As part of our Mission & Beliefs (M&B) , IPM values the importance of consistent feedback to all employees. Compliance for the delivery of the Performance Summary & Development Plan (PS&DP), an HR support process measure, is tracked and results are shown in Figure 7.1-26. FY’13 FY’14 FY’15 FY’16 FY’17 % Compliance 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Figure 7.1-26 PS&DP Compliance 7.1c Supply-Chain Management Results IPM tracks the applicant source (Figure 7.1-27) to make decisions regarding the marketing of open positions. The marketing plans are adjusted based on the hiring source results. Source FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 LinkedIn 15% 53% 25% 26% 26% Referral 35% 18% 21% 15% 26% Indeed 0% 0% 18% 29% 6% Other 50% 29% 36% 30% 42% Figure 7.1-27 Applicant Source Recruiter efficacy is measured by the percentage of Round 1 candidates hired (Figure 7.1-28) . Prior to Round 1, the recruiter is solely responsible for determining candidate fit and whether they should be interviewed by Ops personnel. The decline in 2016 and 2017 reflects the increase in candidates, as we intentionally provide more applicants the opportunity to meet with our management team. Many are being eliminated after first interview before moving on to Round 2.
Malware Encounter Rate (FY)
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
IPM
US Avg.
Worldwide Avg.
Linear (IPM)
Benchmark Data: Microsoft Security Intelligence Report (2017) Figure 7.1-22 Risk and Information Security: Malware Encounter Rate Date Practice Conducted Participation Q1 2017 Yes 100% Q4 2014 Yes 100% Q4 2012 Yes 100% Q4 2010 Yes 100% Figure 7.1-23 Emergency Preparedness Practice
Status 2010- 2017
Desired Direction
Disaster Recovery Update Checklist
Review and Update the Disaster Recovery Plan Review and initiate the DRP Maintenance Requirements for the DRP Review and update the DRP team contacts Review and update procedures for each DRP role
100%
100% 100% 100%
R1 to Hire Ratio (FY)
Review and update the resource list
Review and update the disaster classification matrix Disaster Recovery Plan Preparedness Practice the DRP using a mock disaster scenario Capture recommended improvements and changes to the plan Update the DRP document and communicate changes
10% 15% 20%
100%
15% 16%
14% 13%
13%
100%
100%
0% 5%
100%
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Figure 7.1-24 Emergency Preparedness Checklist IPM strives to maintain a safe work environment as reported in Figure 7.1-25
Figure 7.1-28 R1 to Hire 7.2 Customer Results
7.2a Customer-Focused Results 7.2a(1) Customer Satisfaction
Annual average # of employees
Total hours worked 224,797 239,524 256,845 295,159 329,161 347,013
Total # of injuries
Total # of lost days
Year (FY)
After every project, key stakeholders are sent a Project Performance Evaluation (PPE), wherein they rate our performance on a scale of 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (outstanding) in terms of overall satisfaction (Figure 7.2-1) and nine other key areas: leadership, scope, schedule (Figure 7.2-2) , solutions, risk, commitments (Figure 7.2-3) , competitors (Figure 7.2-4) , behavior (AOS), and verbal (AOS).
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
104.0 112.1 120.1 138.0 148.3 164.6
0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
Figure 7.1-25 Safety Results
Page | 35
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator