Deloitte Global Business Driven Hrt Financial Services

306 views

Published on

This Deloitte report outlines key human capital challenges facing today\'s HR executives in financial services, and how building a more strategic HR partnership with broader business strategies can help overcome these challenges.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Deloitte Global Business Driven Hrt Financial Services

  1. 1. Global business-driven HRTransformationThe journey continues in financialservices
  2. 2. The global business environment is experiencing Financial service’s business challengesunprecedented change and there is arguably no other In developing HR capabilities that support an organization’sindustry affected more than financial services. As a business strategy, many leading FSI HR executives beginresult, the financial services industry (FSI) and the human by understanding the critical drivers that are shaping theresources (HR) organizations that serve them will need to business. These are extraordinarily challenging times fordevelop new capabilities if they want to remain relevant. FSI organizations to grow their businesses, with risingAs FSI organizations engage in HR transformation efforts, debt, high unemployment, a depressed housing market, amany are primarily focused on making existing HR services sputtering global economy, increasing regulation, and themore efficient, effective, and compliant. However, the rules potential for a double-dip recession. These macroeconomicare changing. Basic HR capabilities such as efficient and factors will likely directly or indirectly influence a number ofeffective service delivery, integrated HR systems, employee other challenges and opportunities facing financial servicesself-service, and timely access to relevant workforce data organizations, including:are as important as ever. But they’re seen as foundational • Generating growth through mergers andnecessities — not strategic change. acquisitions (M&A) and emerging market expansion. Persistent macro-economic problems areLooking ahead, FSI HR executives should consider making it hard for bankers and insurers to generateHR capabilities that do not just support an efficient consistent organic growth. The industry should continueand effective HR organization, but can allow for the to look for strategic mergers and acquisitions anddevelopment of a truly “business-driven” HR partnership consider moving into emerging markets with faster-that supports the organization strategy: growing economies to generate growth.• A comprehensive talent strategy • Cost restructuring and operational excellence.• An HR organization designed to enable transformation Challenges to top-line performance and macroeconomic and aligned with the business operating model conditions within the FSI might create an even more• Blended technology solutions that leverage emerging cost-conscious environment — one that leads bankers technologies and insurers to move beyond re-engineering and• Leveraged HR data through benchmarking and analytics headcount reductions and towards transformational cost that increase business results and the effectiveness of HR restructuring programs.• Enhanced HR service delivery capabilities with the right • Regulatory and legislative reform. Changes in balance of insourcing and outsourcing financial services regulations — including Dodd-Frank,• Globally integrated processes and operations, especially the Volker rule, Basel III, Solvency II, International supporting talent and workforce management Financial Reporting Standards, and Insurance Core Principles — may likely give rise to new systemic risk procedures, restructuring of regulatory agencies, new regulators, new capital requirements, increased reporting, and more transparency and stewardship.As used in this document, “Deloitte” means Deloitte Consulting LLP, a subsidiary of Deloitte LLP. Please seewww.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte LLP and its subsidiaries.Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. 2
  3. 3. • Winning the war on talent. The Insurance industry The Deloitte FSI HR benchmarking study1 shows most in particular is faced with several talent management banks and insurance companies are not even close to challenges. The three biggest obstacles to attracting new achieving HR operational excellence — and insurers are blood in the insurance industry include: a poor image as significantly behind the banks (Figure 1). This lack of HR a career destination, the lack of a compelling recruitment operational excellence costs the average company in message, and an aging workforce. Banks and insurers the study between $10 million and $40 million per who can attract the most desirable campus recruits, draw year and significantly affects a company’s ability to focus top talent away from their competitors, and develop and its time and effort on business-driven HR activities and retain valuable workers will likely be in a better position strategies. to excel in the long term. Annual HR cost per employee $US• Innovation. Despite the macro economic challenges, $3,162 insurers and bankers still have opportunities to innovate 3000 $2,961 — by adding new products and reinventing existing $2,475 ones, improving the customer experience, re-examining their management styles, and rethinking the ways 2000 $1,925 $1,719 in which they promote and defend their brands. FSI organizations are typically making great strides in $1,154 leveraging their data — moving beyond underwriting, 1000 claims, stress tests, and capital management to address marketing and talent recruitment as well. New 0 technologies are allowing the industry to do a lot more, Banking Insurance Insurance Banking Financial Cross- while doing it faster and cheaper than ever before. Services industry industry MedianYou’re not the only one facing these challenges Top performerWith FSI organizations facing a strategic mandate on one Figure 1hand and a collection of fast-moving trends on the other,it can be difficult to plot next moves. A key first step is to Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Centermake data-driven decisions based on understanding yourorganization’s strengths and opportunities, then compareand contrast with peers inside and outside the industry.Deloitte’s 2011 FSI benchmarking report casts a spotlighton how financial services organizations are addressing theirneeds for innovation, operational excellence, and the valueof effective benchmarking in order to bring the “business”to business-driven HR. 1 Source: Deloitte 3
  4. 4. The study findings clearly imply that FSI HR organizations In analyzing the staffing efficiency and other primaryare falling short of the degree of operational excellence drivers of the results, four key trends emerged acrosstheir management teams demand. However, the study also industry, service delivery model roles, and geographies.highlights that many top-performing banks and insurers Organizations that recognize these trends can employhave implemented strategies that support their ability the strategies that some of the top-performing banks andto achieve operational results. This allows them to focus insurers use to address these areas. The key trends fromon aligning their HR programs with the overall business the study are:objectives. In support of business-driven HR, many banks • Develop a service delivery model strategy designed toand insurers are developing the following capabilities: deliver better staffing efficiency• A global talent strategy that is aligned with business • Increase the centralization of HR services growth objectives • Rethink outsourcing strategy• An HR organization that breaks out of traditional delivery • Embrace technology and automation paradigms• HR service delivery that supports collaboration, Regional highlights: innovation, and learning Many top performers in Asia-Pacific (APAC) and• Developing organizational talent and supporting Western Europe have similar HR process costs. The operations study also found that many top performers in North• An HR transformation program that is business-driven, America spend 27 percent less than APAC and scalable, repeatable, and standardized 21 percent less than Western Europe on process• Data and analytics capabilities that improve decision costs, which results in a savings of about $600 per making employee. Wage rates for North America are about 8 percent lower than in APAC and Western Europe,Specific findings and strategies for improvement but the key driver in cost differences is the numberOur benchmark study identified that many FSI HR of HR staff. North America has 30 percent fewer HRorganizations’ cost per employee is significantly out of staff than APAC and 27 percent fewer than Westernline with the top-performing organizations in this industry Europe.[Figure 1] as well as in other industries. The results ofthis macro-level performance measure are attributable to These differences can be partially explained byseveral factors — most centered on staffing inefficiencies. complexity. APAC and Western Europe are moreWhile many organizations are focused on headcount complex regions because they include more countriesand wage rates, underperforming organizations cannot of operation, and this does affect staffing decisions.attribute the difference to wage rates for the most part. We see this in APAC and Western Europe in that theyAcross the industry, wage rates accounted for less than have a higher allocation of labor costs to business10 percent of the cost gap. Staffing inefficiencies actually partners than North America — eight and four timesaccount for almost 75 percent of the gap. more, respectively. Finally, North America allocates more costs to outsourcing — 82 percent more than APAC and 310 percent more than Western Europe. Again, the complexity of multiple countries and a lack of regional vendor options typically drive a significant part of the outsourcing differences. 4
  5. 5. Develop a service delivery model strategy designed Companies should not chalk-up these cost differences to to deliver better staffing efficiency (Read more in different wage rates. The median company actually paid a HR Business Partners and Centers of Expertise, lower wage rate than the top performer in most cases. Talent) The median performer in the FSI spends 79 percent Rather, it is staffing efficiency that typically drives the cost more on HR per employee than the median performer in differences. Despite similar labor rates, the median FSI other industries. That same FSI median performer is also organization uses 76 percent more staff to deliver the same paying 66 percent more than the financial industry’s own HR services as the top performer [Figure 3]. If one considers top-performing companies. This represents an average the entire gap in cost-per-employee between the median annual cost opportunity of $1,274 per employee, or a and the top performer, staffing efficiency alone is the potential annual cost savings of $10 million to $40 million. factor responsible for 68 percent of the difference. Breaking down the components of that cost difference Total HR Staff per 1,000 employees shows that each HR process category bears some of the 25.0 19.4 responsibility. But more than half of the difference comes 4.4 from two categories — talent management and strategy 12.5 8.0 11.0 and program design [Figure 2]. In the latter area, the 1.7 median FSI organization spends 2.4 times what the top 4.9 2.7 1.4 performer does — or $352 per employee per year. 4.4 3.0 0.0 HR FSI median HR FSI –500 Process cost gap per employee against the FSI Low-cost performer (LCP) median performer $424 Transaction processing400 Rewards admin $352 Talent management Strategy and PD300 Figure 3200 $191 Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center100 $91 0 Talent Strategy Transaction Rewards management and PD processing admin Median Figure 2 Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center 5
  6. 6. Investigating the service delivery models roles more closely Like many organizations, most banks and insurers continue between banks and insurers; we find banks that close to struggle with the components of their operating and these cost gaps focus on their current use of centers service delivery models. How should they interact with of expertise, especially in talent management, strategy each other to contribute the most value to the business? and program design, and transaction administration. In The top-performing FSI organizations start with a strategy insurance, top performers address staffing inefficiency in to make the most of the organization’s HR centers of the site representative and business partner roles, paying expertise and business partners. Their purpose is to particular attention to transaction processing and rewards develop ways to deliver direct, quick-win benefits to the administration [Figure 4]. Compared to the top performer, business and spend time on processes and activities that the median insurance organization has 15 times the labor drive business performance. The success of these two cost per employee focused on business partners. It also has components of the operating model comes from staffing 15 times the staff, which reinforces the notion that staffing the organization with a quality versus quantity mindset; strategy, not wage rates, is the problem. Faced with this defining a clear scope of services; and engaging line cost disparity, finding ways to reallocate the responsibilities management. With the “business-driven” components of into other roles is a clear imperative. the operating and service delivery model defined, leaders can further refine the operating and service delivery Service delivery model (SDM) role cost gap per employee strategy by isolating and moving the administrative 750 between insurance median and insurance LCP ($US) and less business value processes and activities into the Decentralized Centralized shared service center, outsourced vendor, or site HR 500 $465 representatives. 250 $232 $128 $91 0 Site Business Centers of Shared Outsourcing representative partner Expertise Services (COE) Center (SSC) Median $(353) Figure 4 Source: Deloitte Process cost gap per employee between insurance median and insurance LCP by500 process category ($US) $263 $251250 $80 $(32) 0 Transaction Rewards Strategy and Talent processing adminstration program design management Figure 4 Median Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center 6
  7. 7. Increase the centralization of HR services • The more a financial services company allocates its HRShould FSI organizations rely more on a centralized or labor cost to site representatives, the more it spends perdecentralized service model (i.e., leverage more shared employee [Figure 6]. When the labor cost committed toservice centers and centers of expertise versus on-site site representatives rises from 20 percent to 60 percent,capabilities)? The study shows two curves headed clearly in HR cost per employee increases 26 percent.opposite directions. Impact of site representatives on• The more a financial services organization allocates its HR HR cost per employee $6,000 labor cost to centralized HR services (centers of expertise and shared service centers), the less it spends on HR cost per employee [Figure 5]. When labor costs allocated to HR cost per employee $4,000 the centralized HR service model rise from 20 percent to 60 percent, a company’s HR cost per employee decreases 36 percent. $2,000 Impact of centralization on HR cost per employee $10,000 $0 $8,000 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%HR cost per employee Site representative labor cost as percent of total labor cost $6,000 Figure 6 $4,000 Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center $2,000 As part of centralizing HR services, we also find that under- $0 utilization of shared service centers is a key contributor to 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% the underperformance of financial service companies in Centralization (COE+SSC) labor cost as percent of total labor cost general, but especially in the insurance sector. The study also found that proper utilization of shared service centers Figure 5 delivers particular efficiency in transaction processing andSource: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center rewards administration. • For insurers, there is large room for improvement in this allocation. Compared to the top performer, the median insurance company allocated 94 percent less of its transaction processing cost to a shared center, and 93 percent less of its rewards administration cost. 7
  8. 8. • On the positive side, banks that used shared services Both of these examples point the way to greater use of centers for at least 30 percent of their payroll processing shared service centers as a way to deliver higher quality ended up spending 47 percent less on those costs HR services with less cost. The leading practices of the [Figure 7]. higher-performing banks and insurers include taking more accountability for managing broad/overall HR inquiry, Banking SSC labor cost as % process cost 60 transaction, and administrative services; driving the 48% identification, attraction, development, and movement of 44% talent across the enterprise; and delivering people-related 40 services to support the rapid execution of corporate transactions around the globe. 23% 20 These new accountabilities will add to, not replace, the 9% 9% 5% offerings many HR shared services organizations provide 4% 1% today. Yet the delivery of these increased capabilities 0 Transaction Rewards Talent Strategy and should occur within the same or improved total cost of processing administration management program design ownership. Banking median Banking LCP Whether or not an organization has implemented a shared services model, it may seem a steep challenge to expand Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center the role of HR shared services beyond the current state. However, it remains a challenge for financial services262.5 Banking payroll process cost per employee ($US) organizations to pursue profitable growth in emerging $189 markets, smoothly integrate acquisitions, efficiently175.0 manage a global workforce, and strive for operational excellence. Many high-performing financial services $100 organizations have met this challenge by deploying new 87.5 shared service approaches that move beyond operational efficiencies and expand their scope of services. They’ve implemented improved technology such as Web 2.0, social 0.0 media and collaboration tools, and leveraged strategic or SSC <30% SSC >30% hybrid outsourcing strategies. SSC as % transaction Processing process cost Figure 7 Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center 8
  9. 9. Rethink outsourcing strategy (Read more in Solution An effective use of outsourcing can help financial servicesIntegration, HR Business Partners and Centers of organizations drive operational excellence, support theirExpertise, HR Shared Services and Outsourcing) M&A integration activities, and facilitate global andOne of the most intriguing findings of the study, and emerging market expansion. While outsourcing has ancertainly the most counter-intuitive, is the more FSI entry price, most companies turn to it for the expressorganizations spend on outsourcing, the higher their HR purpose of reducing net costs in the long run — andcost and HR staff per employee will be. Consider the don’t take into account the strategic importance of thefollowing highlights from the study: outsourcing decision. High-performing FSI HR organizations• The top-performing FSI organizations spend 78 percent recognize this and have effectively turned to a selective and less on outsource services than the median organization. strategic outsourcing strategy as part of an overall blended,• FSI organizations outsourcing 60 percent of their scalable HR service delivery solution. processes are spending 18 percent more in HR process cost per employee than organizations outsourcing 20 However, as the study results show, most FSI organizations percent of their processes [Figure 8]. seem to be challenged in their ability to effectively deploy• Banks that outsource 20 percent or more of HR costs their outsourcing strategy and deliver on the benefits actually use more HR staff to deliver processes than realization associated with this strategy. those banks that outsource less.• The one bright spot — outsourcing remains a cost- Embrace technology and automation (Read more efficient way to deliver rewards administration. in Solution Integration, Workforce Analytics, Cloud Impact of outsourcing HR, Social Media) on HR process cost per employee The study found that FSI organizations can potentially $6,000 reduce HR cost per employee by investing in technology and applications such as portal and collaboration tools,HR process cost per employee self-service for managers and employees, and enhanced $4,000 reporting supporting data analytics. A blended technology solution that pairs the effective tools with the effective needs can ultimately support a more efficient service $2,000 delivery model designed to promote operational excellence and innovation. $0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Outsourcing as percent of total HR cost Figure 8Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center 9
  10. 10. Each of the participating FSI organization’s technology The median insurance company spent $91 less persolutions are a different mix of elements such as HRMS, employee on technology than the top performer, but hadpoint solutions, portals, self-service, and other 3.3 more HR staff per employee and spent $514 morecomponents. However, most organizations simply are not per employee in transaction processing and rewardsinvesting enough in any combination, don’t have the right administration. Banks that spent less than 10 percent of HRcomponents, or have not properly integrated their suite of cost on technology spent 23 percent more per employeetechnology solutions. Many of the top-performing banks than companies with a technology budget greater than 10and insurers have figured this out and have achieved percent of overall HR costs [Figure 10].greater efficiencies through a blended use of technology in6000support of their HR service delivery model. An increase in Banking HR cost per employeetechnology spends from 10 percent to 20 percent as a $4,021percent of labor cost resulted in lower cost per employee 4000by just under $1,000 [Figure 9]. } 23% $3,096 Impact of Investment in Technology on HR FSI Labor Cost per Employee ($US) 2000 $8,000 0Labor cost per employee $6,000 <10% >=10% $2,934 Technology as a % of HR cost $1,988 $4,000 Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center Figure 10 $2,000 25.0 Banking HR staff per 1,000 employees 16.5 $0 13.1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 12.5 Technology cost as percent of labor cost Figure 9 0.0Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center <10% >=10% Technology as a % of HR cost Figure 10 Source: Deloitte Global Benchmarking Center 10
  11. 11. In designing a business-driven HR transformation program, To operate at that level, HR organizations should have ait’s critical to consider making the solution scalable and firm performance foundation. Quality of service delivery isrepeatable. This requires considering an investment in one key component. But quality without cost efficiency istechnology and infrastructure (in addition to processes) an illusory benefit. By addressing the discrete and in somethat can adjust to a volatile business environment and cases large cost opportunities that lie within their reach,any shifts in the enterprise business strategy. Many high- HR executives in FSI can improve their operational andperforming banks and insurers have integrated these two strategic prospects at the same time.concepts into their HR transformation programs and areeffectively delivering services in support of their growth About the studystrategies — which have mostly focused on M&A and Deloitte’s Global HR FSI Benchmark Study gatheredexpanding into emerging markets. information on a confidential basis from 35 participating companies across North America, Western Europe, and theThe financial services top performers have also managed Asia-Pacific regions. Twenty-one banks and 14 insurancethe art of integrating technologies (HRMS, portal, self- companies took part by supplying data during winter/service, point solutions, data analytics) into a blended spring 2011. Participating organizations included thoseservice delivery model solution that efficiently delivers with low, middle, and high revenue levels. There was aservices while leveraging emerging technologies such similar variety in headcount.as cloud technology. Cloud-based HR applications aredesigned to combine cost-efficiency and scalability with the The benchmark focused on global HR process costs withindemonstrated need to centralize and mobilize the delivery each company — including labor, outsourcing, technology,of HR services. In the cloud, organizations can deploy overhead, staffing levels, productivity, and cycle times.solutions without limits of size, geography, or scalability. Questions mined information about process categories such as transaction processing, rewards administration,Conclusion talent management administration, and strategy andMany HR executives in FSI are focusing more and more on program design. The study also examined differentroles beyond traditional service delivery. HR organizations roles in FSI HR, including business partners, centers ofthat deliver their full potential benefit to the companies specialization, shared service centers, site representatives,they serve are typically the ones that can transform and third-party providers.from deliverers of service to drivers of strategic businesspriorities.There is a complex methodology to managing manyaspects of HR transformation. It touches everything fromtalent to technology, from benefit design to globalization.But benchmarking one’s own performance against industryleaders is a critical early step. 11
  12. 12. Contact information Jeff Altman Steve Hatfield Deloitte Consulting LLP Deloitte Consulting LLP Stamford, CT New York, NY +1 203 708 4333 +1 212 618 4046 jealtman@deloitte.com sthatfield@deloitte.com Greg des Groseilliers Richard Roth Deloitte Consulting LLP Deloitte Consulting LLP Philadelphia, PA Atlanta, GA +1 215 446 3452 +1 404 942 6719 gdesgroseilliers@deloitte.com riroth@deloitte.comThis publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, renderingaccounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publicationis not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision oraction that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect yourbusiness, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any losssustained by any person who relies on this publication.Copyright © 2012 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved.Member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited

×