The Data Difference

In July, The HR World’s webinar delved into the realms of HR Data and its value to strategy, HR in general and the wider business.

Sponsored by Cezanne HR the webinar featured insights and experience from Craig McCoy, Senior Interim HR professional & Chair of London HR Connection, John Hixon, Chief Operating Officer, Cezanne HR and Peter Hall, Head of Customer Success at Cezanne HR.

The webinar was very well attended and went beyond the usual time allocated. In order to address as many issues as possible, we asked Craig and John to address a couple of the questions posed by attendees which they were unable to respond to in the time given.

Q: What else should be reported on for strategic/board level reporting and to build credibility? Everyone always seems to just talk about sickness, absence and turnover.

John Hixon, Chief Operating Officer, Cezanne HR: The few I would add to the list are:

• DEI – This needs to be clearly defined and also configured based on locations, type of diversity you want to monitor etc.
• Cost of staff (compensation)
• Gender salary gaps
• Average days since change in compensation
• Promotions/movement (also broken down by diversity)
• Performance of employees
• Cost of hire

It would then depend on the makeup of the organisation – are they heavy in part time, casual or contractors? Does this type of head count need to be monitored separately?

As well as the static information, they should also review trends over time e.g. the snapshot on female percentage may be OK on the monthly report, but over the past 12 months that percentage has been decreasing so they may need to take some proactive actions.

I also believe that the reports should lead to actions to make improvements in the business, and that the metrics that are being monitored should be reviewed at least annually to make sure they are still applicable.

Craig McCoy: This is a good list of people data items which boards want to see. I would add in more data regarding recruitment – eg. vacancy rate, time to hire, as well as cost to hire, etc. as resourcing effectiveness is one of the biggest challenges faced by businesses at present. Training data is also scrutinised at Board level especially in businesses where training is mandated, so completion rates for mandatory training.

Another lens to think about this is operational data – historic and up to date – and predictive forward looking data e.g. workforce planning, strategic skills requirements. Boards need to think about the future as well as the past and present. Lead and lag indicators.

Peter Hall: I would also mention the growing importance of employee sentiment as a metric – particularly so in recent times where retention has been such a key issue: eNPS, for example, tends to be a key measure. However, this data is normally only a focus as an extension beyond some of the metrics discussed above.

Q: Can you give your top three priorities or challenges when dealing with HR data and how these can be dealt with practically?

John Hixon: The top priority is identifying the key data that must be captured within the system, either to enable reporting, compliance, supporting line managers or general usage.  The owners of each type of information should then be identified e.g. employee’s for personal information, change of bank details etc.

Once the key information is captured the job becomes ensuring it is maintained so it can be a source for providing ROI for the business, along with allowing HR to focus on strategic issues rather than data maintenance and basic employee queries.

If you have good data then this will allow AI to be used to identify outliers, find hidden talent and identify who may be at risk of leaving.

Craig McCoy: I agree with Johns’ comments regarding priorities. In overall terms the biggest priority for me is the ability to integrate all people data into a single platform which is capable of being manipulated and reported on whilst kept constantly updated.

Peter Hall: One challenge is the practicality of breaking down the data migration exercise. It can often be perceived as overwhelming to bring together data, particularly so when trying to co-ordinate multiple sites/sources/locations and also with different quality levels of data that are being brought together. To help overcome this, we always try to focus clients to break the exercise apart into stages, starting with core elements and bringing in additional sets as phases when necessary. This also gives more time to interrogate the necessity of data sets, which is important where an end-game may be to co-ordinate systems or utilise AI capability.