Are Fusion HCM Applications Based on PeopleSoft?

No and yes.  Oracle used the E-Business Suite (EBS) as a starting point for the main Fusion Applications with the exception of CRM (which used Siebel as the starting point).  The main reason is that the EBS data model from an ERP perspective is more comprehensive.  However, Oracle did not stop there.  They added some of the best PeopleSoft features including Trees, Effective Dating (more complete than in EBS), and Set IDs (for those of you who have wanted to share job codes across business groups in EBS, you will appreciate this).  They also took time to enhance capabilities from both systems.  For example, in PeopleSoft 8.9, Oracle introduced the person model so that it would be easier to track the relationship an employer has with the employee over time (for example, I might start as a contractor, become an employee, move to part-time, and eventually become a contractors again).  Fusion HCM will have an even more flexible person/employment model.  In addition, Oracle has indicated that it will also support PeopleSoft “pillar” style adoption (which was not as easy to do in EBS or J.D. Edwards because of the integrated nature of those solutions).

Will the move to Fusion HCM Applications be a “simple” upgrade for PeopleSoft and EBS customers?

Even though Fusion HCM uses EBS as a starting point, it is a new application.  The data model has been enhanced and new application logic developed using JDeveloper and Oracle Fusion Middleware (OFM).  Oracle will certainly provide some data migration tools and they are leveraging the configurator technology developed for EBS to make it easier for business users to create and maintain configurations in Fusion HCM.   However, customers should expect that they will need to revisit their business processes (potentially to take advantage of new capabilities), interfaces (it is a new data model), training (new user experience), and reporting (different information delivery capabilities embedded in the application).  So, do not expect that it will be a “simple” upgrade (PeopleSoft customers should read “How to Determine Your PeopleSoft Next Steps” for more information – Gartner subscription required).  Also, the functionality may or may not be equivalent in certain areas at a particular point in time.  This leads to the next question.

How will Fusion HCM Applications compare to PeopleSoft and EBS?

I do not know.  I know the planned breadth is to be a relatively comprehensive HCM solution including:

• Workforce Deployment – HR, Global Payroll (based on EBS), and Workforce Lifecycle Manager (used for Onboarding and other process management needs)
• Workforce Development – Profile Management (another carryover from PeopleSoft), Network at Work (Social Software features are included leveraging the WebCenter platform), Performance & Goal Management, and Talent Review
• Workforce Rewards – Compensation Management, Incentive Management, and Benefits Management

There are also significant enhancements in terms of visualization and embedded analytics (somewhat similar to what is in PeopleSoft 9.1).  What I do not know is the depth of functionality in most of the areas.  I have seen a demo of some of the capabilities like compensation management, profile management, network at work, but I have not seen a comprehensive demo yet.  Oracle has not deployed the solution to any early customers yet (though they have brought customers to Oracle to test various aspects of the solution).  Oracle also has not provided any sort of roadmap that gives a view of feature comparability and timeframe (which is typical for Oracle).

Will I have to pay for Fusion HCM Applications if I am an existing Oracle Applications Unlimited customer?

In the discussions I have had with Oracle, they have indicated that they customers will be able to get “like for like”.  It gets a little more complicated in practice as there are many more PeopleSoft modules on the price list than EBS modules.  Since we have not seen the price list yet for Fusion HCM applications, it is hard to know what will actually be “like for like”.  Also, since the PeopleSoft acquisition, Oracle has tried to reduce the number of modules offered (get all the product lines better aligned) so it also depends on when you bought as to what modules you own and what would be considered “like for like”.  That is a long way to say it is hard to know yet and may be different for different customers.

Should all of this matter to an existing Applications Unlimited customer?

Possibly, but probably not.  One of the intriguing things that is possible with Fusion HCM is that the talent management applications (including some of the social software capabilities) could be used in conjunction with PeopleSoft and EBS applications (possibly in a SaaS model as Oracle has indicated that they are “SaaS ready”).  This may be useful to some customers that plan to move to Fusion ultimately.  However, most customers I speak with are concerned with their next upgrade for their existing product (or more concerned with more mundane issues – it was interesting to see this post this morning as I was writing this).  Product planning is already happening for the next releases of PeopleSoft and EBS so Oracle does plan to have more releases of those solutions.

These are some questions I have heard.  What else would like to know from Oracle about Fusion HCM Applications?

• Interest in Talent Management is Still Very High — Sessions focused on Talent Management (including my Ask the Expert session) were packed.  Customers want to learn from the experiences from other customers.  I had the opportunity to attend sessions from Connie Linardakis at Zions Bancorp, Mike Cairns at Aon, and Nick Schaffzin at MetLife.  Connie and Mike discussed their respective talent management journeys (still a work in progress for both organizations).  It is clear that for most organizations.  It is a journey that may take many years to complete to encompass the full scope of talent management.  Nick did a great presentation on workforce analytics.  It was great to see a good sized crowd attend this presentation on the last day of the conference.  In my view, workforce planning and analysis is the most important emerging area in HCM and Nick did a wonderful job describing the highs and lows of its journey as well as making the important connection between workforce analytics and talent management (workforce analytics should drive decisions around talent management interventions).
• Differentiation in Talent Management Solutions is Difficult to Ascertain — There are still functional differences in solutions out there (especially across the broad suite), but the messaging from vendors has become very similar.  Feedback I received from attendees was that finding true innovation on the Expo floor was difficult.  I think it exists, but much of it is coming from specialist vendors that offer innovative candidate sourcing, assessment, workforce planning and analysis (and other) solutions.
• Twitter Has Changed the Conference Experience — I have not been blogging as much because I have been spending more time using Twitter.  Twitter has made the conference going experience much more collaborative.  It makes it possible to follow sessions that you cannot attend.  It also allows you to share your thoughts in real time with other attendees.  This was forcefully demonstrated to me during the Recruiting technology Panel led by Gerry Crispin.  Many of the HR bloggers such as Steve Boese, Kris Dunn, Lance Haun, and Laurie Ruettimann were also attending and tweeting during this panel.  It was almost like having a conversation.  The panel which included Michael McNeal from Intuit, Rodney Moses from Research in Motion (best known for the Blackberry), Libby Sartain formerly head of HR at Yahoo! and Southwest Airlines, and Frank Wittenhauer from Deloitte.  One of the things that stood out to me in their discussion was the importance of workforce planning in being proactive candidate sourcing (vendors take note).

Thanks to Bill Kutik who is the driving force for setting the agenda for the conference and ensuring the high quality of presentations.  Also, it was a pleasure to participate in the Industry Analyst Panel again.  It was probably one of the best in terms of showing different points of view about where the HCM market is and where it is going.

Let’s take some of the key perceived benefits from SaaS and see how a hosted solution might meet those needs:

• Lower up front costs – There is nothing that would prevent a vendor from offering an on-premise or hosted single tenant solution with a subscription license (some vendors already do it)
• Easier upgrades – There are things that vendors with single tenant solutions can do to make upgrades easier for customers.  First, they can offer remote application management services to customers (some are doing this already) where they can apply patches, updates, and new releases for the customer at their site.  They can also host the solution for the customer and do those activities as well.  This does not deal with the difficulty of the upgrade (if there are many customizations or changes in the data model with the new release), but it can help.  There is no reason that vendors of single tenant solutions cannot work with customers the same way (at least moving forward) as SaaS vendors do – just do not allow customizations that impact the ability to upgrade.  If they host the solution, they can enforce that discipline
• More frequent new functionality delivered – There is no reason that traditional vendors cannot do this.  SAP has demonstrated that it can do it with its switch framework and enhancement packs (they started with enhancement packs every 3-4 months, but have scaled back to every ~9 months because SAP felt customers were having trouble adopting the new capabilities that quickly).  It becomes more of a question of resetting customer expectations and patterns.  SaaS sets this expectation and enforces the discipline, but that does not mean the discipline cannot be applied with a hosted solution.

I think you can see where I am going with this argument.  The effectiveness of SaaS is as much about the discipline it enforces in implementation and upgrade practices as it is about technical architecture. 

Now, I also know I am going to hear about the ability for vendors to cost effectively deliver this – SaaS has inherent advantages right?  There is truth there.  However, there are technologies that can help lower hosting costs.  Virtualization technology can make it easier to manage multiple instances (and keep them in sync in terms of release levels).  Grids and Blades can make the hardware environment less expensive and more scalable.  Cloud computing also can help make the compute services used more elastic (think development and test environments that do not use production data).

Does that mean a hosted, single tenant solution can match SaaS on economics?  Maybe not, but I am not sure it has to, it just needs to be in the neighborhood.  The real challenge is the discipline.  Can the vendor resist the temptation to allow customization and increase the tempo of new functionality delivered?

So, what am I missing?  I did not try to detail every benefit of SaaS, but is there a flaw in the logic?  Let me also mention that I am a big fan of SaaS as a delivery model (before the flames start to be thrown).  I just do not think it has to be the only game in town.  As far as I know, no single tenant solution vendor has ever tried to do hosted offering where they enforced these disciplines.  If you know one that has, please comment.

1. Dress intelligently – Do not wear lace up shows if possible.  Wear slip on shoes.  They are easier to take off and put back on.  Wear a belt that does not have excessive metal (so you do not need to take it off)
2. Pack intelligently – Make sure your liquids are easily accessible (in an outer pocket of your carry on bag) and take out your laptop (or better yet get a TSA approved bag where you do not have to remove it) and liquids prior to getting to the bins.  That way you are ready to just empty your pockets.
3. Put your laptop in a separate bin first then put your second bin for the remainder of your metal objects, shoes, and coats on top of that bin.  This clears space on the tables prior to the x-ray machine and allows other passengers to start to load their belongings.
4. Do not put your bags onto the tables.  Wait until you are at x-ray machine (where the rollers/conveyor belt are).  Again this optimizes table space for fellow passengers.
5. Put your bags through the x-ray machine before your bins (you will see why in a minute)
6. When you go through the x-ray machine have your boarding pass in your hand in case TSA wants to see (not everyone does, but it speeds things up if they do)
7. Take your bags off the rollers when they come out (assuming you have a roller bag plus a smaller laptop bag).
8. Re-stack your bins (with the laptop in the bottom bin so it provides a flat surface for the top bin) and move them to the end of the line.  This allows others to get their bags out of the x-ray machine more quickly.
9. Put your belongings back where they belong (do not forget your laptop in the bottom bin) in your baggage.

It is amazing how many frequent fliers even do not think ahead in the security line.  Am I missing any best practices?  Do you disagree with any of these?  What do you think?