What Lurks Beneath? A Tectonic Shift in the Work Arrangement Landscape?

Earthquakes occur when sufficient stress has built up along fault lines, such that the earth moves all of a sudden, and what’s on the surface is often drastically altered. Things in our 21st century world are now happening so quickly that we rarely pause to examine what changes actually occurred and how those changes overtook us (they often come quietly from behind).

Just over the past 20 years, we have known many such instances. One of the most visible ones (you can think of all the rest!) was the advent of iTunes. Prior to that, we were all very comfortable with our time-tested way of consuming music: we would own our own player devices (phonograph, Walkman, CD player) and we would buy our music on some corresponding physical medium (vinyl, cassette, CD containing the IP/content we desired) from some retail outlet (first a physical store and eventually an online store like Amazon.com).

Even as digitization set in, this old pattern or form of arranging access to musical content we did not own — but could pay to use — did not change right away. But at some point — after internet, MP3 technology, and Napster — it did (rapidly and completely). At some point, technology, economic forces, human behavior shifts brought about a major shift — not some major discontinuity or leap in underlying technologies or a suspension of the laws of supply and demand (or laws of intellectual property, for that matter), but a substantial change in how access to music was structured or arranged.

So is such a shift possible in the world of “work arrangements?”

Until quite recently, human capital-related information technology (including HCM and TMS) has not had much impact on the shape of “work arrangements.” Job Boards did not change the form of the traditional permanent employment work arrangement, and Vendor Management Systems (VMS) did not change the form of the traditional contingent/temporary/SOW work arrangements. Both of these information technology developments basically targeted improvements in talent supply chain performance, not the “restructuring” of actual “work arrangements.”

However, over the past six years, a set of forces has been converging (these include, increasing global economic competitive pressures, businesses requiring more flexible workforces and scarce talent, and changes in workforce demographics, expectations, and preferences). These forces, mixed with new possibilities engendered by integration of technologies like social, cloud, mobile, et al, have been having significant impacts on work arrangements (actually spawning new forms). Perhaps one of the most radical of these has been “crowdsourcing” work arrangements, while one of the most pervasive has been “online freelancing” enabled by online staffing platforms like oDesk, Elance, and others. Concepts of “extended workforce” (Accenture), “private talent clouds” (Elance), “workforce-as-a-service” (OnForce) are now not just fantastic ideas, but in 2013 refer to functioning “work arrangements” that have unprecedented characteristics of being fractional, variable, mobile, on demand, etc.

SIA started studying this phenomenon over the past two years, and we continue seeing clear signs of development, innovation, and growth--in what today still looks like a small spot in a petri dish. Some of these visible signs can viewed through the microscopes of two recent SIA reports, The “Human Cloud” in 2013: What It Is, and Why It Is An Emerging and Real Opportunity For Staffing Firms and “Online Staffing” Platforms: 2013 industry segment landscape.

Resource - Staffing Industry Analysts

Workforce-as-a-Service Scales to Meet IT Staffing Needs on Demand

What if you could scale your IT personnel requirements as you would computing resources? Using a workforce-as-a-service model lets you add a skilled, vetted and insured workforce when you need it and release it when you don't.

-By Sharon Florentine

Cannone says that OnForce has nearly 1,000 independent contractors signing up with the company each month, but that doesn't mean they're all hired. Applicants go through a rigorous screening process, he says, that includes a personal and skills questionnaire, an online battery of tests, a phone screening, a background check, drug testing, all to guarantee that customers are receiving 'W-2 quality' workers.

OnForce says it also uses proprietary talent matching algorithms that take more than 20 data points into account to make sure workers are a good match for the job. These algorithms are constantly reviewed based on on-site performance, and workers are given continuing assessments and performance reviews to make sure they're performing at peak levels, Cannone says.

"One issue we address with this WaaS model is the misclassification of workers - how many times have you hired someone for a position and found their skills weren't quite right? That's a costly mistake, and one we can address," he says.

Consistency and Communication

OnForce also ensures its workers are covered under the umbrella of its insurance policy, which can remove a major administrative headache for customers, says Leslie Rudolph, vice president of Operations, Field Services Division, for Tampa, Fla.-based OnForce partner Vital Networks, which delivers networking solutions, monitoring and management, as well as rapid-response support.

"We are a services delivery company, but we saw that with the increasing mobility of our customers that it was tough to provide a consistent staffing solution; we have our own field services engineers, but it was hard to communicate with them consistently, and difficult to manage all the insurance and risk management for all of them," Rudolph says. "It was becoming an administrative hassle and a quality assurance problem," she says.

"We still have our own teams of field service engineers, but we partnered with OnForce to increase our efficiency for customers," Rudolph says. "This is an innovative way to approach the business. It's flexible to the needs of our customers, and it means we can be responsive and fast at addressing their needs," she says.

Resource - CIO

How the Sharing Economy is Evolving Into Workforce-as-a-Service (Infographic)

Posted by Peter Cannone, CEO of OnForce

It would be impossible to overlook all of the talk about the collaborative, sharing economy, which is estimated to be a $110B plus market. Even Thomas Friedman penned a New York Times op-ed column on it. Not to mention IT luminary Irving Wladasky-Berger’s take on it, which recently appeared in the Wall Street Journal.

With companies like TaskRabbit and Airbnb capturing the spotlight, it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that there is a significant opportunity in the IT slice of this market. In fact, of the $3.5B that will pass through the sharing economy this year, approximately one-third of it will go toward IT.

So how exactly does IT play in today’s sharing economy and how is it evolving into Workforce-as-a-Service (WaaS)?

Well, let’s first step back and understand what we mean by the sharing economy. Jeremiah Owyang of Altimeter Group offers the best definition. He explains the sharing economy is “an economic model where ownership and access are shared between corporations, startups and people. This results in market efficiencies that bear new products, services and business growth.”

Now you already know that this whole notion of sharing isn’t exactly new. Rather, the sharing economy has resulted from the evolution of our workforce since the days of the Industrial Revolution.

During that time, the majority of employment opportunities for the first generation workforce were in manual labor and it wasn’t until the World War II economy that healthcare was introduced by employers as a recruiting tool.

As innovations in the Industrial Revolution eventually led to the Digital Revolution, the second generation workforce, marked by the rise of knowledge workers, soon outnumbered all other workers by a ratio of 4:1.

Then, as the Internet age morphed into Web 2.0 where collaboration reigns, came the third generation workforce. In this sharing economy, contract employees double as entrepreneurs carving out flexible work arrangements, funding their own healthcare, and taking more control over their destiny.

It’s not a coincidence that the sharing economy has taken off during a time of unprecedented change in the workforce, especially when it comes to IT. Let me explain.

On the one hand, you have businesses that want to optimize efficiencies without bringing on a slew of full-time employees. On the other hand, there are a growing number of skilled IT professionals that, after weighing the pros and cons of being on someone else’s payroll, voluntarily joined the ranks of the independent workforce and are thriving as entrepreneurs.

When you look at the converging forces in the economy, advancements in technology and the shifts in the traditional employer/employee arrangement, you can see how we’ve arrived at the sharing economy and how it’s evolving into the on demand “Workforce-as-a-Service” (WaaS) business model.

Going beyond tactical tasks of the sharing economy, the WaaS model applies to the fourth generation workforce. In it, knowledge workers are able to satisfy the needs of businesses by successfully executing short-term assignments, anywhere.

For example, let’s consider WaaS for IT. Imagine a business that needs to ramp up quickly or perhaps sustain an existing product line while they focus on other initiatives. In both of these real world scenarios, independent IT service professionals can help with these transitions.

WaaS is an ideal work arrangement when you look at a company’s desire for modular staff to complete a project or get geographic reach quickly, and the rise of independent contractors that want the flexibility and consistency that come from steady, short-term assignments. Yet before you embrace this model, be sure that the assignment is fully protected should anything go awry.

More specifically, what a lot of service buyers may not be aware of is the fact that many assignments are only partially protected, therefore exposing their businesses to significant risk.

If you’re a business or an independent contractor that wants to seize part of the multi-billion dollar sharing economy as it evolves into WaaS, you must have the assurance that each assignment is protected against liability, errors and omissions, and workers’ comp.

Now you may be thinking this adds too much complexity to the idea of hiring on demand but don’t let it be a gating factor. Instead, look to those proven online networks that bring together service buyers and IT service professionals and ask the tough insurance questions before you commit to bringing an independent contractor onsite.

There’s tremendous upside in the WaaS model for businesses and independent contractors as long as both sides are properly protected throughout the engagement.

With flexibility and expertise as it’s hallmarks, and the prediction that 50 percent of the American workforce will be classified as 1099s by the year 2020, it’s clear the WaaS model is here to stay.

Reference - http://insights.wired.com/profiles/blogs/how-the-sharing-economy-is-evolving-into-workforce-as-a-service#ixzz2eWQYMFZg

Poor Attendance Leads to Poor Results

By Terry Stockham, Human Capital Advisor at OnForce

According to The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, the definition of absenteeism is:”Habitual absence from work, thought to reflect employee demoralization or dissatisfaction.”

Absenteeism at work is not only about the direct costs related to an employee’s absence (sick pay, overtime, etc.), but also about the related effects that ripple throughout the organization. Here are just a few examples of the extended impacts of poor attendance:

• Safety implications: working short-handed, hiring inexperienced temporary staff, or relying on overworked employees on overtime can all lead to increased accidents and downtime, as well as have a negative impact on cost and profitability


• Productivity loss: because of reduced staff, your company may shorten certain processes to get things done


• Quality compromised: product and service defects tend to increase when you do not have sufficient staff; also, employees already working a full schedule and asked to put in additional hours tend to make more mistakes


• Performance loss: high-performing employees with good attendance will gradually become disengaged and their performance will suffer as a result of carrying shifted burdens and workload, especially over an extended period of time


• Employee turnover: poor attendance may eventually lead to more high-performing employees leaving, compared to low-performing employees. Over time, this dynamic can drastically impact your organization on multiple levels and inhibit its ability to meet the needs of customers in a quality-driven, sustainable, and profitable manner.

As you can see from these examples, attendance issues are reflected not only with employee cost, but also have cost and performance impacts that can affect your entire organization and your bottom line. While attendance is a relatively complex issue with no single solution, there are things you can look for in your organization such as:

CULTURE: Take a hard look at your culture and how employees are treated and recognized for performance. Do you have a culture of inclusion and collaboration rather than “command and control”?

TALENT: To borrow Jim Collins’ phrase: “Are you getting the right people on the bus…in the right seats?” Work environments, cultures, and jobs change over time. The right person, in the right place, at the right time, doing the right things is crucial. Conversely, mismatches result in disengagement and poor attendance.

RECOGNITION: Pay and benefits come to be perceived as entitlements to an employee in a very short time. They are important, but not true motivators. Look at how your organization recognizes the contributions of employees. It is human nature to desire and seek acknowledgment of successes and performance, which is why recognition is a cost-effective way to get lasting results with positive impacts to the bottom line.

JOB STRUCTURE: Review how your jobs are structured. Maybe it’s time for a change. Does the structure of the job challenge and motivate the employee? Does the employee feel he/she can make a difference in his/her current role? If the answer is “no,” it is time for a change. Some jobs may need to be restructured or redesigned to improve employee satisfaction with the work. If this does not help, some duties may need to be outsourced or fulfilled via an appropriate contingent labor model.

If your company has an attendance problem, the key is to act quickly, before it negatively impacts your entire organization.

Reference: OnForce

Three Ways To Deliver Exceptional Service

Guest blog by George Harris, VP of Business Development at OnForce

Whether you’re a managed service provider, an OEM, a VAR, or even a full-service company in the 3rd-party arena, achieving exceptional service is always a top part of your organizational mission. Although your product or service may be very different from the company down the street, that goal remains the same.

As George Harris, VP of Business Development at OnForce says, “There are a hundred ways to bake a cake, but some taste better than others.” How can you make sure that your efforts are resulting in a robust, tasty strategy? Here are Harris’ picks for top ways to garner exceptional service.

• With a certified, qualified tech trained on a specific product. When bringing in a tech, look for one trained by a manufacturer or who’s been through a formal training program — that way, they understand how a product is being used. Also, glance at work history and get a sense of a tech’s skills and knowledgebase. You want someone who can keep pace with innovation, and supplement existing skills with fresh ones in order to stay sharp in today’s rapidly changing business marketplace. So, find indications of that in a tech’s experience.


• Bring in a tech who understands the business environment in which your product or service is being used — knowing the details of a product is crucial, but a tech should also be savvy about how that product is affecting your business or your industry.


• Increase your company’s “soft skills” by utilizing techs who have exemplary listening and problem solving skills, as well as true passion for their work. A successful IT consultant will be flexible when on a project, dealing with unexpected issues and seeing solutions instead of problems.

Focusing on these types of strategies helps a company operate with lower margins, keeping costs in line, Harris notes: “You have a workforce that’s available now through an online platform, which helps mitigate most of the concerns through a strong vetting process, verification of certification, background and drug testing, performance reporting, and insurance, so why not make the most of that?”

Reference: OnForce

Workforce Problems: Are You Addressing the Symptoms or the Cause?

Guest Blog: Terry Stockham, Human Capital Advisor at OnForce

The Director of Sales at an FMCG organization contacts the company’s HR manager and requests sales training for his staff. Recent high turnover in the sales team has depleted the experienced staff and left him with the majority of the sales members with less than 3 months on the job. He also instructs the marketing team to create a new ad campaign to bolster slumping sales (sales have been declining over the past six months).

Three months later, the sales staff is fully trained and the new ad campaign is running, but sales are still declining. In addition, costs to conduct the sales training and support marketing efforts amounted to $3.5 million. To address this issue, the Director of Sales decides to talk with the company president and they decide to bring in a consultant.

Very quickly, the consultant discovers the real problem is in the production of the company’s products. The production process has not changed in over 20 years. High demand had taken its toll on the employees, processes, and equipment in the production department. The quantity and quality of the product line were the real cause of slumping sales! The production workforce was completely disengaged; they just didn’t care anymore. They had brought the problems forward to management many times, but their complaints were ignored. They were just told to work harder and faster.

It may seem strange that management did not recognize or address the production problems, but it is a true story! They treated the symptoms of the problem and ignored the true cause of the problem.

What can you do to avoid making the same mistake when addressing business problems? Here are a few suggestions:

1. Don’t react – respond. Do not panic and impulsively react to a symptom. Take the time needed to investigate the entire issue before taking action. Symptoms are very obvious and easy to see but causes are usually not as easy to identify.
2. Talk to ALL the people involved in the situation. Create a team comprised of a cross-section of the organization to ensure that you capture all of the critical information and perspectives needed to identify the true cause of the problem. This team approach will be important when developing the solution.
3. Gather data. Make sure that you have all of the data necessary to complete the investigation of the problem. Most serious business problems don’t happen overnight. You need “data history” to identify when, where, how, and why.
4. Test the problem/solution. Make sure you have the true cause-and-effect identified before implementing a solution across the organization. Test it on a small scale before rolling it out. If you’re “fixing” the wrong cause, you may make things worse.

Bottom line: Do it right the first time or you will be doing it again and again and again…

Reference: OnForce

Are Your Employees Disengaged?

Guest blog by Terry Stockham, Human Capital Advisor at OnForce

Are your employees productive, content, and motivated? How can you tell? Typically, employee engagement can be measured with surveys, assessment tests, and by simply observing your employees as they work. Do you see strong contributors, poor performers, or a bit of both? If you’re a manager and see less than par players on your team, beware, they are sabotaging your success and your bottom line. All it takes is just one vocal, influential, and disengaged employee to spread his/her discontent to other team members for your group’s productivity to plummet.

According to recent research (the Gallup 2013 State of the American Workplace report and the AON Hewitt Global Engagement Survey), the current global employee engagement level is at 60%, an increase from 58% in 2012. This level of engagement equates to $550 billion a year in lost productivity within American companies. Yet these same companies spend billions of dollars a year in an effort to improve employee engagement and performance, only to get very little improvement in either!

To further illustrate the negative impact that employee disengagement can have on productivity and the bottom line let’s take, for example, a service employee who completes warranty work for a large technology company. This employee’s weekly salary is $1,000 (based on a 40 hour work week, $25/hour) and receives health benefits, insurance, training, etc., all totaling $1,400 ($1,000 + $400) paid by the company.

During the 40-hour work week, the service employee performs approximately 10 hours of non-service work such as traveling to customer sites, completing paperwork, waiting between job assignments, attending meetings, taking training classes, and so forth. This means that the company is paying for 40 hours but actually getting only 30 hours of service performance, translating to about $750 ($1,000 – $250) of “lost” productivity time. But, wait, there’s more.

If we take the 30 hours of actual service work performed and factor in the global engagement level cited at the beginning of this blog, we get only 18 hours ($450) of targeted service performance (i.e., 30 hours x 60%, or $750 – $300 = $450). If we look at the bigger picture, the company is paying $1,400 for $450 of performance! This is equal to $49,500 of lost productivity per year for this employee alone. If this company has 25 service employees, it amounts to $1,235,000 in overpayment for performance!

The past two decades have shown time and again that traditional incentive programs are not working. It is time to look at innovative and flexible labor models (e.g., flex-staffing or an on demand workforce) that offer workers autonomy, while driving positive business results for you and your company. Which jobs within your organization would benefit most from these new labor models? Given the cost implications of traditional labor models, can you afford the status quo?

Reference: OnForce