Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad

Check these out next

12 of 68 Ad

15
Two Major Marketplace Issues
1. Too Many HR Systems
 33% of companies have 10+ HR systems
 47% will replace to integrate and consolidate vendors
2. Systems Aging Rapidly
 HRIS systems 47% are 7+ years old
 Time & Attendance 40% are 7+ years old
 Performance Mgt 19% are 7+ years old
 Learning Management 17% are 7+ Years old

15
Two Major Marketplace Issues
1. Too Many HR Systems
 33% of companies have 10+ HR systems
 47% will replace to integrate and consolidate vendors
2. Systems Aging Rapidly
 HRIS systems 47% are 7+ years old
 Time & Attendance 40% are 7+ years old
 Performance Mgt 19% are 7+ years old
 Learning Management 17% are 7+ Years old

Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you (20)

Similar to Ten Disruptions in HR Technology for 2015: Ignore At Your Peril (20)

Advertisement

More from Josh Bersin (16)

Recently uploaded (20)

Advertisement

Editor's Notes

  • (c) Bersin and Associates
  • Worldwide, only 13 percent of employees across 142 countries are emotionally invested in their jobs. Gallup also found that those who are actively disengaged – that is those who are negative and potentially hostile to their employers, outnumber engaged employees at a rate of 2:1.
    Gallup believes this is costing businesses more than $800 billion in lost productivity and hiring costs around the world.
    Think about this: who owns the whole “retention and engagement” problem in your organization? How well do you really know what’s on people’s minds on a day to day basis. Do you measure retention regularly and study why it varies from place to place?
    While around 60% of businesses deploy some kind of engagement survey, our research shows that today’s process for measuring and managing engagement has become obsolete.
    Employee engagement is far more complex than it seems – and the old adage “people leave managers, not organizations” is definitely no longer true. New research shows that engagement is much more highly linked to ability to grow and top leadership than management: in other words good managers won’t get you to stay, but bad managers may make you want to leave.
    Companies like Adobe and JP Morgan Chase, who I spoke with in the last few weeks, told me that they are now taking a holistic look at engagement – considering the entire work environment, culture, supervisory skills, leadership, as well as the work itself. We believe this may be the the secret: over the next few years you will have to rethink your engagement and retention strategy in a highly integrated way.
    And technology is here to help.
    New social networking tools, pulse engagement tools, and analytics tools are now able to “predict” retention using Big Data. Some even monitor your employees’ changes to their social networking sites.
    Karen and I will be leading a panel of analytics experts to help you understand how world class companies manage data and we’re very lucky to have Hilary Mason, a real data scientist, talk with us on Wednesday afternoon.
  • (c) Bersin and Associates
  • The Privacy Act also:
    regulates the collection, storage, use, disclosure, security and disposal of individuals' tax file numbers
    permits the handling of health information for health and medical research purposes in certain circumstances, where researchers are unable to seek individuals' consent
    allows the Information Commissioner to approve and register enforceable APP codes that have been developed by an APP code developer, or developed by the Information Commissioner directly
    permits a small business operator, who would otherwise not be subject to the Australian Privacy Principles (APPs) and any relevant privacy code, to opt-in to being covered by the APPs and any relevant APP code
    allows for privacy regulations to be made.
  • But what about this issue of the “overwhelmed employee”? Where does that fit into the calculus of building the “irresistible organization”?
    First, it’s a big problem. Research shows that the average cell phone user checks his mobile device 150 times a day. Neurologist Larry Rosen has found that today’s office worker can only focus for six minutes on a single task, and then opens a window to check Facebook or do something else. We have become physically and emotionally addicted to the buzz, beep, or flash that comes from our devices.
    Julian Birkenshaw and Jordan Cohen noted in the Harvard Business Review that knowledge workers spend 41% of their time on discretionary activities that could be handled by others? Why? Because it’s easier to “complete” these little tasks than it is to ponder and struggle with more complex and difficult projects at work. They found that by changing work habits and reducing time-wasting meetings, people could save 15% of their time in a typical insurance company.
    The bigger issue, of course, is that society is now wired this way. Twitter’s explosive IPO says it all: if you can squeeze your message into 140 characters and blast it out by the millisecond, people will get addicted. Have you noticed how TV shows move faster than ever? They do. The broadcasters now change scenes 35% more frequently than they did only four years ago.
    This problem is here to stay, and our job is to figure out what to do about it. Mindfulness has become a fast-growing industry, moving beyond the best-seller list and newsstand.
    Pfizer recently told me they are putting “mindfulness” into their leadership curriculum, and “self-awareness” came up as one of the most important competencies in new leadership programs.
    Google and Patagonia offer yoga and meditation at work. Huffington Post has nap rooms. Arianna Huffington’s new website The Third Metric, which focuses on work-life balance, is the fastest growing part of her online presence.
  • Approximately 50% of HR professionals feel that PM processes do not help managers make strategic operational decisions1
    45% of human resources leaders don’t think annual performance reviews are an accurate appraisal for employees’ work2

    Only 8% feel their perf managemet effort drives significant value

  • And now poor HR has to catch up. The book Moneyball certainly educated us that data can make a big difference in selection, and people like Malcolm Gladwell and many others have popularized the idea of using data to make more scientific decisions about people.

    I seem to read an article in the New York Times every week about this topic now.
  • We just completed two years of research in this area and found that yes, a small number of HR organizations (14% in fact) are well ahead of the curve and have effectively “datafied” their operation.
    These unique companies are seeing tremendous improvements in business performance: they are two times better at recruiting, twice as capable of building the right leadership pipeline, their HR organizations are typically 3X more efficient, and their stock prices rose 30% higher than the average of the S&P 500 over the last three years.
    The question one has to ask is who are these companies and how did they get here?
  • One of the most important things HR does in the company is to help in hiring the right people. This includes employment brand, talent networking, scientific assessment, mobile recruiting tools, manager and recruiter training, and analytics.
    One specific topic of discussion is the localization of talent acquisition. We are in a war for talent around the world: the war for the best people.
    Today’s workforce is more diverse than ever – in age, expectations, location and mobility. Our research shows that 70% of organizations are still recruiting baby boomers, while 30% will still consider hiring a candidate who has inappropriate postings on social media. Further, our new High Impact HR research shows that organizations with mixed age work forces perform better than those that are highly skewed toward younger or older workers.
    Nearly every organization we work with is looking for ways to grow. Whether this is geographical or line of business expansion, HR professionals are striving to develop workforces that can manage through ambiguity and rapid change.
    This is why
    AT&T chose Bersin to redesign its performance management system, resulting in a 15% improvement in productivity in the first two years
    When Pfizer merged with Wyatt, they looked to Bersin to effectively consolidate two training groups into one organization, 2/3 the size of the previous team. This group cut training costs by 32% while creating innovative, high performing learning programs
    JetBlue University transformed their training team from request managers to performance consultants by using Bersin’s research to create a business alignment tool that ensures that the University’s resources are spent on strategically significant programs.

    Developing relationships with hiring managers is the most influential driver of TA performance outcomes, as it is 4 times more influential than other drivers. A staggering 97% of Level 4 organizations report that they have strong relationships with hiring managers. Hiring managers and recruiters are on the front line shepherding tomorrow’s talent through the door. Hiring managers and recruiters must be in lock-step, delivering a positive candidate experience, true and authentic employment brand messaging and timely talent solutions.
    Not to be overlooked, developing candidate pools is the second most influential driver of TA performance outcomes times at 2x more influential than other drivers. 91% of Level 4 organizations report that they successfully develop candidate pools. Building relationships with prospective candidates is an integral part of the recruiter function. When done well, recruiters can deliver talent on demand. With the presence of online Talent Communities, as well as the more traditional pools of talent, recruiters have a lot of key constituents to engage. Volume concerns and eager hiring managers are a constant in the world of Talent Acquisition. Finding the balance between engaging, communicating, and sustaining a positive employer brand image is vital to recruiter success.

  • You should have been given a handout that looks like this when you entered the room. If you don’t have one for some reason, please raise your hand and we’ll make sure you get one.
    If you’ve seen our maturity models before, what I’m about to show you will look familiar as all of our maturity models are organized the same way. Let’s start at the beginning – or at Level 1, at the lowest level of maturity.
    At Level 1, recruiting is a tactical activity, often done locally, and is viewed as a cost of doing business. Recruiters are basically order takers where the hiring manager submits a job requisition to the recruiter, the recruiter screens candidates, and hiring manager interviews candidates. Hiring processes are not typically well defined, minimal hiring standards are adhered to and there is no strategic focus on candidate experience.
    At Level 2, recruiting has become standardized and is a corporate-wide support function for hiring managers to fill open positions. Organizations begin to define their TA technology strategy, typically starting with an applicant tracking system. Moreover, a strategy is being established to cultivate existing candidates and build long-term relationships. The interview strategy and rating systems are developed and there is some standardization of processes.
    At Level 3, talent acquisition is considered an essential partner in attracting and selecting the right talent for the organization. Executive buy-in and sponsorship contribute to TA success. Recruiters partner with hiring managers to establish a recruitment strategy and timeline. Demand and supply forecasting are used to make proactive decisions and close anticipated gaps. Employment brand and employee value proposition resonate with current employees, often resulting in employer of choice status. TA measurement becomes standardized with key performance indicators defined for critical metrics. A link to succession and performance management is formed, providing TA with an understanding of the workforce and existing talent capabilities, while facilitating internal talent mobility.
    At Level 4 – highest maturity, talent acquisition is seen as a strategic enabler of the business and a necessary investment to drive competitive advantage. The attraction and hiring of top talent is an essential part of the culture. A well-developed governance structure is in place and charts a strategic direction for the acquisition of talent within the organization. Recruiters act as true consultants to hiring managers. They understand trends in the labor market, use various sourcing tools to build talent pipelines, and are well-versed in engaging and converting high-caliber candidates. Integrated workforce plan is evaluated annually, and sophisticated predictive modeling is used in scenario-based analysis
    Based on our study of 297 companies, we found that 35% of companies were at the lower levels of maturity (Levels 1 and 2), the majority (52%) of companies were at Level 3 TA maturity, and 13% at the highest level or Level 4. We were happily surprised to see few organizations at Level 1 as it shows that organizations have already moved to standardize their TA functions at Level 2. It’s also important to note that some organizations may be between levels, possessing some characteristics of one level and also exhibiting many of the improved behaviors of the next level up.
    Our research showed that there were key dimensions and factors to consider when evaluating maturity. We’re going to examine each in detail to help tie this all together.








  • If you don’t believe me on this topic, let me introduce you to the science.
    An Australian neuro scientist named David Rock has conducted research showing that we humans have different regions in our brain. These include the front part (prefrontal cortex), which helps us with learning, creativity, problem-solving, organization, and other important skills. And a deeper region called the limbic system, where the amygdala resides. The amygdala is the “survival” part of the brain.”
    Dr. Rock’s team discovered that when we as humans are threatened, our cognitive processing immediately shifts from the front to the back. In other words, we are “survival” machines. So if you’re at work, happily working away to solve a problem, work in a team, or learn something new and you suddenly feel threatened, all your productivity goes away.
    In fact, not only do you become defensive, but you start to make mistakes, avoid risks, communicate poorly, and generally worry and become unproductive.
    What causes this shift in processing from the front to the back of your brain? A loss of status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness, or fairness. What causes these things? Your boss criticizes you. You don’t get promoted. You hear about a reorg which wasn’t announced. Your boss micro-manages you. You aren’t invited to a meeting. Someone else gets promoted and you don’t. In fact, most of the things that happen in traditional performance reviews create this effect.
    This is such a strong effect that companies can measure its result. Steven Rice, the CHRO of Juniper, actually looked at Juniper’s business performance right after their twice per year performance reviews and saw a measureable dip. He concluded that their entire performance management process was doing exactly the wrong thing – forcing their entire company to shift from “front brain thinking” to “rear brain thinking” twice a year every year. And that is why they totally revamped their performance management process. Which is now one of the biggest topics in business.
  • SG
  • Kelly Services offers outsourcing and consulting services, including recruitment, HR management and vendor management to companies worldwide. The organization, which had $5.5 billion in revenue in 2012, has about 1,100 permanent employees at its headquarters in Troy, Michigan, and about 6,800 more in branch offices worldwide. The company provides temporary employment to about 560,000 people each year.
    In 2008, the HR leadership team at Kelly decided it was time to take a fresh approach to performance management. There was a general sense that the old way was not working, but it was unclear exactly what lay at the root of the problem.
     
    Kelly assembled a team to set a new course – purposely without a vision for what that course would look like. Open-mindedness and candor were important elements of what participants recall as a deeply introspective process. A key element of the process was a focus on Kelly’s fundamental beliefs and assumptions about its people.  Specifically, Kelly looked at how policies and procedures can either communicate or undermine the core beliefs and expectations that leaders have regarding employees. For example, too much emphasis on monitoring behavior through tools like time clocks and activity logs can suggest distrust or an expectation that employees work only for their paychecks, not out of integrity or a desire to do a good job. Kelly took a step back to identify what managers and leaders believed about employees, then let those beliefs guide subsequent decisions.
     
    Leaders at Kelly ultimately decided that past approaches to performance management had been paternalistic, rather than collegial. In examining their core beliefs about employees, leaders concluded that such a tone did not accurately reflect their expectations of employees. The leaders believed most employees cared about their jobs and wanted to do them well.
     
    It followed that the aim of performance management should be to help employees follow through on their natural motivation. But conversation after conversation revealed that many regarded the performance management score as a hindrance.
     
    Kelly could have renewed efforts to standardize the scoring process, but that began to seem like a case of the tail wagging the dog. What leaders and employees primarily wanted wasn’t more consistent scoring; it was more fruitful performance-management conversations.
     
    In the end, the decision came down to what the scores represented for Kelly and its workforce. Rightly or wrongly, the scores had become emblematic of a management-driven, red-tape-laden approach to performance management. So, Kelly decided to abolish them. In one sense, abandoning scores was a tactical move. But in perhaps an even more important sense, the change was strategic and symbolic – an opportunity to redirect thinking across the enterprise.
     
    Since Kelly has abolished performance scores, they have seen higher levels of engagement from employees and received reports that performance conversations are much more honest and effective.
  • (c) Bersin and Associates
  • What are you using – are you using these?
  • Rallyteam(?) – “they take the career portal we designed and put it on steroids” (…like Pathgather?)

×