The Human Resources
Benchmarking Network
An HR Metrics (and)
Benchmarking Tool for
Municipalities
Colin Dawes
OMHRA Spring Workshop
Guelph, April 2011
Presentation Agenda





Introductions/Agenda
Benchmarking Concepts
HR Metrics for Municipalities
The Human Resources Benchmarking Network
The Municipal Group in the HRBN Survey
•
HR Trends in Municipal Government 1998 and 2010
Key Results from the 2010 HRBN Survey Report

Applications for HR Metrics
•
• Training, Technology and the HR Department
• Measurement Advice from the HRBN
My Second Agenda
1. Remind you about a few things
you already know.
2. Measurement and benchmarking
concepts and tools you can use to
help your organization be more
successful – sometimes despite
itself.
Benchmarking
Concepts
What is
Benchmarking?
“Benchmarking is a continuous, systematic
tool for measuring and improving the
processes, products and services of an
organization by comparing them to the very
best “like” processes, products and services
wherever they may be found.”
The Council for Continuous Improvement
HR Metrics for
Municipalities
My Selection Criteria
Frequently completed (in the HRBN
experience)
 Simple to understand
 Avoid duplication
 Significant Impact – either on HR or
the Organization

My TOP TEN Indicator
Selections (HRBN Survey)
1.
External Hire Rate: PFT and Reg. PPT (can
be compared to Turnover indicators)
2.
3.
4.
5.
Average Time to Fill a Position With an
External Hire
Number of Non-Management Employees
Per Management Employee
Extended Health Care Claims Expense Per
Participating Employee
Paid Sick Hours Per Eligible Employee
My TOP TEN Indicator
Selections (HRBN Survey)
* “Pre-External Intervention” Grievance
Rate
7. Workers Compensation Lost Work Hours
Rate
8. Modified Work Accommodations Rate
9. HR Technology Indicator
10. Employees Per HR FTE
6.
The Human
Resources
Benchmarking
Network
What is the HRBN?
Cross-Canada network of HR
functions primarily from Health
Care, Municipal Government and
Not-for-Profit employers who
complete the HRBN Survey
 Open to all sectors
 Current representation in six (6)
provinces

The Annual Benchmarking
Survey






Presently fifty-five (55) indicators
Balance of “Human Asset” and “Human
Resources” indicators
Full spectrum of HR function represented
More In-depth quantitative analysis possible
through demographic breakdowns
Electronic Format (Multi-Sheet Excel File)
Content determined by input from Network
members
Sample Survey Indicators
External Hire
Rate
Average
Time to Fill
Position
With
External Hire
Salary to
Operating
Expense
Ratio
Management to
Staff Ratio
Paid Sick
Hours Per
Eligible
Employee
Training and
Dev’t
Expense
Indicator
Extended
Health
Benefit
Claims
Expense
Indicator
HR “Admin”
Expense to
Operating
Expense
EAP
Utilization
Rate
WCB Lost
Time Incident
Rate
“Final Step”
Grievance
Resolution
Rate
HR “Legal
Costs” Per
Employee
Turnover
Rate
HR “FTE”
Indicator
“Modified
Work”
Accommodation Rate
HR
Technology
Indicator
HR Training
Courses
Attendance
Indicator
Internal
Transfers to
Total Hires
Ratio
“Final
Step”
Grievance
Rate
Benefits
Expenses to
Compensation
Expense
Sample Indicator Definition
The Report of the Annual
Benchmarking Survey





Benchmark statistical data for each indicator
(average, percentile, etc.)
Note of special statistical relationships if
indicated
Statistics breakdowns by Province/Sector where
justified by sample size
Summary table of individual data submissions for
the indicator
Contact names for Network Survey participants
The Report of the Annual
Benchmarking Survey
Sample Data Table: Paid Sick Hours Per
Eligible Employee, HRBN Report
The Municipal
Group in the
HRBN Survey
Human Resources
Trends in Municipal
Government: 1998
to 2010
Trend Setters: Municipal Participants
in the 1998 HRBN Survey








City of Oshawa
City of Toronto
Region of Durham
Region of Hamilton-Wentworth
Region of Niagara
Region of Ottawa-Carleton
Region of Sudbury
Region of Waterloo
Some Things Change …
Indicator
1998
Survey
2011
Survey
Change
External Hire
Rate
9.9%
16.2%
Substantial increase (63.4%) in
hiring rates since the late 90s.
Dental Expense
Per Participating
Employee
$683
$1,112
A significant increase (63%).
Staff Per
Management
Ratio
19.3
24.8
Not good news for “span of
control”.
$50.77
$77.43
No surprise here, with the
increasingly complex legal
environment.
$272
$446
64% increase. Reflects
increased competition and
prices, online solutions.
HR Legal Costs
Per Employee
Employment
Advertising
Expense Per
Hire
Some Things Change … A LOT.
Indicator
1998
Survey
2011
Survey
Change
Extended
Heath Care
Expense Per
Participating
Employee
$854
$2,160
Extended Health care claims –
153% increase in costs (primarily
drug-related, increased use of
para-medicals, etc.)
EAP Utilization
Rate
7.2%
15.4%
EAP usage becoming more
common (115% increase).
HR Technology
Indicator
(showing Ratio
0.375
0.764
Technology has advanced a
great deal (107% increase).
of points scored
to possible
points)
And Some Things Change Less.
Indicator
1998
Survey
2011
Survey
Change
“All Grievances”
Rate
5.4%
5.3%
Surprisingly, unions appear to
have been upset with employers
on a consistent basis for years.
WSIB Incidents/
Lost Hours
3.1%/
3.9 hours
4.3%/
3.8 hours
Less time lost – but more
incidents? Lost hours result
makes more sense
…(Accommodations up slightly
6.6%!)
Employees/HR
“FTE”
102
100.3
Ontario figures generally
unchanged.
Sick Pay
Expense
Indicator
3.3%
3.4%
This result, and the next,
suggest that we may have
reached a “plateau” of sorts.
Paid Sick Hours
Per Eligible
Employee
66.5
69.2
As noted in “Sick Pay Expense”.
Survey Demographics –
2010 Survey


Municipal group represents 28% of the survey
participants (22 in all) and 105,000 employees
Many smaller municipalities plus most members
of the Regional and Single Tier Municipalities
(RSTM) Group





RSTM – 12
Other Cities – 6
Towns – 2
Counties - 2
RSTM - Special Indicator Set - 2004 (16 indicators
in all)
Ontario Municipal CAO’s Benchmarking
Initiative (OMBI) and the HRBN



HR Group asked to identify HR indicators for OMBI
Decision to align indicators to the HRBN Survey
(avoid duplication)
Four (4) indicators identified:
o #T4s per HR staff (Service Level)
o HR administration expense per $1000 of municipal
operating expenditure (Service Level)
o HR services cost per T4 supported (Efficiency)
o Turnover Rate (Customer Service)
Metrics Challenges in Municipal
HR Measurement



Complexity/differences in the how and
“who” provides HR services to different
employee groups
Definition of employees …
Specific Indicator Challenges
o T4 vs. active employee counts
o What counts as “HR”
o Expenses/internal charges
Key Results from the
2010 HRBN Report
HRBN #5 – Average Time to Fill a Position
Formula: Total, for all External Hires, (Difference Between the “Date the Offer
to the New External Hire is Made” and the “Date the Approval to Recruit is
Received in HR”, One Year period
Statistic
Sample Size
Survey
Health Care
Municipal
36
25
10
45.4
16.4
44.6
15.5
47.7
20.8
25th Percentile
23.9
24.4
24.
50th Percentile
44.5
45
48.4
75th Percentile
65.4
65.8
58.8
90th Percentile
77.6
72.9
81.7
Average
10th Percentile
NOTE: Permanent, Full-time and Regular Permanent, Part-time Positions take longer
to fill - 59 days for the full survey (59 days for the municipal group as well)
HRBN #7 – Turnover Rate
Employee-count, One Year period
Statistic
Sample Size
Survey
Formula: # Separations / # Average
Health Care
Municipal
66
48
17
11.2%
10.6%
12.4%
10th Percentile
6.9%
7.2%
5.7%
25th Percentile
8.5%
8.8%
7.8%
50th Percentile
11%
10.4%
11.5%
75th Percentile
13.1%
12.5%
15.1%
90th Percentile
15.7%
13.9%
21.2%
Average
HRBN #4A(1) – Non-Management Employees Per
Management Employee
Formula: # “Non-Management Employee-count” / # “Management” Employeecount, End of Survey Time Period, One Year period
Statistic
Sample Size
Survey
Health Care
Municipal
73
55
17
Average
27.6
28.9
24.8
10th Percentile
11.9
16.9
7.8
25th Percentile
19.6
22.0
11.8
50th Percentile
25.7
26.9
23.7
75th Percentile
31.8
32.0
300
90th Percentile
42.0
41.9
39.4
HRBN #15 (A & B) –
EAP Indicators (Municipal Sector)
Formulas:
(A) EAP Cases / Average Eligible Employee-Count (B) EAP Expense / #
Employees Eligible to Use the EAP, One Year period
Statistic
Sample Size
(A) EAP
Utilization Rate
(B) EAP Expense
Per Eligible
Employee
14
16
Average
15.4%
$47.10
10th Percentile
7.8%
$26.12
25th Percentile
12.2%
$29.34
50th Percentile
15.6%
$46.90
75th Percentile
17.9%
$53.95
90th Percentile
22.8%
$75.50
HRBN #25 – HR Administration Expense
Indicator (Municipal Group)
Formula: $ HR Administration Expense / $ Operating Expense , One Year period
Statistic
Sample Size
Survey
15
Average
0.6%
10th Percentile
0.4%
25th Percentile
0.5%
50th Percentile
0.6%
75th Percentile
0.6%
90th Percentile
1%
HRBN # 1 and #7: Comparison External Hire Rate and Turnover Rates,
Municipal Group, 2007-2010
18
16
14
12
External Hire
Rate
Turnover Rate
10
8
6
4
2
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
HRBN #13: Paid Sick Hours Per Eligible
Employee, Health Care and Municipal
Groups, 2007-2010
80
78
76
74
72
70
Health Care
Municipal
68
66
64
62
60
58
2007
2008
2009
2010
HRBN #9 and #10: Dental Claims and
Extended Health Expense Per
Employee, Municipal Group, 2007-2010
$2,500
$2,000
EH claims
expense per
employee
Dental claims
expense per
employee
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$0
2007
2008
2009
2010
HRBN #23: Percentage of HR
Departments Utilizing Technology, By
Technology Type, 2007-2010
100
90
80
70
60
E-Mail
Internet
HR Intranet
HRIS
50
40
30
20
10
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
HRBN #14(C) – Breakdown of Points in
Time at Which Grievances were Resolved
or Withdrawn in Survey Reporting Period,
2010 (Municipal Group)
8%
19%
46%
28%
Prior to "Final Step"
Meeting
At "Final Step"
Meeting
Through Third Party
Intervention
At Arbitration
Applications for
HR Metrics
Applications for HR Metrics









Reporting purposes
Support HR quality goals
Prove/disprove existence of opportunities
Demonstrate success/failure of initiatives
Illustrate cause/effect relationships
Impacting adversarial negotiations or settlement
opportunities
Create business cases and obtain resources
Improve measurement systems
Positive reinforcement
HRBN #22 – HR Training Course Attendance
(Municipal Group)
Formula: # Training Course Attendance (Per Category) / # Average
Employee-count (or New External Hires in case of Orientation), One
Year period
Statistic
Sample Size
Workplace
Competency
Orientation
(of external Hires)
Health and
Safety Training
16
14
17
Average
81.1%
51.9%
62.8%
25th Percentile
28.3%
16.0%
16.0%
50th Percentile
39.0%
40.5%
26.0%
75th Percentile
110.5%
96.0%
43.0%
90th Percentile
154.5%
107.2%
170.0%
HRBN #23: Percentage of HR
Departments Utilizing Technology,
Municipal Group, By Technology Type,
1998 to 2010
100
E-Mail
90
80
Internet
70
Electronic
Forms
HRIS
60
50
40
HR Intranet
30
Manager
Access HRIS
Employee
Access HRIS
20
10
0
1998
2010
HRBN #24 - # Employees Per HR “FTE”
Formula: # Average Employee-count / # HR “FTE”-count, End of Survey
Time Period, One Year period
Statistic
Sample Size
Survey
Health Care
Municipal
76
53
22
132.1
146.8
100.3
10th Percentile
74.6
78.2
65.9
25th Percentile
91.0
95.1
90.6
50th Percentile
114.8
124.9
104.9
75th Percentile
146.8
185.2
118.9
90th Percentile
220.9
249.9
129.3
Average
HRBN #24(B) – HR FTE Detail –
Functional Breakdown (Municipal
Group) 1998 and 2010
Recruitment
Benefits
HRIS
T&D
Workers Comp/H&S
Compensation
Employee Records
Emp/Labour Relations
Org. Development
Other
2010
1998
0%
50%
100%
Trends –Benefits and HRIS, and new HR functions
(quality, metrics, etc.), and to a lesser extent, WC/H&S
and Recruitment, receive more staff resources now, vs.
in 1998.
HRBN #24(C) –HR FTE Detail –
Organization Level Breakdown
(Municipal Group) 1998 and 2010
Executive
2010
Manager
Professional/Super
visory
Administrative
Support
1998
0%
50%
100%
Trends – There has been a clear trend toward a higher
proportion of supervisors, at the expense of both executives
and managers, and administrative/clerical positions.
HRBN #24(C) –HR FTE Detail – Model of
Service Provision Breakdown
(Municipal Group) 1998 and 2010
2010
Traditional
Designated Client
Group
Alternative
1998
0%
50%
100%
Trends – A change in HR service delivery is definitely indicated, from the
traditional (HR as a separate, “expert” dept. with HR specialties serving the
organization to a model of HR professionals attached to client groups, with
more generalists, and in some cases matrix reporting relationships with
Operational departments.)
Measurement Advice from the
HRBN



Don’t take on more measurement than you can handle
 Focus on objects that are critical success drivers
 Listen to senior management priorities and educate where
possible
Balanced Choice of Metrics
 Simple metrics (in design, in ability to collect data) are
more reliable
 Downside of Simple – inverse relationship
simplicity/value
 Leading vs. lagging where possible
Technology will help (if you are lucky enough to have it)
But don’t stop with
measurement …



Numbers are Susceptible to Manipulation!
Numbers are Quantitative Portrayals of Real
World Situations
Numbers are a Means Not an End
Any Questions?
Colin Dawes
Human Resources Benchmarking Network
416-221-0260
colin@hrbn.ca
www.hrbn.ca