Engagement Review Pros & ConsThe Pinnacle team has been asked by the Talent Development department of LECG Human Resources to assess the ways in which UltiPro can be leveraged to facilitate the engagement review process. Outlined below are the design possibilities and the pros and cons associated with each. There have been 3 scenarios outlined in the following pages:

1. UPM Engagement Review Quarterly/ Semi Annual Process Flow (Scenario A)a. UPM Administrator Batches the Review to the Employee’s UltiPro Supervisorb. The Supervisor signs into UltiPro and Delegates the Engagement Review to the Appropriate Engagement Managerc. The Employee will complete the Engagement Reviewd. The Engagement Manager will Complete the Reviewe. The Employee and the Manager will Meet to Discuss Review Detailsf. The Employee will Acknowledge the Review

2. Proposed UPM Engagement/ Ad Hoc Review Process (Scenario B)a. The Employee reaches the 80 hour threshold on an engagement and notifies HR/MD b. The UPM Administrator OR the Employee’s UltiPro Supervisor will batch an engagement review c. The Employee will complete the Engagement Reviewd. The Employee’s UltiPro Supervisor will delegate the engagement review to the Engagement Manager e. The Employee and the Engagement Manager will complete the reviewf. The Employee and the Engagement Manager will meet to discuss responsibilities, strengths, and developmental areas

from the engagement g. The Employee will Acknowledge the Review

3. Engagement Review Process with Digital/ Electronic Signatures (Scenario C)a. The Employee reaches the 80 hour threshold on an engagement and notifies HR/MD b. The UPM Administrator OR the Employee’s UltiPro Supervisor will batch an engagement review c. The Employee will complete the Engagement Reviewd. The Employee’s UltiPro Supervisor will delegate the engagement review to the Engagement Manager

e. The Employee and the Engagement Manager will complete the reviewf. The Employee and the Engagement Manager will meet to discuss responsibilities, strengths, and developmental areas

from the engagement g. The Employee will Acknowledge the Review

UPM Engagement Review Quarterly/ Semi Annual Process Flow

UPM Engagement/ Ad Hoc Review Process

Engagement Review Process with Digital/ Electronic Signatures

Engagement Review Option

UPM Engagement Review(Quarterly/Semi-Annually)

UPM Engagement Review (Ad Hoc)

Engagement Review PDF (electronic signature)

Strengths On-line convenience Process flow similar to UPM Annual Review Administration of batching owned by HR Email notifications Trainings materials for UPM navigation are

already complete Successful UPM pilot (approximately 10% of

the LECG workforce familiar with system)

Ability for employee to determine when request for Engagement Review is generated

On-line convenience Process flow similar to UPM Annual

Review Administration of batching owned by

HR

Familiarity Still “paperless” On-line convenience, available at any time

and from any location Employee can own Electronic signatures Form downloadable from Connect or

TeamSmart.net as needed by employee

Utilizing the new HRIS system Engagement reviews will be located in the

same area as other reviews (annual) for ease of reference during the annual review process

One review will capture all engagement manager feedback per quater

Email notifications Trainings materials for UPM

navigation are already complete Successful UPM pilot (approximately

10% of the LECG workforce familiar with system)

Utilizing the new HRIS system

Employees are able to better manage their engagement reviews throughout the year

Minimal training will be required

Weaknesses UPM works on a Supervisor-Subordinate Relationship

o Complication: UPM Manager will need to assign multi-raters to the engagement review (the employee’s engagement managers) and will need to sign off on the comments

Employee cannot easily see Multi-rater comments, so the review would either need to be printed out with 360 commentary or summarized by Supervisor in his/her review

Timing of process (i.e. quarterly, semi-annually) may not be as frequent as completing engagement reviews via pdf

o Potential primacy/ recency effects o Timing may have some engagement

managers have an influx of review responsibilities rather than being intervals as with the current process

MD or Admin owns batch process MD or Admin must delegate review to

Engagement Manager MD will not have access to delegated

review, there for employee must make the final engagement reviews available to their supervisor prior to the annual review process by printing to PDF and uploading into UP

o UPM Upload: Pros- all reviews in one place. Cons- supervisors do not have access to Document Libraries so Employee would need to (during self review) create objectives and attach docs which is an extra step and not intuitive process

o UP Core Upload: Pros- employee and Manager can be granted access to the employees documents in Core without additional steps. Cons- a separate location within UP for Engagement vs Annual Reviews.

While electronic signatures may pave the road for greater paperless-efficiency in the future, the onset of this effort could be of a large magnitude as little is formally known about the defend ability and security associated with the out of the box Electronic Signature capabilities offered by Adobe

o Organizational-wide signatures?o Employees to be sent their

signatures via Outlook (security measures should be discussed)?

Recommended Process: Engagement Review with Electronic Signature (PDF)

After reviewing the various processes scenarios for engagement reviews, the Pinnacle team is recommending performing engagement reviews using electronic signatures and converting the document to a PDF for record keeping. Additionally, electronic signatures will benefit LECG beyond improving the engagement review process as the implications would extend to create a paperless organization.

Digital Signature Database:

LECG employee signatures would be collected and maintained in an access database (see example in the I-drive) for simple distribution and retrieval (when employees lose their digital signatures)

On boarding: Employees new to LECG would take a moment to sign a piece of paper; the HR department would make a PDF of this signature and send it to the signature database administrator.

o The administrator would then save it to the zip disc that all employees receive OR send via Outlook, which is how the other LECG employees would be receiving their digital signatures

Process:

1. The employee completes up to 80 hours for an engagement and the suggested approach is to compete an engagement review2. The employee would download, complete and save the Microsoft Word version of the engagement review form from an LECG sponsored website (i.e.

TeamSmart, Connect)3. The employee would email the engagement review to the engagement manager who completes the form and sets up a meeting (i.e. in person or over the

phone) with the employee to discuss the results of the engagement review4. The engagement manager digitally signs the engagement review form and emails to the employee5. The employee signs, saves the engagement review as a PDF and uploads it to My Documents library on their UPM homepage to reference at any time

a. To add as an attachment for their yearly objectives