Workday Post Implementation Assessment – Citywide
We have performed the procedures enumerated in the Scope and Procedures section of the report, which were agreed to by Denver Auditor’s Office of City and County of Denver (the City) pursuant to our engagement agreement, dated May 22, 2019, solely to assist the City with respect to a post implementation assessment of the Workday system as of October 15, 2019.
Watch the Audit Committee presentation here soon.
The City and County of Denver (the City) entered into an agreement with Workday, Inc. (Workday) on July 24, 2015 for a subscription to Workday’s cloud-based Financial Management and Human Capital Management solutions and certain incremental training and consulting services. The City agencies that were coordinating the implementation were Technology Services, the Controller’s Office, the Office of Human Resources, and Purchasing. The implementation went live in 2017 and began being used across the City for the financial and HR functions of the City.
Technology Services is responsible for supporting the Workday system. The Controller’s Office, Purchasing and other agencies utilize the Financial Management portion of the Workday system for payroll, purchasing, accounting, financial and reporting of information around the systems operations. The office of Human Resources utilizes the Human Capital Management portion of the system to recruit, manage, train, and develop the City’s workforce. Other City employees use certain Human Capital Management functions and worker information based on their responsibilities within the agencies.
User Satisfaction: For the most part, users are fairly satisfied with the Workday system. Users noted appreciating the ability to 1) remotely access the system as well as access directly from their mobile device, 2) the incorporation of a lot of systems into one, and 3) the streamlined nature of the HR paper forms now within Workday. From survey results and interviews, the majority of the frustration for users appears to be related to training, interfaces with other existing systems, perceived redundancies or cumbersome Workday steps, and possible concerns around what information is accurate or helpful in their day to day jobs.
Training Satisfaction: The survey indicates that many City employees feel they could use additional training to perform their responsibilities. Some of the additional training types they would like to see include a Workday manual, video training for various topics, job aids, and Agency specific sections. Through individual interviews, we found that most people think generic training was sufficient, but tips and tricks that are specific to their duties could be more helpful.
System Output Sufficiency: The results of the surveys and interviews indicated that for users who are needing the reporting from the system and regularly utilize it, the system reporting is very helpful, easy to access, timely and customizable. For the individuals who indicated that they did not need reporting to perform their tasks within the system felt they had not been able to access the right reports, or don’t understand the reporting functionality well enough to really utilize the information they need or might use out of the system.
Contract Assessment: BKD compared capabilities, modules and features purchased by City to those that were implemented. Based on the procedures performed, the Workday modules that were agreed to in the various contracts were implemented. With change orders and management agreements, they were implemented in the time frame agreed upon by both parties.
We recommend the City consider reviewing their existing Workday training tools to evaluate whether enhancements could be made. Some of the additional training types that individuals indicated may be helpful would be updated Job Aids, a Workday manual, and video training for various topics. It is also recommended that the City evaluate possible mechanisms for Agencies with specific needs to reach out if they feel they require different or additional steps. If these items exist, perhaps consider the location and medium these items are communicated in and identify possible other ways to present them (i.e. electronic on the intranet vs. pdf for a user’s desktop or even paper). Additionally, some possible additional tools that may be useful to users would be a glossary of Workday standard terms.
We also recommend that the City consider, as part of the possible enhancements to existing training tools, identifying targeted trainings for various users. The trainings could include specific trainings about reporting and how to find the more common reports or query information where formal reports may not readily exist.
The City should consider whether it is feasible to have a city specific mechanism that could be a companion to the existing Workday Community tool where users within the City can share reports that are helpful to them, tricks and shortcuts they have learned, and possibly even allow users to pose questions or issues about what they’re running in to for other users to respond to and find what is most relevant to them.
The objective of our post-implementation assessment of Workday was to determine whether Workday was successfully implemented. BKD LLP conducted this assessment on behalf of the Auditor’s Office. I am pleased to present the results of this assessment.
The assessment revealed the city needs to continue to enhance training and provide better mechanisms for users to share information.
Through improved training and user support, the city will be better equipped to ensure Workday meets user needs. Our report lists several related recommendations.
We extend our appreciation to the Department of Finance, Office of Human Resources, and Technology Services personnel who assisted and cooperated with us during the assessment. For any questions, please feel free to contact me at 720-913-5000.
Denver Auditor’s Office
Timothy M. O’Brien, CPA Auditor
Audit Team: Dawn Wiseman, Jeremy Creamean, BKD LLP