Insights

A California-headquartered fintech company with 1,200 employees went live on Workday Recruiting and immediately knew something was wrong. The Workday implementation had been considered successful by traditional measures: the system was live, transactions were flowing, and the project had closed on schedule. But within weeks, the talent acquisition team was overwhelmed. Offer letters weren't working as expected. Hiring managers were frustrated by redundant notifications. Simpl

The Situation A U.S.-headquartered global IT services firm with 2,000 employees across 11 countries was seven months into a Workday Recruiting implementation when leadership made the difficult decision to pause the project. The firm had successfully completed their Workday HCM and Payroll implementation, but the Recruiting rollout was different. Internal staffing changes and frequent resource turnover at their implementation partner had created instability. Design decisions

The Situation A financial services organization that had grown to 2,000 employees in two years was struggling to get consistent, reliable outcomes from Workday. They had aggressive plans for continued growth, but the system and the team supporting it weren't keeping pace. Every pay, payroll, HR and HRIS were spending countless hours resolving issues that surfaced during payroll processing. The executive team desired 98% data quality in support of future initiatives, includi

The Situation A US-based Workday healthcare system with more than 8,000 employees had been live on Workday for several years, but structural gaps were creating risk and inefficiency. The HR team had strong institutional knowledge but lacked deep expertise in specific modules like Recruiting and Benefits. Most of their Workday HR knowledge was concentrated with a single individual, creating a significant single point of failure. Junior team members were eager to grow but had n

The Situation A US-based financial institution with approximately 750 employees completed their Workday implementation three years prior, but wasn't getting the value they expected from their investment. Transactions were getting completed, payroll processed, and teams were using the system; however, cross-functional alignment had never fully developed. IT owned the system, with heavy involvement from HR. Finance and Procurement were engaged but operating largely in paralle