Streamlining the headcount management process by differentiating approval workflows, ensuring accurate tracking of future-dated positions, and integrating forecasting capabilities to improve resource management and decision-making.
📋 Overview
When managing headcount, the system allows users to create seats without properly tracking seat occupancy or ensuring the headcount aligns with available seats. This results in discrepancies, where users can exceed available seats and create negative headcounts, creating confusion and a lack of control over resource allocation.
Empathize
09.22.2024 → 09.29.2024
The Problem Current headcount management system lacks clear approval workflows, fails to track future-dated positions, and doesn’t provide accurate forecasting, leading to resource management inefficiencies.
📱 Client Feedback
Based on feedback gathered over the past 6 months from our clients, we have identified the following key areas for improvement, along with notable client quotes that highlight their experiences:
Define
09.30.2024 → 10.07.2024
We developed detailed user personas based on the various employees and end users within our client organizations. These personas represent individuals in different roles, each with distinct goals, pain points, behaviors, and work environments.
Drawing upon the insights gathered from client feedback and our user personas, we have defined several key objectives to address the core challenges faced by our stakeholders.
Clarify Approval Workflows Differentiate who can approve additional vs. vacant headcount and streamline the approval process across modules.
Future-Dated Seat Management Provide visibility and accurate forecasting for future-dated positions, reflecting in calculations with clear effective dates.
Scalable headcount Management Establish a flexible, scalable system for managing headcount growth and aligning with client workflows.
Dashboard Visibility and Tagging Clear approval tracking/ display of headcount, with seats tagged by requesting module for better resource mgmt.
We conducted a competitive analysis involving 4 direct competitors (Pigment, Rippling, ChartHop, and Abacum) as well as three indirect competitors (NetSuite, The Org, and Clay HRA). This analysis helped us gain valuable insights into current industry trends and platform requirements, enabling us to better understand the competitive landscape and refine our approach.
Ideate / Coming Soon
10.08.2024 → 10.24.2024
Request Headcount User Flow
Approval Workflow
