The deployment of the solution took between six to eight months. When we introduced BrassRing at my company, we encountered several challenges. First, moving data from our old system to BrassRing was tough because it needed reformatting. Second, connecting BrassRing with our HR data was tricky due to manual processes for roles and departments. Third, setting up the workflow in BrassRing was complex. Fourth, configuring user access and approval levels was a detailed task. We also had to manage the change process, including running both old and new systems in parallel, communicating changes, and training users. Lastly, monitoring and reporting were needed to ensure data accuracy and proper system usage once everything was in place. We had a team of six to eight people managing the project from our side during the BrassRing deployment. I'm not sure about the size of the BrassRing team, and we also had our own technical team, which had three to four members. The solution required maintenance, particularly from my side as the administrator. Maintenance responsibilities were divided into two parts: some tasks we, as end-users, could control, while others were the responsibility of the BrassRing team. Payment-related tasks were a regular part of our responsibilities. I wasn't the only person maintaining the solution. There were three power users from Infosys, each responsible for a specific geography. My counterpart managed it in the US, and I, along with my colleague in India, managed it for other geographies.

I was not involved in the initial setup. I was brought in five months after the initial setup to help with some challenges.

For our company, initial setup was pretty complex, because we were trying to combine multiple systems into one. There were a lot of differences between our internal business areas. However, all that was overcome and we were able to implement it, on time, with the solution that worked for everybody.

It was somewhere in the middle. This has more to do with sorting out data sources, cleansing the data, narrowing and improving the data before inputting it to Talent Insights. As the old adage still holds: "garbage in, garbage out." So the up-front work, which you'd have to go through with any HR analytics implementation, is paramount. IBM supplies you with the consultants and data scientist support to ensure the best possible outcome. After it's up and running, and you have been trained to use the tool – easy peasy. You immediately get the hang of things, can generate your own insights, interrogate the data anyway you like, and build presentations within minutes. From that perspective, I'm thoroughly impressed. If there are any issues with the complexity of using this tool, it's usually with the client organization’s data challenges, not with the tool.

I was not involved in the initial setup. I was hired post-implementation to go ahead and help with some of that.

I was involved in the setup. As part of that relationship as well, I was really keen for us not to agree to a long-term contract or a long-term relationship without really understanding what the benefit and value was to Lloyd's. What we decided to do is to put in place an agreement for a period of time. What that enabled me to do is to take stock again. I think what one thing that we've maybe struggled with in the past is the ability to challenge the provider or the partner to say what you're going to do for us now, because we got into a cycle with a previous provider where it was working well, but I think what we wanted to do with this relationship with Kenexa is to push it harder. We knew we had to go harder and faster than before and to be much more dynamic as well. We wanted that science element. There were lots of different facets, so we decided on a short-term arrangement which would be regularly reviewed. We've kept that kind of approach alive today, and it's working well.

I think what's working well for Lloyd's Banking Group is that we get the opportunity to regularly look around the external market to see what's out there. It's a changing marketplace and there are some great providers out there with some great tools. We're constantly speaking and talking to other providers to understand what the emerging trends are out there. At the same time, we want to be able to have good, honest conversations with Kenexa and IBM about where we want to take this in the future and really challenge them, but at the same time allowing them to challenge us and our thinking as well. It works as a partnership and hopefully it will continue for some time to come. At the same time, we've got in place now another agreement for several years, but again we'll be looking both now and also in the future to make sure that the partnership is still the right partnership for Lloyd's Banking Group. I think that's important.

The implementation or the transfer from one provider to another, I think the providers did a brilliant job. If we moved from one provider today to another tomorrow, I think they'd do an excellent job. I think they are getting better at being able to take on new clients and to help them make that transition. We're a large organization and a very complex organization as well. At the time of moving across to IBM, to Kenexa at the time, we were also going through a huge transformation program of bringing together two large banks, which added to the complexity as well.

Within the group, it is complex, and I think we needed a strong partner who really understood us, understood where we were in our own journey and then helping us with our stakeholders to make sure that we put in place the right building blocks to create a great experience for colleagues come the day the survey goes live, which, for us, is always the key moment of truth.

Initial setup was definitely a major project for us. We're a multinational, global corporation, so it was a phased journey. Once we got a few of our clients into the system, it became much easier. Now, as we're continuing to bring on smaller areas, we're getting very fast at being able to bring people on.

I was not involved in the initial setup at my organization. It was just before I joined. It was about a year before I joined, so I wasn't involved, but I have not heard of any issues other than the normal understanding what needs to happen and IT being clear on how we're going to integrate it into the broader network. We haven't had any issues.

I wasn't involved in the initial setup because it happened 10 years ago. However, I believe it is fairly straightforward.

It was already set-up prior to my arrival on the job. Kenexa launched the updated UI platform in 2019, which required me as the admin and Workbench user to go in and make decisions on what the website would look like while updating our applications. 

It does require maintenance on occasion, especially if you need to make updates to applications, which sometimes maybe required if there are changes in the law, for example. 

I was not involved in the initial setup of Kenexa at my current company. In a previous life, I was. It was a little rocky, as they always are, but we went live on time and that's all that matters.

Initial setup was complex, but the system is! I wish that I had spent more time understanding what we were saying yes or no to.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The deployment was done in-house.

This solution requires maintenance. We have a team that is designated to maintain this it.

I was involved in the initial setup. We configured our own instance. We were separated from a former parent company about 2 1/2 years ago and at that time, we set up our own instance, so I've been a part of it ever since we stood that up. It was straightforward; it was good project management. Wwe had the resources we needed from the IBM side to make sure that we stayed on time and on task. It's not different from a lot of other large system implementations. There are a lot of moving parts. There's data migration. There are other things that have to be taken into consideration. Yeah, I think it went as well as it could, given the size and scale of the project.

I was involved in the initial setup. I've got a person by the name of Kevin Rush. He's been more on the technical side but as far as the setup, I was involved since day one. Initial setup took some time. Once the tool was set up for us to be able to use, it took a bit of hand-holding from IBM, but now we're at a place where we can load and link, and do a lot of things with it ourselves.

To set it up was tough, and when I say tough, it was more about learning for us, but we're laughing now with it, for sure.

Initial setup was pretty complex; relatively complex. We just have the applicant tracking system, not the whole HCM, so comparatively speaking, it's not as complex as it could be.

Initial setup was complex because BrassRIng is quite flexible. Essentially, it required a lot of decision making such as drawing on a blank slate.

2xB is extremely complex and convoluted to set up. I joined the company after the implementation of 2xB. I had to live with the consequence of that implementation. From that perspective, 2xB was an admin nightmare. Their Benchmark tool required specialized training at significant cost. Documentation is spotty and filled with gaps. The Benchmark tool was not designed for customers. It was for developers, so there are fields and functionality in locations in the tool that don't make any sense as an Admin user. I would have to jump to three or four screens to do something simple. Even after the training, I only had 80% access to the configuration. The 20% required working with the account management / tech support contact (which was difficult, at best). Simple changes became month-long projects. Glitches happened where it would take weeks to sort out. It was generally one hot mess after another.

I did have the misfortune of trying to implement a garbage piece of software called BrassRing Onboarding or 2xO. 2xO was created by brain-damaged monkeys in front of keyboards. It was so buggy, so inflexible, so difficult to configure and so unfriendly to the candidate that it was literally faster to have the candidate fill out a piece of paper (not a PDF...paper) and mail it back to us than it was to use 2xO. IBM did virtually no development around this tool. It was an orphaned product that no one wanted... including any customer who tried to work with the product. Truly atrocious customer support did not help either. 2xO wins the award for WORST applicant tracking software of all time. 2xO should be and is an embarrassment for IBM. IBM should refund every dime and profusely apologize to any customer every laid eyes on this piece of... well, I'll keep this professional.

I wasn't involved in the original setup.

I was not involved in the initial setup.

At the beginning, initial setup was complex. We had to learn. We are in contact with Kenexa since 2008 and working with them since then.

The setup was straightforward. I liked how we had teams and everyone could help build out product.