SHRM Released their Human Capital Benchmark Report this past week and it’s loaded with a ton of metrics to compare your HR and TA operations against. The survey data comes from over 2,000 HR leaders and pros, and it’s pretty recent being collected earlier this year. Some interesting things I pulled from the report:
– Average cost of hire is $4100. This seemed high to me, but when you really analyze the cost of hire and add in the cost of your staff, benefits, technology, marketing, etc., it adds up quickly. Most organizations leave out the cost of staff when they figure the cost of hire and report lower costs. I like the number.
– 66% of organizations report to Not having a Succession Plan. This number shocked me because I figured most organizations would just lie and say they have one, but we know the truth, most don’t! I tell HR Tech companies all the time, if you really want to make some money, figure out Succession, because normal HR leaders can’t.
– Only 55% of “Head’s of HR” report to the CEO or Owner. I would have thought this number would have been higher in the 85%-ish range. Looks like HR as a function still, has some proof-of-value to do when it comes to respect in reporting.
– $10,211 is the average HR-to-Expense per FTE. This is a great number to have when building budgets as a ballpark. Don’t get too crazy, though, the median is only $1,667. That means we have an industry within HR of the “Haves” and the “Have-Nots”, kind of like America!
– 61% of organizations offer Tuition Reimbursement. This just seems silly that it’s not in the 90’s. No one really uses this benefit, those that do stay for a lifetime, it’s a great selling tool because people think they’ll use it. It’s ridiculous only 61% of organizations have this, it almost costs you nothing long term.
– Average Time-to-Fill is 42 days! If you actually think this statistic is important you’re an idiot. Taken out of context this metric is meaningless. 2000+ organizations, thousands of positions, hundreds of markets and industries. This number means nothing. Don’t pay attention to it and measure yourself against it.
– 66% of your employees participate in your 401K on average. My goal is 100%. It’s the one thing I know actually helps in retention, as those who participate in your retirement plan are less likely to leave your organization and have a longer tenure on average.
Click through the link above to get the report if you want all the detail, there’s a bunch more that I couldn’t fit in here and some other very interesting stuff.
One word of caution when measuring your organization and yourself against macro-data, realize you’re not ‘average’. You are a unique and perfect butterfly. Just kidding, you’re actually less than average, statistically. Unless you’re lucky enough to work for a giant corporation with endless resources.
The challenge with succession planning is quality. Folks want a quick fix. Once you explain it’s more than writing a name in a box, that it takes time to actually develop and nurture your bench, the initiative often gets “de-prioritzed” because there are “more important” things to do.
Tim, here’s where the lack of knowledge of probability and statistics befuddles SHRM and their brethren every time – the publishing of “average” without standard deviations and without breakdown by industries and subindustries, locations, job levels, etc.. No context, no comparisons.
What these reports do is celebrate average. Average.
Research has shown that tuition reimbursement benefits actually hurt most organizations and have little payback. It works if you are a large large organization with succession planning. You can then take that MBA that you paid for and promote and utilize your investment. Most organizations don’t have that capability. Therefore you pay for advanced education that you do not use and therefore the employer finds another job where their education can be utilized (or at lease earn them higher pay). So, in effect, you or subsidizing your own turnover rate.