Total Economic Impact
Cost Savings And Business Benefits Enabled By Prism Analytics and People Analytics
A Forrester Total Economic Impact™ Study Commissioned By Workday, May 2025
Total Economic Impact
A Forrester Total Economic Impact™ Study Commissioned By Workday, May 2025
In a business environment defined by workforce volatility and heightened expectations for agility, organizations are under increasing pressure to make smarter, faster decisions. Yet siloed data and manual processes often stand in the way. Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics help organizations unify fragmented data, elevate workforce insights, and streamline planning and reporting. The result is better talent outcomes, leaner operations, and sharper decisions that drive business resilience and growth.
Workday Prism Analytics allows organizations to bring data in from any source and puts it directly in the flow of work, enabling better decision-making. Workday People Analytics supports workforce productivity and helps organizations make better people decisions, faster. Together, they transform data into actionable insights and prioritize people-first strategies, driving efficient, connected planning.
Workday commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying Prism Analytics and People Analytics.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of Prism Analytics and People Analytics on their organizations.
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed four decision-makers with experience using Prism Analytics and People Analytics. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the interviewees’ experiences and combined the results into a single composite organization, a global organization with 5,000 employees and revenue of $1 billion per year.
Interviewees said that prior to using Prism Analytics and People Analytics, their organizations struggled with fragmented, manual workforce and financial data processes. They relied on a mix of legacy systems, spreadsheets, and homegrown tools, which made it difficult to access timely insights, ensure data consistency, and support strategic decision-making. However, prior attempts to address these issues yielded limited success, leaving them with siloed data, inconsistent reporting, and time-consuming manual processes. These limitations led to inefficiencies in decision-making, delays in reporting, and an increased risk of errors.
After the investment in Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics, the interviewees’ organizations achieved significant improvements by centralizing and standardizing their workforce and financial data across all departments. Key results from the investment included reduced employee attrition, financial and business reporting efficiencies, performance review efficiencies for people leaders, HR analyst efficiencies, reduced M&A effort, and system consolidation and ongoing management savings. These improvements not only streamlined day-to-day operations but also helped organizations make faster, more informed decisions that improved overall business performance and positioned them for long-term success.
Quantified benefits. Three-year, risk-adjusted present value (PV) quantified benefits for the composite organization include:
Reduced employee attrition by up to 10%. The composite organization previously struggled with identifying and addressing employee attrition risks due to fragmented data. Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics enables its HR team to monitor workforce trends proactively and predict potential turnover, which allows the composite to conduct more targeted retention efforts and ultimately reduce employee attrition.
Business reporting efficiencies up to 65%. The composite organization improves the speed and accuracy of auditing and business reporting by using Prism Analytics to centralize financial and operational data. With fewer manual reconciliations and greater data consistency, the financial planning and analysis (FP&A) team spends less time on report preparation and more time on analysis and planning.
Reduced initial onboarding time by 10% per employee. The composite organization accelerates employee onboarding by using Prism Analytics to centralize task tracking across HR, IT, and compliance teams. Real-time visibility into onboarding milestones replaces manual check-ins and email follow-ups, which allows HR specialists to resolve delays proactively so new employees can become productive faster. With fewer manual interventions, the HR team also spends less time coordinating routine onboarding tasks.
Saved 50% of people leaders’ time on annual performance review preparation. The composite organization improves performance review preparation by using People Analytics and Prism Analytics, providing people managers with centralized access to key performance and engagement insights. With a holistic view of each employee, people managers spend less time gathering information from multiple systems and are better equipped to engage in more meaningful performance conversations.
Generated ad hoc HR reporting efficiencies up to 90%. The composite organization streamlines HR reporting workflows by using Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics to centralize and validate data across systems, which means that analysts no longer need to compile information manually from spreadsheets and disparate platforms. With dynamic reporting and visualization tools, HR teams complete recurring reports and respond to ad hoc requests more efficiently to deliver insights to business leaders more quickly.
Avoided up to 7,488 hours of M&A effort over three years. The composite organization accelerates merger and acquisition efforts by leveraging Workday Prism Analytics to streamline data ingestion, transformation, and validation across systems. Automating these processes enables the composite to reduce manual data reconciliation; minimize integration delays; and ensure consistency across financial, workforce, and operational datasets, allowing it to onboard new entities faster.
System consolidation and maintenance cost savings up of $555,000 over three years. The composite organization reduces software licensing and IT maintenance costs by consolidating multiple legacy point solutions onto a single platform with Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:
Avoided excess hires. The composite organization avoids unnecessary hires by streamlining headcount planning with Prism Analytics. Leveraging real-time data on open roles, budgeted headcount, and organizational priorities allows the composite to take a data-driven approach that prevents excess hiring and budget overruns.
Improved cross-functional collaboration between HR and finance. The composite organization enhances collaboration between HR and finance by using Workday Prism Analytics as a shared, single source of truth. With centralized dashboards, HR and finance teams align on key workforce and financial metrics and engage in more productive planning.
Improved decision-making. By easily drilling down into key metrics and trends with Prism Analytics, the composite can make faster, more informed decisions, from bonus allocations to office relocations, with greater confidence and efficiency.
Costs. Three-year, risk-adjusted PV costs for the composite organization include:
Fees to Workday totaling $922,000 over three years. The composite organization’s annual fees for Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics increase over time with expanded use, including higher data volume and additional use cases.
Implementation fees and effort costs of $168,000. The composite organization’s implementation of Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics involves collaboration between internal HR and IT teams and external partners. The process spans several months and includes data integration, system setup, and solution customization. External consultants support more complex tasks such as dashboard setup, data validation, and specialized training.
Ongoing management and training costs of $707,000 over three years. The composite organization’s ongoing management of Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics involves minimal effort postimplementation, with occasional data reviews and system checks handled by HR and IT. People Analytics requires minimal training, and Prism Analytics demands more in-depth training for advanced users.
The representative interviews and financial analysis found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $7.75 million over three years versus costs of $1.80 million, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $5.95 million and an ROI of 331%.
Return on investment (ROI)
Benefits PV
Net present value (NPV)
Payback
| Role | Industry | Region | Employees | Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VP, HR information systems (HRIS) | Healthcare | North America | 20,000 | $3.2B |
| Manager, people analytics | Education | North America | 9,000 | $700M |
| Director, people operations | Retail | Multinational | 21,000 | $10B |
| EVP, global operations | Insurance | Multinational | 11,00 | $3.5B |
Interviewees described a disjointed approach to people analytics before adopting Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics. While most organizations had already implemented Workday as their core human capital management platform, workforce data remained scattered across a range of HR systems, homegrown tools, and third-party platforms, leaving them without a centralized method to access or analyze it for actionable decision-making. Teams often relied on spreadsheets and manual processes to bring this information together — an effort that was time-consuming and prone to inconsistency. Several interviewees highlighted the limitations of their prior setups, noting that although internal solutions were developed to centralize data, they ultimately fell short due to poor integration and lack of scalability.
The interviewees noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges, including:
Labor-intensive and error-prone manual reporting processes. Interviewees noted that most reporting was done manually using spreadsheets to aggregate data from different systems. This led to time-consuming tasks such as data entry, cleaning, and reconciliation. Despite teams’ best efforts, this approach introduced errors, especially as they had to update data manually across various files. This process delayed reports and led to a lack of confidence in the accuracy of the data presented to leadership.
Siloed data across disjointed systems led to inconsistent reporting on workforce metrics. Interviewees shared that their organizations struggled with fragmented workforce data stored across multiple disconnected systems, including HRIS platforms, payroll systems, and spreadsheets. This fragmentation required teams to pull data from different sources manually, which not only resulted in significant time spent on data aggregation and reconciliation but also led to inconsistent reporting. With each department using different methodologies and systems to track and report workforce metrics — such as headcount, turnover, and performance evaluations — there were discrepancies in the data. This made it difficult to create reliable, standardized reports, which ultimately complicated decision-making and hindered alignment across departments.
Leveraging people data on an ad hoc basis limited proactive analysis and forecasting. Interviewees explained that their organizations often took an ad hoc, reactionary approach to people analytics. Requests for data were typically driven by urgent needs, such as executive requests for turnover data or compliance reports, rather than being part of a regular, proactive analysis cycle. This reactive approach limited the ability to spot trends, such as rising attrition rates or skill gaps, and made it difficult to forecast future organizational needs. There was also little ability to conduct scenario planning or model the impact of various workforce changes, which left organizations unprepared for shifts in talent demands or workforce dynamics.
Poor data security put sensitive employee information at risk. Interviewees described concerns over their organization’s lack of secure data handling practices for sensitive employee information. HR teams often shared critical data such as compensation details, performance reviews, and personal demographics via insecure channels like email or file-sharing platforms, which posed a significant compliance risk, particularly in industries with strict data protection regulations, and left HR departments vulnerable to data leaks.
The director of people operations continued: “Workday leverages our current security model, so we didn’t have to build our own security model from scratch. I would have literally had to hire a full-time team member just to do analytic security in a separate system. We couldn’t have done it any other way.”
The interviewees’ organizations searched for a solution that could:
Centralize HR analytics and improve data consistency across regions and departments.
Improve the speed and precision of reporting and decision-making.
Integrate third-party data sources with HR data systems to provide a unified view of workforce trends.
Improve data security.
Based on the interviews, Forrester constructed a TEI framework, a composite company, and an ROI analysis that illustrates the areas financially affected. The composite organization is representative of the interviewees’ organizations, and it is used to present the aggregate financial analysis in the next section. The composite organization has the following characteristics:
Description of composite. The composite organization is a global firm with 5,000 employees and $1 billion in annual revenue. Before adopting Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics, the organization faced a fragmented approach to workforce and financial data, with information spread across multiple systems. To overcome the operational inefficiencies and hindered decision-making this prior environment precipitated, the organization decided to invest in Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics to enable centralized, integrated workforce and financial data analytics across departments and business units.
Deployment characteristics. The composite organization rolls out Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics over three months. The initial phase of the rollout focuses on onboarding most of the advanced users, including HR analysts, FP&A teams, and other key functional leaders, as they use the platform's advanced capabilities most heavily and help support enablement across the organization. General users, including senior leaders and department heads across HR, finance, and operations, are onboarded incrementally as use expands throughout the organization. By Year 3, the composite has more than 1,000 total Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics users, with 900 general users and 105 advanced users.
$1 billion revenue
5,000 employees
900 general users and 105 advanced users by Year 3
| Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atr | Reduced employee attrition | $1,235,520 | $1,729,728 | $2,471,040 | $5,436,288 | $4,409,256 |
| Btr | Financial and business reporting efficiencies | $753,480 | $816,988 | $877,266 | $2,447,734 | $2,019,281 |
| Ctr | Accelerated employee onboarding due to process optimization | $100,125 | $100,125 | $100,125 | $300,375 | $248,996 |
| Dtr | Streamlined performance review preparation for people leaders | $135,000 | $135,000 | $135,000 | $405,000 | $335,725 |
| Etr | HR analyst efficiencies | $20,999 | $22,264 | $23,495 | $66,758 | $55,142 |
| Ftr | Reduced M&A effort | $50,544 | $50,544 | $50,544 | $151,632 | $125,695 |
| Gtr | System consolidation and ongoing maintenance cost savings | $222,984 | $222,984 | $222,984 | $668,952 | $554,528 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $2,518,652 | $3,077,633 | $3,880,454 | $9,476,739 | $7,748,623 |
Evidence and data. Interviewees reported that implementing Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics was important to reducing employee attrition. They noted that the ability to combine real-time workforce data with predictive analytics helped their organizations identify attrition risks and intervene earlier in the employee lifecycle.
Workday Prism provided HR teams with immediate visibility into workforce trends to detect early indicators of employee disengagement, such as declining engagement scores or performance metrics. Several interviewees emphasized that this real-time access allowed them to take corrective actions before patterns escalated into turnover.
Additionally, interviewees highlighted that People Analytics allowed their HR teams to identify employees most likely to leave using historical data. By assessing trends and retention drivers, organizations could deploy targeted retention strategies with greater precision. They explained that this predictive approach allowed their HR teams to allocate resources more effectively and focus interventions where they would have the greatest impact.
The director of people operations in retail shared how People Analytics helped identify the cause of high attrition rates at their fulfillment centers. They found that many employees were leaving due to insufficient understanding of their benefits and the absence of Spanish-speaking support. Using People Analytics allowed the team to track attrition patterns and identify these issues. As a result, they implemented Spanish- and English-speaking team member services on-site. This intervention led to a noticeable decrease in attrition, and their team continued to use People Analytics to monitor workforce trends and make improvements.
The manager of people analytics in education explained that they leveraged Prism Analytics data to gain insight into workforce trends and turnover drivers during a period of heightened attrition across industries. They said: “When the Great Resignation hit, we put together a team to monitor our workforce data. I built a discovery board using Prism Analytics data that highlighted our turnover trends, even though our attrition wasn’t as high as other organizations during that time. Having that insight allowed us to shift our focus from merely trying to reduce attrition to strategically developing our employees and hiring more in line with our needs. Our recent investment in a skills and career path module is a direct result of that approach.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The composite organization has 5,000 employees.
Before implementing Workday’s Prism Analytics and People Analytics, the composite has a 20% voluntary turnover rate.
With Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics, the composite organization reduces its voluntary turnover rate by 5% in Year 1, 7% in Year 2, and 10% in Year 3.
The average fully burdened annual salary of an affected employee is $91,520.
The average cost of replacing an employee is 30% of their annual salary. This is a conservative measure that considers recruiting, onboarding, and training costs and temporary productivity losses as new hires ramp up.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
Employee count.
The average voluntary turnover rate before Workday.
The average fully burdened annual salaries of affected employees.
The average cost of replacing an employee as a percentage of their annual salary.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $4.4 million.
Reduction in voluntary turnover rate by Year 3
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Employees | Composite | 5,000 | 5,000 | 5,000 | |
| A2 | Average voluntary turnover rate before Workday | Composite | 20% | 20% | 20% | |
| A3 | Reduction in voluntary turnover rate attributable to Workday | Interviews | 5% | 7% | 10% | |
| A4 | Employees retained with Workday | A1*A2*A3 | 50 | 70 | 100 | |
| A5 | Average fully burdened annual salary of affected employees | TEI methodology | $91,520 | $91,520 | $91,520 | |
| A6 | Average cost of replacing an employee as a percentage of annual salary | Composite | 30% | 30% | 30% | |
| At | Reduced employee attrition | A4*A5*A6 | $1,372,800 | $1,921,920 | $2,745,600 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Atr | Reduced employee attrition (risk-adjusted) | $1,235,520 | $1,729,728 | $2,471,040 | ||
| Three-year total: $5,436,288 | Three-year present value: $4,409,256 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees noted that Workday Prism Analytics gave their organizations’ FP&A teams a centralized, reliable source of financial and operational data. Its ability to integrate information from Workday and external systems reduced the need for manual reconciliation and minimized discrepancies in reports. Automated data quality checks and governed workflows in Prism Analytics ensured consistency across datasets, which reduced errors and limited the back-and-forth typically required during audit reviews. As a result, finance teams completed audits faster and with greater confidence in their data. Prism Analytics also significantly reduced the time spent on manual data preparation for business reporting. With real-time access to integrated datasets, FP&A teams no longer had to reconcile spreadsheets or verify data across systems and could devote more time to analysis, scenario planning, and forecasting.
The director of people operations in retail explained that before Prism Analytics, the FP&A resources at their organization spent up to nine hours finalizing audit agreements due to extensive back-and-forth communication via emails and the manual process of reviewing and verifying data in spreadsheets.
The director of people operations also discussed how their organization eliminated duplicative reporting efforts: “We had around 100 different HR reports that were generated by different tools and users with varying preferences, which created a lot of additional work for us. When we started doing our reporting on Workday, we decided on five key reports, communicated them to all our regions, and eliminated the need for multiple people creating different reports.”
The manager of people analytics in education said: “One of the top benefits of Prism in my view is faster reporting. We used to create reports based on data pulled from different sources, which took a really long time. Once we moved our data to Prism Analytics, everything updated daily. Our dashboard, discovery board, and standard reports are much faster and more reliable. That kind of performance improvement matters, especially to business leaders who don’t have time to wait and need answers quickly.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The composite organization has 50 FP&A team members.
Before Workday, the FP&A resources spend 15% of their time on auditing.
With Workday, the composite organization reduces the time spent on auditing by 50% in Year 1, 53% in Year 2, and 55% in Year 3.
The average fully burdened annual salary of an FP&A resource is $95,680.
Before Workday, the composite’s FP&A resources spend 50% of their time on reporting activities.
With Workday, the composite organization reduces the time spent on reporting activities by 55% in Year 1, 60% in Year 2, and 65% in Year 3.
For this benefit, the composite has a productivity recapture rate of 50%. Employees spend most of the time they save on activities that generate business value, but do not dedicate all reclaimed time to value-added work.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
FP&A team size.
Time spent on auditing and reporting activities before Workday.
The fully burdened annual salary of an FP&A resource.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $2.0 million.
Reduction in time spent on auditing by Year 3
Reduction in time spent on reporting activities by Year 3
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | FP&A team | Composite | 50 | 50 | 50 | |
| B2 | Average percentage of time spent on auditing before Workday (hours) | Composite | 15% | 15% | 15% | |
| B3 | Reduction in time spent on auditing with Workday | Interviews | 50% | 53% | 55% | |
| B4 | Average fully burdened annual salary of an FP&A resource | TEI methodology | $95,680 | $95,680 | $95,680 | |
| B5 | Subtotal: Auditing time savings | B1*B2*B3*B4 | $358,800 | $380,328 | $394,680 | |
| B6 | Average percentage of time spent on reporting activities before Workday (hours) | Composite | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| B7 | Reduction in time spent on reporting activities with Workday | Interviews | 55% | 60% | 65% | |
| B8 | Subtotal: Business reporting time savings | B1*B4*B6*B7 | $1,315,600 | $1,435,200 | $1,554,800 | |
| B9 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Bt | Financial and business reporting efficiencies | (B5+B8)*B9 | $837,200 | $907,764 | $974,740 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Btr | Financial and business reporting efficiencies (risk-adjusted) | $753,480 | $816,988 | $877,266 | ||
| Three-year total: $2,447,734 | Three-year present value: $2,019,281 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees shared that Workday Prism Analytics played a key role in accelerating employee onboarding by streamlining task coordination across HR, IT, and compliance teams. With a centralized view of onboarding progress, HR teams no longer had to rely on manual check-ins or emails to ensure new hires completed each step. This visibility allowed them to track onboarding milestones in real time and proactively address delays, such as incomplete forms, stalled training, or postponed start dates, before they became blockers. Interviewees also mentioned that HR teams leveraged Prism Analytics data to analyze trends in the onboarding process. This analysis allowed them to identify recurring bottlenecks and implement targeted improvements, such as adjusting training schedules or refining IT setup procedures, creating more efficient workflows.
In addition to accelerating new employees’ time to productivity, Prism Analytics also improved operational efficiency for HR teams. Automating routine administrative tasks and identifying process inefficiencies meant HR specialists spent less time manually tracking onboarding progress, sending follow-up emails, and coordinating approvals across departments. Instead of chasing updates on paperwork completion, system access provisioning, or compliance training, HR teams could rely on real-time dashboards to monitor progress and intervene only when necessary. Additionally, automated status updates kept new hires informed about their next steps, which reduced the number of inquiries to HR specialists about onboarding timelines and requirements.
The EVP of global operations in insurance explained: “We’ve been able to speed up our employee onboarding process up to 30%, so they’re able to start their work more quickly. We’ve also improved the consistency of our onboarding process. Now, we go through a checklist to make sure that every step, including reviewing policies, signing documents, and receiving their workstation setup, is covered.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The composite organization hires 1,000 new employees each year.
Before Workday, the average initial onboarding time per employee was 40 hours.
With Workday, the composite reduces initial onboarding time by 10% each year.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an affected employee is $44.
Before Workday, HR specialists spend 2 hours on initial onboarding activities per new employee.
With Workday, the composite reduces time spent on HR-driven initial onboarding activities by 75%.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR specialist is $31.
For this benefit, the composite has a productivity recapture rate of 50%. Employees spend most of the time they save on activities that generate business value, but do not dedicate all reclaimed time to value-added work.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
New employees hired each year.
Initial onboarding time per employee before Workday.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an affected employee.
The average time spent on initial onboarding activities per new employee before Workday.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR specialist.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $249,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | New employees | A1*A2 | 1,000 | 1,000 | 1,000 | |
| C2 | Average initial onboarding time per employee before Workday (hours) | Composite | 40 | 40 | 40 | |
| C3 | Reduction in initial onboarding time per employee with Workday | Interviews | 10% | 10% | 10% | |
| C4 | Total initial onboarding time avoided with Workday (hours) | C1*C2*C3 | 4,000 | 4,000 | 4,000 | |
| C5 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of an affected employee | A5/2080 hours | $44 | $44 | $44 | |
| C6 | Subtotal: Employee productivity gains due to faster onboarding | C4*C5 | $176,000 | $176,000 | $176,000 | |
| C7 | Average time spent on HR-driven initial onboarding activities per new employee before Workday (hours) | Composite | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| C8 | Reduction in time spent on HR-driven initial onboarding activities with Workday | Composite | 75% | 75% | 75% | |
| C9 | Total time spent on HR-driven initial onboarding activities avoided with Workday (hours) | C1*C7*C8 | 1,500 | 1,500 | 1,500 | |
| C10 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR specialist | TEI methodology | $31 | $31 | $31 | |
| C11 | Subtotal: HR productivity gains due to faster onboarding | C9*C10 | $46,500 | $46,500 | $46,500 | |
| C12 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Ct | Accelerated employee onboarding due to process optimization | (C6+C11)*C12 | $111,250 | $111,250 | $111,250 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Ctr | Accelerated employee onboarding due to process optimization (risk-adjusted) | $100,125 | $100,125 | $100,125 | ||
| Three-year total: $300,375 | Three-year present value: $248,996 | |||||
Reduction in initial onboarding time per employee with Workday
Reduction in time spent on HR-driven initial onboarding activities with Workday
Evidence and data. Interviewees noted that leveraging combined insights from Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics helped improve the efficiency of performance review preparation for their organizations’ people leaders. With People Analytics, managers could access a holistic view of each employee’s contributions, engagement trends, and growth trajectory, and in turn spent less time manually compiling performance data across multiple sources. Workday Prism Analytics complemented this efficiency by integrating data from various systems so their teams could gain deeper insights into workforce trends and performance patterns. Streamlining data access and surfacing key insights allowed managers to quickly identify top performers, pinpoint areas for improvement, and tailor feedback more effectively. This improved visibility not only saved time but also fostered more meaningful performance discussions.
The EVP of global operations in insurance said: “The time our managers spend on preparing for annual performance reviews with their direct reports has been cut in half. Instead of spending an hour digging through past reviews, coordinating with HR, and pulling together total reward statements, all the data is in one place. Our managers can go in prepared to have those conversations with their employees with a clear sense of their performance history and compensation.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The composite organization has 500 people managers, each overseeing 10 direct reports.
Before Workday, each people manager spends 2 hours preparing for annual performance reviews per direct report.
With Workday, the composite reduces the time spent preparing for annual performance reviews by 50%.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of a people leader is $60.
For this benefit, the composite has a productivity recapture rate of 50%. Employees spend most of the time they save on activities that generate business value, but do not dedicate all reclaimed time to value-added work.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
Number of people managers.
Time spent on preparing annual performance reviews per direct report before Workday.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of a people leader.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $336,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | People managers onboarded onto Workday | Composite | 500 | 500 | 500 | |
| D2 | Direct reports per people manager (rounded) | A1/D1 | 10 | 10 | 10 | |
| D3 | Time spent preparing for annual performance reviews per direct report before Workday (hours) | Interviews | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| D4 | Time spent preparing for annual performance reviews per people manager before Workday (hours) | D2*D3 | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
| D5 | Reduction in time spent preparing for annual performance reviews with Workday | Interviews | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| D6 | Total time avoided preparing for performance reviews with Workday (hours) | D1*D4*D5 | 5,000 | 5,000 | 5,000 | |
| D7 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of a people leader | TEI methodology | $60 | $60 | $60 | |
| D8 | Savings on preparing for performance reviews | D6*D7 | $300,000 | $300,000 | $300,000 | |
| D9 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Dt | Streamlined performance review preparation for people leaders | D8*D9 | $150,000 | $150,000 | $150,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Dtr | Streamlined performance review preparation for people leaders (risk-adjusted) | $135,000 | $135,000 | $135,000 | ||
| Three-year total: $405,000 | Three-year present value: $335,725 | |||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees described how combining Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics increased their HR analyst teams’ efficiency by streamlining reporting processes. Before Workday, HR analysts pulled data from various HR systems, spreadsheets, and third-party platforms to compile recurring and ad hoc reports. Recurring reports often included monthly headcount updates, attrition summaries, and DEI dashboards, each requiring consistent formatting and data validation. Ad hoc reports were typically generated in response to leadership or compliance requests and included more complex, one-off analyses like workforce trends by region, compensation modeling, or turnover breakdowns by department.
With Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics, teams could automatically access and validate data across systems in a centralized platform. Prism Analytics made it easier to produce recurring reports by centralizing data collection and reducing errors, and People Analytics offered dynamic filtering and visualization tools that helped analysts quickly respond to custom requests. Together, these tools reduced the time analysts spent on manual preparation and ultimately enabled them to deliver insights to business leaders faster.
The director of people operations in retail explained how self-service reporting enabled their business leaders to access key workforce metrics quickly without relying on HR analysts: “We can drill down into our dashboards very easily to pull metrics in seconds. If someone needs to know our attrition rate, I can open the dashboard, set the dates, and I’ll have that number in two seconds.”
The director of people operations continued: “When our head of DEI wants to see data around pay gaps by age or ethnicity, we can easily pull reports based on any specific needs or questions. We’re pulling data from one system in 10 minutes instead of pulling data from 10 systems in three weeks.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The composite organization has 35 HR analyst team members.
On average, the HR analyst team produces 30 unique, recurring HR reports per quarter. This metric refers to the distinct categories of reports produced, such as headcount, attrition, and DEI, which may be customized or versioned for different departments or business units.
Before Workday, it takes 1 hour to produce each unique, recurring HR report.
With Workday, the composite organization reduces the time spent producing unique, recurring HR reports by 90% in Year 1, 93% in Year 2, and 95% in Year 3.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR analyst is $38.
On average, each HR analyst produces two ad hoc HR reports per quarter.
Before Workday, it takes 5 hours to produce each ad hoc HR report.
With Workday, the composite organization reduces the time spent producing ad hoc HR reports by 80% in Year 1, 85% in Year 2, and 90% in Year 3.
For this benefit, the composite has a productivity recapture rate of 50%. Employees spend most of the time they save on activities that generate business value, but do not dedicate all reclaimed time to value-added work.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
HR analyst team size.
Number of recurring unique and ad hoc HR reports produced per quarter.
Time spent producing recurring unique and ad hoc HR reports before Workday.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR analyst.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $55,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | HR analysts | Composite | 35 | 35 | 35 | |
| E2 | Average recurring unique HR reports produced by HR analyst team per quarter | Composite | 30 | 30 | 30 | |
| E3 | Time spent producing each report before Workday (hours) | Composite | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| E4 | Reduction in time spent producing recurring unique HR reports with Workday | Interviews | 90% | 93% | 95% | |
| E5 | Total time spent producing reports avoided with Workday (hours) | E2*4 quarters*E3*E4 | 108 | 112 | 114 | |
| E6 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR analyst | TEI methodology | $38 | $38 | $38 | |
| E7 | Subtotal: Time savings on producing recurring reports | E5*E6 | $4,104 | $4,256 | $4,332 | |
| E8 | Average ad hoc HR reports produced per HR analyst per quarter | Composite | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| E9 | Time spent producing ad hoc HR reports before Workday (hours) | Composite | 5 | 5 | 5 | |
| E10 | Reduction in time spent producing ad hoc HR reports with Workday | Interviews | 80% | 85% | 90% | |
| E11 | Total time spent producing ad hoc HR reports avoided with Workday (hours) | E1*E8*4 quarters*E9*E10 | 1,120 | 1,190 | 1,260 | |
| E12 | Subtotal: Time savings on producing ad hoc HR reports | E6*E11 | $42,560 | $45,220 | $47,880 | |
| E13 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Et | HR analyst efficiencies | (E7+E12)*E13 | $23,332 | $24,738 | $26,106 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Etr | HR analyst efficiencies (risk-adjusted) | $20,999 | $22,264 | $23,495 | ||
| Three-year total: $66,758 | Three-year present value: $55,142 | |||||
Reduction in time spent producing recurring unique HR reports by Year 3
Reduction in time spent producing ad hoc HR reports by Year 3
Evidence and data. Before implementing Workday Prism Analytics, M&A efforts were highly manual, as resources across various departments had to consolidate data from multiple systems, reconcile inconsistencies, validate information, and ensure accuracy across platforms. Without a centralized data source, tracking and integrating workforce and financial metrics was inefficient and prone to error. Interviewees said that Prism Analytics automated data ingestion, transformation, and validation, which reduced administrative burden and improved data reliability so teams could focus on postmerger strategy and execution instead of data management.
The VP of HRIS in healthcare shared that integrating financial and workforce data during M&A activities used to take six months but could now be done in just a few days with Prism Analytics. They explained: “We’ve seen tremendous time savings on M&A activity. As soon as a new deal closes and the legal agreement is finalized, we’re able to set everything up right away. In the past, we would have to manually transfer large volumes of data from multiple systems and had to ensure that all the data was accurate, compliant, and aligned with our existing frameworks. With Prism Analytics, we can integrate everything, including compensation structures, employee records, and benefits information, without having major disruptions to our business operations.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
On average, the composite organization experiences one M&A instance each year.
The composite organization relies on a cross-functional team of three resources — one each from IT, HR, and finance — to support M&A activities.
Before Workday, each cross-functional team member spends 1,040 hours on financial and workforce data integration each year.
With Workday, the composite reduces the time spent on financial and workforce data integration by 80%.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of a cross-functional HR, IT, and finance team member involved in M&A is $45.
For this benefit, the composite has a productivity recapture rate of 50%. Employees spend most of the time they save on activities that generate business value, but do not dedicate all reclaimed time to value-added work.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
Average M&A instances each year.
Team size and roles involved in financial and workforce data integration for M&A efforts.
The average time spent on financial and workforce data integration before Workday.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of a cross-functional team member involved in M&A activities.
Organization size.
Industry differences.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $126,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | Average M&A instances | Composite | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| F2 | Cross-functional HR, IT, and finance team involved in M&A effort | Composite | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
| F3 | Average time spent on financial and workforce data integration per resource before Workday (hours) | Composite | 1,040 | 1,040 | 1,040 | |
| F4 | Reduction in time spent on financial and workforce data integration with Workday | Interviews | 80% | 80% | 80% | |
| F5 | Total time for M&A effort avoided with Workday (hours) | F1*F2*F3*F4 | 2,496 | 2,496 | 2,496 | |
| F6 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of a cross-functional HR, IT, and finance team member involved in M&A activities | TEI methodology | $45 | $45 | $45 | |
| F7 | Productivity recapture | TEI methodology | 50% | 50% | 50% | |
| Ft | Reduced M&A effort | F5*F6*F7 | $56,160 | $56,160 | $56,160 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Ftr | Reduced M&A effort (risk-adjusted) | $50,544 | $50,544 | $50,544 | ||
| Three-year total: $151,632 | Three-year present value: $125,695 | |||||
Reduction in time spent on financial and workforce data integration during M&A efforts with Workday
Avoided hours for M&A effort over three years
Evidence and data. Before investing in Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics, interviewees’ organizations relied on multiple point solutions for data visualization, reporting, and HR and finance integration. These legacy tools, used for tasks such as employee data management, performance tracking, and financial reporting, often overlapped in functionality and required dedicated IT resources for maintenance and integration. Consolidating capabilities onto a single platform with Workday allowed organizations to retire many legacy point solutions, which led to software licensing cost savings. Interviewees’ organizations also saved labor costs by reallocating IT resources previously dedicated to managing multiple legacy systems.
The manager of people analytics in education said: “What I appreciate about Workday is that it’s built for users who just want to get the data in and tell the story people are asking about without needing a ton of technical expertise. As long as you understand the basics, like using a common text field such as employee ID to connect datasets, you can get a lot done. We often use a base Workday dataset in Prism Analytics and then integrate other data sources, like exit survey data, without having to write any code or manually build tables. It’s incredibly efficient.”
The EVP of global operations in insurance shared: “In our previous environment, we had this mix of tools that was clunky and expensive. We had a tool for data analysis, data visualization, and reporting. Prism Analytics and People Analytics let us bring everything under one roof.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The composite saves $150,000 each year by retiring legacy point solutions previously used for HR and finance functions.
After Workday, the composite reassigns one IT resource previously dedicated to ongoing management of the legacy environment.
The average fully burdened annual salary of an IT resource is $97,760.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
The cost of legacy point solutions.
IT resources previously dedicated to ongoing management of legacy environment that can be reassigned after transitioning to a consolidated platform with Workday.
The average fully burdened annual salary of an IT resource.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $555,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | Cost savings from retiring point solutions | Interviews | $150,000 | $150,000 | $150,000 | |
| G2 | Resources reassigned after retiring legacy environment | Composite | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| G3 | Average fully burdened annual salary of an IT resource | TEI methodology | $97,760 | $97,760 | $97,760 | |
| Gt | System consolidation and ongoing maintenance cost savings | G1+(G2*G3) | $247,760 | $247,760 | $247,760 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Gtr | System consolidation and ongoing maintenance cost savings (risk-adjusted) | $222,984 | $222,984 | $222,984 | ||
| Three-year total: $668,952 | Three-year present value: $554,528 | |||||
IT resource reassigned after retiring legacy environment
Interviewees mentioned the following additional benefits that their organizations experienced but were not able to quantify:
Avoided excess hires. Interviewees described how Workday Prism Analytics helped ground headcount planning and decision-making in real-time data. With greater visibility into open roles, budgeted headcount, and organizational priorities, HR and operations teams could introduce data-backed processes for approving new positions. Rather than relying on manual tracking or disconnected requests, organizations implemented structured workflows that required justification for each new hire. This shift helped eliminate unnecessary or duplicative hiring to prevent budget overruns.
Improved cross-functional collaboration between HR and finance. Interviewees noted that Workday Prism Analytics helped foster stronger alignment between HR and finance teams by providing a shared, reliable source of truth. Prior to Prism, these teams often struggled to align on key operational and workforce metrics. With the introduction of Prism dashboards, HR and finance business partners could meet regularly to review headcount and budgeting decisions using a centralized view, which enabled more productive planning discussions.
Improved decision-making. Interviewees shared that Prism Analytics helped them make faster, more informed decisions about key operational processes. Providing centralized access to detailed workforce and financial data and drilling down into specific metrics with Prism enabled teams to identify trends and resolve business challenges more efficiently and with greater confidence.
The director of people operations continued: “When we had to decide where to relocate offices, we used Workday to figure out which would be most convenient based on where our employees are located. To figure that out before Workday, we would have needed to gather data from ten different systems, and the analysis would have taken weeks. We were able to make a confident decision in days rather than months.”
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement Prism Analytics and People Analytics and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
Expanding use cases and functionality. Interviewees shared that their organizations continuously uncovered additional value from Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics as they expanded their use of the platforms. Although organizations initially adopted core reporting and workforce insights, they evolved their use over time to support more complex business needs, integrate external datasets, and automate new workflows.
| Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Htr | Fees to Workday | $0 | $246,750 | $362,250 | $530,250 | $1,139,250 | $922,083 |
| Itr | Implementation fees and effort | $167,849 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $167,849 | $167,849 |
| Jtr | Ongoing management and training costs | $279,405 | $192,119 | $160,619 | $160,619 | $792,761 | $707,476 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $447,254 | $438,869 | $522,869 | $690,869 | $2,099,859 | $1,797,408 |
Evidence and data. Interviewees’ organizations incurred annual fees to Workday for access to Prism Analytics and People Analytics. Fees were determined based on factors such as organization size, data volume, and number and complexity of use cases. Interviewees explained that annual fees increased over time as their organizations expanded their use of the platforms and added more complex or data-intensive initiatives. Some interviewees mentioned that fees rose when they added new business units or expanded analytics coverage to additional departments.
The director of people operations in retail described Prism Analytics and People Analytics as cost-effective solutions compared to other competitors they evaluated. They shared: “Cost-wise, the difference was significant. For software alone, we were looking at a fourfold increase in price with other options. From a cost perspective, the alternative options were outrageous.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The composite organization incurs two annual fees — one for Prism Analytics and one for People Analytics.
Costs increase year over year as the composite expands its use of the platforms and integrates more data across various business units. Its wide adoption of Prism Analytics results in a higher cost and steeper year over year increase. In contrast, People Analytics sees more targeted use primarily among leadership teams, which results in a slower, more gradual cost increase over time.
Pricing may vary. Contact Workday for additional details.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
The scope of platform use across the organization.
The volume and complexity of data integrated.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $922,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | Prism Analytics fee | Composite | $150,000 | $250,000 | $400,000 | ||
| H2 | People Analytics fee | Composite | $85,000 | $95,000 | $105,000 | ||
| Ht | Fees to Workday | H1+H2 | $0 | $235,000 | $345,000 | $505,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | ||||||
| Htr | Fees to Workday (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $246,750 | $362,250 | $530,250 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,139,250 | Three-year present value: $922,083 | ||||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees’ organizations engaged in a collaborative effort to deploy Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics that involved internal resources and external partners. The implementation process took place over several months in multiple phases.
For both Prism Analytics and People Analytics, interviewees shared that the implementation process required setting up the systems, integrating data, and customizing the solutions to fit their organization’s needs. Internal resources across HR and IT departments were crucial for validating the data, testing the solutions, and ensuring proper configuration. Interviewees’ organizations often used external partners to support the more complex aspects of the implementation, including setting up dashboards, ensuring data integrity, and providing specialized training. The extent of third-party involvement varied depending on the organization’s requirements, with larger organizations opting for more hands-on support.
The manager of people analytics in education said: “The initial implementation for Prism Analytics mostly involved setting up security and uploading our data onto the platform. There’s a slight learning curve, but overall, it’s very user-friendly. With People Analytics, the process took about two to three months. We had a team of three that would test different tabs to ensure everything was accurate.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
The organization incurs a professional services fee of $100,000 to implement Prism Analytics and $30,000 to implement People Analytics.
Implementing Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics takes the composite organization three months to complete.
Two IT resources dedicate 60% of their time to implementation and one HR analyst spends 40% of their time on the effort.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an IT resource is $47.
The average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR analyst is $38.
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
The scale and scope of implementation.
The implementation partner chosen.
The number and roles of internal resources dedicated to implementation.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $168,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I1 | Workday Prism Analytics professional services fee | Composite | $100,000 | ||||
| I2 | Workday People Analytics professional services fee | Composite | $30,000 | ||||
| I3 | Subtotal: Implementation fees | I1+I2 | $130,000 | ||||
| I4 | Implementation time (months) | Composite | 3 | ||||
| I5 | IT resources involved in implementation | Composite | 2 | ||||
| I6 | Average percentage of time an IT resource dedicates to implementation | Interviews | 50% | ||||
| I7 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of an IT resource | Interviews | $47 | ||||
| I8 | HR analysts involved in implementation | Composite | 1 | ||||
| I9 | Average percentage of time an HR analyst dedicates to implementation | Composite | 40% | ||||
| I10 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of an HR analyst | TEI methodology | $38 | ||||
| I11 | Subtotal: Implementation effort | I4*160 hours*((I5*I6*I7)+(I8*I9*I10)) | $29,856 | ||||
| It | Implementation fees and effort | I3+I11 | $159,856 | $0 | $0 | $0 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | ||||||
| Itr | Implementation fees and effort (risk-adjusted) | $167,849 | $0 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Three-year total: $167,849 | Three-year present value: $167,849 | ||||||
Evidence and data. Interviewees described Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics as needing minimal ongoing management once the initial setup and recurring processes were in place. Most of the effort, which was typically shared between HR and IT, involved occasional dataset reviews, system checks, and integration or feature-related issue resolution.
Workday delivered training through short virtual sessions, emails, and optional support resources. Interviewees said that People Analytics required minimal training due to its user-friendly design. Prism Analytics, with its more advanced capabilities, required more in-depth training for advanced users such as HR analysts and FP&A — the platform’s heaviest users — who received early onboarding to support adoption and enablement. General users, including leaders and senior managers across HR, finance, and operations, were gradually trained in a phased rollout across departments and business units.
The director of people operations in retail said: “We have two team members from the original implementation who are still involved in managing the platform. Their primary focus is onboarding other business units. They also occasionally check in with existing users to answer questions as needed, but the volume of inquiries is going down quickly. As expected, the initial onboarding period took longer, but now that things are in place, the number of people involved has decreased significantly.”
The manager of people analytics in education explained: “We have a low-maintenance approach to management. We run the reports periodically and then check them when they appear on my dashboard to see if there are any errors or if any new features require testing. Typically, if no integration issues occur, we just let the system run and monitor for errors. We have one person assigned to handle these tasks, which typically only takes a few hours a month.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Ongoing management
Training costs
Risks. This benefit will vary among organizations based on:
The number and roles of resources dedicated to ongoing management.
The percentage of time each resource spends on ongoing management.
The average fully burdened annual salary of resources dedicated to ongoing management.
The number of total users across Prism Analytics and People Analytics.
The rollout structure for onboarding users.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $707,000.
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J1 | HR analysts managing Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics | Composite | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||
| J2 | Average percentage of time spent on management | Interviews | 15% | 15% | 15% | ||
| J3 | Average fully burdened salary of an HR analyst | Composite | $79,040 | $79,040 | $79,040 | ||
| J4 | IT resources managing Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics | Composite | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||
| J5 | Average percentage of time spent on management | Interviews | 15% | 15% | 15% | ||
| J6 | Average fully burdened salary of an IT resource | TEI methodology | $97,760 | $97,760 | $97,760 | ||
| J7 | Subtotal: Ongoing management effort | (J1*J2*J3)+(J4* J5*J6) | $26,520 | $26,520 | $26,520 | ||
| J9 | Advanced users onboarded on Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics | Composite | 90 | 5 | 5 | 5 | |
| J10 | Average time spent on advanced user training (hours) | Interviews | 30 | 30 | 30 | 30 | |
| J11 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of an advanced user, blended | TEI methodology | $43 | $43 | $43 | $43 | |
| J12 | General users onboarded on Workday Prism Analytics and People Analytics | Composite | 250 | 250 | 200 | 200 | |
| J13 | Average time spent on general user training (hours) | Interviews | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | |
| J14 | Average fully burdened hourly rate of a general user, blended | TEI methodology | $60 | $60 | $60 | $60 | |
| J15 | Subtotal: Training costs | (J9*J10*J11)+(J 12*J13*J14) | $266,100 | $156,450 | $126,450 | $126,450 | |
| Jt | Ongoing management and training costs | J7+J15 | $266,100 | $182,970 | $152,970 | $152,970 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | ||||||
| Jtr | Ongoing management and training costs (risk-adjusted) | $279,405 | $192,119 | $160,619 | $160,619 | ||
| Three-year total: $792,761 | Three-year present value: $707,476 | ||||||
| Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total costs | ($447,254) | ($438,869) | ($522,869) | ($690,869) | ($2,099,859) | ($1,797,408) |
| Total benefits | $0 | $2,518,652 | $3,077,633 | $3,880,454 | $9,476,739 | $7,748,623 |
| Net benefits | ($447,254) | $2,079,783 | $2,554,764 | $3,189,586 | $7,376,880 | $5,951,215 |
| ROI | 331% | |||||
| Payback | <6 months |
The financial results calculated in the Benefits and Costs sections can be used to determine the ROI, NPV, and payback period for the composite organization’s investment. Forrester assumes a yearly discount rate of 10% for this analysis.
These risk-adjusted ROI, NPV, and payback period values are determined by applying risk-adjustment factors to the unadjusted results in each Benefit and Cost section.
The initial investment column contains costs incurred at “time 0” or at the beginning of Year 1 that are not discounted. All other cash flows are discounted using the discount rate at the end of the year. PV calculations are calculated for each total cost and benefit estimate. NPV calculations in the summary tables are the sum of the initial investment and the discounted cash flows in each year. Sums and present value calculations of the Total Benefits, Total Costs, and Cash Flow tables may not exactly add up, as some rounding may occur.
From the information provided in the interviews, Forrester constructed a Total Economic Impact™ framework for those organizations considering an investment in Prism Analytics and People Analytics.
The objective of the framework is to identify the cost, benefit, flexibility, and risk factors that affect the investment decision. Forrester took a multistep approach to evaluate the impact that Prism Analytics and People Analytics can have on an organization.
Interviewed Workday stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to Prism Analytics and People Analytics.
Interviewed four people at organizations using Prism Analytics and People Analytics to obtain data about costs, benefits, and risks.
Designed a composite organization based on characteristics of the interviewees’ organizations.
Constructed a financial model representative of the interviews using the TEI methodology and risk-adjusted the financial model based on issues and concerns of the interviewees.
Employed four fundamental elements of TEI in modeling the investment impact: benefits, costs, flexibility, and risks. Given the increasing sophistication of ROI analyses related to IT investments, Forrester’s TEI methodology provides a complete picture of the total economic impact of purchase decisions. Please see Appendix A for additional information on the TEI methodology.
Benefits represent the value the solution delivers to the business. The TEI methodology places equal weight on the measure of benefits and costs, allowing for a full examination of the solution’s effect on the entire organization.
Costs comprise all expenses necessary to deliver the proposed value, or benefits, of the solution. The methodology captures implementation and ongoing costs associated with the solution.
Flexibility represents the strategic value that can be obtained for some future additional investment building on top of the initial investment already made. The ability to capture that benefit has a PV that can be estimated.
Risks measure the uncertainty of benefit and cost estimates given: 1) the likelihood that estimates will meet original projections and 2) the likelihood that estimates will be tracked over time. TEI risk factors are based on “triangular distribution.”
The present or current value of (discounted) cost and benefit estimates given at an interest rate (the discount rate). The PV of costs and benefits feed into the total NPV of cash flows.
The present or current value of (discounted) future net cash flows given an interest rate (the discount rate). A positive project NPV normally indicates that the investment should be made unless other projects have higher NPVs.
A project’s expected return in percentage terms. ROI is calculated by dividing net benefits (benefits less costs) by costs.
The interest rate used in cash flow analysis to take into account the time value of money. Organizations typically use discount rates between 8% and 16%.
The breakeven point for an investment. This is the point in time at which net benefits (benefits minus costs) equal initial investment or cost.
Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of business and technology initiatives to both senior management and other key stakeholders.
1 Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of business and technology initiatives to both senior management and other key stakeholders.
Readers should be aware of the following:
This study is commissioned by Workday and delivered by Forrester Consulting. It is not meant to be used as a competitive analysis.
Forrester makes no assumptions as to the potential ROI that other organizations will receive. Forrester strongly advises that readers use their own estimates within the framework provided in the study to determine the appropriateness of an investment in Prism Analytics and People Analytics
Workday reviewed and provided feedback to Forrester, but Forrester maintains editorial control over the study and its findings and does not accept changes to the study that contradict Forrester’s findings or obscure the meaning of the study.
Workday provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Zahra Azzaoui
May 2025
https://mainstayadvisor.com/go/mainstay/gdpr/policy.html