined should be on a non linear scale reflecting the benchmarked productivity difference between a high and low performer. For example if a high performer produce 3 times better results then low performer in your industry then the rating should reflect this factor. Reflecting the true factor helps in demonstrating the difference between industry best and rest. 2. Consolidate – Sum of true performance scores across organization and plotted on a line chart. Each point on the chart reflect the HCPQ for the given period. The line chart should be overlaid with the industry best and worst performers as control lines. This simple chart help in visualizing change in HCPQ over time and comparison to industry standard.

Human Capital Performance Q