This HR Shared Services video tells the story of how Kellogg successfully transformed their HR service delivery and exceeded expectations using a HR shared services model. Kellogg was able to add value to employees and the business alike, considerably increase customer response and satisfaction measures, improve operating margins, provide standardized/compliant HR answers and increase adoption rates among employees and managers on a global basis. Learn how advances in HR technology, notably including SaaS, made deploying a new model for HR service delivery via HR Shared Services a reality for 35,000 active/retired employees and their dependents across 13 countries and 4 languages.
3. About Kellogg
• Over 100 years old
• 31,000 employees globally, 2009 sales of $13 Billion
• Manufacturing in 18 countries
• Marketed in 180 countries
• Significant growth through acquisition since 2000
Keebler, Morning Star Farms, Russia and China
• HQ in Battle Creek, Michigan
• Mission to be the Food Company
of Choice for Customers,
Shareholders and Employees
4. Scope of Project:
Global Design, Americas Implementation
• 13 countries
• Four languages: American English, Mexican Spanish,
Brazilian Portuguese and French Canadian
• 17,000 active employees
– 35,000 total lives, including retirees, vested terminated
employees, dependents and survivors
• 6 Core Process areas, Global design, many sub-processes
– Org Mgmt, Employee Data Management, Compensation Planning,
Staffing, Succession Management, Performance Management
• 13 Technologies integrated and implemented
– SAP HR, Talent Management, Compensation Planning, Telephony, Case
Management, Document Management, Content Management, Portal, etc.
5. Business Drivers
• Align HR processes with Kellogg’s strategic objectives
• Build for the future to support continued, sustainable
growth
• Create a consistent customer experience
• Give employees and managers more control of their
information and career resources
• Deliver timely, consistent and reliable data to the
business and regulatory agencies
• Support cash flow with cost-effective solutions
6. Environmental Pain Points
• Data decentralized, many hand-offs diluted accuracy and
efficiency
• Answers to HR questions came from many different
sources and could vary depending on source
• HR intranet site was unreliable, difficult and time-
consuming to navigate
• Content was not centralized, audited or controlled
• HR processes not documented, much in expert’s head
• Technology was outdated or non-existent
• Self-service US Benefits Open Enrollment only
• Varying levels and styles of customer service depending
on Service Area
7. Our Tiered Model
Interaction HR Service
Types Delivery Channels
Face to Face HR Business
•Strategic Partnership
•Consultation
•Advisory
•Facilitation Tier 3
•Change Centers of Expertise
Vendors
Management
•Program Design Tier 2
•Vendor SelectionRegional Service Area
Service Center Specialists
•Information Tier 1
•Transactions
•Case Management
Customer Service
•Data Management
•Project & Vendor Tier 0
Management
•Compliance Self Service
•HR Systems
Governance
8. What Guided Our Efforts
Design
Description
Principles
• Be easy to use with minimal number of steps
Simple • Create a clear and transparent customer experience
• Drive decision making at the lowest appropriate level
• Build usable global processes and standards
• Minimize localization and customization preventing
Standardized workarounds
• Optimize and integrate HR service delivery model
• Require global process ownership
Stewardship • Enable the employee and manager to manage their data
• Mandate discipline
• Optimize the use of automation and technology
Systems • Streamline collecting and reporting of timely, accurate data
• Be scalable and flexible to meet future requirements
9. Building Tech Requirements to Get Where
We Needed to Be
• Tightly controlled security and privacy
• Deliver basic HR services more cost-efficiently and
effectively, leveraging Self-Service
• Facilitate multi-tiered approach to HR service delivery
• Leverage hosted solutions for lower cost of use
• Configured, not customized, to leverage timely and low
cost upgrades
• Provide support for non-HR Legacy systems
Travel and Entertainment, Payroll, Security, etc.
• Cost-efficient, nimble implementation and ongoing
maintenance
10. Technology Platform Overview
WebSphere
Avaya CT, Enwisen CM
Enwisen KB SAP
SAP
SuccessFactors
SAP – 3D view of data
Taleo
CedarCrestone 2009-2010 HR Service Delivery
11. Missing Link: Knowledgebase
• Knowledge/content vs. data management
• Required for effective and efficient Tier 0-2 response
• Resource-intensive to maintain in-house, and not a core
HR competency
• Current KB solution integrated with HR database, and
was Q&A only; couldn’t support multiple content types
• Needed a KB that would:
Provide highly personalized content to the Portal and to
Tier 1 & 2
Support multiple content types
Closely integrated with Case Management to provide fast
answers
Lowest cost for content management and governance
Grow with the organizational needs
12. Value of an integrated systems:
KB, Case Management, Portal
Improve efficiency in HR Service
Delivery
Maximize use of Tier 0 by providing
accurate and targeted information
Enable HRSS to quickly target HR
information for a diverse customer base
Minimize volume of simple HR inquiries
directed to HRBPs and COE staff
13. RFP to Implementation in Record Time
• March – decision to issue RFP
• April – select and contract with finalist
Selected solution with KB and Case Management
• May – tech requirements and integration planning with
all other technology already in plan
• June-August: build
• September-Mid-October: testing and fixing defects
• October 25, 2009: GO LIVE!
14. Preparing for Deployment
• Audit content
• Knowledge management: new skill set for HR
Managing thousands of documents and serving
accurately to the right audience is complex, technical
and time consuming!
HR is liaison between IT and content owners
Understand what you want from data – and power
of data
• Closer to deployment: detailed plan from HR, IT and
vendor partners
Hour-by-hour activities started, completed
Who’s on point to address issues, daily meetings with
team leaders (six months out, down to twice weekly)
15. Lessons Learned
• Stabilization in 3-6 months?
Realistic: 2 years
• Data integrity grows slowly and, sometimes painfully
• Change management – can’t underestimate or over
deliver
Communicate early and often and then “shampoo, rinse and
repeat”; have resource(s) dedicated post-go live
• Generalist jobs changed most, not the HRSS staff
Train, train, train – systems, statistical analysis, strategy
Help generalists understand trends, data relationships
Enable and encourage them to point customers to HRSS
• You can try to anticipate everything, but …
Can’t anticipate all reactions – example: people blaming MSS for
not meeting their own targets/accountabilities
Solution? FLEXIBILITY, HUMILITY and LISTENING SKILLS
16. One year statistics
• 235,000 Cases
Average 4,000 contacts
per week
• MSS transactions
Average 3,000 per month
• Almost 624,000 visits to
the portal, with about 5
million pages viewed
13,000 weekly visits on
Average
17. Customer Satisfaction Surveys
• 2,000 requests sent quarterly, ½ electronic ½ paper
US, Canada and Latin America, Employees and Retirees
• 3.33 score out of 4 point scale (Q3, 2010 results - .23 improvement
over Q1)
87% Sat/Very Sat with quality (accuracy, timeliness) +10% over Q1)
96% Sat/Very Sat with staff's attitude/willingness to help
86% Sat/Very Sat with overall experience (technology & service) +3%
• Decreasing percent of Dissatisfied/Very Dissatisfied
• Moving customers from Satisfied to Very Satisfied
• Good insight on where our opportunities are, and we’re working on it:
Navigation and Content Placement
Application Functionality
End to End Process Improvements
Training and Communications
Regional Content
18. Delivering Value to the Customer and the Business
• Meeting or exceeding SLAs
30 seconds or less average Speed to Answer
5% or less Abandonment Rate
60% or greater First Call Resolution – original target was 50%
75% or greater First Day Resolution – original target was 60%
• Increasing efficiency in closing cases
13% reduction in time spent on First Call Resolution over a 4-month
period
• Delivering Self-Service simplifications
25% decrease in Self-Service coaching calls while maintaining volume of
transaction
60% of survey respondents state they can do SS without help
• Delivering tools for faster, more accurate MSS
transactions
30% workflow complete in same day, 80% complete in 2 business days
19. Multi-Tiered Approach to HR Service Delivery
• Gartner
• HR experts today: 70-80% time administrative / responding to inquiries
• Organizations with multi-tier HR service delivery spend average 20% less per employee;
high performers in this area 50% less
High
Performers
Enwisen 90% 6% in as little as
Customers 80% - 90%
1st Call 6 months
Pop tarts Eggo Morning Star Farms Kashi Sunshine (Cheese-its) Mother ’s Cookies Famous Amos
So how to we get there? Our new Service Delivery Model will be our vehicle. There is a lot of information on this slide. I don ’ t want you to get overwhelmed by it or wrapped up in all the detail. This doesn ’ t represent our new organizational structure, but rather the channels that will be employed as we provide service in our future state.. It really is very simple … The SDM will be global and applies to all of our customers – salaried employees, hourly employees, manager, retirees, vendors, etc. It will also apply to ALL of HR – everything we do and all of our roles. While we captured the main buckets of HR services, there will be some work that HR currently does that we still need to consider how it will get done in the future. An example would be Labor Relations in the plants. Similar to the other industries we discussed earlier, applying a new service delivery model for HR means finding the most efficient and effective way to deliver all of our services to all of our customers, whether that is face-to-face, through a service center, or through the Web. We know that some things, like information requests, transactions and inquiries are best handled through self service or a service center, and other things like providing consultation, consulting, and advice to employees, manager, and leaders is best done through face-to-face support. The new SDM leverages the power of Shared Services – which includes the service center teams, a new HR Portal to drive ESS and MSS and some support from the expertise teams to provide service in a new way. It also includes a clear focus for the business partnership roles – helping business units and functions achieve business goals through a strategic consulting role. This model will allow them to partner even more closely to the business by redirecting the tactical, transactional work. No one person in HR will have to be everything to everybody … and all employees will have the support they need, whether it ’ s provided through self-service, a call center or strategic partnership with an HR professional embedded in the business. So let ’ s look at how the model will work with some real-world examples …
How to build tech requirements – Our IT, HR and IBM did this together. Had a questionnaire they asked us. Our vision was always to put ourselves in their shoes and get the requirements met as consistently as possible. Leverage what we had already purchased, and integrate any new product with that to meet delivery timeline. Enwisen came on in Feb or March 2009, and we had to go live in October. It was all about money. We had so much money to pay for IBM consulting. It was an intense environment. We had 120 consultants between hr, it and programmers. It was VERY costly. No option to extend.
How to build tech requirements – Our IT, HR and IBM did this together. Had a questionnaire they asked us. Our vision was always to put ourselves in their shoes and get the requirements met as consistently as possible. Leverage what we had already purchased, and integrate any new product with that to meet delivery timeline. Enwisen came on in Feb or March 2009, and we had to go live in October. It was all about money. We had so much money to pay for IBM consulting. It was an intense environment. We had 120 consultants between hr, it and programmers. It was VERY costly. No option to extend.
How to build tech requirements – Our IT, HR and IBM did this together. Had a questionnaire they asked us. Our vision was always to put ourselves in their shoes and get the requirements met as consistently as possible. Leverage what we had already purchased, and integrate any new product with that to meet delivery timeline. Enwisen came on in Feb or March 2009, and we had to go live in October. It was all about money. We had so much money to pay for IBM consulting. It was an intense environment. We had 120 consultants between hr, it and programmers. It was VERY costly. No option to extend.
How to build tech requirements – Our IT, HR and IBM did this together. Had a questionnaire they asked us. Our vision was always to put ourselves in their shoes and get the requirements met as consistently as possible. Leverage what we had already purchased, and integrate any new product with that to meet delivery timeline. Enwisen came on in Feb or March 2009, and we had to go live in October. It was all about money. We had so much money to pay for IBM consulting. It was an intense environment. We had 120 consultants between hr, it and programmers. It was VERY costly. No option to extend.
How to build tech requirements – Our IT, HR and IBM did this together. Had a questionnaire they asked us. Our vision was always to put ourselves in their shoes and get the requirements met as consistently as possible. Leverage what we had already purchased, and integrate any new product with that to meet delivery timeline. Enwisen came on in Feb or March 2009, and we had to go live in October. It was all about money. We had so much money to pay for IBM consulting. It was an intense environment. We had 120 consultants between hr, it and programmers. It was VERY costly. No option to extend.
First lesson learned. I was thinking of stabilization in a three- to six-month timeframe. RIDICULOUS. 12-18 months is more realistic. Have had that validated with other people who have gone through this. Another learning – organizational change management. We did a lot of work at the front end, saying it ’s coming and this is what it means. Due to resourcing, we didn’t have a resource post-live. Cannot underestimate and cannot overdeliver on change mgmt – before during after, deployed communication, ongoing communication, what their role is, what the expectations are … you can’t put enough energy into that. Business facing HR people whose jobs changed the most. Not the HRSS people. The generalists needed to become statisticians. We might have to train or hire for. Has been borne out over and over again. Basic and advanced Excel training. We ’re going to deliver the dashboards to them, and work with them to understand the trends and relationships between data points and they will have to OWN this. October 26 was go live. General user did use the system as HR/IT had anticipated. The managers and executives had more issues. More multi-phased forms and transactions. Ex: Just got a resignation from someone and wanted to post a new job opening. It ’s several steps not the same transaction. Posting position internally, externally … checking the open box. Change management and training.
