executive summary - justinpstevens.files.wordpress.com€¦ · web viewindicate immediate support...

Business Case

Section 503 Compliance and Accountability

Employment of People with Disabilities

Proactive Workforce Capabilities & Risk Management Compliance

A Systemic Approach

Presented by

Summit Resource Group LLC, Disability Diversity Division

Brenda Meli, MS, Partner

and

The Institute 4 Worthy Performance LLC

Tim Brock, PhD, CPT, CEO

Presented to

Date

Contents

Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................................2

Section 1: Introduction...........................................................................................................................................3

Section 2: Results-Focused Worthy Performance Framework...........................................................................4

Section 3: Business Model......................................................................................................................................6

Section 4: Defining the Performance Gaps...........................................................................................................8

Section 5: Diagnosing the Root Causes...............................................................................................................11

Section 6: Implementing Needs-Driven Solutions to Root Causes....................................................................15

Section 7: Alignment and Accountability Evaluation Strategy.........................................................................16

Section 8: Proving the Value and ROI of Section 503 Compliance...................................................................18

Proprietary Information, All Rights ReservedSummit Resource Group LLC & The Institute 4 Worthy Performance LLC 1 | P a g e

Executive Summary

Purpose

To help corporations and Federal contractors meet new Section 503 Individuals with Disabilities (IWDs) Affirmative Action Program (AAP) compliance requirements.

Problem Space

Failure to meet new mandates that became effective on March 24, 2014 will result in losing Federal revenue from current contracts and debarment from seeking future contracts. Federal contractors must:

Indicate immediate support and engagement of their affirmative action policy by top executives within the organization.

State the strategies for compliance with the revised Federal regulations in each new annual affirmative action program reports.

Implement a long-term strategy to meet a 7% utilization goal challenge for employing individuals with disabilities.

Create a sustainable outreach program for hiring individuals with disabilities to meet their staffing requirements.

The Department of Justice has created an environment of vigorous enforcement of compliance for Federal contractors. We are currently in a period of increasing enforcement.

Proposed Business Solution

Offer top executives with a holistic, enterprise-wide IWD AAP compliance strategy and framework they can immediately support.

Train corporate workforce, or provide consulting services, to strategize, assess, design, implement, and evaluate needs-driven, results-focused IWD programs that ensure enterprise-wide accountability to meet revised, annual Federal regulation requirements.

Offer secure, safe IT self-identification capabilities to measure, proactively manage, and report effectiveness of 7% utilization mandate.

Train corporate workforce, or provide consulting services, to integrate sustainable outreach program as part of results-focused compliance strategy.

Proposed Compliance Methodology

We offer workforce capability development training how to apply evidence-based, practice proven performance improvement and evaluation methodology. This methodology will address the increased level of accountability required to mitigate

noncompliance risks to current and future federal contracts. We also provide consulting services, when requested, to help organizations adapt and mature this

methodology to their unique IWD AAP needs. This will help executives to confidently meet and exceed the spirit and intent of these new mandates.

It will also help executives avoid or survive the scrutiny of aggressive Department of Justice audit and enforcement actions by showing quantitative and qualitative evidence proving compliance.

Finally, it will align compliance actions with business needs that will demonstrate credible, value-added business impact and Return on Investment results.


Section 1: Introduction

This document establishes a business case and solution model to quickly diagnose and remedy root causes preventing corporations and Federal contractors from meeting new Section 503 compliance requirements.

The intent of this document is to introduce the conceptual framework that SRG and TI4WP proposes for helping corporations and Federal contractors develop the internal performance capabilities. This will involve developing their internal workforce capabilities to diagnose human and organizational performance needs (i.e., gaps between “what-is” and “should-be” metrics), identify root causes, implement needs-driven solutions, measure performance accomplishments at four levels for aligned accountability, and evaluate the effectiveness and worth of compliance program outcomes and results to include Return on Investment.

Statement of Problem

On September 24, 2013, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published a Final Rule in the Federal Register that makes changes to the regulations implementing Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Section 503) at 41 CFR Part 60-741. Section 503 prohibits federal contractors and subcontractors from discriminating in employment against individuals with disabilities (IWDs), and requires these employers to take affirmative action to recruit, hire, promote, and retain these individuals.

The new rule strengthens the affirmative action provisions of the regulations to aid contractors in their efforts to recruit and hire IWDs, and improve job opportunities for individuals with disabilities. The new rule also makes changes to the nondiscrimination provisions of the regulations and revises the definition of “disability” and certain nondiscrimination provisions to bring them into compliance with the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.

The new Section 503 regulations became effective on March 24, 2014.

Impact

Contractors are able to maintain their current affirmative action program (AAP) already in place on the effective date. Contractors must satisfy the new AAP compliance requirements when submitting their next AAP at the beginning of their next AAP cycle. This compliance timeline seeks to provide contractors the opportunity to maintain their current AAP cycle.

Failure to comply puts current federal contracts at risk and will prevent the contractor from bidding on future federal contracts. In addition, international contracts are likewise at risk at countries enacting similar mandates (e.g., Europe, Canada, Australia, and China) as well as nations that have ratified the United Nations 2006 Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities treaty.


Section 2: Results-Focused Worthy Performance Framework

Who We Are Summit Resource Group, LLC, Disability Diversity Division (SRG) consultants are trusted partners and advisors for corporations and Federal contractors developing effective, sustainable, and rewarding outreach employment initiatives, and inclusive campaigns for the self-identification of disabilities as required by the Federal Government. Principles of SRG are results-oriented professionals with deep experience as corporate executives and strong ties to the national disability community; including, but not limited to, national disability organizations and higher education institutions.

SRG has partnered with The Institute 4 Worthy Performance LLC (TI4WP) to provide the performance improvement, assessment, measurement, and evaluation methodology we will use to implement feasible, sustainable programs that are unique to the systemic needs of each organization. TI4WP trains and advises organizations how to improve organizational performance to meet private and public sector organizational goals and objectives. TI4WP also trains and advises organizations how to prove the credible value of these programs at five results-focused accountability levels that include intangible benefits and the ultimate level of financial accountability, Return on Investment (ROI).

Strategic Objectives for the Employment of People with Disabilities The SRG/TI4WP partnership is committed to achieving four objectives represented at Figure 1:

Figure 1. Our Four IWD AAP Objectives

Each one is focused on helping our clients proactively manage compliance risk to improve organizational capabilities, compliance, and business results. 1. Workforce Development

Train executives, senior staff, and designated employees how effectively and efficiently integrate a results-focused IWD human performance system mindset into the workplace culture to establish a strategic and tactical IWD implementation strategy that heightens organizational sensitivity to workforce accessibility and performance support needs.


Conduct public IWD Performance Improvement and Evaluation Accountability workshops with open enrollment at Orlando, FL or other locations.

Conduct in-house IWD Performance Improvement and Evaluation Accountability workshops with tailored content at corporate-sponsored locations.

Offer executive-level and senior management one hour presentations to one day orientations to begin the IWD implementation from the top.

Offer middle management and practitioner skills-building workshops ranging from two-day basic skills to five-day competency certification to implement the IWD program.

2. IWD AAP Expertise Resource

Advise clients in utilizing Section 503 compliance as a strategic discriminator for not only hiring people with different abilities, but also creating a strategic business advantage and increasing the Federal contractor’s social consciousness and commitment to education, outreach, and recruitment initiatives.

Coach executives and other stakeholders how to implement holistic, sustainable IWD programs that not only comply with Section 503 mandates, but also identify, recognize, and reward untapped creativity and diversity of thought as an intellectual and human capital advantage.

Provide IWD performance improvement and accountability evaluation consulting services to customers who have complete training workshops and request additional expertise support.

Provide IWD solution development services to customers who prefer to hire an outside agency to remedy their compliance performance gaps.

Federal contractors

3. Measurable Compliance Results

Improve and sustain IWD campaigns and programs where self-identification is relevant, safe, confidential, and fully integrated with ongoing workforce diversity outreach, recruitment, representation, professional development, career progression, and health and well-being programs.

Focus on improving the performance of IWD employees and proving the worth of IWD-focused programs by using intangible and tangible measures valued by the sponsoring organization and government oversight/enforcement agencies.

Instill self-identification as an employee benefit rather than a stigma to encourage self-identification whenever a person’s health or capabilities changes to meet IWD standards.

Provide safe, secure, and confidential self-identification IT capabilities to organizations that establishes a firewall between the company and individual self-identification data.

4. Long-Term Trustworthy Partnership

Earn the trust of Federal contractors to establish long-term partnerships to assist their efforts to comply with workforce AAP and workplace accessibility and performance support mandates.

Focus on improving IWD workforce inclusion, performance support, and professional development as a resource expert that focuses on results.

Address systemic issues unique to each organization that prevent compliance. Add measureable, quantifiable value to the performance improvement process. Partner with customers and stakeholder to achieve the required results and prove the tangible (i.e.,

ROI) and intangible (i.e., benefits) worth of the effort. Proprietary Information, All Rights Reserved

Summit Resource Group LLC & The Institute 4 Worthy Performance LLC 5 | P a g e

Section 3: Business ModelTo meet the spirit and intent of the revised Section 503 mandates, we offer our clients a unique, holistic solution package. That packages includes three options:

1. Workforce development programs (we train internal employees how to apply our blended Performance Improvement/Return on Investment (PI/ROI) methodology)

2. Expert consulting services (we conduct or lead internal efforts applying our PI/ROI methodology)3. Proactive self-identification services to customers lacking this information technology (IT)

capability.

This blended approach provides the customers with a practice-proven and sustainable methodology for addressing the root causes that prevent companies from meeting Section 503 compliance requirements, measuring the results of the programs designed to close those compliance gaps, and proving the value of the results using mandate and business impact metrics.

Figure 2 indicates the core of what we do is help organizations engineer and measure worthy performance that meets and exceeds Section 508 requirements. It also reflects the four practices we apply to engineer the required worthy performance through organization and human performance results.

Figure 2. The Purpose and Four Practices for Engineering and Measuring Worthy Performance

Performance Improvement and Measurement MethodologySolutions and programs used in the past no longer produce the proactive and sustainable results expected by the Department of Labor or Department of Justice. What is now needed is a proven, systemic, and systematic methodology that will diagnose and recommend feasible, sustainable solutions. These solutions must satisfy the concerns of executive and stakeholders at different levels of the organization that these solutions will satisfy the letter and intent of this mandate before the executives will personally commit to them.

We are performance improvement and disability employment experts. We will train or model for our clients how to apply our evidence-based, practice-proven methodology to improve and sustain human and organizational performance to satisfy and even exceed these IWD AAP mandates. Our methodology (see Figure 3) reflects the principles and practices of the International Society for Performance Improvement, the world’s leading professional association for performance improvement. It also mirrors the methodology adopted by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for Human and Institutional Capacity Development (HICD) as part of their global economic growth, agriculture, and trade development programs.


Figure 3. Performance Improvement Methodology

We are also ROI measurement and evaluation experts who will train or model for our clients how to apply the ROI MethodologyTM (see Figure 4) that is used by over 5,000 organizations around the globe, including the United Nations and World Bank, to establish credible strategic and tactical assessments and measurements to prove the tangible and intangible value of human and organizational performance improvement disability programs.

Figure 4. ROI MethodologyTM


Section 4: Defining the Performance Gaps Our training and consulting services begin with defining the measurable gap between what should be (or required performance) and what is (or current performance). This quantifies the need (or gap) the organization must close to comply with the Section 503 mandates. The performance gaps are based upon facts and are unique to each organization.

Figure 5 indicates how our data collection approach pertains to interdependent variables within each organization that are required to establish a holistic current state and required state performance gap at four levels that are unique to every organization.

Figure 5. Gap Analysis Framework

Required Performance for Federal Contractors

Our methodology will establish required performance for our clients from legislative mandates, government regulations, and judicial rulings. We are careful to align our methodology to reflect our client’s unique mission, vision, goals, values, strategies, culture, critical issues, and stakeholder perspectives to earn and sustain leadership commitment and stakeholder support. Examples from the resources listed below are:

Section 503 of the Rehabilitation ActOFCCP Webpage: http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/section503.htm

7% Mandate - Establish a nationwide 7% utilization goal for qualified IWDs.

Must apply to each of their job groups, or to their entire workforce if the contractor has 100 or fewer employees.

Must conduct an annual utilization analysis and assessment of problem areas and establish specific action-oriented programs to address any identified problems (i.e., gaps).

Documentation – Establish baseline and update annually several quantitative comparisons for the number of IWDs who apply for jobs, are hired, and advance in position.

New quantitative measurement and analysis requirements to determine the effectiveness of outreach, recruitment, and inclusive cultural change efforts.

Maintained for three years.

IWD Self-Identification – Must invite applicants to self-identify as IWDs at both the pre-offer and post-offer phases of the application process, using language prescribed by OFCCP.


http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/section503.htm

Must also invite current employees to self-identify as IWDs every five years, using the prescribed language.

Incorporation of the EO Clause – Requires specific language when incorporating the equal opportunity clause into a subcontract by reference.

Alerts subcontractors of their AAR responsibilities as Federal contractors.

Records Access - Must allow OFCCP to review documents related to a compliance check or focused review, either on-site or off-site, at OFCCP’s option.

Upon request, must inform OFCCP of all formats in which it maintains its records and provide them to OFCCP in whichever of those formats OFCCP requests.

Current Performance of Federal ContractorsWhen collecting data to define actual or current performance, we consider multiple data sources to ensure we discover the critical barriers that prevent compliance and produce risk. We take a systematic approach to collect systemic human performance system data to impacts four levels of accountability and performance: worker, work, workplace, and world.

Figure 6 represents our approach to defining current performance and diagnosing human and organizational compliance barriers. The data sources we investigate are listed at the top of the graphic. From there we assess the performance gaps, diagnose the root causes for the gaps, and then craft a business case recommending feasible and sustainable solutions for executives to decide how they want to prioritize and allocate resources.

Figure 6. Actual Performance Needs Assessment

The following definitions of each level provide insight into the four levels of accountability and performance we investigate and the importance of each one.


Worker – Assess skills, motivation, and actions of individuals and teams to perform to Required Performance standards.

Not the job title of the workers, but how they do their job to support IWD requirements and business impact results.Key Point: Most of the efforts in performance improvement have been at this level. Organizations often try to fix how workers do their jobs, failing to consider how the work design, information, and resources provided to the workers influences how they do their jobs.

Work - The design of work tasks and processes, especially cross-functional processes.

Work design is crucial to complying with IWD requirements/business impact results. Key Point: Workers don’t always understand what the processes are and where their work fits into supporting IWD requirements.

Workplace – The design of the organization, its governance, policies, strategies, and culture, all of which can promote or impede IWD compliance performance.

Policies and cultural practices greatly influence workforce motivation and their ability to actually perform tasks, to innovate, and adapt. Key Point: Exhorting the workers to work smarter will do nothing to change this.

World – The business environment, regulation, and societal expectations and obligations that impact organizational performance.

Factors that organizations do not control, but must pay attention to and plan for. Issues include the economy, changing industry regulations, and public reactions to the organization’s

impacts on the environment and on local and distant communities. Each time there is a new federal regulation governing an industry, organizations must make

adjustments to their business processes and work tasks to be compliant. Key Point: World factors impact the worker, work, and workplace.


Section 5: Diagnosing the Root Causes

We train or model how to apply the evidence-driven, literature-based principles and practices of Performance Improvement advocated by the International Society for Performance Improvement. These principles and practices guide a performance chain thinking framework throughout our time with clients and stakeholders to treat root causes of performance gaps rather than symptoms. The four guiding principles are:

1. Focus on valued, measurable Results or Outcomes, not a predisposed set of solutions.2. Take a Systemic view of how systems and subsystems are dynamic and interdependent.3. Add Value to facilitate better decisions, higher quality work, and effective results.4. Partner with clients and stakeholders to involve them in decisions and engage specialists.In addition, we train or model how to use a Performance Engineer Model1 to diagnose performance deficiencies. Figure 7 indicates how this model allows us to craft solutions that can address multiple root causes to ensure the solutions generate worthy performance that produces the required business impact results and a positive ROI.

Figure 7. Performance Engineering Model

Industry Trends Performance Analysis The ODEP Report on Disability Employment October 2014 indicates the following current state trends that the revised Section 503 is seeking to mitigate (a desired result):

Employment levels of people with disabilities are low, and those who are employed tend to be in low-paying occupations. Only one-third (32.0%) of working-age people with disabilities were employed on average in the 2010-2012 period, compared to over two-thirds (72.7%) of people without disabilities.

1 Our Performance Engineering Model is adapted from the Behavior Engineering Model by Thomas Gilbert from his seminal book “Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance”, Tribute Edition, Pfeiffer, 2013.


Employment rates among people with disabilities do not vary greatly by gender, but are particularly low among blacks and those with low levels of education (both absolutely and relative to people without disabilities).

Employed people with disabilities are underrepresented in management and professional/technical jobs, and overrepresented in service, production, and transportation jobs.

People with disabilities are overrepresented in slower-growing occupations, which lowers their projected employment growth rate through 2022 assuming disability prevalence by occupation stays constant.

The projected job growth rate over the 2012-2022 period for people with disabilities is 10.4% compared to 10.8% overall, based on applying occupational projections to disability prevalence in the current occupational distribution (assuming disability prevalence stays constant within occupations).

If the growth rates were equal there would be an additional 32,200 jobs for people with disabilities in 2022.

People with disabilities are underrepresented in 16 of the top 20 fastest-growing occupations, but are overrepresented in the fastest-growing occupation of “personal and home care aides.”

People with disabilities are overrepresented in 17 of the top 20 fastest-declining occupations.

Challenges for Federal Contractors The affirmative action policy statement of Federal contractors must indicate immediate support and

engagement of the top executives within their organization.

Federal contractors must now state their strategies for compliance with the revised Federal regulations in each new annual affirmative action program.

The challenge of a 7% utilization goal for employing individuals with disabilities creates the need for a long-term strategy for Federal contractors, especially due to the applicability of this requirement to all organizations within the enterprise.

Many Federal contractors lack the resources within their organization to create a sustainable outreach program for hiring individuals with disabilities to meet their staffing requirements.

Specifically, Federal contractors do not have a far reaching network with higher education institutions and organizations needed for creating sustainable outreach programs to individuals with disabilities.

In 2016, the OFFCP will publically report the Federal contractors in non-compliance.

Federal contractors are also challenged with fostering an inclusive culture for IWDs, collecting meaningful data, and creating annual reports of compliance to the OFCCP.

The inclusive culture of the organization must enable the hiring, promotion, retention of IWDs. The inclusive culture must also foster self-identification of disabilities by job applicants and employees.


Federal contractors found to be in noncompliance will lose Federal revenue and face debarment from future contracts.

In 2017, all Federal RFPs and RFIs will require a compliance statement to be included on the bid list for Federal contracts.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has created an environment of vigorous enforcement. Since 2006, there has been increasing enforcement and the number of claims filed by the DOJ.

On July 17, 2014, the DOJ filed a lawsuit against Entergy Corporation for violating Executive Order 11246, Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974. Entergy Corporation is at risk of losing $5 billion.

Organization Performance AnalysisWhile these Industry Trends and Challenges are universal, different organizations are at different levels of compliance maturity and capabilities. Therefore, a Performance Analysis is required at each organization to determine their unique business needs. These needs drive sorting and prioritizing the possible solutions based on the feasibility and sustainment constraints. These solutions influence and are influence by the strategic and tactical plans to written to guide the performance improvement initiatives.

This Performance Analysis consists of a performance gap assessment and root cause analysis that considers the current state and required state at the worker, work, workforce, and world levels to derive a comprehensive and sustainable solution. Figure 8 provides a visual representation of the Performance Analysis each organization must conduct to identify the root causes preventing immediate and sustainable compliance.

Figure 8. Performance Analysis Model. Source: Van Tiem, Moseley, and Dessigner.

The Cause Analysis phase of the model will identify barriers and missing enablers required performance. One category, classified as Individual Factors, occurs within the workers (their capabilities, capacity, and motivation/expectations). The other category, classified as Environmental Factors, occur outside of the worker and are provided by the organization (information, workplace support, incentives/consequences).


Literature indicates the 80/20 rule applies with root causes where 80% of the barriers and missing enablers occurring at the organization level.

Rather than treat these new Section 503 mandates as another HR paperwork compliance issue, it is critical to identify the non-compliance root causes. Without this root cause analysis results, executives will not have the data required to develop immediate and long-term, needs-driven strategies to implement effective and sustainable AAP IWD solutions required by the revised mandate. In addition, executives and senior management must realize the tangible and intangible value realized by their organization as a result of creating an inclusive culture to recruit, hire, develop, and promote IWD workforce employees and as a result of implementing meaningful outreach programs within their local communities.

The organizational Performance Analysis will identify different gaps and different root causes to select the right solution set for each organization to achieve the required compliance results.


Section 6: Implementing Needs-Driven Solutions to Root Causes The Performance Analysis will result in different solution sets for different organizations to meet the required compliance mandates. There is no one-size-fits-all IWD solution. This makes the SRG/TI4WP approach unique, adaptable, needs-driven, and results-focused. Figure 9 below indicates possible compliance solutions that include the personal development of IWD employees as well as performance support solutions and job analysis/work design remedies to provide value-added, meaningful work. In addition, the performance analysis will also need to consider those who work with and supervise IWD employees to remove obstacles that hinder compliance (i.e., hiring managers who subconsciously don’t hire someone with an obvious disability because they don’t have time or know-how to address their performance support needs). In addition, anyone can unexpectedly experience a life-changing event at any time resulting in an observable or unobservable disability. All employees will benefit from knowing about how this IWD program protects and supports them.

Figure 9. Potential Solution Alternatives

The Solution Phase also requires a final leadership commitment to the feasible and sustainable solution(s) proposed. Our approach ensures this leadership commitment is in place from the beginning of the Performance Analysis using the four principles of performance improvement discussed on page 7. In addition, leadership commitment is further secured through the business alignment methodology we apply that is discussed in the next section.


Section 7: Alignment and Accountability Evaluation StrategyTo ensure stakeholder commitment and accountability for achieving IWD objectives at all levels of the organization, the short-term and long-term strategy, as well as the implementation and sustainment funding, must align business needs with compliance evaluation metrics at each level. IWD mandates are not about filling a square to qualifying for federal contracts. They are about proactively creating an inclusive workforce where meaningful work, performance support, and career opportunities are the norm for everyone.

To achieve business alignment, Figure 10 indicates how we will train or model for stakeholders at all levels of the organization to align the unique IWD needs of each organization to meet mandate and business impact needs. It begins by establishing data-driven needs via the Performance Analysis. To ensure the evaluation metrics of the program are aligned to close the performance gaps (i.e., needs), accountability objectives are written at five levels to establish tactical and strategic measurements required to meet aligned organizational compliance objectives.

Figure 10. ROI Methodology Value Stream Alignment Model

At face value, increasing the number of employees with disabilities and achieving greater exposure for outreach to the disability community makes good business sense from a revenue, economic impact, cost reduction, and political trend perspective.

From a revenue perspective, the minimum benefit for Federal contractors achieving compliance with Section 503 is maintaining the current revenue from Federal contracts and eligibility for future Federal contracts.


From an economic impact perspective, corporations that create campaigns to advertise employing, creating career advancement opportunities, and the general advancement of individuals with disabilities obtain a strategic business advantage over their competitors. People with disabilities have a history of high brand-loyalty to companies that support people with disabilities. Corporations can take advantage of the socially engaging, memorable, effective branding, and messaging opportunities. Organizations that exhibit greater support for IWDs will gain the brand loyalty of the 57 million people with disabilities in the U.S. with a annual discretionary income of $544 billion. Corporations that were allies of the disability community represented $8 trillion in market impact.

From a cost reduction perspective, employees with disabilities have higher retention rates of employment than employees without disabilities. This reduces hiring and training costs inherent with hiring new employees and low retention rates. There are also substantial tax incentives for Federal contractors who increase accessibility and the employment of people with disabilities.

From a political trend perspective, the disability community has an increasingly powerful political influence, as evidenced by recent policy changes that positively affect the disability community. Organizations that are in front of this trend will realize unplanned and unrealized benefits. For example, increasing the representation of people with disabilities within the Federal contractor’s workforce leads to increased diversity in thinking, creative problem solving, and productivity.


Section 8: Proving the Value and ROI of Section 503 Compliance

The Bottom Line of Section 503 Compliance is the Bottom Line

Too often, bottom line thinkers miss the point of bottom line thinking. By focusing on costs, which are simple to project, versus the benefits of human capital investments, which are more difficult to project but doable, they miss realizing untapped value within their organization.

Table 1 shows the ROI (the ultimate bottom line metric) that organizations have realized improving the organizational performance by improving the performance of their people. The first example listed is for an All Inclusive Workplace (AIW) diversity course for managers. An ROI Impact Study was conducted on this course to determine if it was a worthwhile investment using different types of quantitative and qualitative metrics. As Table 1 shows, the tangible ROI for this diversity program was 163%. The ROI was credible and defendable to the executives who approved and funded. The cost of conducting the ROI Impact Study was included as a cost in the ROI calculation. Conducting an ROI Impact Study is part of our solution set that will provide executive additional evidence that IWD compliance programs worth the investments beyond seeing it as an additional square to fill to compete for Federal contracts.

Table 1. Human/Organizational Performance Improvement Program ROI Examples


executive summary - justinpstevens.files.wordpress.com€¦ · web viewindicate immediate support...

Documents