I just read this article
. As you might know, I'm one who goes in and does pre and post implementation audits for HR/Payroll and related software. My company focuses on Kronos Workforce products implementation, best practices and support.
So as you might imagine, I'm often interested in numbers such as are in this article. Part of my job is creating or validating them. Still, one must ask when presented like this, "Who says there is a 110% ROI and how were those figures calculated?" In my experience ROI is such a soft number that it's really only useful for internal slapping on the back. Not that I doubt the ROI numbers. They're just not useful without detail. Same thing for reducing payroll error by 90%. My first question isn't about the validity of the number it's more, "Why not 100%?". Yea, call me crazy, but I think Payroll should be right, all the time. So scream at me cause you've got 30k employees and how can it be!