Payroll - bureau or in house

The last quarter of the year tends to be when a number of our clients consider bringing their payroll in house. Many mid-sized companies outsource payroll to a small bureau or one of the big players (eg ADP) and this costs them a packet. However, bringing it in house can be scary and will it actually save money?

In my experience the only honest answer is 'yes - but'....

Something as sensitive (critical) as a payroll can not be experimented with and many companies think of it as a project to implement software. Actually, its all about the people that are going to end up running the payroll. Projects to bring payroll in house must be resourced properly and if it is going to go wrong this is the most likely cause. A company that outsources its payroll usually has someone in house that does a large part of the work (bureaus rarely earn their keep) and this person can / should be central to the project. They will dislike software, be very nervous and fear for their job. Training this person must not be skimped on and a level of hand-holding after implementation is essential to build up confidence and experience (don't forget that the first tax year end). Even when they are up and running, someone to call on occasionally when a difficult question arises is important. In a few cases this person is simply not the right resource, so a change of personnel has to happen but this rapidly becomes obvious to all concerned.

CRM systems - Buy vs build

One question I get asked quite often when talking to organisations needing to improve how they manage their relationships is should they buy an off the shelf CRM system or build their own.

There is no straight forward answer to this as it really depends on requirements. With some clients it is obvious that an off the shelf solution is right - maybe the system has exactly the features they need or there aren't the right skills available to build.

The decision to build from scratch tends to come from one of three positions:

• "My requirements are so simple I don't need a system with all the extra
  stuff."
• "I want a system that matches all my requirements exactly and none of the packages do this."
• "We can't afford a package solution."

In each case we suggest the client looks a bit deeper before making a decision.

Simple requirements - I don't need all the stuff
It is true that CRM packages have lots of functionality that never gets used but they are also designed to allow for this. Typically a company will only use 20% of a software system's functionality but every company uses a different 20%. The point to consider here is the over time you will no doubt want to add functionality - as your knowledge and confidence grows so will your requirements. It is also often true that as you get used to using a CRM system your understanding of what you really need will change - the power of hindsight. So the system needs to be flexible and easily changed - not always possible with a bespoke system.

Exact requirement - one size does not fit all
When CRM systems became the rage in the late 90s the trend was to try and make them do everything. This led to high profile implementation failures, as organisations pushed the boundaries, trying to implement systems to do exactly what they wanted and to include everything the CRM pundits said they should have. We advise our clients to carry out a dispassionate cost benefit analysis of their requirements - for example, linking CRM to an accounting system is great but exactly what benefit will you get, is it wort the extra cost?

We can't afford a package
This is a difficult one as it needs to take into account what is involved in developing a system. It is relatively easy for someone with good PC skills to create a basic CRM system using MS Access or similar. There are a number of serious questions that need to be considered before setting off down this route such as:

• Have we really got a good handle on our requirements?
• Can these requirements be documented in a way that they can be passed onto the person developing the system?
• Are you happy to rely on one person developing the system - all eggs in one basket?
• Is the developer prepared to work to a fixed price & time frame and provide support?
• What happens when the system needs changing - will they be there, able to cope and charge a reasonable amount?

When all of these points are taken into consideration the cost of an entry level CRM package often doesn't sound so bad.

Buy vs Build is not a straightforward decision and should always be considered when you start the process of implementing. However, good off the shelf systems come with lots of the thinking already done and best practice embedded. They are also implemented by people that know about CRM and have valuable experience to pass on. You can read any number of articles that say CRM is about changing a mindset not just a system, and I suggest that buying an implementation from CRM expert using, a well proven package, is the best way to achieve this.

Getting away from it all!

As I close things down for my summer holiday I face the same quandry as many business owners and managers - how 'in touch' do I stay?

I often go to the highlands of Scotland during the summer and until a couple of years ago the mobile coverage wasn't up to much. More recently I get better coverage there than I do in Surrey so the temptation to check mail is always there.

On the one hand I know that a complete break is best BUT will I relax better if I check in occasionally? I have a great team of people who would consider it a failure to have to contact me on holiday and I wouldn't insult them by calling in. So, this year the 'out of office' is on and I am determined to only check my mail once or twice a week.

Joined up HR systems

There is a lot of buz around the subject of 'Talent Management', with any number of seminars, workshops and white papers available. As ever, the software world has latched onto this potentially huge market place and solutions are available from many vendors.

What I don't understand though, is that this new breed of system seems to be being implemented independently from an organisations HR system. This leads to an organisation having two (or more) silos of employee related information that may or may not speak to each other. Surely the business world knows that this is a bad idea so why is it happening?

The problem seems to lie somewhere between a lack of clarity as to what a talent management system (TMS) should look like and a lack of flexibility in many HR systems. Gartner have identified that many organisations implementing TMS, are doing so as a toe in the water effort to replace spreadsheets or Word Docs ('Unlocking the Strategic Value From Talent Management Application Investments' - Dec 2007). It is also well known in the HR world that traditional HR systems are cumbersome (aka expensive) to adapt so are not being tailored to handle TM.

Organisations are spending vast amounts of money joining up business systems, removing silos and sharing information. Lets hope we don't have to go through the whole process again combining HR data. HR and talent management systems must not be separated - information about the employee should be held in one place.

An organisation adopting talent management strategies is making an important investment but lets not forget that the ideas are not completely new - they draw on lessons from the past. In that same spirit, lets not forget the great IT lesson of the 90s not to create data silos.

Age discrimination

I met a contact at the Employers Forum on Age today and he shared with me the idea that the debate over retirement ages could be solved by having three dates:

• State pension age
• Work scheme pension age
• Actual retirement age

This approach would then allow the employer and employee maximum flexibility instead of the state dictated retirement age.

CRM and short term memory

There seem to be two types of CRM users - those that use it to manage transactions and others that use it to organise their business lives.

I unashamedly fall into the latter group - I use my CRM system to manage my every move. In looking at ways to release more time for thinking and planning it came to me that I use CRM as the system equivalent of my long term memory - memory stored as meaning that can fade over time if it is not recalled on a number of occasions. CRM for me has become a memory store. With smart use of reminders and triggers I can get the system to recall information over time. The problem with this is that reminders can interrupt and overwrite what users are currently thinking, ie what is going on in short term memory. Smart use of CRM takes this into account but in this respect a system is only as good as its user.

Succession planning - inside outsiders

Whilst researching succession planning I came across the idea of 'inside outsiders'. These are employees that have managed to keep an open mind and haven't been sucked in by company think. The argument is that they make excellent future leaders as they have an outside view of the business and its world. Listen to Harvard Business Online Episode 68

Once again, a great contact base is cited as essential. More evidence that, to succeed, a business must have a strategy to manage its relationships. See also Darren Shirlaw's article