Page 214 - Successful Onboarding

198 • Successful Onboarding

It is true that flawless onboarding program administration will not by
itself materially affect the Onboarding Margin (i.e., productivity or reten-
tion). If all that you invest in is cleaning up onboarding administration,
you will not likely realize any material return on investment. Even if the
administrative process is broken, and no real governance exists, new hires
will eventually receive their equipment and gain access to required sys-
tems and tools, albeit while experiencing frustrations, annoyances, or
unnecessary cost. Further, program administration can be a thankless task;
it will only garner attention insomuch as things go wrong. So why bother?
Seamless program administration plays a critical role in ensuring that
higher-impact early career progress and support, networking, and devel-
opment are properly executed. If system participants do not inform and
guide new hires toward the key resources available to them and do not play
their part more broadly, new hires are far more likely to miss out on learn-
ing or developmental opportunities critical to their success at the company.
And although program administration alone may not make or break a new
hire’s experience, flaws in execution represent one of the most common
“gripes” that you hear from new hires. “They weren’t prepared for me,” new
hires say. “I didn’t even have a place to sit.” “I had no idea where to go or
what was expected from me.” “My manager wasn’t even in the office the
whole first week to meet me.” We have all witnessed these initial impres-
sions tarnish a company’s reputation as an employer of choice.
The motive we most commonly hear about for improving program
administration is wringing cost and wasted energy out of the process.
Automation and centralized oversight can simplify and standardize the
onboarding experience and reap significant cost savings for the organi-
zation. As senior management realizes the cost benefits, many of our
onboarding clients find that improved program administration builds
momentum, generating the capital and organizational energy to attack
higher-impact program upgrades. Governance, meanwhile, is essentially
a higher-level form of administration. It ensures that the firm is doing
what the program design says it should do; i.e., address the most critical
issues uncovered in the diagnostic. It also involves evaluating on a regu-
lar basis (we recommend annually or upon conclusion of a business cycle,
whichever is shorter) whether the program design remains the right
answer and assessing consequences to participants for failing to perform