The document summarizes how UC San Diego improved their employee onboarding process through a Lean Six Sigma project. [1] The project team streamlined the onboarding form, reducing fields by 36% and simplifying the process. [2] They also created training and reference materials for hiring managers. [3] As a result, the improvements are estimated to save over 2,000 hours of staff time annually, equivalent to $58,000 in cost savings.

1. How UC San Diego Saved 2,000
Hours a Year in the Employee
Onboarding Process
Presented by Kristin Kielich
Senior Strategic Initiatives Analyst
UC San Diego

2. About Our Presenter
• Senior Strategic Initiatives
Analyst
• Office of Strategic Initiatives
(OSI)
Kristin Kielich

3. Lean Six Sigma Green Belt Project
Instructor: Tracy O’Rourke
“All On Board”
Improving the Onboarding Process
Project Team: Kristin Kielich
Traci Carpenter
Marina Bogdanova
3

4. 4
Executive Summary
Business Case Project Results
During any given month, there are 6 new employees within the
department. Every year, the equivalent of 8.5 months of staff
hours are dedicated to onboarding these new employees.
Finding a more efficient way to onboard staff will significantly
reduce the cost and effort devoted to onboarding which can be
redirected to other priorities.
1) Saved 6 months of staff time, over 1,000 hours
2) Equivalent to $58,000 in pay/benefits for that time
3) Reduced email handling by 60%, <413 hrs of touch time>
4) Reduced the number of data inputs by 36%
Root Cause Analysis
1) The form in the automated workflow was too long and
disorganized
2) The number of tasks and emails generated were overwhelming
and email content was without specific actionable direction
3) Not enough knowledge was being imparted to hiring managers
Graphical Display of Improvement
Solutions Implemented
1) Streamlined the process
2) Redesigned the form
3) Incorporated onboarding process discussion in recruitment
meeting
4) Created a concise guide for hiring managers to reference
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
EMAIL FORM FIELDS TASKS
NumberofTransactions
Process Baseline of Workload
Before After
“All On Board”

5. DEFINE
5
“All On Board”

6. Problem Statement:
Hiring managers were not always using the established
process and tools of the automated workflow to onboard
their new hires due to a perception of a complicated and
confusing process and form. This was reflected in a 48%
completion rate for the onboarding form, and a 19%
completion rate for assigned tasks. The result is the
inability for HR and hiring managers to properly track
onboarding status, completion, and issues.
Project Charter
6
Goal Statement:
§ Streamline and clarify process for all stakeholders
§ Increase completion of onboarding form to 100%
§ Ensure 100% of new hires are properly set up and
able to work on their start date
Assumptions & Constraints
§ New hires are being provided space, equipment, and
access, just not efficiently
§ The data set contains mixed information due to the
insertion of a new step in the process in September
2016
§ The scope of this project does not include changing
technology platforms, which turns out to be highly
desired
High-Level Timeline:
December 1 – Business process maps created & baseline
data gathered
December 12 – Survey data gathered and categorized
December 13 – Combined VOC & Brainstorm Workshop
January 6 – Stakeholder process improvement session
January 15 – Form and workflow changes implemented
January 24 – Celebration
19%
19%
9%
27%
48%
22%
86%
83%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HIRING MANAGER
SENIOR MANAGER
DESKTOP
ACCESS
Completion Rates
May 2015 through November 2015
Form Completion Task Completion
“All On Board”

7. Suppliers
•ITS-HR
•Hiring
Managers
Input
•Onboarding
Form
Process
•Hire
Preparation
and
Onboarding
Process
Output
•Completed
Onboarding
Form
•Resources
Customer
•Hiring
Manager
•New
Employee
7
Employee
starts
Cell phone
and special
access held
for new
employee
ITS-HR notified
of completed
form
Internal
service units
provide
resources
and close
tasks
Form
completed
and tasks
assigned
Onboarding
workflow
started
Notice of
recruitment
generated
SIPOC
Key Takeaway: The scope of this project focuses on the end of a hiring process
where most of the work is done once a job offer is extended and accepted.
“All On Board”

8. 8
Current State Process Map
Key Takeaway: There is too much movement in this process.
“All On Board”

9. 9
What is
working well
with the
Onboarding
Process?
What isn’t
working well
with the
Onboarding
Process?
¡ Surveyed 70 Hiring
Managers
PROCESS
FORM
KNOWLEDGE
¡ Voice of the Customer
workshop
Voice of the Customer
Key Takeaway: Stakeholders think customer service from HR is great, but the process
and the technology are not.
“All On Board”

10. 10
Customer Critical-to-Quality (CTQ’s)
Key Takeaway: The process should be easy to understand, the technology easy
to use, training should be provided.
Voice of the Customer Translation Matrix
Customer Comment
(What Are They Saying?)
Gathering More Understanding
(Why Are They Saying it?)
Customer Requirement
(What Do They Want?)
We get too many notifications, but none that
are helpful
Stakeholders only want to know when the
details are available for them the start their
portion of the process
Only send one notification when process
owner needs to start their portion of the
process, and clear direction of what is
expected should be included in the
notification
The form is too long, inaccurate, and
disorganized
Stakeholders want to complete form in one
sitting and it should be easier
The form should be easily accessible; it
should have a an easily identifiable button to
indicate when process is complete; and it
should only include what is needed from a
stakeholder
The process is confusing; I can't tell where
things are in the process
Process owners do not understand who does
what in this process and when
Instructions and definitions for the various
onboarding processes should be easily
accesible during process
Hiring Managers need to be accountable for
their steps in the process
Other stakeholders are dependent upon the
hiring manager to provide the information for
them to complete their steps
Expectations of hiring managers should be
clearly stated at the beginning of the process
SharePoint won't integrate with other tools
so I won't use it
Current platform is not integrated with other
tools so I complete my tasks in a different
tool
Ensure platform integrates as much as
possible with ServiceNow
“All On Board”

11. MEASURE
“All On Board”

12. 12
Key Takeaway: Three solid pieces of data were available: date/time stamp for creating an
onboarding workflow; date/time stamp for creating and modifying a task; and email
notifications to whom for what. The fourth piece of data discovered was number of form fields.
Measure Data Type Operational Definition
Stratification
Factors
Sampling Notes Who and How
Number of
notification
emails generated
from Onboarding
form
Discrete
By design, emails are generated to
various groups when certain steps
are taken (e.g., creating a form,
filling out a field, entering a
“complete” signature)
None
Sample will include all
email recipients based
on the rules of the form
and defined group lists
ITS Workplace
Technology Services to
review programming
Number of pieces
of information
collected for each
onboarding
Discrete
The form contains data fields color
coded by who provides the
information
None All fields in form
HR to provide current
copy of form
Stakeholders
initial reaction to
Onboarding
Process
Discrete
Questions regarding current
Onboarding process will be
created and sent to the third party
to conduct survey
None Survey
Green Belt Team, HR
send out survey to more
than 70 hiring managers
Number of
completed tasks
vs open
recruitments
Continuous
Data will be downloaded into
Excel from two SharePoint
libraries. One library contains all
active (not completed) tasks,
another - all recruitments since
April 2015
None
Total number of active
(not completed) tasks is
520. Total number of
Recruitments for
specified period is 145
Traci Carpenter by
merging data from two
SharePoint libraries on
requisition number
Data Collection Plan
“All On Board”

13. 13
(20)
-
20
40
60
80
100
120
4/16/2015
5/16/2015
6/16/2015
7/16/2015
8/16/2015
9/16/2015
10/16/2015
11/16/2015
12/16/2015
1/16/2016
2/16/2016
3/16/2016
4/16/2016
5/16/2016
6/16/2016
7/16/2016
8/16/2016
9/16/2016
10/16/2016
11/16/2016
12/16/2016
1/16/2017
Time Between Initiation of Onboarding and
Employee Start
Q1 4
Min -6
Median 7
Max 104
Q3 12
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
DaystoCloseOnboarding
Box Plot
Q1
Min
Median
Max
Q3
§ The median time to
onboard is 7 days, but 25%
took 20-104 days
§ Process changes made in
September had unintended
consequences
Time from Onboarding Kick-Off to Employee Start
Key Takeaway: Turns out that cycle time is a subjective measure in this case, easily
manipulated by the start date of initiating the onboarding process.
“All On Board”

14. 14
§ Form Fields § Emails
Workload Measures
Key Takeaway: More reliable measures of efficiency were found in the data being
requested on the form and in the number of emails generated.
“All On Board”

15. 15
ANALYZE
“All On Board”

16. 16
Why 1 Why 2 Why 3 Why 4 Why 5
Why? Because Why? Because Why? Because Why? Because Why? Because
Form is not
completed
during
Onboarding
process?
Form is
unclear
Form is
unclear?
Form
contains
many fields
for which
meaning is
not always
familiar to
Stakeholders
Stakeholders
don't
know what
fields they
need
to input?
There are no
definitions,
documentation
or checklist
for Form
fields
Documentatio
n is missing?
No training
on
Onboarding
process
was
provided to
Stakeholders
Training is
needed?
Stakeholders
need to
understand
how to
complete
Onboarding
document and
when the Form
entries are due
Form is not
completed
during
Onboarding
process?
Form is
very busy
and
outdated
Form is
busy and
outdated?
Form
contains too
many colors
that are not
organized
based on
Stakeholders
area
Form needs
to be
organized?
Each color
should be
combined in
one section
that will be
filled up by
one
Stakeholder
It is important
to organize
the Form?
It will help to
eliminate
outdated
ACT
locations
and add new
ITS locations
It is
important
to update
Form?
Form needs to
be simple and
relevant to
speed up
completion
during
Onboarding
Process
5 Whys - Onboarding Workflow Document is not completed
Key Take Away: Root Cause Analysis will focus on verifying how much Form content
and lack of knowledge are impacting Onboarding Process
“All On Board”

17. 17
Fishbone Diagram
Key Takeaway: Hiring Managers Workshop showed that the main problems occurred in the
areas of Knowledge, Process, and Form. Platform is not in the scope of this project.
Onboarding Completion 48%
“All On Board”

18. 18
Hypothesis Confirmations
Key Takeaway: The amount of information being requested, the number of
notifications, and the number of people being notified was overwhelming.
Over 100 fields on
the formEach onboarding
workflow generates
184 mails
184 x 72 avg.
annual hires =
Root Cause Hypotheses
Hypothesis # Possible Root Cause (x) Root Cause Hypothesis Result
1 Complicated form The form is lengthy and disorganized. TRUE
2 Lead time
The lead time between notification of the start of the onboarding process
and when a stakeholder could take action was too long.
TRUE
3 Tasks and Notifications There are too many tasks and other notifications issued. TRUE
“All On Board”

19. 19
IMPROVE
“All On Board”

20. 20
Process
1. Reviewed and streamlined the
process
2. Redesigned the form
• Grouped stakeholder sections
• Eliminated unnecessary fields
Knowledge
1. Added review of the Onboarding
process and form to initial
recruitment meeting with Hiring
Manager
2. Creation of a concise reference
guide for hiring managers
3. Tailored notification content
4. Enhanced SharePoint site with
reference materials
List of Improvements
Key Takeaway: The Stakeholder Improvement Session developed a future state
process that addressed CTQ’s and enabled the improvements.
“All On Board”

21. New Process
21
Removed Sr. Mgr
from Form
Reworded and
Synced notices to
Need-to-Know
Eliminated Manual
Checking of Form
Redesigned
Recruitment Mtg
Removed Finance from Form
Updated
Form
Progress tracking
improved
Coordinated
solution mgmt
Coordinated
Asset Storage
Key Takeaway: The Stakeholder Improvement Session developed a future state
process that addressed CTQ’s and enabled the improvements.
“All On Board”

22. Previous Onboarding Form
22
Key Takeaway: The previous form had 106 fields that 7 units were responsible to
complete as indicated by an assigned color.
“All On Board”

23. New Onboarding Form
23
Key Takeaway: The new form has 68 fields with 4 responsible units (a -36% reduction).
“All On Board”

24. -
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
EMAIL FORM FIELDS TASKS
NumberofTransactions
Process Baseline of Workload
Before After
24
Results Achieved
Key Takeaway: The implemented solutions will save at least $58,000 annually and
increase adoption of the process and technology to ensure new staff are properly set
up and able to work on their start date.
Metric Baseline
Cost
(before)
New
Cost
After
Goal >
$40,000
Actual
Savings
Annual Cost
Savings
$86,800 $28,800 $58,000
Email
handling*
47,600 18,600 29,000
Form
completion
26,900 8,600 18,300
Extra work 5,800 0 5,800
Follow-up 6,500 1,600 4,900
662 hrs
266 hrs
540 hrs
0 hrs
376 hrs
17 hrs
*includes task emails
“All On Board”

25. 25
CONTROL
“All On Board”

26. Control Plan
Monitoring Plan Response Plan
Name of the Measure
Input,
Proces
s or
Output
?
What is the
Target?
Method of
Data Capture
Checkin
g
Frequen
cy
Person
Responsi
ble
Upper/Lower
Trigger
Measure
Who Will
Respond
?
Reaction Plan
I1
Number of Positions
Recruited
I
100%
accuracy
HireOnline
Every
Recruitm
ent
IT HR Mgr
More than 10
occurrences
in a day
IT HR
Manager
Communicate with staff and stakeholders
when a larger than anticipated amount of
hires are occurring so the teams can
accommodate the demand.
O2
Incomplete Onboarding
Forms
O
100%
accuracy
Reason code
sheet
daily IT HR
More than 1
occurrence in
a day
IT HR
Staff
Research the defects to determine the
root cause and make corrections where
appropriate. Was it a process issue? A
training issue? Or just a human error?
Can anything be done to mistake-proof
the error?
O3
New Employee Onboarding
Needs Met
O
100%
Needs Met
ITS
Onboarding
Survey
Every
Recruitm
ent
IT HR
More than 1
instance
IT HR
Staff
Research to determine the root cause
and make corrections where appropriate.
O4 Hiring Manager Satisfaction O
100%
Satisfied
with
experience
ITS
Onboarding
Survey
Every
Recruitm
ent
IT HR Mgr
Scores lower
than 3 out of 5
IT HR
Staff
Research to determine the root cause
and make corrections where appropriate.
26
Key Takeaway: Proposed control plan focuses on monitoring workflow completion
and periodic surveys of the customers.
2 3
4
1
“All On Board”

27. 27
Let’s Celebrate and Continue Improving
Key Takeaway: We celebrated current improvements, but there are still plans to
continuously improve.
Reinforcing the changes
• Sponsor hosted a celebration of
the new improvements
• Reviewed changes with the Hiring
Managers
• Celebrated staff contributions
Moving Forward
• Glossary of terms
• High-Level Process Map for Hiring
Managers
• Measure and verify savings realized
“All On Board”

28. Lessons Learned
28
Innovation Transfer Opportunities
Process
Innovation/Addition/Change/Remo
val
(Describe the solution)
Process Benefits
(Describe measurable plus
intangible benefits of the change)
Area/Department/Business Unit
(Indicate the area that could
benefit from innovation transfer)
Automated Process
Technology-enhanced workflow
provides a more efficient method of
communicating, tracking,
documenting, and assigning
resources
Any Campus department that does
not currently have an automated
workflow and/or standardized
onboarding process
Streamlined Form
36% reduction in number of fields -
preparation for transition to
ServiceNow
ITS Recruitment Work Life Cycle
Documentation
Technology supporting process
was significantly blind to process
owners; can now be used for
training and continuous
improvement
SharePoint team; ITS Recruitment
Work Life Cycle; all Hiring
Managers
Streamlined Process
60% reduction in workflow
notifications; 50% reduction in
decision points; 20% reduction in
required work -- preparation for
transition to ServiceNow
SharePoint team; ITS Recruitment
Work Life Cycle; all Hiring
Managers
Key Takeaways: 1) This project work sets the stage nicely for movement to a
different workflow platform; 2) Other campus departments currently using a
manual process could benefit from adopting this automated workflow.
“All On Board”

29. 29
Thank You!
“All On Board”

30. 30
Appendix
“All On Board”

31. Other elements of the Project Charter
31
Project Scope
In Scope
The scope of this project contains the following:
• Improving the processes around completion of the Onboarding workflow
document*
• All hires including current UCSD employees
Out of Scope
The following are out of scope:
• Any steps that are outside the Onboarding process (e.g., recruitment)
• Steps executed by other teams that are triggered by the Onboarding workflow
• Onboarding process for P.O. Contractors
• Movement of the Onboarding form to a different platform (ServiceNow)
Appendix - Define

32. 32
Measurable Project Objectives and Related Success Criteria
Objective Success Criteria (Proposed)
1.Increase rate of timely completion of
the Onboarding workflow document
to 100%
• All Onboarding tasks are completed in
time to provide a minimum of 5
business days prior to employee start
date to unit service providers
• Number of hiring managers
completing the hiring forms
accurately and timely is increased to
100%
2.Reduce number of inquiries to HR
regarding hiring status that cannot be
answered by checking the
Onboarding document
• Number of times HR staff cannot find
the information in the Onboarding
document is reduced from X to 0
3.Create transparency for hiring
managers of Onboarding workflow
process
• Detail process maps are created and
accurate
Appendix - Define
Other elements of the Project Charter

33. 33
Stakeholder Analysis
High
HighLow
Low
Influence
Interest
Sponsor
Workstation Life Cycle
Finance
Sharepoint Mgr
Onboarding Form Mgr
Access Group
Senior Mgr
Hiring Mgrs
Field Support
IT HR Consultant
Appendix - Define

34. Communication Plan
34
Stakeholder/
Stakeholder Group
Objectives
(Actions Desired)
Message Content
Delivery
Method(s)/Venues
By When (Frequency)
Management Support the project
Ensure project is incorporated as part
of the current overall redesign of the
entire ITS hiring process and respond
to design changes requiring
management approval
Senior Manager (SMT)
Meetings
Weekly
Internal Service
Providers
Participate in the
improvements; use the
new process and tools
Tell us your pain points; help design the
future state process; interact with the
new form; celebrate
VOC session;
Future state process
design session;
Brown bag lunch
12/13/16;
12/22/16;
1/24/17
Hiring Managers
Provide input; complete
the onboarding workflow
form
Tell us your pain points; interact with the
new form; celebrate
Electronic survey;
VOC session;
Brown bag lunch
12/5-12/16;
12/13/16;
1/24/17
Communication Plan
Appendix - Define

35. 35
Operational Definitions
Measure Operational Definition
Pre-onboarding Process
First Cycle of recruitment process conducted by ITS HR. At this point new
requisition information is entered into Form and email send out to Hiring
Manager and Stakeholders. Email sent out.
Onboarding Process
Second Cycle of recruitment process that indicates that new hire was
selected and the name was entered into PPS send out to Hiring Manager
and Stakeholders. Email sent out.
Notification Email
Email automatically generated from SharePoint workflow task that is
assigned to Hiring Manager or Stakeholder.
SharePoint Task
Task is the time stamp shows when Hiring Manager or Stakeholder
completed their section in Onboarding workflow document (Form).
Onboarding Workflow
Document
Online form that contains fields to provide new employee with the access
to UCSD business systems.
Onboarding Process
Stakeholders
Is any individual who is affected by or can affect a Onboarding process
improvement Project – Senior Manager, Finance, Access Group, its
Recruitment Work Life Cycle, Field Support.
Appendix - Measure

36. Risk Assessment
36
Appendix - Improve

37. Implementation Plan
37
Appendix - Improve
Technology Solutions Communication/ Training
Process/Policy

38. 38
Impact Effort Matrix
High Impact
Hard Easy
Remove outdated locations
Update form data
Replace Onboarding Platform Remove Finance & Sr. Mgr from
Form
Creating submit and save
buttons
Only Require Sr. Mgr
involvement for special
exceptions
Update when
notifications sent
Low Impact
List of definitions
Appendix- Analyze

39. Questions?

40. Getting Started
Check out more success stories from Go-Getters just
like you at GoLeanSixSigma.com/Success

41. Thank You for Joining Us!
More questions? Ask us at
contact@goleansixsigma.com
Click here to download free tools,
templates, infographics and more!
@GoLeanSixSigma/company/GoLeanSixSigma-com /GoLeanSixSigma