Multicountry Payroll and Time Management · payroll and time management, two disciplines that have...

Multicountry Payroll and Time Management A Practical Approach to Improving Efficiency, Control, and Management Information By Keith Rodgers Webster Buchanan Research www.websterb.com An Oracle White Paper August 2004

Multicountry Payroll and Time Management

Executive Summary .......................................................................................... 3 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 4 Part One: An Integrated Approach to Multicountry Payroll and Time Management ....................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Multicountry Implementations: The Business Drivers..................... 5 1.2 Multicountry Implementations: The Technology Factors ............... 7 1.3 An Integrated Approach to Payroll, Time Management, and HR .. 9 1.4 The Cultural and Organizational Challenges.................................... 10 1.5 Multicountry Versus Global—Building a Pragmatic Business Case11

Part Two: Payroll—The Broader Business Case ........................................ 13 2.1 Overtime, Exceptions, and Retroactive Adjustments..................... 13 2.2 Data Accuracy....................................................................................... 14 2.3 Management Control, Compliance, and Business Insight.............. 14 2.4 Enhancing the Employee Experience ............................................... 15

Part Three: The Evolution of Time & Labor ............................................. 15 3.1 The Operational Perspective .............................................................. 16 3.2 Management Control and Insight ...................................................... 17

Part Four: Case Studies................................................................................... 18 4.1 Logitech—Payroll and Time & Labor on Three Continents......... 18 4.2 Weyerhaeuser—Rolling Out Time & Labor for 40,000 Employees20 4.3 Lend Lease—Implementing Payroll Across Two Continents....... 22 4.4 European Investment Bank—Tackling Exceptions and Retroactivity................................................................................................. 23

End Notes ........................................................................................................ 25 About the Author ....................................................................................... 25 Disclaimer and Copyright Notice............................................................. 25



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Special Report addresses the growing demand for a multicountry approach to payroll and time management, two disciplines that have traditionally been managed on an individual country basis. Drawing from the experiences of organizations around the world, it weighs the benefits— and challenges—of standardizing business processes and working practices, based on a single IT infrastructure. Focusing on practicalities rather than business theory, it argues that:

• The unique regulatory and business needs of individual countries have encouraged a piecemeal approach to payroll and time management in the past—yet there’s a surprising degree of commonality in the core processes that underpin each operation. If these can be standardized, organizations can mirror best practices across multiple territories, strengthen internal controls and compliance, establish global centers of excellence, and improve management insight.

• The design of payroll and time management applications is critical to multicountry implementations. The latest generation of software applications separates the underlying engine from the tools users need to configure their unique business rules: this approach allows companies to build one core infrastructure but layer local functionality on top.

• Standardizing on software in multiple countries brings technical challenges but also offers many potential benefits for the IT function, including economies of scale in support and development.

• Likewise, taking a multicountry approach brings significant cultural challenges, both within individual sites and between countries. Meeting those challenges will be as critical to success as tackling the technical issues.

• The effectiveness of a multicountry approach is partly determined by how tightly payroll, time & labor, and HR applications are integrated. There are different degrees of integration, from running overnight “batch” transfers between applications to building a single platform with a shared database, and the chosen approach will have a significant impact on issues such as data synchronization and cross-functional workflows.

• Early adopters recommend taking a pragmatic rather than purist approach. Instead of tackling payroll and time management on a global basis from day


one, organizations are better advised to focus first on territories that will deliver the biggest short-term gains, while maintaining a policy of “coexistence” with the existing applications and outsourcing arrangements used in other territories. This is a “multicountry” rather than “global” approach.

• Leaving aside the multicountry issues, organizations may have a case for implementing new payroll and time & labor applications in single countries purely on the basis of improving efficiency, accuracy, control, and management insight.

INTRODUCTION Payroll systems have long occupied a curious niche in the human capital management field. Usually one of the first HR-related activities to be automated or outsourced, they’ve tended to be viewed as standalone components, operated by a specific business function and subject to the unique regulatory requirements of each country. Seen as transactional engines rather than strategic drivers for the business, they also tend to be viewed very pragmatically—if they do the job within a suitable time frame and with an acceptable number of errors, there’s rarely much call to tinker with them. As a result, most multinational organizations have spawned a network of independent payroll operations, each developing its own unique workarounds to compensate for system or process weaknesses.

Like every other aspect of human capital management, however, payroll processes, working practices, and technologies continue to evolve. Some changes are subtle, the result of shared best practices: others, particularly in terms of underlying technology architectures, bring about fundamental change to the way payroll can be managed, integrated, and accessed.

Similar changes have occurred in the time & labor field. Once viewed primarily as a clocking-in process for hourly workers, time & labor applications are emerging as a key component of the people management armory in a range of industries, from traditional manufacturing to professional services. Time reporting, while still a core component of each software package, is just one feature in a new generation of systems that provide a range of management inputs, from improving cost reporting to better absence management.

These developments aren’t just about adding bells and whistles to a basic transactional engine—rather, they’re about improving process efficiency, employee access to data, management control, and the quality of business information. In particular, the latest generation of payroll and time management systems allows organizations to do something they’ve rarely done before—run multiple country processes on a single, integrated central system.

This Special Report, which is illustrated with case studies, addresses both the benefits and the challenges of taking a centralized approach to payroll and time & labor. Weighing legislative, cultural, and technical issues, it recommends a step-by-


step approach to multicountry implementations, focusing on delivering rapid returns in key territories and gradually extending them to smaller business units.

PART ONE: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO MULTICOUNTRY PAYROLL AND TIME MANAGEMENT For most multinational organizations, process and system standardization is a double-edged sword. From a global perspective, it brings efficiencies, improves control, allows best practices to be replicated across the enterprise, and increases visibility into individual country activities. From a country or regional perspective, however, it can run into resistance, with managers pushing back against initiatives that fail to cater to the nuances of their local environment. That’s particularly true both of payroll, which is shaped by individual country regulations, and time management, which tends to involve unique and often complex rules that vary from site to site.

Successful multicountry implementations depend on an organization’s ability to strike a careful balance, standardizing core processes at a multinational level while giving managers sufficient flexibility to meet their own specific needs. This is an organizational, cultural, and technical challenge, and it inevitably involves some trade-offs.

1.1 Multicountry Implementations: The Business Drivers Historically, there’s been a tendency for organizations to equate local legislative and organizational requirements with a need for customized business processes. In reality, however, the building blocks beneath most payroll and time management processes are common.

Take involuntary terminations as an example. Each country will have a different legal framework governing the way that employees can be dismissed. In the U.S., for example, staff are hired and fired at will, whereas in many European countries, they’re entitled to the protection of performance, disciplinary, or redundancy codes. Within a payroll application, however, the process is common: all outstanding salary, overtime, vacation, benefits, and other entitlements have to be calculated, a final net payment has to be made, and year-to-date tax issues have to be finalized. There will be some deviations country by country, but the basic series of transactions governing a termination remain the same. Likewise, the individual rules for time scheduling will vary from country to country, but the fundamental processes—such as the ability to create schedules, make them accessible to employees, and amend them on the fly—are common to multiple environments.

Organizations that have already embarked on multicountry payroll and time management initiatives —such as Lend Lease, the real estate services company, and Logitech, a technology supplier specializing in personal peripheral products—argue that there’s a large amount of commonality in the way countries handle core pay-related activities, such as bringing on board new hires or managing tax amendments. Patricia Asima, HR operations manager at Lend Lease, has


implemented a multicountry payroll application in the U.K. and Australia, supported from Atlanta, Georgia, in the U.S. She argues that 75 percent of payroll activities are common across each country in terms of tasks and outputs—what differs in each territory is the methodology.1

In some cases, lack of standardization creates significant problems. Different approaches to job transfers, for example, can cause payroll difficulties when employees switch region. Likewise, before implementing a multicountry application, Logitech struggled to manage profit sharing because entitlements were calculated in different ways, even within single territories such as China. With the implementa-tion of a multicountry payroll system prompting across-the-board change, Logitech has now standardized a number of processes globally, including new hires, terminations, transfers, uploads to HR and financials, tax amendments, and reporting.2

By using the same core engine and database to run multiple payroll and time management applications, organizations can also centralize control over data, giving them greater visibility across the entire enterprise.

In many respects, this evolution of payroll and time & labor reflects the development of core HR management systems within multinational organizations. Historically, applications or services tended to be purchased on a single country basis, with the choice of supplier or outsourced service provider made at a local level. Even where one vendor was selected centrally, country applications usually evolved on a country-by-country basis, with software customized to meet local needs and upgrades implemented at different times in different locations. Today, however, a growing number of organizations have implemented single-instance, multicountry HR systems, improving process efficiency and giving them greater visibility into HR management information around the world. They include the likes of Baxter, the medical products and services company Lend Lease, and leading technology suppliers such as Hewlett-Packard and Cisco.

These organizations have demonstrated through their global HR implementations what organizations can potentially achieve through multicountry payroll and time & labor. Together, centralization and standardization allow organizations to:

• Implement best practices. Business processes tend to evolve over years, with short-term fixes to problems becoming the de facto norm and existing working methods becoming entrenched, however inefficient. Implementing a multicountry approach at the very least challenges the status quo and forces organizations to question what they’re doing. At best, it allows them to take proven best practices from one region and replicate them in another.

• Improve internal controls and compliance. Imposing common processes ensures that transparent authorization techniques can be applied and

1 See “Lend Lease—Implementing Payroll Across Two Continents,” Part Four. 2 See “Logitech’s Multinational Payroll and Time & Labor Projects,” Part Four.


enforced across the board. Not only is this best practice, it has also become a high priority in light of Sarbanes-Oxley and Basel II (see Part 2.3).

• Build centers of excellence. By standardizing both processes and the underlying technology infrastructure, organizations can build a central pool of specialists to handle queries from multiple regions, working with individuals at local sites. Clearly, this approach has logistical challenges, particularly where organizations work across multiple time zones, and it’s important to set up processes to ensure that local requirements are understood and acted on. But it can be done—Lend Lease, for example, has implemented its payroll systems by using technical resources in Atlanta, Georgia, working with local developers in the U.K. and Australia. The core payroll system is supported by Atlanta with some processing supported locally.

• Establish shared services centers. Shared services centers take the concept of a center of excellence one stage further. By pooling both functional and technology expertise, they allow organizations to run HR, payroll, and other disciplines as a central internal service for multiple regions. As well as maximizing economies of scale, these centers are a half-step toward outsourcing, allowing organizations to centralize and remodel their business processes prior to passing responsibility for the applications—or indeed the whole function—to a third-party service provider.

• Improve management insight. An integrated approach to payroll and time management gives organizations the opportunity to develop common reports. By automating the same processes in multiple countries, they can also ensure that they generate and capture consistent data for analytical purposes, allowing senior management to compare relative costs and deployment levels across regions. This kind of analysis underpins both historical reporting and predictive modeling, contributing to a broader human capital management strategy.

While these benefits build a powerful business case, execution is everything. The organizational, cultural, and technical factors outlined following ultimately determine how far the benefits can be realized.

1.2 Multicountry Implementations: The Technology Factors Seen primarily as transactional engines that perform necessary but not strategic functions, payroll and time & labor applications haven’t always found themselves at the top of the list of HRIT purchasing priorities. Even where organizations have been forced to develop custom workarounds and manual processes to fill functionality gaps or cater for system weaknesses, there’s often a reluctance to meddle with something that “does the job.” In some instances, customization even becomes an argument for retaining the status quo—if so much work has been put into a system to meet the unique needs of an individual country, why replace it?


This laissez faire approach to systems management may be logical at an individual country level, but it runs counter to the concept of multicountry payroll and time management. To realize the benefits of standardization and centralization outlined in Part 1.1, organizations require a flexible IT infrastructure that combines commonality with responsiveness. In practice, that means a single core engine to drive payroll and time & labor in multiple regions, with the functionality necessary to generate country-specific rules layered on top. From a design perspective, the ability to create rules needs to be separated from the core application logic. It’s the difference between customizing an application—which requires technical expertise to dig beneath the covers and change hard code—and configuration, which doesn’t impact the core logic. In some instances, configuration can be carried out by trained functional personnel or “power users” rather than technical experts, which is particularly helpful where IT support is handled remotely.

As well as providing a platform for the business benefits outlined previously, implementing a single platform brings a number of technology-specific benefits:

• Single development environment. Standardizing on one environment means that in-house support and development staff work with familiar tools, making it easier to cross-train and cross-skill. A single development platform also makes for faster initial setup and easier upgrades.

• Centralized support. As outlined in Part 1.1, organizations can enjoy economies of scale by developing centers of excellence that provide technical and functional expertise around the world.

• Common functional and end-user experience. Usability is critical for the experts who administer payroll and time & labor, but it also impacts end users who have to enter data or who want to leverage self-service functionality (for example, to view online payslips). Developing a common end-user interface and workflows also makes it easier for transferred employees to use different country systems.

Alongside these potential benefits, however, are some important challenges to address from an IT perspective. To begin with, the central applications, along with the hardware and database technology that supports them, will need to be scalable to cater for fluctuating workloads and future growth. Where time & labor and payroll applications share the same multicountry engine, the sheer volume of transactions can significantly slow down processing times—although it’s worth noting that Weyerhaeuser, the international forest products company, is betting that it can cater to up to 40,000 employees without impacting performance.3 In some instances, users have staggered their payroll runtimes between different countries to ensure that volumes are spread evenly across the pay period. An alternative option is to implement two or three regional systems, rather than one global engine. While this practice precludes organizations from enjoying all the benefits of data centralization, particularly in terms of centralized support, the impact is relative— 3 See “Weyerhaeuser—Rolling Out Time & Labor for 40,000 Employees,” Part Four.


two regional support centers may be less efficient than one global center, but it’s a more efficient setup than operating dozens of country-specific centers.

In addition, operational capacity may become an issue at the center of excellence. It’s important, for example, to establish whether a centralized, global payroll function can physically manage the volume of statutory updates for every single country.

1.3 An Integrated Approach to Payroll, Time Management, and HR As well as developing an integrated geographical approach to payroll and time & labor, cross-functional integration is also a growing priority. The way that time & labor and payroll applications link together—and the way they’re in turn integrated with project management, HR, and financials applications—will ultimately impact a host of business outcomes.

Almost all specialist time & labor applications come with prebuilt integration points that connect to payroll packages. Although this is a well-established, practical means of updating data between two independent systems, often through overnight batch processing, there are different degrees of integration. All basic integrations offer one-way data transmission, sending reported time data to the payroll application so that employees can be paid. What’s less common is two-way integration that takes the costs calculated by the payroll application and matches it back to time. This process allows organizations to track the cost of time and provides valuable information for analysis.

For many organizations, there will be a strong argument in favor of taking integration a step further and implementing both applications on the same vendor’s platform, sharing the same database. Not only does this configuration remove the need to build and maintain multiple interfaces, it also allows setup tables to be shared and improves the flow of data between the different applications. Once overtime payments are identified in the time & labor application, for example, they will automatically be recognized as such in the payroll module.

As we outlined in Part 1.2, standardizing on a single application environment also means that the IT department will be using the same development tools and languages, while power users and end users should enjoy the same—or at least, a similar—user interface. While some specialist time & labor applications may offer greater depth of functionality than the multicomponent suites supplied by enterprise vendors, these kinds of integration advantages may outweigh feature-based benefits.

The same principles apply when it comes to feeding data from payroll and time & labor into HR, project management, and general ledger applications. The quality of integration here is critical—because of differences in the way data is presented and treated within different systems, organizations can run into synchronization prob-lems, giving HR or financial management a distorted view of true payroll spend.


Again, many vendors offer prebuilt integrations to the most common HR and financials packages, but there are important differences in approach. Simple interfaces may be enough to transmit data, but they can also create a maintenance overhead for IT, particularly when one system is upgraded and the interfaces need to be updated. More sophisticated specialist integration packages will synchronize different business units and map different cost centers between two vendors’ applications and are built in such a way that they maintain the integrity of the integration even during an upgrade.

Once again, there may be some advantages in running both payroll and time & labor applications on the same platform as the core HR management system. Where applications share the same core code, for example, software developers can provide prebuilt, cross-functional workflows, allowing data from one system to trigger events in another. Organizations such as the European Investment Bank (EIB) in Luxembourg testify to the efficiencies this kind of integration can bring. The bank, which has replaced a custom-built mainframe application with a new generation payroll system based on Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise architecture, has eliminated a backlog in exchanging data between payroll and HR since standardizing on a common application framework.4

1.4 The Cultural and Organizational Challenges Implementing any kind of system or process change carries with it inherent cultural challenges, and when it’s driven on a multinational basis, those difficulties will likely be magnified. This is a particular concern where working practices are firmly entrenched—which is often the case with payroll departments—or where the impact is particularly sensitive for the individuals affected, such as with time management.

Many of these issues can be tackled with standard change management techniques. Establishing senior management buy-in at the outset is critical, particularly because multicountry implementations will cross organizational boundaries, and hierarchies and some degree of arbitration—or at least, the threat of arbitration—may be necessary to resolve turf wars. Securing that support ultimately rests on the credibility of the business case, and the ability to demonstrate quick, tangible wins will be a key factor (see Part 1.5).

Even with senior management buy-in, however, some degree of resistance to change is inevitable at other levels within the organization, be it from country managers, line managers, or payroll and HR employees. Sometimes it stems from reluctance to abandon the comfort of established working practices; other times, it’s a control issue, particularly where country or line management believes that centralization threatens their autonomy, or where individual employees feel that their power base is threatened. Overcoming these kinds of hurdles generally involves a combination of carrot and stick—with the carrot once again taking the

4 See “European Investment Bank—Tackling Exceptions and Retroactivity,” Part Four.


shape of quick, meaningful wins. In addition, one of the biggest challenges that organizations face early on is to demonstrate in practical terms that the centralized approach can still cater to local needs.

Multicountry payroll and time management implementations bring a further set of challenges because the processes and organizational structures being upgraded typically vary widely from region to region. The highly consultative management model favored in European countries such as the Netherlands, for example, is incompatible with the more structured management hierarchies that are common in China and some other Asian territories.

Logitech faced many of these organizational and cultural issues when it rolled out Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll and Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor applications in China, Taiwan, and Switzerland. Some of the problems Logitech experienced were predictable, including the language barriers between the Swiss company’s U.S. headquarters and China and the difficulties the project team experienced in getting travel visas between China, Europe, and the U.S. More fundamentally, however, the company believes that its Chinese manufacturing site is using just 50 percent of its available PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor functionality as its managers and employees slowly ease their way into the system. Many manual processes are still being used as the management transitions to using the automated processes of the PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor system.

If an employee logs on at 7:45 a.m. for an 8 a.m. shift, for example, it’s possible to automatically adjust the time records to reflect the 15 minutes of unpaid preparation. That adjustment, however, is currently being done manually at the plant. Likewise, the company is not fully using access controls so that line managers can alter staff production schedules and swap groups or shifts. Issues around organizational hierarchy, security, and confidentiality are being addressed to facilitate these changes.

Tackling these kinds of issues is a methodical process. Logitech recommends pilot schemes, leveraging the enthusiasm of early adopting users to show the benefits the system brings and to demonstrate its full potential. In addition, system flexibility—and in particular, the ability to create local business rules on top of the core transactional engine—will be crucial to demonstrating that local needs can be met.

1.5 Multicountry Versus Global—Building a Pragmatic Business Case While the concept of implementing a single system to handle payroll and time management in every single country might appeal to management purists, in practice, it’s usually more of a stated long-term goal than an operational priority. For one thing, global implementations carry significant risk, and most (but not all) multinationals today tend to favor a phased approach to rollouts, focusing on delivering the largest tangible gains in the early phases. Many of the benefits of multicountry payroll and time management are incremental, so a step-by-step approach to implementation is a logical way of achieving continuous gains.


Just as important, it may be hard to justify the cost and disruption of major change in territories with smaller head count, especially in the short term. In some instances, head count may be too low to justify a major IT and process investment; in others, the local legislative or organizational climate might demand too much customization and rule creation. As a result, approaches to multicountry implementations will vary widely. Lend Lease, for example, will continue to rely on outsourced applications and off-the-shelf packages in many of its smaller Asian territories. Logitech, by contrast, has implemented multicountry payroll in its Swiss operation, where there are only 300 employees.

It’s important that integration is pursued pragmatically, based on a business case that addresses need and return in each country. The experience of early adopters suggests that some of the practical benefits achieved through this kind of project become apparent only during the implementation process—you may not know, for example, just how many inaccuracies are built into your existing payroll processes until they’re exposed by a new, comprehensive system. But many other key components of the business case, as outlined in Parts 1.1 and 1.2, can be estimated with reasonable levels of comfort up front, including:

• Reduction in administrative overhead (e.g., through the automation of manual time management processes or the introduction of payroll self-service).

• Reduction in absenteeism and other cost savings achieved through improved time management.

• Cost-savings from error reduction.

• Reduced IT overhead (e.g., lower support costs through centralization).

• Better management control, compliance, and risk reduction.

• Better management information, allowing for comparative analysis of overhead and employee deployment, as well as predictive modeling.

• Improved quality of service to employees (through the provision of self-service, for example).

• These components should be weighed against the cost of investment, including:

• License fees for software.

• Implementation, customization, and integration fees.

• IT and end-user training and skills acquisition (if required).

• Ongoing cost of ownership (including allocation for central support, future upgrades, and so forth).

• Operational disruption during the change management program.


Where the business case doesn’t stack up for any individual country, most organizations adopt a policy of coexistence, building interfaces to transfer data to the central service from existing applications or outsourced services.

In Parts Two and Three, we examine the business case for upgrading to the latest generations of payroll and time & labor applications—whether multicountry or in a single territory—in their own right.

PART TWO: PAYROLL—THE BROADER BUSINESS CASE At first sight, it’s not always easy to build a business case to replace a payroll system that’s worked satisfactorily, if not spectacularly, for many years. The inefficiencies that inevitably hamper older-generation products tend to become accepted as standard practice, with all the product customizations and manual workarounds they involve. But in most organizations, these inefficiencies cost money—either in terms of supporting manual overhead or through payroll errors. Just as significantly, in today’s compliance-driven business environment, they may also expose companies to unnecessary risk. That’s why, while much of the debate about multicountry payroll rests on factors such as process standardization and centralized control, there are other issues to address at a simpler, functional level. Put simply, would implementation of the latest generation of payroll applications make a significant difference to your bottom line, improve your management insight, and reduce risk?

Like many other aspects of human capital management, what the latest generation of payroll products brings to the table is an accumulation of potential business benefits as much as radical new functionality. Some components available today—particularly in terms of employee self-service—have become possible only through the evolution of internet-based architectures, which allow individuals to access systems that were previously designed purely for the use of payroll administrators and managers. Others represent a steady evolution in transaction processing and reporting, focused specifically on eliminating the most time-consuming, manual components of payroll management—something that might best be described as “extended automation.” The experiences of organizations such as the EIB demonstrate that automation of complex processes and a rules-based approach to payroll can make significant differences to operational efficiency.

2.1 Overtime, Exceptions, and Retroactive Adjustments While the bulk of payroll transactions can usually be handled automatically by an in-house or outsourced service, most administrative overhead is consumed dealing with overtime calculations, exceptions, and retroactive adjustments. Minimizing all three is a top priority for any automation project, but the ability to do so is determined by two factors—the complexity of the business rules that govern each kind of transaction and the ability to write those rules into the application.

Business rules tend to be subject to constant revision, repeatedly refined by legislative changes, switches in company policy, and the pragmatism of


administrators and managers. While rules might be comprehensively documented when they’re first created, time pressures and staff turnover conspire to disrupt the audit trail, making it hard to piece together the underlying logic. Worse, complexity feeds uncertainty, and specific scenarios will often be interpreted differently even within the same country.

In many cases, organizations have only a sketchy understanding of how and why rules were created, particularly where they have long outsourced their payroll operations. Picking through this complexity can be a time-consuming process—Logitech spent two months doing just that in China, while the EIB spent seven months rewriting its pension rules, spending four months of it on historical data to tackle retroactive changes that stretched back two years. It is, however, a one-off investment. As a result of its efforts, the EIB has reduced the number of exceptions from 100 to half a dozen.

As we outlined in Part 1.2, the ability to build these rules into the payroll applications rests on the capability of the rules engine and its ease of use. In many early generation payroll applications, the rules need to be hard-coded within the application, making it difficult to change without the assistance of IT professionals. A more flexible approach is for the rules to be layered on top of the application so that they’re configurable by power users. The level of granularity is essential— the further you can drill down into nuances, the more rules you can automate.

2.2 Data Accuracy Payroll accuracy is often taken for granted by senior management, but the reality in any large enterprise is that errors are inevitable. Where they fall in the company’s favor, the employee tends to raise the alarm; where they fall in the employee’s favor, there’s often no system to intervene. Worse, in many instances where there are complex deductions or commissions, neither party will actually be aware that mistakes are being made. What that means in practice is that most companies are losing money through payroll inaccuracies—they’ll just never know how much.

Organizations such as Logitech have found that when they parallel test their new payroll implementation with their legacy systems, it exposes inconsistencies in the legacy setup. That kind of improvement in accuracy can lead to significant cumulative benefits.

2.3 Management Control, Compliance, and Business Insight Improved management control is also a function of streamlined processes and extended automation. At an operational level, organizations can use in-built workflows to ensure that exceptions are automatically escalated where necessary and that approval is sought for prespecified transactions, as well as to flag breaches of predefined parameters. By automating manual processes, managers also have greater visibility into the tasks and activities necessary for regulatory and internal compliance.


The regulatory impact has become increasingly significant in the light of Sarbanes-Oxley and Basel II, which demand enforceable and provable policies relating to data accuracy, changes to data, and data access. As a result, reporting and auditing capabilities have become a high priority. Eliminating manual processes and centralizing control are important steps in improving data accuracy and restricting access, as well as in providing evidence, if required, that effective measures have been put in place. Payroll automation is an important component of compliance, because it:

• Reduces the need for error-prone manual payroll adjustments.

• Improves accuracy and completeness of data entry.

• Helps restrict access to sensitive data, even within the payroll and HR departments.

• Allows continual process improvement when backed by effective operational reporting.

From an analytical perspective, automation converts manual information into digital format, broadening the amount of data available for analysis and improving visibility into processes that might previously have been handled on paper or locked inside standalone systems. Payroll applications provide a wealth of data, from statistics on absenteeism to relative pay levels and departmental costings, so the benefits are enjoyed by HR, finance, and senior management.

2.4 Enhancing the Employee Experience Self-service functionality, which gives employees access to certain components of the payroll system portfolio through the internal network or remotely over the internet, allows employees to change their bank details online, access electronic versions of their payslips, and view their pay history. Not only does this access reduce administrative overhead by eliminating the need to rekey personal data and handle employee queries, it also makes meaningful information instantly available to employees 24 hours a day.

Although electronic payslip distribution is in its infancy, it can represent a sizeable saving in print costs for multinational organizations. It also allows organizations to run payroll slightly later, giving a larger window for last-minute adjustments to be made.

PART THREE: THE EVOLUTION OF TIME & LABOR Originally rooted in “clocking-in” environments and long associated with hourly workers and manufacturing environments, time & labor is now a key component of the human capital management armory and is being increasingly widely adopted. According to research carried out by Cedar, for example, 39 percent of U.S. companies already use time & labor applications and another 35 percent plan to do


so within 12 months.5 Although the largest proportion is in traditional manufacturing industries, a quarter of transportation organizations and 20 percent of communications operations already run these applications, and services industries are closing the gap.

In highly complex pay environments, the ability both to capture and automatically interpret time-related data is critical. Logitech, for example, believes it would have been nearly impossible to roll out its multicountry payroll application without introducing time & labor in its Chinese manufacturing plant. But the growing uptake isn’t just based on the need for better transaction management. While improving operational efficiency and accuracy remains an important goal, from a management perspective, the latest generation of applications have as much to do with demand forecasting, improving real-time control and providing greater visibility.

3.1 The Operational Perspective As with multicountry payroll applications, much of the strength of a time & labor application depends on the flexibility of its rules-based engine, which determines how easily and how accurately organizations can configure business rules to match their unique needs. The level of analytical skills required by power users may be somewhat higher than in the development of payroll rules, particularly in hourly pay environments where there’s often a wide diversity of complex rules. But the benefits come at an operational level, with more accurate data capture generating significant savings in administrative overhead and error correction.

That’s reinforced through self-service functionality, which allows employees to enter time data directly into the system over the internet and so cuts duplicate data entry and potential rekeying errors. By using self-service, Weyerhaeuser has eliminated manual paper-based reporting at 78 sites and removed the need for time administrators to enter data.

Research conducted by Cedar demonstrates multiple potential savings through time & labor applications, including:

• Reducing the error rate, particularly where time & labor is integrated with HR/payroll.

• Increasing productivity of administrative staff.

• Reducing management overhead by enabling management by exception.

• Cutting overtime and possibly head count through productivity savings.

• Lowering risk and the costs associated with noncompliance through automated, prebuilt rules.

• Reducing unauthorized leave and absenteeism.

5 Source: Cedar 2003 Workforce Technologies Survey, Sixth Annual Edition, which surveyed 328 organizations, the majority in the United States.


• Improving employee satisfaction and reducing disputes through more consistent application of pay rules, along with access to time/pay histories.

Above all, tight integration with payroll is critical to leveraging the power of a time management application, and the degree to which data can be shared will be a key factor in the vendor selection process. As we outlined in Part 1.3, while some best-of-breed suppliers provide richer functionality than integrated enterprise application providers, the integrated approach offers payback in other areas such as:

• Providing a single data repository for payroll and time & labor for reporting and analysis, either within the core database or a separate data warehouse (see Part 4.2).

• One-time data tagging (e.g., to identify overtime payments and associated rates).

• Lower IT overhead, by removing the need to build and maintain interfaces and through familiarity with the development and support environment. (One caveat is that time & labor applications can be demanding on processing capability, and organizations may need to optimize or upgrade their hardware.)

3.2 Management Control and Insight As with any analytical exercise, the quality of output from assessing time & labor data will be determined in part by the quality of raw data that’s initially fed into the repository. By automating manual processes and integrating what were formerly standalone systems, organizations can generate and collate far more comprehensive data, particularly where payroll and time & labor applications share the same database. That allows them to:

• Improve the quality of attendance tracking and absence management.

• Track the business impact of absenteeism by analyzing nonattendance versus paid time (for example, the cost of overtime incurred to cover for an employee’s absence).

• Compare data from site to site and even country to country, assessing factors such as the costs of labor, productivity per employee, and so forth.

• Carry out standard checks, such as reconciling time reported versus time paid.

At an operational level, time & labor applications improve management control through the use of built-in workflows that automate approvals processes. Increasingly, vendors are also building real-time alerts into their packages that allow preventative action to be taken—managers can be warned, for example, when preset overtime limits are about to be breached.

Workforce scheduling techniques, using tools designed to forecast demand and optimize schedules to maximize the labor supply, also allow organizations to improve operational efficiency. By assessing peaks and troughs in customer


numbers at a bank, for example, companies can adjust shifts patterns to maximize service levels during peak periods.

At this stage, the time & labor suite is no longer merely focused on transactional efficiency and cost containment—instead, the focus shifts to core business drivers such as employee and customer satisfaction and, ultimately, revenue and profit generation.

PART FOUR: CASE STUDIES

4.1 Logitech—Payroll and Time & Labor on Three Continents Of all the countries to choose for a multinational payroll and time & labor project, China has got to be one of the toughest. In a legislative environment where regulations differ from district to district, let alone region to region, interpreting and defining business rules is a major challenge. Likewise, with organizational culture and working practices differing so dramatically from the U.S. and Europe, the idea of imposing global policies and processes is daunting.

But for companies like Logitech, a technology supplier specializing in personal peripherals, these kinds of issues have had to be tackled head-on. Quoted on the Swiss stock exchange and head-quartered in California, Logitech has around 6,500 employees in more than 50 countries, some 4,500 of them at its Chinese manufacturing facility. Looking to replace indigenous products in three of its key territories, it recently completed the implementation of PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll in China, Taiwan, and Switzerland, along with PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor for the Chinese plant.

The company, which has also standardized on PeopleSoft Enterprise core HRMS engine, originally considered a wide range of options when it came to upgrading its applications, including outsourcing to a third-party service provider and purchasing country-specific solutions from local suppliers. Aside from the need to improve accuracy and timeliness, one main aim was to manage a balancing act common to many multicountry payroll implementations—building an infrastructure that standardized as many processes as possible, while at the same time allowing each territory to meet its own unique regulatory and business needs. From a technical perspective, the system also had to be scalable to meet fluctuating head counts, as well as integrate with Logitech’s core HR system and its Oracle Financials application. Those needs tilted the balance to a single product from a supplier with multinational capability.

The PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll rollout saw Logitech implementing the PeopleSoft Enterprise prebuilt country extension for Switzerland while developing its own business rules and reports for China and Taiwan based on the software supplier’s templates. Each country implementation took approximately four months, requiring one functional expert and two technical specialists, with several additional employees brought in where needed on the client side. In China, an


additional two months were spent up front getting a full understanding of the complex business processes that underpinned its payroll operation (see Part 1.4).

According to Roberta Linsky, vice president of Worldwide Human Resources at Logitech, automation has delivered several kinds of benefits, beginning with error reduction, better consistency of data, and tighter control over compliance. “We found tons of inconsistencies and errors in our old processes that we needed to address,” she says. “At a very basic level, there was no documentation—things were being done very differently site to site, person to person, so there was no way of seeing if we were adhering to government regulations.” Automating manual processes has streamlined pay-related activity in each country, making it easier to handle complex tasks such as implementing retroactive legislative changes. In addition, prebuilt integration between payroll and HR ensures that data is consistent and removes the discrepancies that were common when HR records showed one set of pay data but third-party payroll providers recorded another.

In the longer term, Logitech expects standardization to bring greater visibility into the payroll and time management processes at both a headquarters and regional level, giving it a map of common processes and greater insight into why discrepancies occur and what they mean. The company’s profit-sharing processes, for example, are based on the same global formula but had previously been calculated in a variety of different ways in China. Now that it’s standardized, the organization has a consistent methodology and a far better understanding of the implications of making changes to the scheme in the future. In addition, it’s able to rapidly target and forecast profit-sharing payments at a global level.

Going forward, Logitech will also be able for the first time to break down pay, bonus, profit share, and sales commission for each employee and compare the cost of labor and headcount required for similar jobs in different regions. That includes HR itself. “It makes us really look at the level of efficiency of our internal HR and payroll workforce,” says Aaron Green, who was formerly global analyst on the project. “We stopped and questioned why we were doing business differently when the net result is always the same.”

Common processes across the three territories now include:

• New hires.

• Terminations.

• Transfers.

• Other salary transactions.

• Uploads to the HR and financials systems.

• Downloads from the employee directory.

• Tax amendments.

• Reporting framework.


PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor, meanwhile, has proved to be critical to the rollout. “The rules are so different, it would have been nearly impossible to do payroll in China without the PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor module,” says Linsky, pointing to both the sheer complexity and high volume of procedures. The implementation and ongoing management of the two applications were made easier by the fact that both products are built on the same design principles and code sets, so there’s a single setup and common underlying environment. In addition, much of the integration between the applications comes out of the box—overtime payments, for example, can be flagged in PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor and automatically calculated in PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll. The only major issue that’s surfaced with the combined implementation is that the additional PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor rules increase processing time on the PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll engine, so the underlying processing capability has been fine-tuned to improve performance. Logitech has also changed its payroll schedule so that countries process payroll on a staggered basis to reduce system load.

From an IT perspective, the single system allows for a streamlined support model —because of the common platform and development tools, it’s possible for IT to offer support in multiple regions even if it doesn’t understand the subtleties of local business rules. There is a small kick-back in that PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll is a more complicated undertaking for users than HR, and Green believes that power users will need a stronger grasp of logic to write the rules. PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor adds a further degree of complexity in both setup and maintenance, which is why Logitech requires local technical support. As Green points out, this reinforces the need for a formal learning program. “Training becomes a big issue. You can’t just learn by doing it and tracking the implementation consultants,” he says.

Overall, however, Linsky concludes that the implementation gives Logitech information it never previously had access to. “It was almost a black box before. You never understood the logic, the accuracy, whether you were adhering to government regulations. Now, it’s documented and visible in the system.”

4.2 Weyerhaeuser—Rolling Out Time & Labor for 40,000 Employees With almost 700 unique business rules created so far and 78 of its 380 plants live, Weyerhaeuser, the international forest products company, has more experience than most of the practicalities of implementing time & labor applications.

The company, which ultimately aims to bring some 40,000 employees onto the same time & labor platform, has undergone an extensive overhaul of its entire pay infrastructure in recent years to replace 27 different legacy payroll systems and four time-entry applications.

The program began when it standardized its back-end operations on Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise Payroll for North America, a move that significantly cut its IT overhead. “At any one point in time, there was always someone building or


buying a new payroll system,” says Brian Pederson, director of Payroll Standardization. “We eliminated the costs of those new systems and the requirement for local IT support.” Putting everyone on a common payroll platform has also given the company a single source for employee information, which significantly improved its reporting capability. Prior to the rollout, sites submitted information for both internal and external reporting on a quarterly basis, which meant that basic information such as head count often wasn’t current or consistent.

In addition, Weyerhaeuser has implemented self-service functionality, allowing employees to change data such as direct deposit information and view their pay history online. Over time, the introduction of electronic pay slips is expected to deliver significant savings by replacing paper.

Although the rollout allowed Weyerhaeuser to standardize some basic back-end processes, each individual site continued to submit hours and rates into the payroll application by using legacy or manual systems. That changed in the second phase of the project, beginning in August 2002, with the first implementations of PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor. The PeopleSoft Enterprise application was again chosen, not least because the prebuilt integration between the new application and payroll removed the need for Weyerhaeuser to build and maintain interfaces.

Pederson acknowledges that developing the time & labor business rules has been a significant challenge, given that each plant has its own unique agreements with trade unions. With 78 sites live so far, Weyerhaeuser has based its rollout on 82 core business rules, some built on top of the predelivered PeopleSoft Enterprise templates. These are then tailored by the IT department for each individual plant, making around 700 rules in total.

Weyerhaeuser originally carried out a survey to establish how pay was calculated in its different plants, which helped it build the initial rules. But as Pederson points out, there were inevitably surprises as the company grappled with the different nuances of each plant’s setup, and it wasn’t until the rules were tested on site that they could be refined. As a result, the average rollout time for each plant—from initial rules analysis to going live—has averaged around 16 weeks, with a dozen or so sites going live in any one period.

Employees can now enter their own time data directly by using prebuilt self-service screens on PCs placed in lunch rooms or other convenient places. Manager approval typically takes less than 20 minutes a day, and all time & labor responsibilities have been removed from plant administrators. Employee training is carried out remotely by using webcasts and teleconferences, which reduces both the cost of sending trainers to each site and has sped implementation time. Before going live, the system is piloted in parallel to the existing processes so that employees can practice data entry.

Given the large number of employees coming onto the system and the volume of rules created, there were some initial concerns as to whether the new application would impact underlying system performance. However, Pederson says


Weyerhaeuser has not run into capacity problems with the 13,000 employees currently on the system and, based on testing, is cautiously optimistic that it will be able to process 40,000 employees without throughput issues.

Due to the complexity of their environment and the structure of the PeopleSoft Enterprise tool, Weyerhaeuser has had to tune the system to achieve acceptable processing time cycles. As a result, IT support has been higher than initially anticipated as the technical staff responds to production issues while gaining knowledge on the system.

4.3 Lend Lease—Implementing Payroll Across Two Continents Implementing multicountry payroll may allow organizations to impose better cost control over their individual country operations, but any change can be disruptive for the employees involved. Deciding how to divide up responsibilities and brokering deals in the turf wars that sometimes erupt during reorganizations are all issues that surface in any IT rollout—particularly one that crosses geographical borders.

That at least is the experience of Lend Lease, a real estate services business headquartered in Sydney, Australia, that employs 8,500 people in 52 different countries. The company was the first adopter of PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll in 2002 in the U.K., following with an implementation in Australia in July 2003. Going forward, it’s also looking at implementing PeopleSoft Enterprise Time and Labor in certain regions—not in Australia, which has just 300 construction workers and uses manual processes, but possibly in the U.S. and on a smaller scale in Europe.

As the first client to go live on PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll, the company inevitably ran into some glitches during the U.K. implementation. Patricia Asima, HR operations manager, suggests in hindsight that the project was under-resourced for a “bleeding edge” implementation, and getting the right skills in place proved a particular challenge—the product was new, so technical expertise was limited. In addition, payroll had previously been outsourced, so the in-house team had only limited experience in the field. The company resolved the problem pragmatically, hiring a former employee of the outsourcer to head the new payroll project.

But with the early implementation hiccups behind it, Lend Lease has been able to focus on getting the most out of its product functionality, prebuilt integration, and standardized processes. It’s currently rolling out features such as online payslips and individual pay history records in Australia and is about to do the same in the U.K. “Online payslips will reduce the number of calls to the payroll office—for professionals, having direct access to their information goes down well,” says Asima. Prebuilt integration with the global HR application also means that payroll data can automatically update HR tables and trigger actions. “We like the fact that we have employee self-service for leave and online payslips and don’t need separate databases—so there are process efficiencies. We have the information at our fingertips.” The company is also enthusiastic about the query and graphical


reporting tools bundled with PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll and used several predelivered reports as a template to configure its own customized analytics.

From a systems and business process perspective, Asima is convinced of the argument for standardization and commonality. In terms of systems, that means implementing single products— whether an online phone directory or centralized helpdesk for IT—that work across all regions, with an infrastructure supporting common workflows. From a process perspective, it’s about building a single IT foundation for all territories, while layering local processes on top. Asima believes that 75 percent of payroll activities are common across each country in terms of tasks and outputs—what differs country to country is the methodology. “There’s a potential to standardize a lot of that,” she says. “The system processes don’t change, but the business processes can be kept local. There’s going to be different considerations—different working practices, different unions, different mindsets—and you’re more likely to get it embraced if you accommodate regional needs.”

Lend Lease is now committed to having a single HR platform for all employees. Where financially viable, it will take the same approach for the payroll engine and database. The one area that Asima is less convinced about is standardizing payroll in Asia, where the company has small numbers of employees dispersed across some 13 countries. Because of the low head count in each territory, she argues that it makes better financial sense to outsource or use off-the-shelf packages.

Meanwhile, in addition to streamlining the underlying system processes, implementing multi-country payroll has also helped reduce IT support overhead. The company has a technical centre in Atlanta, Georgia, that oversees payroll in both the U.K. and Australia and has also deployed one technical expert in each region along with an HR and payroll functional specialist. In theory, that means that the U.K. could, if necessary, offer support to Australia. Just as important, with the central support team focused on the PeopleSoft Enterprise application, Asima argues that the quality of employee service has improved—and “in a payroll environment, where you need to be responsive, that’s a good sell.”

The idea of “selling” the project is important not just to users but also to HR and payroll professionals within the different regions. “Working successfully across borders and time zones comes down to the team in place—the team must be cohesive and work towards a common goal. It becomes very person dependent,” says Asima. Asking junior employees to be in a telephone meeting late at night, for example, isn’t easy. In addition, Lend Lease has seen some turf wars crop up across borders and lines of business and has focused hard on keeping communications flowing. “As new staff join the team, we get teams together for planning workshops for a week. That relationship building, getting over turf issues, made a huge difference to success.”

4.4 European Investment Bank—Tackling Exceptions and Retroactivity Handling exceptions and retroactive changes has long been a frustrating, time-consuming process for payroll managers, so the more that complex rules can be


automated, the better. At the EIB in Luxembourg, where four sets of payroll and pension arrangements were being managed on a combination of homegrown applications and manual processes, the time savings gained from a new payroll rollout can be measured in days rather than hours.

The bank, which is the financial development arm for the European Union, had 1,100 employees and 300 pensions to manage when its payroll project began in 2000. It had previously been using an in-house, mainframe-based application for more than 20 years. But with two sets of highly complex rules for pensions, it was running numerous exceptions and handling for 10 entire calculations manually, spending up to half an hour on each. In addition, it ran separate payrolls for two employee constituencies, each with their own manual elements.

Having reviewed all its pension rules in 2000, the EIB took the decision to invest in PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll at the end of that year. By using the application’s rules-based engine, the bank spent seven months writing and testing the pension rules before implementing that part of the system in August 2001, with the new PeopleSoft Enterprise Global Payroll system going live the following January. Of the total implementation period, some four months were spent handling historical data: Because retroactive calculations can go back two years or more at the bank, it recalculated all payrolls and pensions dating back to January 2000 in the new system.

Once the system went live, the level of manual work dropped significantly. “From 100 exceptions, we’ve gone to something like five,” says Robert Johanns, HR application manager at EIB. “We have created about 1,000 earnings formulas and exceptions for both pensions and payroll.” Johanns adds that rules creation is relatively simple in PeopleSoft Enterprise. After he and two colleagues attended a training course in December 2000, they had the first rules running the following February. “If you can write an Excel formula, you can write this. The problem is more about having functional knowledge,” he says. While he and his team continue to maintain the rules today, the aim is for payroll professionals to take over.

In the early days of the rollout, one of the biggest challenges the bank faced was to convince the payroll team that they had something “new and better than before,” says Johanns. “People were used to the existing system. At the very beginning, they recalculated everything manually again— and we found errors in our old system when we ran them in parallel!” That initial resistance took time to overcome, but once it was tackled, the benefits began to unfold. Aside from reducing its manual workload, Johanns points out that the bank is now far less dependent on the IT department to build and change rules. In addition, it no longer has to build and maintain interfaces between payroll, HR, and finance, because all three functions work on the same PeopleSoft Enterprise platform and are pre-integrated. That’s eliminated a significant backlog in exchanging data between the payroll and HR applications.


From the employee perspective, meanwhile, self-service functionality allows them to view their payslip history going back four years and also carry out tasks such as entering individual personal deductions. For example, where the EIB provides cell phones for business use, employees need to deduct the cost of any personal calls they make from their payroll. Employees can also carry out payroll and pension “simulations,” asking what-if questions such as “How will my payroll change if I get married?”

The EIB is now preparing to implement a new time & labor application next year to help it track time for project costing purposes. Johanns indicates that the PeopleSoft Enterprise module will be the logical choice because of the bank’s existing investment in Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Resources, Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise Financial Management, and Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise Performance Management applications. “It could be another program, but we’d have to create interfaces,” he says. “[By standardizing on one platform], you’re sure the data is right on every side. It’s important to have the information correct and only entered once.”

END NOTES

About the Author Keith Rodgers is cofounder of Webster Buchanan Research, a media and market intelligence company specializing in the practical implementation of business strategy. Webster Buchanan Research focuses on the deployment of information technology as a tool to deliver business benefit, primarily in the fields of human capital management, financial management, and business integration. The organization is based in London, San Francisco, and Hong Kong. Visit www.websterb.com.

Disclaimer and Copyright Notice The information contained in this paper is intended to provide an overview of a particular topic. Facts presented and information provided by users referred to in this paper have been verified to the best of Webster Buchanan Research’s knowledge. Webster Buchanan Research is not responsible for any errors or omissions or for the results obtained from the use of this information.

The information contained in this paper is provided on the strict understanding that Webster Buchanan Research is not engaged in rendering professional advice and services of any description. As such, the paper should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional advisers.

All information in this paper is provided “as is,” with no guarantee of completeness, accuracy, timeliness, or of the results obtained from the use of this information and without warranty of any kind express or implied including but not limited to warranties of performance merchantability and/or fitness for a particular purpose. In no event will Webster Buchanan Research or its related partnerships or


corporations, or the partners’ agents or employees, be liable to anyone for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the information in this paper or for any consequential special or similar damages.

This paper is copyright. Except as permitted by the Copyright Act, no part of it may in any form or by any electronic mechanical photocopying recording or any other means be reproduced stored in a retrieval system or be broadcast or transmitted without the prior permission of Webster Buchanan Research.


Multicountry Payroll and Time Management A Practical Approach to Improving Efficiency, Control, and Management Information August 2004 Author: Keith Rodgers Oracle Corporation World Headquarters 500 Oracle Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065 U.S.A. Worldwide Inquiries: Phone: +1.650.506.7000 Fax: +1.650.506.7200 oracle.com Copyright © 2004, 2005, Oracle. All rights reserved. This document is provided for information purposes only and the contents hereof are subject to change without notice. This document is not warranted to be error-free, nor subject to any other warranties or conditions, whether expressed orally or implied in law, including implied warranties and conditions of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. We specifically disclaim any liability with respect to this document and no contractual obligations are formed either directly or indirectly by this document. This document may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, for any purpose, without our prior written permission. Oracle, JD Edwards, PeopleSoft, and Retek are registered trademarks of Oracle Corporation and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners.

Multicountry Payroll and Time Management · payroll and time management, two disciplines that have...

Documents

Transcript of Multicountry Payroll and Time Management · payroll and time management, two disciplines that have...