2.0 employee headcount cap

Comments: 7

Oldest • Newest • Most likes • Fewest likes

• Add a comment
• 18 Jun, '24
  Suzy Stratton

  Highlighted comment
  
  And/or rotating seats for active employees. I think a percentage of their user count should be allotted for rotation because attrition, position creation, promotion, etc, is a part of the business - and you're putting them in a position to scale their headcount in the PI software for life, even if their business doesn't scale to match - simply because when a seat is used and burned forever.

  3 Copy link to this comment
• 11 Apr, '24
  Beth Friel

  Employee headcounts can be very dynamic, especially for companies with high turnover in common roles. Many of my clients have had PI for 10-12 years and are not good about cleaning up their data. We are adding a burden to account admins that they now need to update the Type every time someone leaves. There are also good reasons to keep old employees in the database - especially for use in benchmarking Job Targets.

  4 Copy link to this comment
• 14 May, '24
  Teri Kinsella

  I agree with Beth on all points, we can barely get clients to change people from a candidate to a employee, when that actually matters. (Luckily that gets fixed in PI2) It will be very difficult to get compliance with deleting people who have left. Also, as a consultant, I am always reviewing usage, especially at renewal, to make sure clients are paying for what they use. Unnecessary for me and cumbersome for the client.

  3 Copy link to this comment
• 12 Jun, '24
  Bill Barker

  A cap is a parent-child action. It will be the rare client who might "abuse" the use of PI assessments. Let's maintain an adult-to-adult relationship with clients.

  5 Copy link to this comment
• 12 Jun, '24
  Becca VanDerveer

  Having clients being able to send assessments to friends and family is how we get referrals.... limiting the opportunity to send the assessment will lead to a reduced opportunity for referrals. Referrals are the number one lead source for most PI consultants.

  6 Copy link to this comment
• 20 Jun, '24
  Jon Zulawski

  Agree with all the points raised. Another issue is that this change assumes there is some sort of well-functioning, centralized process in place whereby the PI admin, HR, etc. is always kept up-to-date on employee changes. This often isn't the case. For example, we have a PI client who utilizes the PI BA via their Talent Acquisition specialists in support of their satellite locations. There's where the PI admin function lives. However, that function is separate from the corporate HR function, and even the corporate HR function isn't always privy to the goings-on at each of the satellite offices. As a result, information on departed/promoted employees doesn't always flow back to the PI admin folks in a timely or efficient manner. Right now, they do annual audits, but even that isn't perfect. Hard caps will require a significant process change for that client that will cause additional friction. The software should serve the client, not the other way around.

  4 Copy link to this comment
• 20 Nov, '24
  Beth Friel

  I have clients with a Parent account and multiple children accounts. Will the child account headcount be added to the total? If so, when one of the child accounts reaches the headcount threshold and needs to add a BA will they need to contact the parent to add additional headcount? What happens when they are using OI links and an employee tries to enter their information and take the BA? Will they get an error message? Will the owner of the link get the message? Agree with the comments above that the software should serve the client not the other way around

  Copy link to this comment