State of Nebraska - Department of Administrative Services State Personnel

Transcription

1 ID # (assigned by CSG): 12-MW-04-NE Please provide the following information, adding space as necessary: State: State of Nebraska Assign Program Category: Government Operations and Technology Program Name: Administering Agency: Talent Management Software Solution/LINK State of Nebraska - Department of Administrative Services State Personnel Contact (Name and Title): Dovi Mueller, Personnel Program Administrator Address: 301 Centennial Mall South, Lincoln, NE Telephone Number: (402) Address: Web Address: Dovi.Mueller@nebraska.gov 1

2 1. How long has this program operated (month and year)? Note: the program must be between 9 months and 5 years old as of April 5, 2012 to be eligible for this year s award. In the Summer/Fall of 2009 a Request for Proposal (RFP) was developed for a fully integrated Talent Management Software Solution. The technology requested within the RFP included the following Human Resources Solutions: Applicant Tracking, Assessments, and Background Checks, On-boarding, Learning Management and Online Learning Content, Performance Management and Competency Data, Succession Planning Management, and Compensation Management. Moreover, the State of Nebraska requested this functionality as a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) so that business process owners could focus efforts around implementing best business practices and acculturation to new technology, improved processes, and subsequent policy changes. At the time the RFP was developed and released, there was no one-stop shop software solution for all requested Human Resources functionality. As a result, the State allowed the primary contracted vendor to partner with up to three subcontractors in order to provide the full Talent Management Software Solution we were looking to implement. After scoring the RFP and Vendor Demonstrations, Cornerstone OnDemand was awarded the contract as the primary, with NEOGOV as a sub-contractor. Talent Management Software Solution Picture: Since the initial contract was awarded to Cornerstone OnDemand, the State of Nebraska had an opportunity to avail itself of additional functionality requested as part of the RFP. Cornerstone OnDemand has subsequently partnered with Workday to provide Benefits Management and Employee Open Enrollment as part of a new Human Resources system of record. Over the course of the last three years since the contract was awarded, the Talent Management Software Solution has evolved into a project called LINK. The LINK project encompasses all of the Human Resources functionality originally requested as well as other programs and services that the State of Nebraska is looking to move to SaaS, such as Procurement. On the Human Resources side, LINK has been consolidated into three primary areas: 1) Career Center/Recruitment and Selection Center, which includes Applicant Tracking and Assessments 2) Employee Development Center, which includes, Learning, Performance, and Succession and 3) Employee Work Center, which includes 2

3 Benefits Management, Employee Open Enrollment, and On-boarding as part of the HR System of Record. There is a fourth area within the LINK project, the Payroll and Financial Center. This functionality is still held within the State s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, EnterpriseOne. We have not moved the payroll functionality from the ERP as payroll and associated activities were not included as part of the Talent Management Software Solution RFP. Effective March 2011, the State has issued a Request for Information (RFI) to determine the feasibility of moving payroll and financial processes. Work is continually being performed to develop and implement these integrated pieces; however, the Career Center/Recruitment and Selection Center have been implemented and operating since June 20, Additionally, the Learning piece of the Employee Development Center was implemented and made available to all state employees effective July 1, The remaining pieces of this program are anticipated to be fully implemented through 2012 and Specifically, Open Enrollment in Spring of 2012, Performance and On-Boarding in the Winter of 2012, and Succession Planning to follow in Current LINK Project Picture: 3

4 2. Describe the program: Why was it created? Why is it a new and creative approach or method? What are the specific activities and operations of the program in chronological order? Is it effective? Provide tangible results and examples. Why was this program created? State of Nebraska had a limited Human Resources technology infrastructure that was necessary to move human capital management forward in a way that aligned with the Governor s vision and the available resources to support such an initiative. Furthermore, the State is facing a significant talent shortage within the upcoming years. Roughly 31% of State employees are at or over the retirement eligibility age, with the average age of the state employee being 47.1 years. State of Nebraska HR processes and practices were proving to be outdated and inefficient, especially in tight economic times. A review of traditional human resources functions performed within the State of Nebraska found that, while similar in nature, some functions were centrally managed by the State Personnel Division (i.e. advertising and recruiting) while many other functions were decentralized and managed at the agency level (i.e. training). This way of doing business was found to be ineffective and often resulted in vast redundancy and inconsistency across the State s 80 agencies. A coordinated, best business practice approach to Human Resources was largely lacking. In addition, it was evident that agencies with larger, dedicated human resources staff and greater financial resources were able to develop more robust internal human resources departments and programs; whereas smaller agencies with fewer dedicated staff and resources did not have the resources to deploy the breadth and depth of the programs of the larger agencies, nor was there a coordinated effort to share programs between agencies. The technology used for the Applicant Tracking System the State implemented in 1999 was no longer supported. Personic was housed on a Windows NT server that was obsolete. The software maintenance agreement for Personic had expired, and the only option to maintain this service was a $400 per hour per incident charge to a third-party vendor. In 2003, we implemented an ERP system using JD Edwards software. This implementation provided Nebraska an important first opportunity to integrate various statewide business processes through a single technology source. While this ERP solution was a leading technological advancement in 2003, it was much more attuned, and largely created for, the financial aspects of the organization and did not provide much HR functionality out of the box. Despite the ERP purchase, agencies still continued to create and maintain separate processes and shadow systems. In some cases, agencies even customized pieces of the ERP to support their separate programs. These programs were necessary in part, because the technology to support a coordinated approach did not exist. One of the consequences of this was data inconsistency. The data came from disparate areas; there was no consistency of format, content, or language. Intelligence built into codes was different for different agencies (as an example) and reporting across agency lines was nearly impossible and minimally accurate without a lot of cleanup. This inefficiency was clearly not cost effective. In addition, in order for any custom reporting within the ERP, programmers were required to do it at a significant per hour cost to the requesting entity. This cost further drove agencies to seek separate options outside of the ERP solution. In order to address the limitations of the HR portion of the ERP system, we would have had to purchase solutions by third-party vendors at an additional cost to the State. All factors considered, and with ever- 4

5 advancing and more cost-effective technologies available, a complete and integrated talent management solution was determined a necessity and a decision was made to pursue this course of action. Why is it a new and creative approach or method? There are several factors that make this project new and different from other projects similar to this in nature. The first factor is the scope of the LINK project. The State of Nebraska recognized that in order to successfully provide effective service delivery to our customers, we had to coordinate efforts. In order to do that, we needed to have a technological infrastructure to support the coordination. In addition, we needed to employ and adhere to best business practices, utilize the software consistently across agency lines, and essentially learn to speak the same language in terms of data and its application. We made the decision to strategically and methodically review and revise nearly all Human Resource activities and to automate, consolidate, and streamline as many of them as possible. This review was for all HR processes to include; recruitment and selection, the HR System of Record, and employee development. Recruitment and Selection refers to all aspects of the applicant tracking and hiring process, including; assessments, electronic applications, selection devices, screening tools, source history tracking, reporting, advertising, electronic job requisitions, candidate pool searches, and resume searching. The HR System of Record review included; benefits enrollment, position control, records, employee work locations, reporting structures, on-boarding, data analysis, reporting capability, workflow, employee mobility (promotions, transfers, demotions, terminations), and demographic data. Employee development covered; training delivery, performance management, and succession planning, with a new coordinated focus around the use and deployment of competencies. These HR functions were tracked with spreadsheets, homegrown software applications, or in some cases, not tracked at all. The second factor is utilization of the Software as a Service (SaaS) platform for the entire solution. The SaaS platform provides a software solution that is built from the end-user perspective, rather than from a programmer s point of view. This paradigm shift allows for a myriad of different alternatives when considering implementation and maintenance. Since the solution was built from an end-user perspective and usually with best business practice models in place within the technology itself, business process owners, subject matter experts, and end-users can manage the lions share of the implementation roles and responsibilities. Changed leadership coupled with identifying as is and to be processes become the focus, with an eye toward short-term and long-term policy implications. In addition, system maintenance is a lot different and easier to manage. Software upgrades are done in a day, as opposed to months and they occur at multiple times per year. Hardware is maintained by the provider therefore we can focus resources on other things such as communication and training. While some system customization and configuration is possible, the software, by virtue of its being maintained by the vendor centrally, has pre-built HR processes, built on best business practices. These processes drove intentional and thoughtful change and consistency to the current HR practices of the State of Nebraska. The third factor that makes this project unique is the deep integrations between the systems. This integration of multiple human resources functions into a completely integrated talent management suite allows for coordination of human resources service delivery, an aligning of the data within the systems between agencies, creating more efficiencies and consistent outcomes and automating many of the current pen-to-paper processes human resources staff within agencies are accustomed to performing. This also allows for records pertaining to the employee to more easily travel with them through the course of their employment, regardless of the agency in which they are located. This integration presents a new way to look at how human resources functions are completed and addresses the inefficiencies that existed previously. Additionally, this integration and centralization of functions allows all agencies (from large to small) to equally participate in the maintenance and development of their human resources. 5

6 The fourth factor is the composition and function of the implementation teams. As stated before, many of the HR functions for the State of Nebraska were de-centralized, either by common practice or (in some cases) by State Statutes. With that in mind, software implementation team members were built from a representative cross section of the agencies. This multi-agency involvement helped us change our processes and come up with a streamlined approach that meets the needs of agencies both large and small across the state. LINK Integrations Project Picture: 6

7 What are the specific activities and operations of the program in chronological order? The specific activities and operations of the program all relate to the career life cycle of the employee. This cycle starts at the application process using the Recruitment and Selection Center agencies submit job requisitions, search resumes, choose selection instruments, and start the recruitment process. Applicants apply online by creating accounts in the Career Center, search for current vacancies, create their resume information and submit that information for jobs. Once a candidate is selected for hire, information travels from the applicant tracking portion to the Employee Work Center (EWC), where all core HR data is kept. From there, employee information is sent to the Employee Development Center (EDC), which includes Learning, Performance, and Succession Planning. Employees are able to manage their careers in a way that they ve never been able to do prior to the implementation of the LINK software solution. Contained within the EDC are competency models linked to all employees and specific positions, transcripts for each employee that follow them throughout their career. There are trainings offered in a variety of formats, (on-line, instructor-led, documents) all of which can be tracked and reported on by anyone in the employee s chain of command, HR, or system administrators. Employees can enter their resume information into the system and do comparisons to other positions in order to gauge qualification and to create development plans to address possible deficiencies. There is also a social collaboration area where employees can communicate with one another and speak to subject matter experts on a variety of topics. Employees and managers can utilize performance management to grow their talent. The Performance module is linked directly to the Learning module, so that if an employee needs additional training, the training can be identified and scheduled within the system. 7

8 Is the Program Effective? While the entire LINK project is not completely implemented, many benefits have already been realized: Career Center / Recruitment and Selection Center LIVE since June 20, 2010 Activity Before Implementation After Implementation Job Requisitions/Orders Hiring managers submitted job requisitions via paper, fax, and electronically. Weekly update of vacancy information was published every Friday. Deadline for vacancy publication was each Wednesday afternoon. Recruiters manually entered job posting information which was then organized into a word document and ed to various city, state, county and university employers. Hiring managers utilize the Recruitment and Selection Center to electronically create and submit job requisitions. Once approved by State Personnel, the job posting is automatically released to the State Personnel sponsored web site. Job site is updated on an on-going basis, often several times a day. Employment Applications Employment Applications, cont d. Both paper and electronic applications were accepted. Paper applications, transcripts, etc. were scanned and manually entered into the applicant data base. State Personnel staff manually entered each applicant s job request. Since paper applications were accepted and State Personnel utilized a postmark application deadline, applications were screened and referred to the hiring managers four days AFTER the application deadline. In FY 2009/2010, received 59, 627 applicant requests Only online applications are accepted. Applicants choose the positions of interest and once the application is submitted, are automatically attached to the job posting. Applications are screened and referred to the hiring manager one day after the job posting has expired. In FY 2010/2011, received 87,131 applicant requests Selection Process Hiring agencies determined when selection tools were used. Applicants completed the paper supplemental questionnaire which was either mailed or electronically mailed to State Personnel. Recruiting staff manually reviewed to determine numerical rating. Excel spreadsheets were used to calculate scores. Use of supplemental questionnaires cannot be measured. The selection tool and corresponding scoring plan are identified and developed before the job posting is released. As applicants apply they are automatically scored and ranked, with information being attached to the job vacancy. Use of supplemental questionnaires/training & experience devices has increased from 520 in the time period of 1/1/2011 to 3/20/11 to 583 in the time period of 1/1/2012 to 3/20/2012. Job Interest Cards Did not exist Applicants may elect to receive notices when a vacancy occurs in the category(ies) of interest. In FY 2010/ ,391 job interest cards were completed. 8

9 Activity Before Implementation After Implementation The highest areas of interest are for positions in the Human/Social Services and Office & Administrative Support categories. From 7/1/2011 to 3/27/2012, 6461 Job Interest Cards have been completed. Highest areas of interest remain in the Human/Social Services and Office & Administrative Support categories. Completing the Hire Records Retention Cost Savings Agencies were not completing the entire recruiting and hiring cycle. Some hire information was provided; however, there was no mandate to do so. Roughly $15,000 Annually Hiring agencies complete the cycle by completing an online PAF (personnel action form). All PAF s are submitted to the recruiting staff for approval. With the implementation of HCM, hire information from the ATS will integrate with other software systems. Under $200 Annually, a cost savings to ONE agency of roughly $15,000 Employee Development Center Learning LIVE since July 1, 2010 Activity Before Implementation After Implementation On-line Learning Opportunities Not tracked 271 online courses that are offered Statewide Intra-Agency Training Opportunities Defensive Driving Not tracked The class was 4 hours at a cost of $14.25 per class 70+ instructor-led courses that are offered Statewide The class is one hour with a cost of $ This class has been taken 3411 times, saving the State 10,233 labor hours (or the equivalent of nearly 5 FTE) as well as $7675. One Course Evaluation Statewide Statewide New Hire Orientation and Leadership Development Program Did Not Exist Attached to every online / instructor-led course for scoring and evaluation, regardless of class, creating a consistent benchmark of successful training. Did not exist Coming

10 Other Effectiveness Measures Common between All Systems: Increased user-friendly report capabilities that require little to no set-up or configuration. An increased sharing of training resources between agencies. A more consistent and efficient way to conduct business by centralizing traditional human resources functions and reducing the amount of double entries and pen-to-paper processes. Reduction of waste of resources and time by allowing training, performance and other employment related documents to electronically follow the employee across all agencies within the State of Nebraska. Movement toward a more empowered workforce allowing employees more input and control on their personal and professional development and career choices. Development of a leadership program and other trainings to give supervisors and managers more tools to effectively lead and develop their employees. 3. Did this program originate in your state? If YES, please indicate the innovator s name, present address, telephone number, and address. Yes, implementation of a complete and fully integrated talent management suite using SaaS technology originated in Nebraska. Contact information for the innovator is as follows: Dovi Mueller, Personnel Program Administrator 301 Centennial Mall S, Mall Level Lincoln, NE (402) Dovi.Mueller@nebraska.gov The State of Nebraska has been highlighted for its innovative public sector efforts through the following venues: April 2010 Cornerstone Press Release Deploy-Cornerstone-OnDemand%E2%80%99s-Integrated-Talent October HR Technology Conference Presentation November 2010 Talent Management Magazine Article May Government Technology Article State-of-Nebraska.html October 2011 CHCI Webinar Cornerstone OnDemand White Paper Tough-Times-Make-Talent-Management-Essential-in-the-Public-Sector.pdf 10

11 00ruk7 4. Are you aware of similar programs in other states? If YES, which ones and how does this program differ? It is our understanding that no other state has or is currently implementing a fully integrated talent management suite using the SaaS technology platform. While some states have implemented pieces of a talent management system, such as an Applicant Tracking System or a Learning Management System, none are undergoing a complete revamp of traditional human resources functions. We believe solutions in other states are traditional onsite solutions. 5. What limitations or obstacles might other states expect to encounter when attempting to adopt this program? Resource allocation, specifically human capital and time, are possible limitations. The State of Nebraska used current staff to oversee and facilitate all aspects of the project, almost all of whom took this project on in addition to their regular job responsibilities. Coordinating schedules and work between staff was difficult. Almost all of the software solutions on the market are currently geared toward the private sector. As such, there are some limitations to it when applied to a public sector model. For example, we have over 80 agencies and though the Governor has direct authority over some, he does not have direct authority over them all. This structure caused some issue when trying to work through supervisory hierarchy within the software. Also, while the software has tremendous capabilities and has allowed us to make significant positive changes, it does have limitations. Recognizing and working through what the software cannot do is something other states will need to be cognizant of when attempting to adopt this program. The biggest challenge has been culture change. In order to implement the system, many agencyspecific processes needed to change. In some cases, decades-old functions were drastically altered. We needed champions from all levels of State Government. Getting all of these entities together for an extended period of time and working towards a common cause was difficult, but it was critical for the success of the end product. Some individuals with a vested interest in maintaining current processes and service delivery models saw this project initially as a threat. We spent a significant amount of time communicating and working through traditional paradigms, allaying fears, and solving issues. Another challenge has been the speed at which software updates occur. Because functionality can change significantly within a relatively short period of time, it completely changes the paradigm of how system information needs to be communicated. Internal end-user guides, process flows, and other system usage information now need to be reviewed more frequently, and communications of changes need to be done more aggressively and with a broader audience. Software testing, which was once a rare occurrence, is now a regular necessity. Now that agencies are linked by a common software solution, business process changes need to be considered from a State-wide perspective more often. While this is an excellent result, it can be challenging to find a solution that works for all. Agencies that were once use to being able to act 11

12 autonomously now can have additional considerations before moving forward on policies and procedures. Branding and comprehensive marketing strategies are also daunting. Demonstrating not only what the system can do, but also to communicate what it cannot do was sometimes difficult. We needed to discuss the project in its entirety in such a way that was compelling and easy to understand for a variety of stakeholders. Scope creep is also a potential hazard. It is tempting to want to fix everything all at once, especially if you have various entities working on something of this magnitude. Maintaining focus on key initiatives is critical, especially when resources are limited. All of these challenges, limitations, and obstacles are resolved, or at least significantly lessened, by increased effective communication. Communication is always important, this projects implementation and subsequent linkages makes communication paramount. CSG reserves the right to use or publish in other CSG products the information provided in this application. If your agency objects to this policy, please advise us in a separate attachment. 12

13 Use these as guidelines to determine the appropriate Program Category for your state s submission and list that program category on page one of this application. Choose only one. Infrastructure and Economic Development Business/Commerce Economic Development Transportation Government Operations and Technology Administration Elections Information Systems Public Information Revenue Telecommunications Health & Human Services Aging Children & Families Health Services Housing Human Services Human Resources/Education Education Labor Management Personnel Training and Development Workforce Development Natural Resources Agriculture Energy Environment Environmental Protection Natural Resources Parks & Recreation Water Resources Public Safety/Corrections Corrections Courts Criminal Justice Drugs Emergency Management Public Safety Save in.doc or rtf. Return completed application AND video (if applicable) electronically to innovations@csg.org or mail to: CSG Innovations Awards The Council of State Governments 2760 Research Park Drive Lexington, KY Contact: Nancy J. Vickers, National Program Administrator Phone: Fax: Attn: Innovations Awards Program The Council of State Governments nvickers@csg.org This application is also available at 13

14 14