Continuing on our series in speaking with industry leaders in HR and the People space, this week we turned our conversation to benchmarking and what people analytics metrics they find key in measuring.

Because there are a plethora of metrics available to us  - engagement, psychological safety, career growth etc - from a wide array of sources as well including surveys, sentiment analysis, and other data collection methods, it's important you understand what exactly you may be measuring and which areas may provide more insights than others. 

Here’s what our esteemed folks have to say so you could get an idea of what might help drive your benchmarking strategy.

*Answers edited for brevity*

Which Specific People Analytics Metrics Do You Think Are The Most Important To Benchmark Against?

Fred Leong (Chief People Officer and Advisor):  The metrics I like to focus on include eNPS, sentiment analysis for engagement (I wonder if it’s possible to get a deeper loyalty score or leverage AI to include context), regrettable turnover to uncover underlying issues as well as and internal mobility and skill gaps for growth.

Although, I do see a gap when it comes to the depth of how far benchmarks can actually go. Looking for more specifics or breadth on metrics such as regrettable attrition or playing around with something such as the employee engagement index (EEI) can prove a holistic metric that can dig deeper on things such as satisfaction, commitment and pride in a company. So just something to think about for benchmarking as a whole. 

Ryan Nestor (People Analytics Associate at a Fortune 500 company): I find it helpful to consider benchmarks for metrics like attrition (total and voluntary/involuntary), promotion rate, engagement scores, compensation, manager ratio/span of control, org design (what percentage of the company is R&D vs Sales vs G&A), and org efficiency (revenue and expense per employee, cost per hire, cost of benefits, cost of real estate).

It can be tricky to find appropriate and reliable benchmarks. It's typical to compare with companies of similar size, stage, and industry when possible, but I reference more than one benchmark/source and do some investigating before presenting. Lastly, just because something is in line with a benchmark doesn't mean it's good. So in addition to a benchmark, I also consider other points of comparison like internal historical trends or a company target.

Carl Brown (Head of People): I've always found the concept of benchmarking interesting, particularly for people analytics. Culture, geographic location, salary structures and employment conditions all heavily influence the results of a metric.  Which means that comparing to an external benchmark, could cause issues if used to say their result is "better.”

My approach has been to try and partner with another organization before benchmarking. That way if a metric result is different, we can talk to them about what factors are at play to drive that result, allowing us to better understand if it is a "better" result or if it's just different. Haven't pulled this off yet though. 

That's why I advocate for benchmarking internally. Way more powerful and allows for change to be driven, because when you identify a team that is an outlier compared to their peers, the reasons why can be better understood.

Kristina K. (SVP of People at a high growth startup): There are staples and then [elements]  dependent on the strategy of the organization. I will develop specific insights to ensure we are tracking our overall talent goal. You touched on a lot above. Some of the data points I rely on can be split into two categories: general and strategic.

General:

• Onboard Survey / Score - assess your hiring and onboarding process
• Regrettable Attrition - if your performance management strategy process is working, you are allowing your employees to exist gracefully and this group is leaving voluntarily, but it's a good thing. I define regrettable as any employee marked as a solid employee to high potential/performer
• Manager engagement: critical in understanding where development and coaching is needed
• Recruitment: Top of funnel, when my diversity strategy is effective, the top of funnel distribution will match the internal distribution, time to hire, agency use, employee referral rate, hiring failure
• Absenteeism: this can often signal that something is brewing within that org if that number starts to jump, as well as getting in front of burnout.
• Performance & Productivity: ensuring the talent strategy is enabling the company strategy and goals are being attained, while rewarding performance.  

• Drill deeper into the engagement survey: for example, the company recently went through M&A, "connectives and belonging" and so forth
• When growth and development are key elements of the culture: internal mobility, L&D participation

The Right Metrics For You

As you can glean from the above answers, there are a diverse set of strategies to be made uniquely your own based on your company goals. Remember, as one of the interviewees mentioned, it's not so much about the metric itself, versus the context that goes into it. Always make sure to consider the conditions behind individual metrics.

With that being said, Worksense AI would love to help providing a deeper understanding of your people analytics measures. Just let us know which ones!