beyond the benchmark more than just “what the other guys are doing” presented by: russ haynie,...

Beyond the BenchmarkMore Than Just “What the Other Guys Are Doing”

Presented by:Russ Haynie, CERP, CRP, SGMSDirector, Consulting ServicesBrookfield Global Relocation Services

Agenda Benchmark: A Definition and Some Recent Data

The Role of Benchmarking in Mobility Program Design

Interactive Exercise

Consulting Case Studies

Tips for Effective Benchmarking

Debunking Some Myths

Q + A

Definition

bench . mark

noun

A standard or point of reference against which things may be compared or assessed.

“a benchmark case”

Synonyms: standard, point of reference, gauge, guide, guideline, guiding principle, norm, touchstone, yardstick, barometer, indicator, measure, model, exemplar, pattern, criterion, specification, convention

verb

Evaluate or check (something) by comparison with a standard.

“We are benchmarking our performance against external criteria.”

Source: Google

Some Recent Data 2013 CERC Relocation Policy Survey (82

organizations participating, representative of relocation management practices of most of the major industry groups in Canada):– Over 50% of the organizations report they do not benchmark

the program on a regular basis, but will do so on an ad hoc basis

– Just 10% say they don’t benchmark the program at all

Some Recent Data 2012 Worldwide ERC Innovation Survey of 27

companies found:– Innovations, aside from technology, by relocation services

provider that have had the most impact on mobility program:• 77% approach to challenges• 65% problem solving• 54% benchmarking• 46% program design• 8% other

The Role of Benchmarking Deliberately considering the competitive

positioning of mobility provisions can:– Facilitate program buy-in and approval– Uncover opportunities for competitive differentiation– Validate / defend existing approaches that may be under

scrutiny – Often be accomplished with alternatives of little

additional effort or cost– Complement exception management strategies

Benchmarking within a Layered Design Process

Companies should be cautious of making policy decisions just to match a common practice

– Don’t: Allow benchmark data to disqualify potential approaches too early in design process,

especially if data are too narrow to capture emerging trends and contemporary practices

– Do: Strive for a solid understanding of combination of variables that influence

potential pros and cons of policy changes.

Interactive Exercise The Situation:

– You are a mobility industry consultant

– A client contact from Tug-of-War Inc. (TOW) has asked you to provide a broad outline of recommended domestic Canada relocation entitlements

– TOW is under high pressure to recruit talent with the critical skills necessary to grow its business in its high cost of living centres

Interactive Exercise The Situation (continued):

– The Company has no written policy today and manages relocation entitlements in ad hoc fashion

– BU leaders are under high pressure from the CEO and CFO to strictly limit mobility benefits costs

– Your contact is relatively new to mobility and needs your guidance to construct a policy that not only meets basic needs of its transferees but also ensures TOW is competitive

Interactive Exercise Task 1:

– Recognizing that TOW’s target talent profiles are highly-skilled mid-career professionals (often, but not always, with owned homes and families), choose 5 entitlements from the list below you feel should be top priorities for TOW’s proposed new policy:

Home Sale Assistance* Final Move TripHome Purchase Assistance* Home Finding TripMiscellaneous Expense Allowance Cost of Living Allowance

Dual Career Assistance Lease CancellationHousehold Goods Transportation* Family Settling-in Support

Equity Loss Protection Temporary Accommodations

*Assume full coverage of reasonable/ customary expenses


– Compare your Top 5 with a few of your audience peers


– Compare your Top 5 entitlements with the Industry Benchmark:

Household Goods Transportation (100%) 1

Final Move Trip (100%) 2

Home Finding Trip (96%) 1

Lease Cancellation (92%) 2

Home Purchase Assistance (90%) 4

Home Sale Assistance (86%) 1

Miscellaneous Expense Allowance (85%) 1

Temporary Accommodations (63%) 3

Dual Career Assistance (46%) 1

Equity Loss Protection (43%) 1

Family Settling-in Support (41%) 1

Cost of Living Allowance (25%) 1

12013 CERC Employee Relocation Policy Survey of 82 companies 22012 Trippel Domestic Relocation Policy Survey of 148 companies32013 Atlas Corporate Relocation Survey of 418 companies42013 Worldwide ERC Relocation Assistance: Transferred Employees survey of 154 companies

Interactive Exercise Questions:

– How difficult was it to choose only 5 entitlements?

– Imagining that your audience peers are competing companies, how competitive were your chosen entitlements?

– How closely aligned to the Industry Benchmark were your chosen entitlements?

– Knowing the entitlements your competition chose, would you change any of yours? Why? Why Not?

– Knowing the Industry Benchmark entitlements, would you change any of yours? Why? Why Not?

Case Study 1: Leveraging Culture to Attain Competitive Differentiation

Case Background:– Global supplier to the oil and gas industry – Needs to attract critical skills for assignments to remote and

difficult locations– Accumulated experience developing assignment benefit

packages in ad hoc fashion

Step 1: Internal Research– Consensus of global HR: defined international mobility suite of

policies needed to control costs – Company culture committed to acknowledging impact of

assignments on whole family, not just the assignee – Spouse / partner dissatisfaction directly attributable to recent

cases of failed assignments


Step 2: Competitive Benchmarking

– Company referenced external benchmark data from broad sources

– Affirmed need for defined spouse / partner support provisions

– Company ultimately chose to adopt a flexible and comparatively generous lump sum payment approach

– Enable accompanying spouses / partners to have flexibility to accommodate a wide range of needs


Lessons from beyond the benchmark:

– Start with solicitation of feedback from frontlines to identify key touchstones of design initiative

– Interpret benchmark data as a foundation to build upon and deliberately exceed, rather than simply match

– Simply matching common scope of assistance and dismissing opportunities to highlight a cultural stance may miss a true opportunity for differentiation

Case Study 2: Finding Value in the Minority Position

Case Background:

– Financial services company

– Large volume of domestic transfer activity

– Policy re-design initiative with goal of maximizing flexibility for business units with widely varied budget tolerances

– Cultural commitment to providing baseline of competitive support to all employees


Case Background:

– Company entered design process with a tiered program structure strained under pressure from the business units to meet varied budget constraints

– Some managers even bypassing centralized mobility program altogether and offering lump sum payments or limited packages


The process: a supporting role for competitive benchmarking

– Survey of benchmark data affirmed use of tiered program structures among a majority of Company’s industry peers

– Initial drafts of new program design adhered to this approach

– Instincts of mobility manager ultimately led to a program design that deliberately diverged from competitive norm.

– Result: set of core provisions clearly offered by a strong majority of peer companies supplemented with menu of optional provisions that each business unit may authorize within defined governing criteria to match unique goals and budget constraints


Lessons from beyond the benchmark:

– Understanding the competitively common practice was essential

– Benchmarking did not inform the final program design but rather became basis of validating a divergent approach

– By positioning new policy as deliberately different, mobility manager gained buy-in from business units who saw their unique goals reflected in a progressive new program structure

Tips for Effective Mobility Program Benchmarking

Check the shelf first

Let defined objectives guide benchmarking efforts

Broaden scope of target companies

Ask the right questions

Be available to the efforts of your peers

Uphold a commitment to confidentiality

Debunking the Mythical Best Practice

Reliance on benchmarking data is valid and understood

As mobility functions evolve, need to defend design decisions against quantified competitive measures

Embrace opportunities to be different, especially when differences are validated by:

– Alignment with business goals

– Alignment with company culture

– Contribution to competitive differentiation

Best practices may not always be aligned with common practices but are rather those that set your company apart

Questions?

Thank You

beyond the benchmark more than just “what the other guys are doing” presented by: russ haynie,...

Documents