Loading

Subscribe to this Blog

Your email:

Are you preparing for an implementation or upgrade?

Kronos Implementation Strategy

Download the WFM Implementation Strategy White Paper

About Bryan

Resume Pic of Bryan deSilvaMusician & Yin Style Bagua practitioner. Over twenty years of software implementations and upgrades, project management, systems and applications development experience with a current focus on ADP eTime & Kronos Timekeeper/HR systems implementation. 

The "Kronos Guy" Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

PARALLEL THINKING

  
  
  
  

PARALLEL FESTIVUS POLESWe have two client projects underway at Improv now that have “Parallel Testing” on the project plan.    In my experience these appear to come pre-printed on Kronos HRIS/Payroll Project Plans from the factory like Christmas and Hanukah do on a Calendar. It’s there at the end even if you only celebrate Festivus. I recently read a blog on HRIS projects that went as far as this statement about parallel testing:

“How do you determine if your new HRIS/payroll system is performing as you expect it should?  It’s called Parallel Testing.”

The article goes on to say “Parallel Testing is also arguably the most important part of a HRIS/payroll implementation because it provides assurances that employees’ pay is being calculated correctly.”

I always liked that word ‘assurance’. Particularly when Insurance companies started using it in their names as in “Federated Assurance Company…pay us money and if you have a loss we will be there to assure you everything is gonna be okay!”

As it turns out, both our clients are changing the pay policies and rules at go live and are also heavy users of Kronos Workforce Scheduler.  Both situations make it practically impossible to do a true parallel test.  I pointed this out to the first client very early on in the project.

“But we gave our risk management people assurances we would be doing a parallel test”.  Darn.  There is that word ‘assurance’ again. 

We finally got the client to see there could not be an ‘apples to apples’ comparison between the old and new systems.  I then proposed we drop the word ‘parallel’ from the project plan.  You’d have thought I canceled Festivus on them.

The second client agreed early on that they couldn’t do a parallel test and wanted to call it a “modified parallel test”.   There was nothing parallel about it but they just had gotten so used using the word they just couldn’t stand to drop it.  Arguably you would be foolish to put a new HRIS/TIMEKEEPING/PAYROLL system in without a parallel test!  Well… let me argue then.

Okay. I get the fact that if you take a bunch of punches from the old machinery and put them thru the new machinery and they come up with the same pay for the same period you probably aren’t too screwed up…but most important? 

Like my father says—you can’t control quality at the end, you are going to have to build it in in the first place!  At Improv we have seen way too many new clients invite us in around month 8 of parallel testing and it STILL isn’t right.  Of course most clients plan only a few pay periods at most.  Which periods then? Typically the most recent ones around the time you are ready to go live because those are the ones with the actuals available that also align with current pay policies. These, of course, are rarely representative of the most complex or high risk areas involving pay.  So why is this such a great test then?

We don’t except this in other critical builds like cars!  “Oh yeah, we tested the brakes and bumpers as to what they’d see in an average day with an average driver and we can assure you it performed okay”.  Personally I want you to test it like my uncle Louie is gonna drive it with 4 bald tires and stuffed with 500 lbs of Festivus fruit cake in the back. 

If I had more time I could go into the tenants of Festivus but someone else is going to have to explain the religious fervor over parallel testing to me one more time.  No presents? No Fruitcake? What exactly are you celebrating again?

Comments

WHEN I WORK FROM 2100-0500 AND THEN START MY REG SHIF FROM 0530-1330 KRONOS WILL NOT CLOCK ON THE NEXT DAY BUT STAY ON THE NIGHT BEFORE NOONE KNOW HOW TO FIX IT. I WORK OT 2100-0500 ON12/18/2011 AND START MY REG SHIFT 12/19/2011 IS SHOWS ME ABSENTS BECAUSE IT SHOWS ME WORKING 16HRS ON 12/18. CAN YOU EXPLAIN
Posted @ Thursday, January 19, 2012 2:15 PM by BETTY
I couldn't agree more. Running parallel does nothing more than prolong (ok, drag out) the implementation. The end results are always different (and usually better on the replacement system) because as you say it's apples and oranges.  
Add to that, the poor ee's that are forced to deal with TWO systems (because they just want to get paid) are typically going to RELY on the old system because they know they're being paid from that system. So if they accidentally forget to punch here or there, or forget to approve a TC every now and again - guess which system looks like it's not working?  
 
Parallels also sends a strong signal to the work force without sending out a single message ... Management simply isn't sure of its own decisions, so they have to test it.  
 
Whenever I get a hint of a even a potential desire to run parallel, I immediately discuss the negative aspects and ask the client to document what they'll do with the results.  
The negatives blow away any "results data" every time. 
 
If they've done their due diligence and made the right decision to change systems, they need to cut the cord and demonstrate to the workforce that the new system is better than the old. And oh by the way, if you don't use the new system like you're being paid from it - guess what? You won't be paid properly. It still amazes me how fast that simple concept gets even the most uncooperative ee's on board.
Posted @ Friday, January 20, 2012 5:55 PM by Commandant Kronos
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics