As we discussed in last month’s post, one key aspect to successfully using analytics to drive decision making is being able to tell the story—apply important context to the results to understand what they mean. Another key consideration is your audience. Your audience should determine what analytics to focus on and how you visualize the results.
In our last post, we explored the value of visualizations in bringing workforce data to life and simplifying understanding. So what comes next once we have robust people data, deeper understanding, and great visualizations? It’s time to start using HR Analytics to share insight and drive decision making with executives and lines of business. What’s the best way to do this? It’s through storytelling. That’s right…good old–fashioned storytelling.
In our last few blogs we covered numbers 1 through 9 of our list of the 10 most common questions and concerns HR professionals raise when considering getting started with workforce analytics. It’s time now for #10.
In our last few blogs we covered numbers 1 through 7 of our list of the 10 most common questions and concerns HR professionals raise when considering getting started with workforce analytics. Now let’s move onto 2 more questions and concerns and how you can overcome them.
In our last two blog posts we covered five of the most common questions and concerns HR professionals raise when considering getting started with workforce analytics. Now let’s move onto two more questions and concerns and how you can overcome them.
There’s a lot of focus today on Big Data and analytics and this extends into all areas of business, HR included. We get it and we’re huge proponents of its value—in fact we’ve built our business on workforce analytics and insight. We know that numbers can tell us what’s working and what’s not within an organization. They can identify how much it costs and how long it takes to recruit a new employee; where, when and who is leaving the organization; who the top performers are; where we experience the highest productivity, and so much more. So data can tell us a great deal about what, who and where things are happening in an organization.
I am often contacted by human resources groups and analysts looking to take their work to the next level and discover the next great insight. Often they are seeking some holy grail or mystic equation that will simply answer the complex questions that human systems create. This is a worthy and powerful quest and one which is moving human resources groups and the organizations they serve into a better and more productive position. Unfortunately…
Last night, I was presenting to an MBA class at the University of British Columbia. For interest’s sake, I started with the question, “what are your perceptions of HR?”
The negative answers I got back were not surprising…
For my last post of 2011, I will follow the age old tradition of predictions for 2012. The slight twist is that the post will feature someone else’s predictions—much easier than gazing into my own crystal ball.
We have just reported our Q2 2011 results. We have gone through the time consuming and detailed process of auditing and are now in the process of letting folks know what happened in Q2 2011 on a range of metrics. One measure that we have been keeping a close eye on is absenteeism. Absenteeism keeps going up and the Q2 results are continuing that trend.
How do we resolve this dilemma? Time to Fill does tell us something important, yet we cannot be sure whether a change to this number is due to our own efforts or the effects of the overall job market.
The most frequently used analogy when it comes to measuring HR is that of driving a car without a speedometer: how would you drive if you did not know your speed?
The deeper we look into HR measurement the less satisfying this analogy becomes. The basic premise that you need information to perform well is correct. However, when you have a speedometer and you are going too fast, your actions are obvious – you take your foot of the gas pedal.
This direct link between information and action is not the case for HR.