Showing posts with label human capital management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human capital management. Show all posts

Friday, April 29, 2011

Case Study: How Fairchild Semiconductor Has Leveraged the Workday Integration Cloud

Edited transcript of a BriefingsDirect podcast on new forms of cloud-based integration and its use in enterprise business processes.

Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Download the transcript. Learn more. Sponsor: Workday.

Dana Gardner: Hi, this is Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and you're listening to BriefingsDirect.

Today, we present a sponsored podcast discussion on how new forms of cloud-based integration are helping a major high-tech company build new relationships among and between extended enterprise business processes.

We'll examine how Fairchild Semiconductor has been an early adopter of integration platform as a service (iPaaS). The venerable Silicon Valley company has been using graphical tools to build integrations among and between far-flung applications and services but with those integration platforms housed in a newly unveiled Workday Integration Cloud. [Disclosure: Workday is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]

We’ll learn here from the chief technology officer at Workday on what the integration cloud approach can do and how it points to a future in which broad integration capabilities are increasingly built into software-as-a-service (SaaS) applications.

This cloud-based integration model will prove far less vulnerable to the complexity, fragility and cost that plagues traditional on-premises middleware integration methods. It should also spur the evolution of services ecosystems among multiple business service providers and application providers.

So here to dig into what makes integration as a service (IaaS) tick and what it means for the future is Paul Lones, Senior Vice President for Information Technology at Fairchild Semiconductor. Welcome, Paul.

Paul Lones: Thank you.

Gardner: We’re also here with Stan Swete, the Chief Technology Officer at Workday. Welcome back, Stan.

Stan Swete: Thanks, Dana.

Gardner: Let me start with you, Paul. What's the problem now with integration? Why is this different than a few years ago? Why is it that we need to adopt a different take on integration?

Lones: For companies like Fairchild that are really trying to take advantage of some of the new capabilities that SaaS providers are offering and put together a broader group of applications, integrations are a new challenge, a broader challenge than they have been traditionally.

Gardner: And what is it about what Workday is doing as an application provider that makes this interesting -- the human resource management, the human resource (HR), equation. We’ve seen integrations in some other service orientations, such as in the supply chain side of things. Why was this a challenge?

Custom integration

Lones: Traditionally, in the HR arena, there has been no such thing as a standard integration. Every benefit provider, every payroll service provider that you want to work with requires a custom integration. That’s always been true, and having the set of tools that we now have at our disposal makes that a lot easier.

Gardner: So, in a sense, the HR ecosystem challenge is a really good place to try to perfect or advance iPaaS. Do you agree with that?

Lones: Absolutely.

Gardner: Stan, let's go to you. What needed to change and when you looked at this issue of your ecosystem and how it tied things together, what sort of requirements did you have for integration that now you can pass along to your customers?

Swete: We still look at it as having the same requirements for enterprise integration. Especially for hub systems like human capital management, there are ton of other systems that you have to integrate with. So the requirements are daunting and are still there. It's been the same for a while at enterprise software.

What we see as being a cloud vendor, a SaaS vendor, is just new opportunities to leverage the SaaS model to do integration a little bit differently, have the application vendor take on more of the ownership of the integration issue and use the fact that we've got all of our customers running on a single version of the product to tie some integration logic to that and bring more control and stability to that integration for our customers and our partners.

Gardner: Why is it, Stan, that the traditional systems, platforms, and middleware that are in place are not up to this task? Why not just turn the switch on your on-premises integrations and start tying together these cloud and SaaS based services?

Swete: There's just a split today between the technologies and the platforms that are used to execute integration and convey data and then the application’s endpoints that are involved with and tied up in the logic of that integration.

It's not that no one is up to it, but it's just that that gap splits responsibilities where maybe they don’t have to be split. What we’re trying to do is marry it, use what we know about our applications to create integration logic, and then embed technology that hasn’t been embedded with applications before to help with the delivery of that.

That hasn't replaced every single kind of middleware technology that you need. You still need a middleware technology behind your firewall. You still need specialized middleware technology in the cloud to do things that it does best. But, for the application-centric part of integration, application vendors can do more.

Gardner: Paul, at Fairchild, you've adopted a number of SaaS system approaches or services approaches. One of them is Workday. You have mentioned a few others to me earlier. When you look at your ability to absorb and adopt and exploit more SaaS, how does integration fit into that? Is this something that needs to be solved in order for you to proceed?

Critical enabler

Lones: It's a critical enabler to take advantage of some of the capabilities that we see are available to us and can help us in our business. We look for two things. One, we want to find a supplier that thinks of this in a more holistic ecosystem-like way, and that has a series of application-level partners, that we can add to our overall architecture and overall application capability.

In addition to that, we look for good integration tools, because even beyond those partnerships, we still have to do a lot of integration work.

Gardner: And how long has Fairchild been using Workday for their human capital management activities?

Lones: We've just recently gone live with Workday and several of their partners and have completely transformed our human capital management landscape with Fairchild.

Gardner: When you started to do this, I would think that that involved a number of integration points. Perhaps you could share how that works and then we would like to hear more from Workday about why their Workday Integration Cloud announcement has come to up to the bat to start swinging at this problem.

Lones: Sure. For the Workday partners who I was talking about earlier, those integrations are handled between Workday and their partner, which reduced our integration burden. We don't have to maintain those, as both of those applications continue to improve. In addition to that, we've built 28 application integrations ourselves, largely to benefit service providers and payroll service providers around the world.

Gardner: And you were using your tools or leveraging some of the investments you have made? How did you build those integrations?

Lones: We were fortunate enough that we were able to get some early access to the toolset that Workday is now making available to their broader customer and partner base.

I had a small team of IT staff that was completely unfamiliar with Workday when they first started, and we put them to work on these integrations. We were able to complete these 28 integrations in less than 120 days, which I think was pretty good performance.

Gardner: Just for comparison sake, how long would that perhaps taken in a traditional enterprise application integration (EAI) environment?

Lones: I wouldn't want to necessarily put a date on that. We do know that from an overall project implementation perspective that an on-premises application typically will take 2-3 times as long to execute, and I'd expect that the integration piece would have a similar scaling.

Gardner: Alright. Well, let's dig in a little bit more with the announcement recently that Workday made -- something called the Workday Integration Cloud. Stan, give us the top-down understanding of what this is about.

Important components

Swete: The Workday Integration Cloud is an extension of Workday's cloud that we use to host and process our on-demand applications and it has several really important components. One is a platform component. The tools that Paul mentioned that they used to build integrations, up until today, have been there for Workday developers. The announcement makes these tools fully available to Workday customers and to Workday partners.

In addition to the tools, there is a rich enterprise service bus (ESB) execution environment that runs the results of these developmental tools. We offer not only the tools to build integration systems but the execution environment for the integration systems. And then we've a set of scheduling and monitoring tools that our customers can use to directly schedule and monitor the execution of their integrations.

So those three things taken together form the platform, that's part of the integration cloud. The resulting integration systems we also consider a part of the cloud. Workday for some time has been building what we call Packaged Integrations and Connectors. We have a library of those that we can make available to our customers.

Fairchild has used some of these. These integrations are built with our tooling by us and for our customers. Packaged integrations really just look like another Workday product, but they handle both ends of the integration challenge.

We also have connectors that handle our end of it but build logic out. The main example is a payroll interface product that lets our customers, gives our customers a starting point for hooking up Workday human capital management to the variety of international payrolls many of our larger customers have.

This is very solid ESB technology, well thought of by the engineering talent that we now own.



Packaged integrations from Workday is another component of the Integration Cloud and the final one is just the body of integrations that our customers and partners create.

These are the intellectual property of our customers and our partners. Workday does facilitate sharing of those definitions if the customer and partners are interested, but there is that growing body of application as well. Those things taken together are the Workday Integration Cloud.

Gardner: And just to be clear, this is designed for your customers. This isn't just a general purpose integration service that you are opening up writ large. This is about your ecosystem and your customers, is that right?

Swete: The beauty of it is that it's based on middleware from a company formerly called Cape Clear that Workday acquired three years ago. I think that's very important to mention that. So it's not like we, an apps vendor, just did our take on an ESB. This is very solid ESB technology, well thought of by the engineering talent that we now own.

Built-in integration

W
e're taking this technology and integrating it into our applications, building integration into our applications as the way we refer to it, and then making the combined product available to both our customers and our partners. The partners are the equally important point. Systems integration partners from Workday can get access to these tools and this platform.

Gardner: And how about the pricing. Is this something that you would just check a box off and get a different bill for? How does this relate to the existing suite of application services you providing?

Swete: The Workday Integration Cloud platform is being made available at no additional cost to Workday customers and Workday partners. We make our money selling our application services.

Gardner: I'm intrigued by this notion of making integration part of the application. I think the history of this, Paul, has been that over the years, new applications and platforms, and even models of computing would come along. You would get great productivity from the application, you would buy and install and master the platform, and then you would be faced with an integration problem.

This is happened over and over again. We've seen it with mainframes to client-server and then into multi-tier and distributing computing and then ultimately with web and now cloud computing.

Companies like ours and many companies working on this are moving from a monolithic internal application orientation to one that's more of a hybrid model.



Given that integration has been a bolt-on, something that's been delivered after they shift in an application model, why now change? Why is integration and the application coming together now?

Lones: Part of it is that our approach to overall enterprise architecture is changing. Companies like ours and many companies working on this are moving from a monolithic internal application orientation to one that's more of a hybrid model, where we want to really take advantage of the new capabilities and the quicker pace of development and deployment of improvements that SaaS providers offer.

Therefore, integrations naturally become a critical part of that, because the number of applications that we use in our business increases somewhat with this sort of approach.

Gardner: Same question to you, Stan. Why this need to bring an application and its integration features together?

Swete: The challenge here is that the requirements in the large problem of integration haven't changed, and there have been a lot of tools developed to address the issue. Some results have been achieved, but I don't think anyone is satisfied with how maintainable enterprise integration is. And, we happened to think the answer is to build more robust integration where the integration definitions themselves are more informed by what exists and what's changing in the application.

Hub system

That's the opportunity that we were seeing. We came on to it by just being the provider of an application that is going to be the hub system and be hooked up to a lot of different systems.

We knew that integration was going to be front and center for us as a brand new SaaS vendor six years ago. One of the differences we wanted to make was to do more about the problem. So, we started with an investment of technology.

Where that has led us is really tying what can get done with integration technology to what applications know about, everything from their security model to, in our case, we leverage a lot the fact that we know about people and how they are organized. So, we're able to have integration definitions that can get routed around for the appropriate approvals before certain steps happen.

That’s unique, but it's breaking down the separation between integration that would be built by one side of the company and tying it back to who it's really serving, the other side of the company.

For payroll integration, the payroll admin can be hooked into the fact that a major feed of HR data is going out to a payroll system and they can get a check on that before it happens. That’s something we’ve built in and we’ll continue to look for those opportunities. I still think it's actually early days for what our integration tools can leverage inside the application.

You still have to have experts on integration middleware and we have that, but the real benefit we think comes from blurring the distinction and marrying these things together.



Gardner: So, the system of record for HR and the governance and policies about employees and their roles in the organization can now be applied pretty seamlessly to who gets to do integrations and/or how integrations as part of a business process would work. Am I reading that right?

Swete: Yeah, how they get executed, how they get approved is all built in to the same sort of system that you use to schedule a report or any other thing you’d do in your application. For us, it's just an extension of the application, rather than a hard line and then some integration technology that no one on the app side understands.

There still are differences. You still have to have experts on integration middleware and we have that, but the real benefit we think comes from blurring the distinction and marrying these things together.

Gardner: So you mentioned some tools and Paul mentioned very compelling timeframe for creating 28 integrations. Who are the people who use these tools typically and are they same old software engineers that were building EAI connections, or is this a wider group of people? Who can take advantage of this tool capability?

Swete: We’ve taken the approach of splitting the development tools into a framework that is more geared for developing simple integrations, as we call them. This is one-way data in or one-way data out of Workday to third-party systems, and we have a tool called the Enterprise Interface Builder (EIB) that is a non-programmer could use. You still need to know that you are sending something to a secure FTP location, but you don’t have to be a developer.

Sets of choices

We give you a graphical user interface, we give you a selected set of choices for how you can source data, a selected set of choices for how you can transform it, and a select set of choices for how you can deliver it. You can save that, and then you have a definition that you can then schedule on a recurring basis. That’s built for non-developers.

The other tool that we have has a completely different personality. It's what we call Workday Studio. This is the developer tool that we have used to build our integrations, and it is now available for our customers. But, on this one, you want to be a developer. You're not doing programming, but you are working in an Eclipse-based framework with detailed control over integration components and orchestration of how data flows. So, this is a technical development tool.

The thing it creates is the same thing that the EIB creates, an integration system that can then be executed in Workday, but the creation of it is much more technical.

Lones: Along those lines, this is really a marriage between having a strong, skilled team of developers with a great tool set. So, it's not a substitute for having well-skilled staff in the IT organization.

Gardner: What about the idea here that integration can be better and newly leveraged because we’ve solved with a SaaS provider’s multitenancy architecture some of these thorny and complex issues about version heterogeneity within the organization?

A lot of times companies might want to update an application, but fear breaking or disrupting integrations. That integration in the traditional sense can become an impediment to the advancement of features and functions in applications.



A lot of times companies might want to update an application, but fear breaking or disrupting integrations. That integration in the traditional sense can become an impediment to the advancement of features and functions in applications.

Paul, did it occur to you that the multitenancy, the fact that everyone is on the same version of this app and that all the integrations follow through by virtue of the responsibility of the vendor, not the user, that that’s sort of added bonus. How have you recognized that and what does it mean to you?

Lones: It's an important part of thinking about the use of SaaS applications in a company like Fairchild. To the extent that it's easy to maintain those integrations through the improvement cycle, we are going to be much more willing to follow a SaaS model, because upgrades come every three or four months, depending on who the supplier is.

We like that model. We'd much rather have a small incremental improvement every three or four months than have this huge disruptive step function upgrade. Really, it typically is more like a reinstallation that occurs for large monolithic installed applications every two or three years. You need to have your integrations keep up, and that's an important consideration.

Gardner: So it's interesting, Stan. You have a user like Fairchild, using these tools, building these integrations, moving more towards a multiparty ecosystem process-oriented benefit, but the responsibility on those integrations is with you.

It seems as if you're really giving an awful lot here. How can you do that with a strong sense of confidence? Isn't there a risk that if these integrations start breaking that you are in the catbird seat?

Levels of the game

Swete: Yeah, well, there are levels of the game for how you can leverage the support you get out of the core application that we keep moving forward. One level of the game is for us that's very important in the integrations we build and sell are ones that can just share the application definitions. So, we support those across all the updates and verify that the logic of those is going to work.

For the integrations tools, we can put smarts into the tools that share how the applications are constructed in that. It gives our customers a leg-up that they can start with these components. Then they can create integrations that are a little bit more impervious to being broken by changes in the applications, because they're sharing metadata back into the applications.

Lots of integrations are built on our application programming interface (API) and so we've got to be rigorous about versioning the API and having a contract to support back versions that gives us a certain amount of insurance. It's not like that with some of these opened in the tools that there couldn't be logic and coding errors that are put in and those are the ones that we would have to encounter together with our customers and we're not going to debug every single one of those.

So, for different levels of the game, more packaged, complete support, on up to the more open-ended integrations, you do what you can to try to make it so the integrations are a little bit more robust than what would have been built with a separate tool set.

Gardner: Paul, it sounds less like a buyer-seller relationship than a partnership. Do you view it that way?

Our experience to date is that companies like ours have more of a voice in the feature improvements of the application.



Lones: We do. Our experience to date, working with providers like Workday and some of the other SaaS providers that we are fortunate enough to do business with, is that companies like ours have more of a voice in the feature improvements of the application.

There tends to be, and certainly it's the case with Workday, a much more active community of clients, users, that are sharing information about everything from somewhat technical to very business process-oriented experiences that all of us have had. That's a very different experience.

In some ways, it's sort of ironic to me that we view it quite a bit more as a partnership. A lot of people perhaps think that it's a SaaS application and, if things don't work out, then when your contract is up, you just go find another SaaS provider.

It is true that there might be a little bit more flexibility, but what we’re finding so far in our experience, and it is early, is that the receptivity and the sense of making improvements together, I think it will actually stick longer than maybe some of the traditional software applications.

Gardner: And just to help our listeners understand the extent of your project with Workday, how many employees were involved? Tell us a little bit about your organization, Fairchild Semiconductor, and your global footprint.

Global base

Lones: Fairchild Semiconductor has roughly 10,000 employees worldwide. We're a semiconductor manufacturing company. We have manufacturing facilities in the United States and throughout Asia. Our customer base is global, our employee base is global. Over 70 percent of our business is in Asia and 70 percent of our employees are in Asia. Having the capability to provide a core HR platform like this to that broad a set of colleagues around the world is really exciting for us, and to be able to support our internal customers and the HR group.

Gardner: And have you brought all of those 10,000 employees up on Workday or has it been a staggered rollout? How has that worked?

Lones: We’re at the very end of our go-live process and we introduced this to our colleagues around the world on April 4.

Gardner: One thing that’s interesting is the degree of integration complexity when you’re dealing with multiple markets. So if you’ve brought all of these employees around the world up on this system -- different payroll, different benefits, different government, different cultures -- how is that issue something you can tackle, given that Workday’s integration was a service to you?

Now, we’re looking forward to doing some additional integrations with some of our local payroll systems.



Lones: Well, we had a lot of payroll integrations. I don’t think we would have gotten those all done in the time frame we did without having that capability that Stan mentioned. In fact, with our legacy system, we actually stopped doing payroll integrations, because they were too hard.

Now, we’re looking forward to doing some additional integrations with some of our local payroll systems to improve that connectivity between our system of record for HR and the payroll service providers that we didn’t build integrations to in the past.

Traditionally, we built integrations only for our large-sized locations. There are smaller-sized locations where we have sales offices, and the like and we typically didn’t build those integrations. We’re going to go back and look at doing that now.

Gardner: Well great. Stan, let's take a look to the future. Where can this go? It seems if this is a proving ground given the number of different integration points, a global organization like Fairchild. I know you’re pointing this at your ecosystem and your customers, but if IaaS works here, couldn’t it potentially work anywhere?

Swete: It could work anywhere but we’ve got a lot to do here. I think that when we look toward the future, there are just several different dimensions where we have to build this up. One is something that Paul has been mentioning -- just the value of the ecosystem and I think we've got a good start, but there is a lot of building we can do there.

That is, we can use the fact that this platform is out there and available and proven to attract more and more partners to it both development partners as well as application partners who can be the other endpoint in integrations that we can support.

So, building out packaged integrations for us to enhance the ecosystem is one aspect. Deepening what the tools are doing is going to be a never-ending task. We’re just starting to have ideas about how to share application’s functionality, and embed that inside the tools to make them more powerful integration tools. I very much look forward to continuing to enhance our toolset and that will benefit the integrations our customers and partners build.

The final aspect is the one you hit on, community. We have to encourage people to want to share these integrations. We didn’t need to do more to automatically support that because our partners are going to be generating these things, as our customers, and in the SaaS community, there is just this great notion about sharing the things you do. So, we see supporting that and we can ultimately see that even leading to selling some of the things you do. All of those are potential features for this space.

Gardner: It seems to me a very extensible model.

Swete: Well, let's hope so. We think we’re just starting.

Gardner: Well great. You’ve been listening to a sponsored BriefingsDirect podcast discussion on how new forms of cloud-based integration are helping Fairchild Semiconductor build new relationships among and between extended enterprise business processes. They're doing that using the Workday Integration Cloud.

I’d like to thank our guests, Paul Lones, Senior Vice President for Information Technology at Fairchild Semiconductor. Thanks, Paul.

Lones: Thank you.

Gardner: And Stan Swete, Chief Technology Officer at Workday. Thanks, Stan.

Swete: Thank you, Dana.

Gardner: This is Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions. Thanks for listening and come back next time.

Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Download the transcript. Learn more. Sponsor: Workday.

Edited transcript of a BriefingsDirect podcast on new forms of cloud-based integration and its use in enterprise business processes. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2011. All rights reserved.

You may also be interested in:

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Just-in-Time Resourcing Provides Strategic and Productive Visibility into Professional Services Staffing Decisions

Transcript of a BriefingsDirect podcast on how bringing automation and new methodology advances resource utilization from an art to a science.

Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Download the transcript. Sponsor: Compuware.

For more information on resource utilization, read RTM's whitepaper "The ROI of Resource Utilization -- Measuring and Capturing the Real Business Value of Your People."

Learn more about Compuware Changepoint.

Dana Gardner: Hi, this is Dana Gardner, principal analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and you’re listening to BriefingsDirect.

Today, we present a sponsored podcast discussion on how technology suppliers can get the most from resource utilization and management in the global services economy.

The shifts in technology and business models now under way and, in many ways, accelerated by the recession are forcing technology vendors, in particular, to adopt more of a professional services revenue model across their business lines. Increasingly, sellers of IT are finding it harder to win large software and hardware capital purchases contracts, which traditionally followed three- to seven-year obsolescence and refresh cycles.

Buyers of technology moving to IT shared services and software-as-a-service (SaaS) models internally, and off of the capital outlays roller coaster, are increasingly moving to smoother and more predictable operating and charging models outside, beginning with long-term professional services and outsourcing engagements.

Both the buyer and seller of services therefore need to focus on the implementation, integration, and solutions level of value, placing a much larger and more complex burden on the services delivery personnel themselves, as well as those who managing the services.

We’re here to find out some new, best ways of managing and automating the intellectual resources that support the professional services lifecycle. We’ll see how recent research shows that more of a just-in-time (JIT) methodology is required to keep the skills in balance with myriad project requirements and obligations.

Taking charge of the process around professional services fulfillment ensures that the people are well-managed, protected from missteps amid their responsibilities, and better utilized at what they do best.

To learn more about resource utilization and management in the global services economy, please join me in welcoming our panel. We are here today with Lori Ellsworth, Vice President of Changepoint Solutions at Compuware, the sponsor of this podcast. Welcome, Lori.

Lori Ellsworth: Thank you, very much.

Gardner: We're also here with Mark Sloan, Chief Operating Officer of RTM Consulting. Welcome, Mark.

Mark Sloan: Thank you.

Gardner: Let me throw my opening question out to both of you. Why is it that resourcing is such a challenge in professional services organization? Why is this so hard?

Necessary to have

Ellsworth: Just tapping into the comments you made a moment ago, first of all, it's the increased importance of the professional services organization inside a technology company to meet their financial obligations and to promote customer success. The change and the focus on professional services is moving from something that was nice to have to something that is necessary to have to be successful.

Now, organizations have to understand how to get a handle on the people they have working for them, how best utilize them, and how to make sure that your employees, those assets, are challenged and happy, but that you are delivering that service to provide value to your customers.

Gardner: Lori, are we seeing this extend beyond a small portion of companies? Are we seeing this extend to other business lines? Is that where the expansion is coming?

Ellsworth: The first part of the expansion is coming just because of the importance of professional services to technology companies. Software companies are a great example. Historically, companies in that sector may have done mostly product business and less service.

The stakes are higher, in terms of the discipline and the approach that we need to take to manage that part of the business.



To your comments that you made earlier about the change that’s going on in the market and the changes in the economy, services are now necessary to deliver success, and the services business is a very healthy part of the software business and is contributing significantly to the bottom-line.

So, the stakes are higher, in terms of the discipline and the approach that we need to take to manage that part of the business.

Gardner: For those organizations that have been focused on product management, finding the right balance mix in devoting the proper resources to the management of those professional services providers, that’s quite a different ballgame.

Ellsworth: It is. It’s dealing with people rather than product, many different types of attributes that have to be managed, and information you need to understand. Some of the points that RTM deals with every day. You have different issues on the table, when you're dealing with people, and those have to be effectively managed as part of the process.

Gardner: Let’s go to Mark Sloan at RTM. First, tell us a little bit about RTM and what you do, and then let’s hear a bit about this need to shift how companies are relating their business models towards more of a professional services’ portion of the mix.

Sloan: Thank you. RTM Consulting is focused on working with consulting, professional services, and shared services organizations to drive operational improvements throughout the organization.

One of our core areas of focus is in this area of resource management is how can you get the right person in the right place at the right time and drive up utilization, but at the same time, make sure that you're delivering value to your end customers and leaving them satisfied and coming back for more.

Accelerated rate of change

In terms of the shift, I’d agree with Lori’s comments. The economy over the last couple of years has only accelerated the rate and pace of change here. When a software company shows up with its professional services arm, the client is expecting that each and every one of the people who show up is an expert in the software, the technology, and the implementation process. The days of people learning on the job and coming up to speed are long gone.

The challenge today is for companies to get visibility into the type of work that’s coming down the pike, so that they can proactively train their internal resources and be prepared for that work, so that when they do show up, they are the experts.

Gardner: Mark, also tell me about some of the research you’ve done recently, and I'm particularly interested in this notion of JIT. I know that we worked with that 15-20 years ago in the manufacturing field. It's also spread into logistics, transportation, and the supply chain, so it’s been something that’s been permeating across business, but how does it relate to professional services?

In some organizations they are operating at zero idle resource capacity. I know all the CFOs out there would truly appreciate that.



Sloan: In looking into resource management in some of the research we’ve done, we’ve actually taken the principles of JIT manufacturing and directed them to the professional services organization.

Just as 30 years ago, any manufacturing company had big inventories of supplies, finished products, sitting in their warehouse. Ten or 15 years ago, the big services organizations were able to have excess resources on the bench, in the office, waiting for that next project to arrive.

In the services business, these margins have contracted and customers have gotten more savvy in their purchasing. The ability to have a bank and have surplus resources is diminished significantly. In some organizations they are operating at zero idle resource capacity. I know all the CFOs out there would truly appreciate that.

What we’ve done is taken those same principles -- forecasting what the future scenarios look like, what the demands look like, and then translating that back into how many resources you are going to need, the types of resources, the skills those resources need to have. You can, at that right moment, bring on a new employee, go to a third-party contractor to fulfill that demand, or give yourself enough advanced notice to cross-train your existing resources on new technologies, new products, so that they can work across your portfolio and not just focus on one particular area.

Gardner: Before we go into Mark's research and some of the major findings, it sounds as if managing and getting utilization benefits from professional services has moved and is required to now move from being an art to a science. Lori, from your vantage point there at Compuware, is that a good way to look at it?

Ellsworth: That’s a fair statement, and Mark’s comment about it needing to become proactive is really the important thing, in that it can no longer just be people scrambling around the office, trying to find out who is in the office, and plug someone into a slot on an engagement, because you won’t deliver the value.

There needs to be more discipline, more information, and a better process for decision-making and forward planning, so that the organization can scale and scale in a financially successful way, if I can use that expression.

Gardner: Mark, what have been some of the critical success factors that for those folks that have made the transition and moved from the art to more of a scientific, proactive, data-driven approach? What are some of the success factors that they’re finding?

Key things

Sloan: There are two or three key things. First and foremost is the change management aspect. As Lori said, managers historically are used to walking around the office or having on their whiteboard their list of employees in their department available and where they are. Then, late at night, they can think about where they go next.

In a sense, they have to rely on the technology that’s out there to give them visibility not just into their people, but to give them the visibility to the entire organization, so that they're thinking about optimizing what the company does and what the professional services organization does for the end client, and not just how do I optimize what I do with my 5, 10, 15 people and my department.

So, getting managers focused on that is one big thing, but the second critical success factor is laying out some forecast of the future scenarios. What is in the pipeline? What revenue do we think we are going to get? What's the timing in that revenue? And then, translating that back into what are the resource requirements of the different stages of those projects?

By creating that future visibility, you can compare that to resources that you do have in the overall organization -- what gaps there might be in terms of skill sets or just in raw quantity? Then, you will lay out a recruiting plan to get people, a training plan to cross-train people, or contracting plans to source from third-party vendors.

Gardner: Lori, when you saw the research from RTM Consulting and saw some critical success factors, what was top of mind for you? What jumped out?

You need to start with the fundamental. You need to understand your people and their skills and get that view of your business.



Ellsworth: Well, there are four critical success factors, but also the building-block approach. In other words, you need to start with the fundamental. You need to understand your people and their skills and get that view of your business. Then, you can start to add levels of maturity, look at forecasting, look at different models for resource allocation, and bring in project management.

The success factors were very sound in terms of the building-block approach, and how you mature the organization through them. You don’t just go from 0 to 60, turn everything on, and think that your organization is going to be performing very well.

Gardner: What is the change point it's bringing to the table in order to help make these transitions automate, control, develop this as a methodology?

Ellsworth: It's both the automation and the best practices, as organizations start to put the buildings blocks in place and adopt the disciplines and build the processes that work in their business. You can't scale that.

You can make that work within a small team or across a couple of small teams, but if you need to scale that to your entire services organization, including management, and then broaden the picture to other critical stakeholders in the company that need visibility, perhaps sales or others in the organization, you can't scale and reinforce that discipline without automation.

The two really have to go together. One won’t be successful without the other in a large professional services organization. Automation brings the scale factor.

Gardner: And doesn’t the automation also allow for governance, for allowing for the scale that the automation entails, but also to keep it under control?

Critical success factors

Ellsworth: It certainly brings the governance angle. It also brings the ability to measure, and measurement and monitoring is something that Mark highlights as critical success factors. Again, you’ve got a large group of people with a lot of activity going on. There's lots of data, but you have to roll that up to the management level to make it valuable to help drive decisions in the business.

Gardner: For those of our listeners who might not be that familiar with Changepoint, perhaps you can give us a quick encapsulation of its history -- how it got to where it is and what it does?

Ellsworth: The Changepoint solution has been active and working with customers in their professional services organization for many years, going back to the late 1990’s. Our focus has been on driving that view as a professional services organization, but importantly driving that view inside the context of the broader company.

It starts with those building blocks around who are your resources, what are their capabilities, and where are they being utilized. It brings you to the next level of maturity in terms of being able to look at forecasts and do some demand and capacity planning. And then it goes even further from a resource perspective to that professional development side that Mark just talked about. Let's look at the gaps in the next six to nine months. Where can we identify resources and put them on a development plan to fill those gaps?

We're managing the day-to-day business of a professional services organization and going beyond that to deal with project management, engagement management, and right through to billing for a professional services organization and for technology companies that also have a strong product side of a business.

The paybacks can be, and are, significant. First and foremost, is really speed to revenue and cash flow.



We also deliver a project portfolio management capability to allow them to manage products and manage delivery of those product applications.

Gardner: Back to you, Mark Sloan. For those organizations that do this well, making that transition focusing on professional services, getting the right mix, understanding where their resources are, where they are needed, and how to manage those personnel to make them the most productive, what are the paybacks? What do you get from doing this right?

Sloan: The paybacks can be, and are, significant. First and foremost, is really speed to revenue and cash flow. Lori mentioned that doing this in a large services organization is critical and an enabling technology is required to make that happen.

I’d argue the same for small professional services organizations. Having the information that tools like Changepoint can put at your fingertips, you can quickly identify people in your organization that have the right skills, that off the top of your head you might not think of, and staff projects quickly with the appropriate resources, ultimately enabling you to get that revenue.

Billable utilization

Secondly, you start to see a significant lift in overall billable utilization. This is for the professional services organization. Again, by getting better visibility into the skills that different resources have, you realize you have many more people in the organization that can do work than you think of.

For more information on resource utilization, read RTM's whitepaper "The ROI of Resource Utilization -- Measuring and Capturing the Real Business Value of Your People."

Learn more about Compuware Changepoint.

We've worked with a number of organizations where they had a small group of people who are highly utilized -- 80 to 120 percent --because those are the people that the practice leads, the staffing managers, just know intuitively can get the work done. What they don’t realize is that there is a whole trail of people behind that have skills and who maybe just haven’t been on a project yet to deploy those. Increased billable utilization is another.

Other research points to the fact that companies who do this development of staff and get projects started on time are significantly more likely to finish their projects on budget and on time and drive significantly positive customer satisfaction.

Companies that aren’t able to do this -- take an extra five, 10, or 15 days to fill some of the slots on a project -- tend to go over-budget, don’t get it done on time, and, as a result, have poor customer satisfaction. If you think about it, it's back to that mantra, "Do it right the first time." This process helps you do that.

Ellsworth: If I can just add one comment there. Mark’s point is really important in terms of your ability to staff the project at the right time. If you think about technology companies who are out there competing, it's no longer a world where you are competing solely on the basis of the features and functions available in your product.

We’ve found, as we've gone back and studied organizations that have adopted JIT resourcing, that their attrition levels actually decrease.



There is just so much more that your more educated customer is evaluating. In my mind, your services capability that you bring to the table is a clear differentiator for you. Not only the services you have, but your ability to deliver them effectively and in a timely fashion. It's a necessary capability to allow you to compete effectively today.

Gardner: I have to imagine that buy in from the actual practitioners is important. Is there something about this more organized and managed approach, using these tools, that benefits the consultant. Perhaps it reduces the lack of clarity of where they will be next week, or the sense of being yanked around like a yo-yo. Mark, anything anecdotal out there?

Sloan: Absolutely. We’ve found, as we've gone back and studied organizations that have adopted JIT resourcing, that their attrition levels actually decrease. We were curious as to why this happened. What we found when we talked with various practitioners is that people were able to more closely align the work they wanted to do with the work that was out there.

So, just as forecasting your revenue and the resources you are going to need helps services organization, your services employees can now get involved and identify the types of work they want to do. For some of your folks that will be, "I want to go deeper and become the subject matter expert in this area." For others, it will be, "I want to broaden my horizons and get involved with different roles."

It's not that each individual can dictate exactly where they're going to go on every project, but you give them more insight and more control. They become a better part of the process. They feel empowered and enabled and they don’t feel like they are just a body that you are moving from project to project to project. They feel like they can really guide their career much more closely.

Gardner: Lori, this is a competitive landscape. Highly skilled workers are often in demand. So, this plays into the advantage across the board I expect.

What's in it for me?

Ellsworth: It does. I want to add a comment to what Mark just said. I definitely think that you need to think about what's in it for the practitioner. What you find when you are making the change is that you're adding discipline, automation, and maybe some requirements for your practitioners to interact with that automation. You have to think about the "what's in it for me" factor.

As you're adding discipline and increasing maturity, there is participation from the practitioner, if you can position the value to them in terms of increased opportunity or an ability for them to better manage their schedule and not be burnt out. They have access to different opportunities. It's very valuable and can help them actively participate in moving the business forward and not kind of fight against it.

Gardner: This certainly sounds very clear and compelling in theory. Do we have any actual examples where we can look at what's happened? Do we have a use case scenario, something that will give us something a bit more tangible to draw some conclusions from?

Sloan: There are some very specific and real-world examples that companies that we’ve worked with that have adopted JIT Resourcing. I've generally seen a five- to 10-percentage point improvement on their billable utilization.

It's through being able to forecast the work that's coming. They can better align both their employees and their third-party contractors. If work is starting to decline for a quarter, they can reduce their reliance on contractors, get their employees billable, and demonstrate to their employees that there is long-term job security in the organization. That helps them avoid having idle resources.

Customers . . . on a year-over-year basis . . . are able to reduce that non-productive time and therefore the cost of that non-productive time by 16 percent.



A client that we just finished working with had to go back before their investment board. They had achieved a 6.5- to 7-times return on investment (ROI) by deploying JIT Resourcing through improved utilization.

These are all companies that are leveraging technology to support that process to get them to visibility. But, they are really taking on that process change, as Lori alluded to earlier. They're not just deploying the technology and putting it out there. They're going through an effective and constructive change-management process to change the way people are using the available information and drive real positive returns.

Gardner: Lori, some anecdotes form the field. What are companies experiencing when they start to use these things?

Ellsworth: Many of the customers that I am talking to, after they have focused on both the process and discipline side as well as the automation side, will often articulate the benefit they are seeing in terms of something Mark just mentioned, and that is the improved turnaround time or the reduction in non-productive time.

Customers of mine, in Europe for example, are quoting that on a year-over-year basis, they are able to reduce that non-productive time -- and therefore the cost of that non-productive time -- by 16 percent.

Other customers will articulate the value of this entire solution in terms of revenue increase, the focus of getting control over their resources, who they have and how they can most effectively deploy them. Another customer of mine in Europe talks about a 30 percent increase in revenue, linked directly to implementing some of these practices in getting that control over their resources.

Strategic activities

Sloan: We have worked with other services organizations that are designed to support the product. They aren't necessarily managed as a P&L, but the goal is to break-even. They’ve also deployed these processes, plus the goal of increasing bottom line, but were freeing up time for their resources to get involved with more strategic activities.

They've worked with their third-party systems integrators (SIs). They also do work with their product, and it’s enabled them to better train those organizations, so that they can go out and deploy the software more broadly as well. So, it can drive both hard financial benefits, but also additional strategic benefits as well.

Gardner: Mark, are you seeing other verticals or industries or types of organization that can use this? We've been focusing on IT suppliers today, but where does this also go? Is there a role for this in the creative types of professional services, service report, user help desk, that sort of thing?

Sloan: Absolutely. We've spent a good part of the conversation talking about the professional services organizations and driving up billable utilization. The same lessons apply to shared services organizations, internal captive large IT departments managing multiple projects per year to deploy technology.

They can leverage the technology that Changepoint offers to keep track of the people, where they are deployed, what skills they have, what new projects are coming in, and achieve a similar increase in productive utilization of those resources. But to your point, in terms of creative organizations, this would apply to any organization that is focused on moving people with particular skill sets to a unique project.

When we architect a solution for clients, it’s a unique solution taking into account the various constraints and the environment of that client.



That includes engineering services organizations, creative agencies that are moving talent from one project to the next -- anyone who relies on definite skills and knowledge that aren’t just easily interchangeable. This helps forecast where you can get the biggest bang for the buck with those people.

Gardner: Well, it sounds like something to look into. How do you get started? Where do you go to find more information? In addition to getting more information, what’s a typical approach to putting this into actual use?

Sloan: There are a couple of things. The white paper that we published with Changepoint can be accessed off www.compuware.com under Changepoint.

In terms of getting started, when we typically work with clients, we come in and do a quick assess and architect phase where we’ll take a look at how resource management is being done today, compare that to the best practices that we’ve defined for JIT Resourcing, and identify areas where you are strong and areas where there is an opportunity for change and improvement. When we architect a solution for clients, it’s a unique solution taking into account the various constraints and the environment of that client.

JIT Resourcing is a defined approach. We have recognized that there are unique aspects to every business, and can tailor the solution to fit there.

Gardner: Lori, from the perspective of Changepoint, how do you see folks often getting started with this?

Discipline and maturity

Ellsworth: Our approach is very much consistent with what Mark has talked about. Mark and his organization, for example, might be in up front, doing some of that assessment in laying out a roadmap for pure resource management discipline and maturity.

When we participate with customers from an automation perspective, we obviously want to take the same approach. We don’t want to just drop something in there and turn it on. It has to be configured to support their level of maturity. It has to be able to easily grow with them as they expand their capabilities and some of the things they want to do in terms of the resource management discipline.

It’s very much about understanding their level of maturity, the goal or the vision they are driving to, and then the appropriate steps and milestones to get there. That’s important to factor into some of the concepts we’ve talked about like change management within the organization, ensuring adoption of the discipline and the solutions, so that you're getting the return you are looking for and so on.

Gardner: We're just about out of time, but I want to wrap up with a look into the future. It seems to me what we are hearing from the industry around cloud computing has a bearing on more services, more choices for the location of technology, more types of supply chain and ecosystem activities around solutions coming together. It seems that also offers an opportunity for the need for the need for management and automation and bringing people, process, and technology together.

First to you, Mark Sloan. The trends that you see pushing us into the everything-as-a-service era, how does that relate to some of our discussion and the need for these types of tools and methods?

Those processes were developed to deal with on-demand needs for products, because we now are in this era of on-demand needs and services.



Sloan: It’s really only going to accelerate the need to be prepared for on-demand work. You can go back to JIT manufacturing. Those processes were developed to deal with on-demand needs for products, because we now are in this era of on-demand needs and services.

You're going to need to be prepared with the right person at the right place at the right time. By deploying these processes now, you can start to learn the continuous improvement that’s needed, but be enabled as more and more of your clients go to SaaS, but you’ve got to have to deploy people with the moment’s notice.

You're going to get much better at predicting and forecasting what your future needs are, enabling you to align your resources and capabilities accordingly. You want to achieve the benefits we talked about -- speed to revenue, speed to cash-flow, and zero idle resources.

Gardner: Lori, last word to you. Is there anything more to offer in terms of how the future will create more demand through this?

Ellsworth: I would certainly echo what Mark was just talking about in terms of the types of service or the portfolio that companies are going to need to step up to the more traditional capabilities, and then shorter duration, more JIT-type services and different methods for delivery of those services.

It's the need, as it comes back to resourcing, to draw on the broader organization, something that Mark touched on earlier. But, as we're looking at being flexible in the types of services and how we deliver them, it’s more likely that we need to draw on not only our professional services organization, but maybe forward in the cycle to support and backward in the cycle to product development or technical resources.

So, a broader pool of resources comes there to help you respond to customers which just increases the need to understand who those resources are and what they can bring to the table to support these services.

Gardner: We’ve been learning about getting the most from resource utilization and management across global services industries and the economy, particularly with an emphasis on the technology sector, but it certainly sounds like this has applicability beyond that and the more aspects of each company maybe impacted as well.

I want to thank our guests. We've been joined by Lori Ellsworth, Vice President of Changepoint Solutions at Compuware, the sponsor of this podcast. And, we've been joined also by Mark Sloan, Chief Operating Officer at RTM Consulting. Thanks to you both.

Ellsworth: Thank you.

Sloan: Thank you.

Gardner: This is Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions. You’ve been listening to BriefingsDirect. Thanks, and come back next time.

For more information on resource utilization, read RTM's whitepaper "The ROI of Resource Utilization -- Measuring and Capturing the Real Business Value of Your People."

Learn more about Compuware Changepoint.

Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Download the transcript. Sponsor: Compuware.

Transcript of a BriefingsDirect podcast on how bringing automation and new methodology advances resource utilization from an art to a science. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2010. All rights reserved.

You may also be interested in: