Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Odnet-internals] The bottom line...

Expand Messages
  • Terrence Seamon
    wow Sherryl, way to go. you ve provided us with a good model to follow. thanks Terry Terrence Seamon (732) 246-3014 home/office (732) 715-8218 cell
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 1, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      wow Sherryl, way to go. you've provided us with a good model
      to follow. thanks

      Terry


      Terrence Seamon
      (732) 246-3014 home/office
      (732) 715-8218 cell
      thseamon@...
      http://www.linkedin.com/in/thseamon
      http://twitter.com/tseamon
      http://learningvoyager.blogspot.com/






      ________________________________
      From: "Stalinski, Sherryl" <Sherryl.Stalinski@...>
      To: odnet-internals@...; HRNET@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 2:18:24 PM
      Subject: [Odnet-internals] The bottom line...


      To end the year on a good note, I thought I'd share:
      I've just completed our 2009-2010 business metrics for OD & HR: A 7.3%
      reduction in voluntary turnover since 2007 has resulted in estimated
      savings (cost avoidance) of $4.9 million in our company.

      Can HR/OD take full "credit" for this? No more than Finance can (or
      does) take credit for the P&L. However, even though much of our lower
      turnover can be attributed to the economy, our reorganization to a
      matrix structure has also resulted in an increase of internal placements
      (estimated savings of about $6500 per candidate for internal vs.
      external placement) and, we believe, increased engagement/commitment
      contributing to at least part of the reduction in voluntary turnover.

      I've also calculated the potential savings of over $350,000 by
      increasing our internal placements (vs. external hires) from 18.4% to
      25%. And finally, I've been able to put a bottom line cost on the "days
      to fill" metric by calculating cost of lost opportunity:
      average billable hourly wage (and estimated which percent of hires are
      billable) by average days to fill.

      Sherryl Stalinski
      HR Director of Talent Management
      Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group
      100 W Walnut St, Pasadena CA 91124
      626.440-2644 | www.parsons.com




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Fred
      Congratulations, Ms. Stalinski. Has anyone yet asked what you ve done for them today? :-) Fred Nickols
      Message 2 of 9 , Jan 4, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Congratulations, Ms. Stalinski. Has anyone yet asked what you've done for them today? :-)

        Fred Nickols

        --- In HRNET@yahoogroups.com, "Stalinski, Sherryl" <sherryl.stalinski@...> wrote:
        >
        > To end the year on a good note, I thought I'd share:
        > I've just completed our 2009-2010 business metrics for OD & HR: A 7.3%
        > reduction in voluntary turnover since 2007 has resulted in estimated
        > savings (cost avoidance) of $4.9 million in our company.
        >
        > Can HR/OD take full "credit" for this? No more than Finance can (or
        > does) take credit for the P&L. However, even though much of our lower
        > turnover can be attributed to the economy, our reorganization to a
        > matrix structure has also resulted in an increase of internal placements
        > (estimated savings of about $6500 per candidate for internal vs.
        > external placement) and, we believe, increased engagement/commitment
        > contributing to at least part of the reduction in voluntary turnover.
        >
        > I've also calculated the potential savings of over $350,000 by
        > increasing our internal placements (vs. external hires) from 18.4% to
        > 25%. And finally, I've been able to put a bottom line cost on the "days
        > to fill" metric by calculating cost of lost opportunity:
        > average billable hourly wage (and estimated which percent of hires are
        > billable) by average days to fill.
        >
        > Sherryl Stalinski
        > HR Director of Talent Management
        > Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group
        > 100 W Walnut St, Pasadena CA 91124
        > 626.440-2644 | www.parsons.com
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • Stalinski, Sherryl
        Fred, Right now I m trying to get 500+ managers to complete 3000+ performance appraisals, and I am personally anti-appraisal so don t even get me started on
        Message 3 of 9 , Jan 4, 2010
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Fred,
          Right now I'm trying to get 500+ managers to complete 3000+ performance
          appraisals, and I am personally "anti-appraisal" so don't even get me
          started on what people are asking me today (or how I'm answering!) ;-).

          That said, re: the HR/bottom line metrics... I think it's interesting
          (and have always thought this...) that no one ever equates Financial
          data with the performance of the Finance department itself, and yet HR
          data is *somehow* supposed to "justify" our existence?! Is the Finance
          department held accountable when P&L numbers are bad? Do they get to
          claim "credit" when profits are up? Yet, we read in Talent Management &
          HR magazines all the time how HR & OD are supposed to create "bottom
          line" metrics to prove their value. I absolutely agree we need to
          demonstrate financial impacts of talent metrics, but I don't think HR or
          OD should be the ones accountable or responsible for the actual
          results... that is up to managers and leadership. We just provide the
          tools and resources to help them manage people the same way finance
          gives them tools and resources to manage the money.

          Anyone else? Am I missing something obvious here?

          Sherryl Stalinski
          HR Director of Talent Management
          Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group
          100 W Walnut St, Pasadena CA 91124
          626.440-2644 | www.parsons.com



          ________________________________

          From: HRNET@yahoogroups.com [mailto:HRNET@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          Fred
          Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 2:57 PM
          To: HRNET@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [HRNET] Re: The bottom line...




          Congratulations, Ms. Stalinski. Has anyone yet asked what you've done
          for them today? :-)

          Fred Nickols

          --- In HRNET@yahoogroups.com <mailto:HRNET%40yahoogroups.com> ,
          "Stalinski, Sherryl" <sherryl.stalinski@...> wrote:
          >
          > To end the year on a good note, I thought I'd share:
          > I've just completed our 2009-2010 business metrics for OD & HR: A 7.3%
          > reduction in voluntary turnover since 2007 has resulted in estimated
          > savings (cost avoidance) of $4.9 million in our company.
          >
          > Can HR/OD take full "credit" for this? No more than Finance can (or
          > does) take credit for the P&L. However, even though much of our lower
          > turnover can be attributed to the economy, our reorganization to a
          > matrix structure has also resulted in an increase of internal
          placements
          > (estimated savings of about $6500 per candidate for internal vs.
          > external placement) and, we believe, increased engagement/commitment
          > contributing to at least part of the reduction in voluntary turnover.
          >
          > I've also calculated the potential savings of over $350,000 by
          > increasing our internal placements (vs. external hires) from 18.4% to
          > 25%. And finally, I've been able to put a bottom line cost on the
          "days
          > to fill" metric by calculating cost of lost opportunity:
          > average billable hourly wage (and estimated which percent of hires are
          > billable) by average days to fill.
          >
          > Sherryl Stalinski
          > HR Director of Talent Management
          > Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group
          > 100 W Walnut St, Pasadena CA 91124
          > 626.440-2644 | www.parsons.com
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Robert Bacal
          ... Interesting. I suspect that differences between Finance and HR, perhaps subtle, cause the differences in expectations. Whereas Finance can be described
          Message 4 of 9 , Jan 4, 2010
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            On 4 Jan 2010 at 15:08, Stalinski, Sherryl wrote:

            > That said, re: the HR/bottom line metrics... I think it's interesting
            > (and have always thought this...) that no one ever equates Financial
            > data with the performance of the Finance department itself, and yet HR
            > data is *somehow* supposed to "justify" our existence?! Is the Finance
            > department held accountable when P&L numbers are bad? Do they get to
            > claim "credit" when profits are up? Yet, we read in Talent Management &
            > HR magazines all the time how HR & OD are supposed to create "bottom
            > line" metrics to prove their value. I absolutely agree we need to
            > demonstrate financial impacts of talent metrics, but I don't think HR or
            > OD should be the ones accountable or responsible for the actual
            > results... that is up to managers and leadership. We just provide the
            > tools and resources to help them manage people the same way finance
            > gives them tools and resources to manage the money.
            >
            > Anyone else? Am I missing something obvious here?

            Interesting. I suspect that differences between Finance and HR, perhaps subtle,
            cause the differences in expectations. Whereas "Finance" can be described with
            the following descriptors, HR cannot usually:

            focused on a single function or business aspect
            easily understood
            reasons for controls clear
            fairly clear boundaries

            (and others)

            HR seems to have evolved in ways that make it less clear what the focus is, and
            in the absence of clear understanding, it makes sense to say [we haven't a clue
            how you really contribute, so] prove it bottom line.

            HR is somewhat of a hodgepodge of claimed functions, and HR people often aspire
            to control more in the organization than others want them to control.

            Mind you parts of financial departments are, in fact, rationalized and
            downsized, certainly, and outsourced. Come to think of it, I'm not completely
            sure the situation is that different between finance and HR.

            Leadership & Management Search Engine
            http://researchprofessional.org/managementleadership/index.htm
          • Stalinski, Sherryl
            ... often aspire to control more in the organization than others want them to control. I would agree with you here, Robert. I do believe part of this comes
            Message 5 of 9 , Jan 4, 2010
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Robert wrote:
              > HR is somewhat of a hodgepodge of claimed functions, and HR people
              often aspire
              to control more in the organization than others want them to control.

              I would agree with you here, Robert. I do believe part of this comes
              from HR wanting a "seat at the table"... Something that Finance
              typically gets by default, so the desire to 'control' certain things
              (like OD, performance management, employee development). I believe HR
              can, and should be both tactical and strategic, but perhaps you are
              right, the boundaries are not as clearly defined as with Finance.

              Good thoughts for fodder, thanks.

              Sherryl Stalinski
              HR Director of Talent Management
              Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group
              100 W Walnut St, Pasadena CA 91124
              626.440-2644 | www.parsons.com

              .

              <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=321015/grpspId=1705001380/ms
              gId=21417/stime=1262649062/nc1=4507179/nc2=3848642/nc3=5922761>




              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Robert Bacal
              ... Maybe the answer is just as simple as Well, everyone understands what the Finance Department does , (or so they believe), while HR confuses people. There
              Message 6 of 9 , Jan 4, 2010
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                On 4 Jan 2010 at 16:05, Stalinski, Sherryl wrote:

                > Robert wrote:
                > > HR is somewhat of a hodgepodge of claimed functions, and HR people
                > often aspire
                > to control more in the organization than others want them to control.
                >
                > I would agree with you here, Robert. I do believe part of this comes
                > from HR wanting a "seat at the table"... Something that Finance
                > typically gets by default, so the desire to 'control' certain things
                > (like OD, performance management, employee development). I believe HR
                > can, and should be both tactical and strategic, but perhaps you are
                > right, the boundaries are not as clearly defined as with Finance.

                Maybe the answer is just as simple as "Well, everyone understands what the
                Finance Department does", (or so they believe), while HR confuses people.

                There is certainly a "no man's land" or "stuck in the middle" thing with HR,
                where they control but have no power except by association, and they sometimes
                advocate for employees and sometimes don't....

                This is particularly the case when training, development, learning, benefits
                administration and EAP are lumped together under HR.

                Are HR people in the "helping profession" supporting employees (well, yes,
                often they do that) or are they an arm of management used to control things
                (well, one could argue that's true too).

                I know if confuses employees a lot, whether to trust HR.

                My bet is all this has historical roots but you'd probably have a much better
                idea about that. I'd suspect that as the working world got more complex, many
                of the new complexities got attached to the HR function. And thus HR become
                confusing as in what do they do up there?

                I know I'd never have known about the many HR functions and its value without
                working so closely with HR, both physically and functionally.

                HR more often than any other segment (except management) gets bum raps.
              • Fred
                I think it s really quite simple, Sherryl: The Finance department is the one that gets to hold the others accountable for financial performance and, the
                Message 7 of 9 , Jan 5, 2010
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  I think it's really quite simple, Sherryl: The Finance department is the one that gets to hold the others accountable for financial performance and, the portion of Finance that is responsible for certain aspects of financial performance (e.g., investment management, cash flow management, asset management, etc), is off-limits to non-financial folks. Just try poking your nose into the workings of the Finance department and see how fast it gets snipped off.

                  Regards,

                  Fred Nickols

                  --- In HRNET@yahoogroups.com, "Stalinski, Sherryl" <sherryl.stalinski@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Fred,
                  > Right now I'm trying to get 500+ managers to complete 3000+ performance
                  > appraisals, and I am personally "anti-appraisal" so don't even get me
                  > started on what people are asking me today (or how I'm answering!) ;-).
                  >
                  > That said, re: the HR/bottom line metrics... I think it's interesting
                  > (and have always thought this...) that no one ever equates Financial
                  > data with the performance of the Finance department itself, and yet HR
                  > data is *somehow* supposed to "justify" our existence?! Is the Finance
                  > department held accountable when P&L numbers are bad? Do they get to
                  > claim "credit" when profits are up? Yet, we read in Talent Management &
                  > HR magazines all the time how HR & OD are supposed to create "bottom
                  > line" metrics to prove their value. I absolutely agree we need to
                  > demonstrate financial impacts of talent metrics, but I don't think HR or
                  > OD should be the ones accountable or responsible for the actual
                  > results... that is up to managers and leadership. We just provide the
                  > tools and resources to help them manage people the same way finance
                  > gives them tools and resources to manage the money.
                  >
                  > Anyone else? Am I missing something obvious here?
                  >
                  > Sherryl Stalinski
                  > HR Director of Talent Management
                  > Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group
                  > 100 W Walnut St, Pasadena CA 91124
                  > 626.440-2644 | www.parsons.com
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ________________________________
                  >
                  > From: HRNET@yahoogroups.com [mailto:HRNET@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                  > Fred
                  > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 2:57 PM
                  > To: HRNET@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: [HRNET] Re: The bottom line...
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Congratulations, Ms. Stalinski. Has anyone yet asked what you've done
                  > for them today? :-)
                  >
                  > Fred Nickols
                  >
                  > --- In HRNET@yahoogroups.com <mailto:HRNET%40yahoogroups.com> ,
                  > "Stalinski, Sherryl" <sherryl.stalinski@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > To end the year on a good note, I thought I'd share:
                  > > I've just completed our 2009-2010 business metrics for OD & HR: A 7.3%
                  > > reduction in voluntary turnover since 2007 has resulted in estimated
                  > > savings (cost avoidance) of $4.9 million in our company.
                  > >
                  > > Can HR/OD take full "credit" for this? No more than Finance can (or
                  > > does) take credit for the P&L. However, even though much of our lower
                  > > turnover can be attributed to the economy, our reorganization to a
                  > > matrix structure has also resulted in an increase of internal
                  > placements
                  > > (estimated savings of about $6500 per candidate for internal vs.
                  > > external placement) and, we believe, increased engagement/commitment
                  > > contributing to at least part of the reduction in voluntary turnover.
                  > >
                  > > I've also calculated the potential savings of over $350,000 by
                  > > increasing our internal placements (vs. external hires) from 18.4% to
                  > > 25%. And finally, I've been able to put a bottom line cost on the
                  > "days
                  > > to fill" metric by calculating cost of lost opportunity:
                  > > average billable hourly wage (and estimated which percent of hires are
                  > > billable) by average days to fill.
                  > >
                  > > Sherryl Stalinski
                  > > HR Director of Talent Management
                  > > Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group
                  > > 100 W Walnut St, Pasadena CA 91124
                  > > 626.440-2644 | www.parsons.com
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.