The Human Resources Benchmarking Network An HR Metrics ( and ) Benchmarking Tool for Municipalities
description
Transcript of The Human Resources Benchmarking Network An HR Metrics ( and ) Benchmarking Tool for Municipalities
The Human Resources Benchmarking Network An HR Metrics (and) Benchmarking Tool for Municipalities
Colin Dawes OMHRA Spring WorkshopGuelph, April 2011
Presentation Agenda
Benchmarking Concepts HR Metrics for Municipalities The Human Resources Benchmarking Network The Municipal Group in the HRBN Survey• HR Trends in Municipal Government 1998 and 2010• Key Results from the 2010 HRBN Survey Report Applications for HR Metrics• Training, Technology and the HR Department• Measurement Advice from the HRBN
Introductions/Agenda
My Second Agenda
1. Remind you about a few things you already know.
2. Measurement and benchmarking concepts and tools you can use to help your organization be more successful – sometimes despite itself.
Benchmarking Concepts
What isBenchmarking?“Benchmarking is a continuous, systematic tool for measuring and improving the processes, products and services of an organization by comparing them to the very best “like” processes, products and services wherever they may be found.”
The Council for Continuous Improvement
HR Metrics for Municipalities
My Selection Criteria
Frequently completed (in the HRBN experience)
Simple to understand Avoid duplication Significant Impact – either on HR or
the Organization
My TOP TEN Indicator Selections (HRBN Survey)
1. External Hire Rate: PFT and Reg. PPT (can be compared to Turnover indicators)
2. Average Time to Fill a Position With an External Hire
3. Number of Non-Management Employees Per Management Employee
4. Extended Health Care Claims Expense Per Participating Employee
5. Paid Sick Hours Per Eligible Employee
My TOP TEN Indicator Selections (HRBN Survey)
6. * “Pre-External Intervention” Grievance Rate
7. Workers Compensation Lost Work Hours Rate
8. Modified Work Accommodations Rate9. HR Technology Indicator10. Employees Per HR FTE
The Human Resources Benchmarking Network
What is the HRBN? Cross-Canada network of HR
functions primarily from Health Care, Municipal Government and Not-for-Profit employers who complete the HRBN Survey
Open to all sectors Current representation in six (6)
provinces
The Annual Benchmarking Survey
Presently fifty-five (55) indicators Balance of “Human Asset” and “Human
Resources” indicators Full spectrum of HR function represented More In-depth quantitative analysis possible
through demographic breakdowns Electronic Format (Multi-Sheet Excel File) Content determined by input from Network
members
Sample Survey Indicators
External Hire Rate
Average Time to Fill Position With External Hire
Salary to Operating Expense Ratio
Manage-ment to Staff Ratio
Paid Sick Hours Per Eligible Employee
Training and Dev’t Expense Indicator
Extended Health Benefit Claims Expense Indicator
HR “Admin” Expense to Operating Expense
EAP Utilization Rate
WCB Lost Time Incident Rate
“Final Step” Grievance Resolution Rate
HR “Legal Costs” Per Employee
Turnover Rate
HR “FTE” Indicator
“Modified Work” Accommo-dation Rate
HR Technology Indicator
HR Training Courses Attendance Indicator
Internal Transfers to Total Hires Ratio
“Final Step” Grievance Rate
Benefits Expenses to Compensation Expense
Sample Indicator Definition
The Report of the Annual Benchmarking Survey
Benchmark statistical data for each indicator (average, percentile, etc.)
Note of special statistical relationships if indicated
Statistics breakdowns by Province/Sector where justified by sample size
Summary table of individual data submissions for the indicator
Contact names for Network Survey participants
The Report of the Annual Benchmarking Survey
Sample Data Table: Paid Sick Hours Per Eligible Employee, HRBN Report
The Municipal Group in the HRBN Survey
Human Resources Trends in Municipal Government: 1998 to 2010
Trend Setters: Municipal Participants in the 1998 HRBN Survey
City of Oshawa City of Toronto Region of Durham Region of Hamilton-Wentworth Region of Niagara Region of Ottawa-Carleton Region of Sudbury Region of Waterloo
Some Things Change …Indicator 1998
Survey 2011 Survey
Change
External Hire Rate
9.9% 16.2% Substantial increase (63.4%) in hiring rates since the late 90s.
Dental Expense Per Participating Employee
$683 $1,112 A significant increase (63%).
Staff Per Management Ratio
19.3 24.8 Not good news for “span of control”.
HR Legal Costs Per Employee
$50.77 $77.43 No surprise here, with the increasingly complex legal environment.
Employment Advertising Expense Per Hire
$272 $446 64% increase. Reflects increased competition and prices, online solutions.
Some Things Change … A LOT.Indicator 1998
Survey 2011 Survey
Change
Extended Heath Care Expense Per Participating Employee
$854 $2,160 Extended Health care claims – 153% increase in costs (primarily drug-related, increased use of para-medicals, etc.)
EAP Utilization Rate
7.2% 15.4% EAP usage becoming more common (115% increase).
HR Technology Indicator (showing Ratio of points scored to possible points)
0.375 0.764 Technology has advanced a great deal (107% increase).
And Some Things Change Less.Indicator 1998
Survey 2011Survey
Change
“All Grievances” Rate
5.4% 5.3% Surprisingly, unions appear to have been upset with employers on a consistent basis for years.
WSIB Incidents/Lost Hours
3.1%/3.9 hours
4.3%/3.8 hours
Less time lost – but more incidents? Lost hours result makes more sense …(Accommodations up slightly 6.6%!)
Employees/HR “FTE”
102 100.3 Ontario figures generally unchanged.
Sick Pay Expense Indicator
3.3% 3.4% This result, and the next, suggest that we may have reached a “plateau” of sorts.
Paid Sick Hours Per Eligible Employee
66.5 69.2 As noted in “Sick Pay Expense”.
Survey Demographics – 2010 Survey
Municipal group represents 28% of the survey participants (22 in all) and 105,000 employees
Many smaller municipalities plus most members of the Regional and Single Tier Municipalities (RSTM) Group RSTM – 12 Other Cities – 6 Towns – 2 Counties - 2
RSTM - Special Indicator Set - 2004 (16 indicators in all)
Ontario Municipal CAO’s Benchmarking Initiative (OMBI) and the HRBN HR Group asked to identify HR indicators for OMBI Decision to align indicators to the HRBN Survey
(avoid duplication) Four (4) indicators identified:
o #T4s per HR staff (Service Level)o HR administration expense per $1000 of municipal
operating expenditure (Service Level)o HR services cost per T4 supported (Efficiency)o Turnover Rate (Customer Service)
Metrics Challenges in Municipal HR Measurement Complexity/differences in the how and
“who” provides HR services to different employee groups
Definition of employees … Specific Indicator Challenges
o T4 vs. active employee countso What counts as “HR”o Expenses/internal charges
Key Results from the 2010 HRBN Report
HRBN #5 – Average Time to Fill a Position Formula: Total, for all External Hires, (Difference Between the “Date the Offer to the New External Hire is Made” and the “Date the Approval to Recruit is Received in HR”, One Year period
Statistic Survey Health Care Municipal
Sample Size 36 25 10Average 45.4 44.6 47.710th Percentile 16.4 15.5 20.825th Percentile 23.9 24.4 24.50th Percentile 44.5 45 48.475th Percentile 65.4 65.8 58.890th Percentile 77.6 72.9 81.7
NOTE: Permanent, Full-time and Regular Permanent, Part-time Positions take longer to fill - 59 days for the full survey (59 days for the municipal group as well)
HRBN #7 – Turnover Rate Formula: # Separations / # Average Employee-count, One Year period
Statistic Survey Health Care Municipal
Sample Size 66 48 17
Average 11.2% 10.6% 12.4%
10th Percentile 6.9% 7.2% 5.7%
25th Percentile 8.5% 8.8% 7.8%
50th Percentile 11% 10.4% 11.5%
75th Percentile 13.1% 12.5% 15.1%
90th Percentile 15.7% 13.9% 21.2%
HRBN #4A(1) – Non-Management Employees Per Management EmployeeFormula: # “Non-Management Employee-count” / # “Management” Employee-count, End of Survey Time Period, One Year period
Statistic Survey Health Care Municipal
Sample Size 73 55 17Average 27.6 28.9 24.810th Percentile 11.9 16.9 7.825th Percentile 19.6 22.0 11.850th Percentile 25.7 26.9 23.775th Percentile 31.8 32.0 30090th Percentile 42.0 41.9 39.4
HRBN #15 (A & B) – EAP Indicators (Municipal Sector)
Formulas:(A) EAP Cases / Average Eligible Employee-Count (B) EAP Expense / #
Employees Eligible to Use the EAP, One Year period
Statistic (A) EAP Utilization Rate
(B) EAP Expense Per Eligible Employee
Sample Size 14 16
Average 15.4% $47.10
10th Percentile 7.8% $26.12
25th Percentile 12.2% $29.34
50th Percentile 15.6% $46.90
75th Percentile 17.9% $53.95
90th Percentile 22.8% $75.50
HRBN #25 – HR Administration Expense Indicator (Municipal Group)
Formula: $ HR Administration Expense / $ Operating Expense , One Year period
Statistic Survey
Sample Size 15
Average 0.6%10th Percentile 0.4%
25th Percentile 0.5%
50th Percentile 0.6%
75th Percentile 0.6%
90th Percentile 1%
HRBN # 1 and #7: Comparison - External Hire Rate and Turnover Rates, Municipal Group, 2007-2010
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2007 2008 2009 2010
External HireRateTurnover Rate
HRBN #13: Paid Sick Hours Per Eligible Employee, Health Care and Municipal Groups, 2007-2010
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
2007 2008 2009 2010
Health CareMunicipal
HRBN #9 and #10: Dental Claims and Extended Health Expense Per Employee, Municipal Group, 2007-2010
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
2007 2008 2009 2010
EH claimsexpense peremployeeDental claimsexpense peremployee
HRBN #23: Percentage of HR Departments Utilizing Technology, By Technology Type,
2007-2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2007 2008 2009 2010
E-MailInternetHR IntranetHRIS
HRBN #14(C) – Breakdown of Points in Time at Which Grievances were Resolved or Withdrawn in Survey Reporting Period, 2010 (Municipal Group)
19%
8%
28%
46%
Prior to "Final Step"MeetingAt "Final Step"MeetingThrough Third PartyInterventionAt Arbitration
Applications for HR Metrics
Applications for HR Metrics Reporting purposes Support HR quality goals Prove/disprove existence of opportunities Demonstrate success/failure of initiatives Illustrate cause/effect relationships Impacting adversarial negotiations or settlement
opportunities Create business cases and obtain resources Improve measurement systems Positive reinforcement
HRBN #22 – HR Training Course Attendance(Municipal Group)
Formula: # Training Course Attendance (Per Category) / # Average Employee-count (or New External Hires in case of Orientation),
One Year period
Statistic WorkplaceCompetency
Orientation(of external Hires)
Health and Safety Training
Sample Size 16 14 17
Average 81.1% 51.9% 62.8%
25th Percentile 28.3% 16.0% 16.0%
50th Percentile 39.0% 40.5% 26.0%
75th Percentile 110.5% 96.0% 43.0%
90th Percentile 154.5% 107.2% 170.0%
HRBN #23: Percentage of HR Departments Utilizing Technology, Municipal Group, By
Technology Type, 1998 to 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1998 2010
Internet
ElectronicFormsHRIS
HR Intranet
ManagerAccess HRISEmployeeAccess HRIS
HRBN #24 - # Employees Per HR “FTE”Formula: # Average Employee-count / # HR “FTE”-count, End of
Survey Time Period, One Year period
Statistic Survey Health Care Municipal
Sample Size 76 53 22Average 132.1 146.8 100.310th Percentile 74.6 78.2 65.925th Percentile 91.0 95.1 90.650th Percentile 114.8 124.9 104.975th Percentile 146.8 185.2 118.990th Percentile 220.9 249.9 129.3
HRBN #24(B) – HR FTE Detail – Functional Breakdown (Municipal Group) 1998 and 2010
0% 50% 100%
1998
2010RecruitmentBenefitsHRIST & DWorkers Comp/H&SCompensationEmployee RecordsEmp/Labour RelationsOrg. DevelopmentOther
Trends –Benefits and HRIS, and new HR functions (quality, metrics, etc.), and to a lesser extent, WC/H&S and Recruitment, receive more staff resources now, vs. in 1998.
HRBN #24(C) –HR FTE Detail – Organization Level Breakdown (Municipal Group) 1998 and 2010
0% 50% 100%
1998
2010 Executive
Manager
Professional/SupervisoryAdministrativeSupport
Trends – There has been a clear trend toward a higher proportion of supervisors, at the expense of both executives and managers, and administrative/clerical positions.
HRBN #24(C) –HR FTE Detail – Model of Service Provision Breakdown (Municipal Group) 1998 and 2010
0% 50% 100%
1998
2010Traditional
Designated ClientGroupAlternative
Trends – A change in HR service delivery is definitely indicated, from the traditional (HR as a separate, “expert” dept. with HR specialties serving the organization to a model of HR professionals attached to client groups, with more generalists, and in some cases matrix reporting relationships with Operational departments.)
Measurement Advice from the HRBN
Don’t take on more measurement than you can handle Focus on objects that are critical success drivers Listen to senior management priorities and educate
where possible Balanced Choice of Metrics
Simple metrics (in design, in ability to collect data) are more reliable
Downside of Simple – inverse relationship simplicity/value
Leading vs. lagging where possible Technology will help (if you are lucky enough to have it)
But don’t stop with measurement …
Numbers are Susceptible to Manipulation! Numbers are Quantitative Portrayals of Real
World Situations Numbers are a Means Not an End
Any Questions?Colin Dawes
Human Resources Benchmarking Network
www.hrbn.ca