making talent management technology work for nonprofits · 2017-07-11 · making talent management...

Making Talent Management Technology Work for Nonprofits

M A K I N G T A L E N T M A N A G E M E N T T E C H N O L O G Y W O R K F O R N O N P R O F I T S 3

Executive SummaryOrganizations of all shapes, sizes, and classifications are wrestling with the issue of how best to attract, hire,

develop, and retain the talent needed to achieve their objectives. HR leaders have identified talent management

as a top need in the past few years, and there is every reason to expect that the focus on talent will continue for the

foreseeable future. Every organization must address fundamental issues pertaining to talent (e.g. engaging employees,

determining future talent needs, preparing for leadership change, communicating with a diverse/multigenerational

workforce). While emerging talent management technologies can help any organization improve these processes,

nonprofit (NP) organizations face some unique challenges.

Although NPs have been able to leverage a strong mission and sense of purpose to attract qualified candidates, this

advantage has been offset by significant resource constraints. While HR departments in many leading firms have begun

to implement integrated talent management (ITM), a holistic approach that breaks down functional silos and weaves

together many strategic HR processes (e.g. recruiting, learning, performance management, career development, suc-

cession planning, compensation), NPs have had to focus on the “basics” of HR (core data management, payroll,

compliance, etc.). Many have come to the conclusion that merely delivering the HR basics (often with antiquated

technologies) will not be sufficient to keep the next generation of key contributors and developing leaders engaged

and growing in the face of significant barriers (personal sacrifices required of NP executives, financial concerns, lack of

mentorship and support from incumbent executives, and limited career advancement). In response, NPs are following

the lead of early adopters in the commercial sector and deploying ITM processes and enabling technologies.

HRchitect recommends that all organizations assess more than application functionality and cost when

selecting ITM enabling technologies, and instead prioritize a broader set of selection criteria. The unique

characteristics of nonprofits will tend to impact these additional “decision drivers” in the following ways:

• VENDOR VIABILITY & INTERACTIONS – Nonprofits have tended to skimp on due dili-gence and purchase the cheapest solution; instead, be rigorous and validate the vendor’s industry focus on this sector.

• PACKAGE USER EXPERIENCE – nonprofits often are short on funds for training, so ap-plication must be as user-friendly and intuitive as possible for employees, managers and HR administrators.

• SERVICE AND SUPPORT – nonprofits usually need more services due to limited internal re-sources, but lack budget for increased vendor support; check references to validate vendor support claims!

• GLOBAL CAPABILITY – more nonprofits are “going global”, regardless of size; vendor claims regarding global and country-specific functionality should be carefully validated during the selection process.

• EASE OF INTEGRATION/INTEROPERABILITY – ITM vendors may not have experience inte-grating to aging and/or “off brand” core HR systems used by nonprofits; this adds to inte-gration complexity and cost.

• PACKAGE CONFIGURABILITY – limited in-ternal IT support is common in nonprofits, therefore it must be easy for the HR adminis-trator to configure and manage the new ITM application by themselves.

• TECHNOLOGY & SCALABILITY – watch out for low network bandwidth, older PCs & op-erating systems, and multiple browsers/plug-ins, all of which can reduce system perfor-mance or cause issues.

4 M A K I N G T A L E N T M A N A G E M E N T T E C H N O L O G Y W O R K F O R N O N P R O F I T S

IntroductionO rganizations of all shapes, sizes, and classifica-

tions are wrestling with the issue of how best to

attract, hire, develop, and retain the talent needed to

achieve their objectives. In fact, respondents to the

Towers Watson HR Service Delivery and Technology

Survey have identified talent management as the top

HR service delivery issue for the past six years running,

driven by demographic shifts, shortages of critical-skill

employees, and changing business priorities.1 There is

every reason to expect that the focus on talent will con-

tinue for the foreseeable future, and HR departments

will therefore need to answer a number of critical tal-

ent-related questions such as:

• Howdowe continuously engageand re-engageour employees?

• What talent do we need as the organizationevolves? How is that different from now? What are the current and future gaps?

• Whichpositionsshouldwegrowfromwithin?

• Isourtalentproperlydeployednow?

• Howdowekeepthebestandbrightestgrowingwith us?

• Areweprepared forplanned/unplanned leader-ship changes?

• How do we connect and communicate with anincreasingly multigenerational workforce on their terms rather than ours?

Clearly, these questions must be addressed by any

organization (regardless of nonprofit/for-profit status)

in order to be considered an “employer of choice.” It’s

also a given that emerging talent management technol-

ogies can dramatically impact any organization’s ability

to improve these processes; many firms are utilizing

an “integrated talent management” approach to drive

current implementations. However, nonprofit orga-

nizations have some distinctive characteristics (both

positive and challenging) that affect the deployment of

new technology-enabled talent processes. The purpose

of this white paper is to explore some unique factors

impacting talent management for nonprofits (NPs),

and examine how technology evaluation, selection, and

implementation can be tailored for these organizations

to increase their chances of success.

Integrated Talent Management DefinedIntegrated Talent Management (ITM) is a comprehensive

approach to maximizing the engagement, performance,

and effectiveness of the workforce by deploying integrated

processes and enabling technologies. ITM technologies

are a subset of Human Capital Management (HCM) ap-

plications and include the following functions:

• Recruiting(aka talent acquisition, applicant track-ing) – includes requisition creation, job posting, candidate portals, sourcing/searching, inter-viewing process management, and professional, hourly, and contingent recruiting.

• Onboarding – includes hiring process admin-istration, forms processing, provisioning (e.g., security badges, network access, space/equip-ment/supplies), and orientation support.

• Performance andGoalsManagement– includes goals management, appraisal automation, multi-rater/360 degree feedback, and linkage to devel-opment needs.

• Learning Management – includes learning ad-ministration, tracking of formal and informal learning events, content catalog/partners, con-tent management and delivery, and content de-velopment tools.

• CompensationManagement – includes compen-sation administration, compensation planning/allocation, and incentive compensation manage-ment (not commission-based).

• SuccessionPlanning/Management – “top down” (organization’s perspective) approach that in-cludes talent identification, potential and readi-ness tracking, and succession planning.

• Career Development/Planning – “bottom up” (worker’s perspective) approach that includes ca-reer path analysis and career development plans.

• Talent Profile and Competency Management – tracks employee skills, competencies, preferenc-es, and other characteristics in one place for use by other ITM functions. This area also includes competency development/modeling and integra-tion to third-party competency providers.

1 Towers Watson 2012 HR Service Delivery and Technology Survey Executive Summary Report, page 6.


• Assessments – includes tools to author and ad-minister multiple types of assessments (pre- and post-hire) across the ITM suite.

• Workforce Planning – includes workforce needs analysis and projections (demand side), labor availability analysis (supply side), and organiza-tional scenario modeling.

• Communication and Collaboration – addresses the needs of ITM functional areas to foster infor-mation sharing and collaboration across multiple functional ITM areas via social networking tools, mobile-enabled applications, and internally fo-cused knowledge-sharing systems.

• MetricsandAnalytics – delivers talent-related in-formation and analysis to stakeholders in order to drive adjustments to talent programs and im-prove the effectiveness of processes.

• Offboarding – ensures a secure and orderly tran-sition of an employee out of the organization, in-cluding elimination of access to networks and ap-plications, and termination of benefits and other employment related programs

The goal of ITM is to break down existing process and

information barriers between HR functional “silos” by

weaving together disconnected HR processes. Done right,

ITM should permeate the entire employment/talent life

cycle of the organization. Figure 1 shows the conceptual

relationship between functional areas (grey honeycomb)

and ITM enablers (assessments, metrics and analytics, on

/off boarding, communication, collaboration, workforce

planning), where each function leverages information

gained from other areas and contributes to the overall

effectiveness and impact of ITM processes.

Nonprofit Characteristics and Challenges

At a high level, NP organizations are trying to focus

on talent and achieve ITM objectives in a manner

similar to that of for-profit enterprises. One advantage

that NPs have historically enjoyed over most for-profit

companies has been that of purpose. Many NPs have

been able to attract altruistic, talented individuals who

are so aligned with the firm’s mission, vision, and val-

ues that they forego the salary, benefits, and perks they

might garner working at a commercial organization.

However, many NPs have discovered that a compel-

ling, clearly articulated mission does not guarantee

an engaged workforce over the long term. This is true

at all levels of the workforce, but is especially evident

to those looking to develop the next generation of NP

leaders. A 2007 study of NP organizations, “Ready to

Lead?,” indicates that significant barriers exist when at-

tempting to develop leaders:

• Personal sacrifices (long hours, compromisedpersonal lives) that are significant deterrents to those considering executive positions

• Financial concerns (NP salaries and actual orperceived insufficient lifelong earning potential)

• Lackofmentorshipandsupportfromincumbentexecutives

• Inherentnonprofitstructurallimitationsandob-scure avenues to career advancement that are obstacles to leadership opportunities

For the vast majority of NP organizations, lack of

resources (capital, financial, and people) is an underly-

ing issue that directly impacts all the issues described

above; the HR function has had to focus on “doing

the basics” of core data management, salary/payroll/

benefits administration, compliance/policy/procedure,

and employee relations. After working with a number of

NP clients, HRchitect believes that basic HR functions,

even if executed flawlessly, can never truly create or

enhance worker engagement and motivation. It is not

enough for HR to just make sure everyone gets paid

and has benefits and an accurate paycheck. On the flip

side, note that failure to do the basics well can be a

huge dis-satisfier and can easily demotivate employees.

On/O� Boarding Workforce Planning A

ssessments

Met

rics

& A

naly

tics

Communication C

ollaboration

Talent Pro�le & Competency Management

Learning

Performance & Goals Mgmt

Career Development

Succession Planning

Compensation

Recruiting

Figure 1 - ITM Conceptual Model


The authors of “Ready to Lead?” seem to be in agree-

ment that NP leadership must do more than just the

HR basics; the study makes a number of recommen-

dations, many of which fall directly in line with the

integrated talent management approach:

• Replacedatedpowerstructuresthatalienateemerging leadership talent

• Helpstaffbuildstrongexternalconnections and networks

• Mentorpotentialleadersintheirorganizations

• Beagoodrolemodel

• Payreasonablesalariesandprovidebenefitstoallay financial concerns

• Engageinsuccessionplanning

• Recognizegenerationaldifferences,includingstyle, approach, and priorities2

Additional research from integrated talent manage-

ment provider Cornerstone OnDemand indicates that

NPs are indeed adopting an ITM approach in order to

better manage talent in their organizations. A survey conducted in July/August 2012 indicates which ITM processes are rated most important (rating average on

a 1–5 scale, 5 being most important)4.

Note that all ITM areas scored above a 3, indicating that all are considered at least somewhat important, but that some functions were of primary importance and needed to be addressed first. In HRchitect’s experience, the importance of these areas is directly related to the relative lack of systems support for “basic” ITM functions such as learning, goal set-ting, and performance, which must be supported before an NP can turn attention to more complex issues such as career development and succession planning. Note also that the talent profile (ranked third by respondents) is the fundamental repository of talent data that needs to be populated to support multiple ITM processes. Given that this data resides in spreadsheets and other isolated systems in most NPs, it’s not surprising that this function ranked so

highly among those taking the survey.

2 M. Cornelius, P. Corvington, A. Ruesga. Ready to Lead? Next Generation Leaders Speak Out, page 16. 3 Ibid, 25–26.4 Cornerstone OnDemand ITM Nonprofit Survey, July/August 2012 – 24 respondents.

Figure 2 - Most important ITM processes for nonprof its


Respondents were also asked to indicate their top three barriers to achieving ITM in their organization,

which led to a very familiar set of responses (Figure 3)

In addition, more than 88% of respondents indicated that “lack of IT infrastructure/support” was either a

top barrier or the second biggest barrier to implementing ITM5.

Directionally, the research clearly shows that NP organizations recognize the need to better manage their

talent via the ITM approach and would like to make progress toward adopting it. However, there are major

barriers (chief among them is the lack of resources) that stand in the way. How can resource-constrained

NP organizations overcome these obstacles?

HRchitect recommends that all organizations rank and prioritize “decision drivers” to facilitate the selec-

tion of the most appropriate ITM technology. The remainder of this paper will define these decision drivers,

discuss how they are impacted by NP status and characteristics, and offer some recommendations on how

NPs can most effectively utilize this approach.

ITM Software Decision Drivers

HRchitect’s experience with more than 2,000 HCM

technology projects for more than 900 clients has

revealed that a singular focus on feature/function re-

quirements can result in a flawed software selection

process and, ultimately, an implementation that does

not deliver value to the organization. There are a num-

ber of other criteria that a project team should factor

into the overall evaluation to ensure a more balanced

view of the available vendors; one of the team’s first

tasks should be prioritizing these “decision drivers”

based on their organization’s unique characteristics,

strategies, and priorities:

• VendorViabilityandInteractions

• PackageUserExperience

• Service&Support

• GlobalCapability

• EaseofIntegration/Interoperability

• PackageConfigurability

• Technology&Scalability

• PackageFunctionality

• Cost/ROI

Figure 3 - Top 3 barriers to achieving ITM

5 Ibid.


Basingan ITMsoftware selectionondecisiondrivers

provides the following benefits:

• Afact-based,objectiveprocessforITMtechnology evaluation

• Greaterdepthoffitwithabroaderscopeoforganizational requirements

• Betteruserbuy-inacrossalltherolesinthefirm

• Potentialforincreasedproductlongevityduetobetter depth of fit

• Amorecompleterealizationoftheproject’sreturn on investment (ROI)

Let’s look at each of the decision drivers in detail, and

highlight the differences in impact on software evalu-

ations for NP organizations compared to for-profits.

Vendor Viability and Interactions – the best software

functionality in the world doesn’t help if the vendor is

not around to support and enhance the application.

Viabilityisusuallyanaggregateratingcomposedofthe

following elements: financial status of company (such as

funding, cash position, cash burn rate, and profitability),

market position, strength of product landscape/road

map, vision, execution, and channels/partners. Potential

metrics supporting the ranking may include client “wins”

in recent quarters, number of customers, number of

employees, or likelihood to be acquired. There is also a

subjective analysis of the vendor’s culture and what kind

of a partner they will be. In addition, the project team

should take advantage of the company CFO and his/her

staff’s expertise to help assess the financial health of the

vendors being evaluated.

Historically, NPs have tended not to be very rigorous

about vendor viability, often skimping on due diligence

and just purchasing the cheapest solution available.

This kind of short-term focus has resulted in some NPs

being left “holding the bag” when their chosen solu-

tion provider went out of business or was acquired by

another vendor with different product goals. To reduce

the risk of this happening, HRchitect recommends

that NPs conduct a rigorous due-diligence process

that includes an evaluation of the financial health of

the vendor. NPs should also check to see if the vendor

has an association with a foundation and/or a vertical

focus on NPs, as either is a solid demonstration of

long-term commitment to the NP sector.

Package User Experience – the rapid emergence of

easy-to-use social networking and commercial applica-

tions (e.g., Google, Amazon) has increased the impor-

tance of this criterion for most organizations, especially

those that have a higher percentage of younger workers

who are “digital natives.” Overall user experience is

usually determined by demo script hands-on scoring,

results of any “sandbox” or “conference room pilot”

usability testing, and reference feedback. How intuitive

is the system? What is the number of clicks required to

complete a transaction? How easy is it for end users to

navigate through the system? Are the screens cluttered

or clean? Can the application appearance be configured

to reflect the client style guide? How much training per

client role will be required? Operational effectiveness is

another key component of the user experience; this as-

sesses the impact the vendor application will have on

the staffing and running of the HR function(s) covered

by the software.

This criterion is important to the NP organization in

a number of ways. There is usually not a lot of budget

available to train end users, so the application must

be as “trainerless” as possible to increase the chance

of adoption by the employee and manager population.

With generally less IT support and limited HR head

count available for system administration, the ITM app

must also be easy for the HR admin to configure and

operate. Finally, the user experience needs to accom-

modate the expectations of all those altruistic Millen-

nials who are entering the NP workforce in droves and

have little patience with HR applications that can’t be

easily accessed via smart phones, can’t connect with

their favorite social platforms, and are generally cum-

bersome to use. A generally poor user experience is a

huge dis-satisfier that can negate all your other strong

efforts toward implementing ITM, so make sure that

your chosen vendor delivers a strong user experience!

The rapid emergence of easy-to-use social networking and commercial applications has increased the importance of the package user experiece.


Service and Support – of primary importance in this

category is the breadth and quality of the vendor’s

professional services offerings and customer-facing

support functions. Prospects should look at the size/

tenure/hours of support staff, the vendor’s imple-

mentation methodology, and especially how vendor

liability is defined within the service-level agreement

(e.g., issue escalation/resolution process). If the

solution is hosted by the vendor, then another set of

criteria must be weighed, including the hosting facil-

ity security (e.g., access to buildings, access to data,

extent of background checks of staff), data backup and

disaster-recovery procedures, and compliance with the

prospect’s hosting site standards.

NPs are often “caught between a rock and a hard

place” with vendor service and support; there is usually

a greater need for vendor client services due to limited

internal resources, but the budget for support is often

lower.Vendorapproachestoserviceandsupportvary

greatly in the ITM market, and therefore customer ref-

erence checks (of your own “back channel” references

as well as those supplied by the vendor) are critical. Re-

member that vendors are in business to make money,

and it is difficult to make NP engagements profitable.

Therefore, don’t be surprised by vendor efforts to

qualify your organization during the evaluation process

to ensure they can meet your needs cost-effectively.

Global Capability – as one might expect, this decision

driver addresses the extent to which the vendor soft-

ware supports multiple languages, currencies, and/

or country-specific legislative and regulatory require-

ments. It is important to understand any plans your

organization may have for expanding into additional

countries. Additional needs include Safe Harbor certi-

fication, data privacy regulations, data center require-

ments, and any country-specific legislative support

(e.g.,Sarbanes-Oxley,BaselII,HIPAA).

HRchitect’s work with NP clients has revealed the in-

creasing importance of global capability over the past

five years. We find that the need for global capabilities

is generally independent of size, especially for NPs;

organizations with several hundred employees and/

or contract consultants can easily have operations in

more than thirty countries, which adds to the complex-

ity of ongoing operations. NP project teams evaluating

ITM solutions should carefully vet vendor claims made

in RFP responses by asking for further validation dur-

ing demonstrations, and verifying actual capabilities

with references by customers that are operating the

application in multiple geographies.

Ease of Integration/Interoperability – regardless of

the scope or extent of the application under consider-

ation, it will need to connect with other HR and enter-

prise systems. Even though there has been some gen-

eral progress in building better integration frameworks

and enabling technologies, most organizations still

underestimate the cost and time needed to integrate

these systems, which suggests that the criteria should

be given a higher priority. The criteria rating should

include an assessment of the application’s integration

framework, application programming interfaces (APIs),

and ease of integration with third-party applications.

In addition, this category examines the extent to which

the vendor has implemented services-oriented archi-

tecture (SOA) to enable/increase interoperability, and

how well the vendor’s ITM modules integrate with each

other (strong integration between modules is definitely

not a given in this era of acquisition).

There are several interesting nuances to integration

in the NP sector. NPs may not always have a “brand

name” core HR system, and it will likely not be the

latest version. While ITM vendors are used to integrat-

ing to multiple “back end” HR systems, they may not

have experienced the “off brand” core HR system being

used by the NP. This may add to the time and expense

needed to complete the integration, as well as increase

the cost of support over the life of the implementation.

NP project teams should make sure their ITM request

for proposal (RFP) and demonstration script clearly

indicate which systems need integrations, and examine

the integration tools and framework to ensure the

chosen vendor can truly execute on promises of easy

integration to multiple NP enterprise applications,

some of which may be using legacy architectures and

development tools.

Even though there has been some general progress in building better integration frameworks and enabling technologies, most organizations still underestimate the cost and time needed to integrate these system

1 0 M A K I N G T A L E N T M A N A G E M E N T T E C H N O L O G Y W O R K F O R N O N P R O F I T S

Package Conf igurability – this criterion addresses

the ability of the software to make changes in applica-

tion panels/pages, workflow, user-defined fields, and

reporting without customization. How robust is the

system administration “workbench” for end users,

and how self-reliant can the client ultimately become

from vendor resources? Prospects should assess the

comprehensiveness of the configuration parameters

for the system in order to determine how much of the

system can be tailored to their requirements without

impacting system upgrades.

The ability of the HR administrator to quickly and easily

configure the ITM application is even more critical for

an NP than for a for-profit company, as IT support for

NPs tends to be extremely limited. Therefore, any abil-

ity of the application to evolve to fit changes to HR pro-

cesses is in the hands of the HR system administrator,

and thus it needs to be easy. NP project teams should

assess configuration tool robustness and ease of use

during the RFP and demonstration phases, and check

with vendor references to verify that customers are do-

ing the lion’s share of configuration duties themselves,

without IT or vendor support.

Technology and Scalability – often a “knockout”

criterion (e.g., a vendor that is not able to satisfy the

client’s standards is eliminated from further consider-

ation), this item examines overall fit with the organiza-

tion’s tech standards/conventions and assesses the

strengths/qualities of the vendor’s technology strategy

and infrastructure. From a scalability standpoint, does

the software and vendor operational environment have

the “horsepower” to meet the current and anticipated

future processing volumes of your organization? De-

pending on the particular functionality being selected,

specific measures range from requisition and applicant

volumes to the number of worker records and user

counts. Prospects should also look at the bandwidth of

the vendor-hosting center as well as the performance

of the software to identify possible bottlenecks.

This criterion has a unique impact on the NP organi-

zation in two main ways. First, an NP is more likely

than a for-profit organization of similar size to have a

hodge-podge of different browsers, PC hardware, and

network infrastructure, which is likely to complicate

both implementation and ongoing operations. Second,

NP employees have a greater chance of needing to

access the application from locations that have low

network bandwidth; this may significantly impact sys-

tem response time. Project teams undergoing an ITM

evaluation should work with IT to gather a complete

inventory of currently supported applications, brows-

ers, and networks. They should especially watch out

for severely out-of-date PCs, or other enterprise ap-

plications that require a different version of a plug-in

(e.g., Adobe Flash, Java) than your proposed solution,

as chances are good that users will be frustrated when

the ITM application refuses to work or performs slowly.

Package Functionality – this is generally given an

overall higher priority compared to the other decision

drivers at the beginning of the project; however, most

organizations need to break this criterion down into

the various functional areas to be covered by the ap-

plication (see the ITM definition earlier in this paper).

No matter the type of project, there is almost always a

priority order of functionality, driven by major organi-

zational “pain points.” Therefore, any project team is

likely to have to prioritize the most critical functionality

that will drive system selection.

Some specific functional areas will generally receive

greater attention from NPs than from their for-profit

brethren. For example, NPs often must track multiple

funding sources (e.g., grants, endowments) and tie

specific jobs/positions to one or more funding sources

by a fixed-dollar amount, percentage, or other method.

The need to support encumbrance accounting is another

common functional requirement for NPs, as is the re-

quirement for a flexible ad hoc reporting tool to satisfy

a diverse set of reporting requests from various leaders

and functions. Information on functionality is gathered

throughout the selection process, but often validated dur-

ing the demo phase and verified by customer references.

M A K I N G T A L E N T M A N A G E M E N T T E C H N O L O G Y W O R K F O R N O N P R O F I T S 1 1

Cost/ROI – always important, the focus on cost has

certainly increased during the economic downturn,

as firms now scrutinize every potential investment to

the nth degree. In most cases this criterion reflects

the total cost of ownership for the solution over a

multiyear period (three and five years are the most

common periods). Often part of this criterion is cost

allocation – how the cost of ownership will be shared

between the client’s various business units/companies

(e.g., charge-backs). This rating normally includes soft-

ware purchase or rental, hosting or subscription fees,

implementation services fees, client resources needed

during implementation and post-implementation,

hardware, and any other third-party costs.

ITM solution costs directly impact the NP sector in a

number of ways. Often NPs have quite sophisticated

desires for ITM but very limited funding for enabling

technologies to support it – in other words, “sushi”

tastes on a “Filet-O-Fish” budget. Additionally, budget

for implementing an ITM solution may be there one

month and gone the next, depending on the impact

of fund-raising ebbs and flows on overall organiza-

tional cash flow. Making ITM happen on a reduced

budget is certainly a challenge; HRchitect’s advice to

NP organizations is to realize that the ITM with the

cheapest quote given at the front end of a project is

not necessarily the cheapest to own over the life of the

application – one must take into account not only up-

front costs but ongoing operational expenses as well.

Therefore, NP project teams should develop a rigor-

ous total cost of ownership (TCO) model for at least

a three-year period (five years is advised) in order to

present the most accurate picture to those responsible

for approving the project.

Information on functionality is gathered throughout the selection process, but often validated during the demo phase and verified by customer references.

SummaryDespite lingering uncertainty over the economy, both NP and for-profit organizations are

focusing on talent management, and are investing in the ITM concept and applications.

NPs are generally trying to achieve the same ITM objectives as for-profit companies, but

must respond differently to key software selection criteria in order to pick the best-fit solu-

tion. HRchitect recommends developing a set of these decision drivers as early as possible

in the selection process, gaining consensus within the organization as to the relative priority,

and using the ranking as a guide throughout the software selection process. In addition, NPs

should seek out technology providers that have experience with addressing and overcom-

ing the significant challenges faced by this sector. Following these recommendations will

increase the chances of your NP implementing efficient, effective, and impactful integrated

talent management processes to develop and manage the talent that is needed to meet your

current and future organizational objectives.

About Cornerstone OnDemand

Cornerstone OnDemand is a leading global provider of a comprehensive learning and talent management solution.

We enable organizations to meet the challenges they face in empowering their people and maximizing the productivity

of their human capital. Our integrated software-as-a-service (SaaS) solution consists of the Cornerstone Recruiting

Cloud, the Cornerstone Performance Cloud, the Cornerstone Learning Cloud and the Cornerstone Extended

Enterprise Cloud. Our clients use our solution to source and recruit top talent, develop employees throughout their

careers, engage all employees effectively, improve business execution, cultivate future leaders, and integrate with

their external networks of customers, vendors and distributors. Visit us on the Web at www.csod.com.

About HRchitect

HRchitect is the leader in HR systems strategic consulting. As the premier Human Capital Management (HCM)

and Talent Management Systems consulting firm, we offer end-to-end HR technology consulting services focused

around strategic planning, evaluation/selection, project management and implementation of HR systems, Talent

Management Systems, Talent Acquisition Systems, and Workforce Management software. In over 15 years, we have

worked on over 2000 successful engagements for more than 900 clients around the world. HRchitect is a name you

can trust as your one-stop shop for all your HR technology consulting needs. For more information about HRchitect,

please visit HRchitect.com.

making talent management technology work for nonprofits · 2017-07-11 · making talent management...

Documents