Ramco returned its request for information (RFI) for HCM, and as analysts, we compared it against the combined responses of other vendors within the HR space. Ramco responded to the RFI with almost total support against all criteria. There were several flags against various supported entries. (Flags are more often signs of superior functionality.)
TEC’s way of certifying any vendor—including Ramco—is fair and impartial. Over the years, TEC has created an RFI form tailored to HCM, which has been completed by many vendors of HCM products. TEC has a database of the responses that correspond to the RFI. Through the gathering of such data, we know statistically when an RFI criterion is industry “supported,” whether it is a “customization,” or if it holds some other status. In cases where the general industry response is different from the respondents, the software “flagged” that response.
The next step in the certification process is to verify the RFI by constructing a validation suite of criteria that the vendor must demonstrate. The “supported flag entries” mentioned above are also included. TEC sends this validation list (or demo script) to the vendor two weeks prior to the certification meeting. This validation list is required in order for the vendor to demonstrate that the level of support for a particular functionality is as it has claimed. We also include other items that are essential to HCM functionality. As analysts, we play the role of examiner, with a “show me the functionality; I want to validate your responses” approach.
Overall, the Ramco certification went very well. Ramco’s analysts demo’ed the product. There was not one aspect of HCM that they did not know or demo. Not once was there the response of “I’ll get back to you.” Every “flagged” item that we noted as supported passed the test.
In validating over 200 entries, we noted the following:
* The entire user interface is browser-based and very easy to use.
* The HCM product is very rich in functionality.
* The menus are well organized, with common functionalities grouped together.
* The detail screens were not cluttered, making them easy to read.
* Horizontal scrolling was used when an entry required more data than what a line could contain.
* Data screens were user-friendly and easily searchable.
* The general layout and functionality was impeccable.
TEC’s way of certifying any vendor—including Ramco—is fair and impartial. Over the years, TEC has created an RFI form tailored to HCM, which has been completed by many vendors of HCM products. TEC has a database of the responses that correspond to the RFI. Through the gathering of such data, we know statistically when an RFI criterion is industry “supported,” whether it is a “customization,” or if it holds some other status. In cases where the general industry response is different from the respondents, the software “flagged” that response.
The next step in the certification process is to verify the RFI by constructing a validation suite of criteria that the vendor must demonstrate. The “supported flag entries” mentioned above are also included. TEC sends this validation list (or demo script) to the vendor two weeks prior to the certification meeting. This validation list is required in order for the vendor to demonstrate that the level of support for a particular functionality is as it has claimed. We also include other items that are essential to HCM functionality. As analysts, we play the role of examiner, with a “show me the functionality; I want to validate your responses” approach.
Overall, the Ramco certification went very well. Ramco’s analysts demo’ed the product. There was not one aspect of HCM that they did not know or demo. Not once was there the response of “I’ll get back to you.” Every “flagged” item that we noted as supported passed the test.
In validating over 200 entries, we noted the following:
* The entire user interface is browser-based and very easy to use.
* The HCM product is very rich in functionality.
* The menus are well organized, with common functionalities grouped together.
* The detail screens were not cluttered, making them easy to read.
* Horizontal scrolling was used when an entry required more data than what a line could contain.
* Data screens were user-friendly and easily searchable.
* The general layout and functionality was impeccable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment