W here does your contingent workforce management (CWM) program stack up against the IQNavigator community of CWM programs? You will have a great opportunity to compare your program against peers in both your industry and with similar annual spend at this year’s IQNsiders event.
To help you break the ice, I have compiled two to three industry benchmarks on CWM program maturity that will provide for some great discussion during networking and breakout sessions this year in Phoenix. These benchmarks include comparisons of several common CWM program statistics, as a means of exposing differences in program definitions, program objectives, and their related sourcing strategies.
Here are some of the basic statistics that I believe most companies will want to focus on in comparing their programs against industry peers, and against programs of similar annual spend:
- Size: Total geographic (regional) spend, by CW and SOW
- Activity: Total assignments in previous calendar year (2014)
- Job Types/Scope: Total job titles active or filled in the period, along with job titles added/merged in the period
- CWM Program Adoption: Total suppliers utilized in the period
- CWM Program Focus: Percentage of sourcing from requisition, targeted order, or other
- CWM Program Quality: Percentage of CW assignments completed to planned end date (i.e., full duration)
- CWM Speed: Average time to fill for most active assignments (i.e., most volume)
- CWM Competitive Advantage: Average time to fill for most ‘strategic’ of roles, where time to fill can have greatest impact
Each of these measures could be taken out of context, or could vary considerably with both seasonal and strategic business changes in the corporation’s CWM program. However, a comparison of these gross measures also provides a glimpse at the relative success of each toward CWM program optimization:
- Has your company rationalized the titles it has participating?
- Has your company optimized the use of particular suppliers, by job category/labor type?
- Has your company achieved cost savings through its sourcing methods?
- Is your company delivering the highest quality talent for hiring managers, as evidenced by the number of ‘completed’ assignments?
As part of these discussions, I anticipate we will get into discussions of program maturity, and whether each of these programs has achieved its full potential, or realized tangible value for their corporations. I believe that lurking in these comparisons of supplier optimization, sourcing methods, and CWM program quality will emerge a number of ‘best practices’ and ‘landmines’ with which most of our IQNavigator customer and partner community will resonate, or personally identify. I am excited to share and discuss these benchmarks with this year’s IQNsiders attendees, and will plan to capture these insights for our broader IQNavigator customer/partner community.
If you are interested in a benchmarking discussion of your IQNavigator program against peers, a discussion of these measures relative to your program goals, and an introduction to IQNavigator’s new Strategic Solutions team, please send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org. I hope to see many of you in Phoenix!