find us on facebook follow us on twitter join us on linked in

Best fit means less customizations, easier configuration and higher likelihood of user acceptance and project success. To identify best fit HR Cloud Solutions' automated product:

Contains formulae that applies the user group weighting to product capability at several levels of detail, depending on user preference.

At the broadest level (Level ONE) the result only eliminates products that do not supply critical components. The comparison is not particularly useful because insufficient detail is compared to differentiate products. Most ERP products will give a 100% fit.

At the process level (Level TWO) the focus shifts to specialty products as a gap solution. For example, payroll for products that have all of the HR components but do not offer a payroll component for each country.

The only true comparison is the data level (Level THREE). HR Cloud Solutions applies a factor to adjust the weighted scores from the higher levels to produce a more accurate comparison and a better understanding of the additional cost to implement.

HR Cloud Solutions provide their client community with a supporting ecosystem that includes a Wiki with copy and paste formulas (reusable code) for developers and a commercial component registry for component assembly solutions.

Service Objective

The objective is to determine which HCM products in the marketplace best fit the client's HCM requirements. Products can be compared at Level ONE, TWO or THREE - depending on what level of precision matching is required.

Process

The requirements input (collected via a portal) by clients is compared to the HCM product capability database to determine the level of functional fit. The process involves calculating the percentage fit of items in relation to the specified weighting from levels ONE to THREE.

Process Example

The screen shots in this section illustrate the process to compare products, produce a total, sort into best fit order and identify the functional gap.

Best Fit at Level One - Best fit matching is performed on the 1,700+ products in the database

The initial best fit matching compares capability details of over 1,700 products from around the world. Information in the database may come from sources such as vendors,business partners, individual experience with the products or information available through marketing material - including the company's web site.

 

 
Best Fit at Level Two - Applies a factor to reduce the Level TWo score

Some clients prefer to input requirements to Level TWO only and compare products in the marketplace.

The advantages of going to Level TWO only are:

It takes less time to define requirements
The client may have a product in mind and this exercise may confirm functional fit
The client may wish to include specialty products in a multi-product solution and integrate several products with their chosen system of record.

The disadvantages of going to Level TWO only are:

Product information has been generalized in some instances and further investigation for proof of claims is necessary.
The exact extent of the functional gap will not be known until after purchase and possibly not until the configuration phase.
Vendor customisation will probably be necessary unless one of the "open source" products is chosen

The real cost of the products being compared cannot be accurately estimated without a detailed functional gap analysis

In the diagram above the score of 79% credits the supplier with having all of the components (reports, transactions and data) that are available in the requirements criteria. That score becomes the focus of Level Three matching and when a factor is applied a score of 51.16% emerges. That means the cost of addressing the functional gap would be greatly under-estimated relying on the Level Two score.

Best Fit at Level Three - Applies a factor to reduce the Level Two score

As part of the Best Fit process at Level Two suppliers are usually credited with having all of the data that makes up a Level TWO process component. Once the analysis process goes down to Level THREE to determine what data is available in a supplier's product a new picture emerges. If not all data is provided and the client requires those items then customisation costs are incurred.

A FACTOR representing the percentage of data provided needs to be applied to the Level TWO score to achieve a clearer picture. The purpose of this level of comparison is to accurately asses customisation costs and to provide a better comparison between products.

Gap g

 
The Bottom Line - Applying the Factor to Components for a More Realistic Comparison

The bottom line is a more accurate comparison of products is possible by going down to Level THREE (data level) and applying a factor to each products Level TWO score.

In the example shown opposite the original score for the product under scrutiny was 79%. After checking data availability and recalculating the score a new figure of 51.16% was identified. The value in this type of analysis is it eliminates the distortion between products that supply data for the client's nice to have items, and are rewarded the same as the suppliers who deliver the must have items. The products that deliver the mandatory data requirements will find their way to the top.

Gap e