ERP Area: Workforce Management (Time & Labor Management)
Software: UKG Pro Workforce Management
Products Implemented: N/A
Company Size: 20 – 50k Employees / Industry: Healthcare / Medical
Regions in Scope: North America
Reviewer Role: Project Leader
Consultant Recognized: Jonah Ferguson
Project(s) in Scope: Initial deployment (Phase 1),Add-on deployment (Phase 2, and not in the original SOW),Optimization / Ongoing support services,Training
Systems Expertise 3 out of 5
Implementation Process 4 out of 5
Responsiveness 4 out of 5
Quality of Consultants 3 out of 5
Flexibility / Adaptability 3 out of 5
SPEED & COST
Speed vs. Expectations: 1.5x the time we expected
Cost vs. Expectations: 1.25x cost budgeted
SCOPING ACCURACY:
How well did your implementation partner scope the work and understand your needs during the pre-sales process?
Partner did not identify issues that came up during implementation and we had some change orders
Was the implementation team who actually performed the work the same team that was proposed?
Team changed a lot
What “Lessons Learned” would you provide to others implementing with this partner / software? What else would you tell us about your project experience?
For an implementation of this size and complexity, early alignment on scope, decision-making, tenant management, and change control is critical. The project benefited from Align HCM’s flexibility, ongoing engagement, and willingness to support OhioHealth through shifting timelines, evolving requirements, go-live, and stabilization. Their partnership was especially valuable during complex workstreams such as timekeeping, scheduling, payroll integration, and the timeclock conversion.
Key lessons learned include the importance of having deep scheduling and integration subject matter expertise engaged earlier in the project, with continuity of assigned resources throughout design, build, testing, and go-live. Earlier joint working sessions between vendor SMEs and internal SMEs would have helped validate requirements, identify gaps sooner, and reduce downstream rework. Stronger feedback loops after design sessions and stakeholder workshops would also have improved alignment and helped ensure decisions were fully understood before moving forward.
I would also recommend that future projects establish formal tenant management, configuration governance, and change control processes at the beginning of the implementation. Clear expectations around development, testing, validation, smoke testing, and configuration movement between environments can help reduce confusion, minimize retesting, and strengthen overall project execution.
Finally, large-scale workforce management implementations require significant internal resourcing. Earlier guidance from the partner on recommended project staffing models, SME time commitments, program management needs, and operational backfill would have helped the organization better prepare for the level of effort required.
Overall, Align remained committed and collaborative throughout the project, but future implementations would benefit from earlier structure, stronger SME continuity, and more proactive governance around requirements, configuration, and resource planning.