Developing a Comprehensive Shared Services Performance Measurement Package
While individual process areas often have very detailed performance measurements related to cost, productivity, quality, and customer service, many times the overall Shared Services operation struggles to present its overall results in a concise and effective manner. The challenge for any Shared Services organization is to develop and maintain a cohesive reporting package that meets both the needs of the Shared Services organization and its key customers and remains relevant as the business evolves.
Recently, a $17B global producer of consumer food products operating in over 100 countries shared their approach to Shared Services performance measurement with the Peeriosity membership on a PeercastTM. Looking to enhance their existing reporting package for their Global Shared Services operations, they developed the following performance measurement improvement objectives:
- Supplement existing performance management reporting with consistent external measures
- Establish a repeatable process
- Identify gaps in where other companies may be doing things differently, especially over the long-term
- Ensure we are spending time efficiently
Organizationally, with both a Service Delivery Manager and Global Process Manager for each major process area, prior to the change project the Service Delivery Manager was primarily responsible for performance management, while the Global Process Manager provided expertise and support as needed in that area. As part of the development of a new approach to Shared Services performance measurement, this company made a shift from a monthly operational scorecard that focused on internal measures to a quarterly benchmarking scorecard that focuses on how they compare externally and how they are trending in what they call “The Measures (Pillars) of Performance”, which are: Cost Effectiveness, Process Efficiency, Staff Productivity, and Cycle Time. The shift was also made to have the scorecard be driven by the Global Process Owner rather than the Service Delivery Manager.
Another important concept shared by the featured company was what they consider to be the successful keys to the identification of the proper performance measures, which are as follows:
- Understand what benchmarks are available externally and match your process
- Select the right measure(s) for each pillar that moves the dial. Getting your volume measures(s) right is key.
- Have confidence that you can reasonably source the data internally
Other areas shared by the featured company that is available to Peeriosity members on the member website include the project timeline, the benchmark sources utilized, and their data gathering approach. They closed their presentation with the following list of lessons learned in carrying out the initiative:
- Focus historically has been on personnel cost alone, but system cost needs to be incorporated, especially with the maturity of RPA technologies
- Benchmark data can come in deciles and quartiles, but you can convert it
- Leverage outside information such as vendor quotes
- Use existing processes/data, don’t reinvent the wheel
Related to this PeercastTM was a poll developed utilizing Peeriosity’s iPollingTM technology. Reviewing the results of this poll, the first question focused on the type of performance reporting package that the companies were currently utilizing for the key stakeholders and internal customers of their Shared Services operation. The most prevalent response was a balanced scorecard at 39%, well known for its combination of financial and non-financial measures and often proactive in its measurement and closely tracked with target values. This was followed closely by a formal dashboard that is not as robust as a balanced scorecard, often more focused on historical financial data, with 33% of the companies utilizing that approach.
The second iPollingTM question then addressed how often the Shared Services performance reporting package is reviewed and updated as it relates to the type of information presented (key metrics utilized) and format (delivery, layout, etc.). All too frequently, companies spend a significant amount of time creating a strong performance measurement program, only to then not provide the necessary updates to keep it as relevant as it should be.
Reviewing the results, a very large majority (82%) indicated that they update their performance reporting package at least quarterly, with 9% doing this semi-annually and another 9% performing the update on an annual basis.
Some of the member comments related to the poll include the following:
Healthcare, Pharmaceuticals, Biotech Member: Each functional area has a balanced scorecard (e.g. Finance, HR, Supply Chain, Revenue Cycle, etc.) presented to their respective Client Advisory Groups; some metrics are reported monthly, and most are quarterly.
Media & Entertainment Member: We basically have a monthly scorecard that we hold quarterly meetings to review with the stakeholders.
Consumer Products & Services Member: We provide a balanced perspective to key stakeholders.
Healthcare, Pharmaceuticals, Biotech Member: We have an internal dashboard that measures several metrics for each functional area, as well as an external dashboard with higher-level metrics. Both dashboards are issued monthly. For the external customer-facing dashboard, we include customer satisfaction from ticket surveys, average speed to answer, abandonment rate, total calls, and total tickets per month.
Financial Services Member: Formal dashboard with a mix of measures, not as robust as a balanced scorecard. However, given we are a relatively new Shared Services organization, additional measures are still under development.
How effective is your Shared Services performance measurement program? Is it updated frequently to ensure its continued relevance and effectiveness?
Who are your peers and how are you collaborating with them?
“PeercastsTM” are private, professionally facilitated webcasts that feature leading member company experiences on specific topics as a catalyst for broader discussion. Access is available exclusively to Peeriosity member company employees, with consultants or vendors prohibited from attending or accessing discussion content. Members can see who is registered to attend in advance, with discussion recordings, supporting polls, and presentation materials online and available whenever convenient for the member. Using Peeriosity’s integrated email system, Peer MailTM, attendees can easily communicate at any time with other attending peers by selecting them from the list of registered attendees.
“iPollingTM” is available exclusively to Peeriosity member company employees, with consultants or vendors prohibited from participating or accessing content. Members have full visibility to all respondents and their comments. Using Peeriosity’s integrated email system, Peer MailTM, members can easily communicate at any time with others who participated in iPolling.
Peeriosity members are invited to log into www.peeriosity.com to join the discussion and connect with Peers. Membership is for practitioners only, with no consultants or vendors permitted. To learn more about Peeriosity, click here