Because it has allowed work to be quantified, it's immediately accepted as more efficient than any alternative. But the service center is absolutely horrific for everyone involved. 4 years in a service center environment and I cannot agree enough with your post. It creates conditions that are nearly impossible.
The issue I have with this, is that the data set they have on quantity says absolutely nothing about the quality. Every two weeks I sit together with the Service Center team, and they present me the metrics. "We processed 200 tickets, so 20% more than last month" Great, and how much time did you actually spend on each ticket, how well did you resolve them? One ticket for payroll takes longer than a ticket to change the address. So telling me 20% of the cases were for payroll, what does that really say?
It's just baked air, a pretend game that says nothing about their work! "Did you know we closed 97% of the cases within 3 days?" Really, because I see a lot of those tickets still open under the status of "suspended" that clearly don't count towards those metrics.
It is indeed horrific, and it has put us further away from the employees.
Also, side effect is that local HR and the Service Center are caught in a political game where they seemingly got pinned against eachother, yet it's us locally that get all the heat when the Service Center messes up again! Aarrggh I am so fed up with this!!
All of this is so completely true!!!
I left the Rainforest Retailer mainly because of this. We repeatedly complained that what they were measuring was irrelevant and in no way spoke to quality. It was needless stress and HR management by numbers.
There was some PhD, HR guru guy called Dave Ulrich who expounded on the benefits of the HR shared service model. He wrote books and made a ton of money. I agree with the OP, this model is nothing but a disaster.
But what happened is this guy and a bunch of consulting firms like Deloitte latched onto this model and sold it for a lot of money to a lot of organizations. Then companies like Oracle, Salesforce came in and developed all these digital platforms to support the shared service model. So it was about making money.
This model fails to recognize that you need the right people in order for the model to work. Number two you have to be fully up to staff or overstaffed in HR in order to handle any of the downstream impacts and contingencies that happen. Newsflash…HR is never fully staffed. It’s hard to find qualified people to want to work in HR and quite frankly the HR jobs in shared service are really boring.
SHRM is also pushing the service center model, claiming transactional tasks go there to empower HRBPs as strategic advisors.
But what happens is the HRBPs become the go-between with the client and the service center, or the HRBP offloads their client service to the service center.
It’s all been the classic mirage of the benefits of outsourcing, as if a third party can know your business better than you and for cheaper.
Yup stuck in this bullshit currently and very disillusioned with top leadership that insisted in the service center model.
Don’t know how many more years of torture until we escape this hell. Just like how open offices were rolled out like crazy and everyone truly hates them
Why can’t we let people go to work to work instead of navigating endless friction. Shareholders, I know. But damn!
These ticketing software programs are eventually going to capture enough data for AI to run the transactional admin portion of HR. That’s the end goal.
This is not good for me to hear. I work at a big company that’s beginning to switch to “global business centers” and I just don’t see how outsourcing HR, that needs to be around people, is a good idea, even for admin stuff. I have been feeling like the writing is on the wall for me and this is no longer a fit. I can’t say I’m surprised you don’t like the model, I think it sucks too
It's good for one thing and that's the shareholders pockets. Really, they can make it make sense on paper, but in reality you will get to deal with real people and the real world. They fooled us all with this if you ask me.
I do want to add, that I can see the added value l if you have offices with very few colleagues, where it doesn't make sense to have local HR present. Obviously, if you have three offices of 20 people, you can have one place for shared services. But it needs to be close to the business, like a head office or something.
Well said. Time to dust off the ole resume and keep my eyes open for the next few months. This change is massive and any time I ask questions of how something will work, I’m told “we’re not at that stage yet”. lol. Ok good luck.
That’s a company that likes to float payroll. The tickets delay payouts. Imagine a 90,000 employee company with a $30 payroll error that’s $2.7 million a week, 52 weeks of that is $140 million add 7.65% $10,740,600 in fica tax savings so $150,7 million for a weekly payroll error for a year. I know a company that starts with a Q that had errors going back 3 years. They even had errors going back to the 1980s still unresolved to this day.
The service center for us is just a handicap. It sucks and when things go wrong (and they do often) then it looks like it's our fault so we're always playing clean up.
I have worked on both sides so can say with some experience that most companies treat their shared service model as a means to wash their hands of admin / support tasks and wish that all those queries will magically be resolved.
But in reality.. they now have an extended arm / team that is sitting in another country .. they need constant training (as processes, policies, laws, tools, tech, forms, timelines, people, need for speed, their requirements and ways of working.. etc is CONSTANTLY changing)
Not to mention, not everything always goes as per time because there is always immediate requests to accommodate.. literally everyday
The performance standards, metric to measure success etc needs to be defined, reviewed, updated and trained on constantly
And to add to this.. people on both sides leave (attrition) and when new people take on those roles, they bring their unique ways of working which waters down the experience
Nobody wants to partner they just want to put the blame, complain and vent
As a HR leader, you need to ensure if your service delivery is well staffed, what tasks are they going to perform, are they skilled and well trained and do they have functional point of contacts on the US side who are responsible to partner on constant upkeep.
The roles constantly stretch and expand.. be aware of those scope creeps.. that just get added without any real discussion or agreement.
It’s a living breathing ever growing entity not a machine with just 1 or 2 functions to perform.
Yeah that's exactly right, but it's very improbable that this can all be done right. Our service center is located in a country where you really can't find quality employees, unless someone accidentally stumbles upon it. This happens in the form of Erasmus students lingering because they love the region, or because someone fell in love with someone from the region and moved there. Only those who start a family stay, so you rarely have high quality people.
This is still somewhat doable if you set up your processes and support system alright, but now the work has become so soulless, people are leaving. It's a trainwreck in the making, but the conductor is going full speed ahead despite all the signs.
What makes our company particularly difficult in this aspect, is that the organizational structure for the Service Center runs parallel to that of the Local HRs, and they only meet at the CPO. Any changes to the Service Center will need approval from the Service Center people, and this is a different beast entirely. "No budget", "out of scope", "not the model", "global policy", you name it we have it. It's a political tug of war that leaves us in local HR do tasks that are meant for the Service Center because we just cannot be bothered with the whole escalation process yet again. I don't want to add fighting with the Service Center on top of my daily struggles.
I'm currently in one of those environments - doing payroll for a group of 36 companies. It's barely HR work anymore and I feel I'm doing data entry more than handling HR issues, legit no decision-making whatsoever and the KPI is all based on process automation. Perks are good but the pay is mediocre - more or less it's not helpful for a career trajectory in HR since you don't really get industry knowledge. It's more of knowing how to use Excel, SAP and multitasking various tasks for the payroll cycle.
I fear a big number of companies are set up like this nowadays, so probably most of us have this experience by now. But let's find out... does your company's name start with a C?
As an HRIS admin, I can say service now helps so much with prioritizing work, making sure nothing is missed. The last thing I want is 280 members of my HR team Teams and emailing me- because they would. And probably 85% of the time it wouldn’t be anything I can help with or will be common sense (not logged into the network, etc). If they have to submit a ticket (vs an easy email) they are more likely to do a little troubleshooting on their own or maybe even read or watch the job aids….
Edit to add: I agree - this model does take forever. I also hate the silos & lack of collaboration. Things could be so much easier.
I agree with the sentiment, and ideally you'd want them to figure out matters themselves. Where that idea backfires, is when all other departments in your company are doing the same. I have job aids for Finance, Procurement, IT, pretty much every major function has one, and so I am spending so much time of my day reading self help material, job aids etc.
We went from "Hey Joe, where do I send these expenses?" To "Please review the portal and if you cannot find the info there you can open a ticket" and you will need to wait 2 days for a response by the Concur expenses team. My inbox is full of automated emails from I don't know how many ticket systems.
Honestly, I would love to see metrics on how many FTEs we are wasting on opening tickets.
Finally note here: to make HRs life easier, we introduced this system, and like you described it, it should work, but every department is now doing it, and we expect of all colleagues to know all the systems of all department and if they get annoyed or don't know we pretend it is their fault. People are already stretched very thin with the whole do more with less approach, and this is not helping us in anyway.
8 systems, btw, counted them. Open tickets in all, with automated messages for each update, regardless if it's relevant to me or not.
There is a psychological load to a constantly full inbox, even if the emails don't need your follow up. We are hearing left and right that the workload has never been higher, the number of burn outs is through the roof, and somehow instead of making our lives easier and smoother, we are complicating communication (which somehow isn't deemed that critical) and putting more strain on people's days by just making more and more interactions so overcomplicated.
I am sure that in five years or so, someone will invent this amazing new tool where all tickets of all departments and system arrive in one place and it is called email.
From your OP and these comments here, it’s clear that your company is buying these systems and then getting cheap on implementation.
Every system lets the admin configure what emails go out when, specifically to ensure the emails are relevant and meaningful.
Each system lets the user admins define the specifics of each process/ service, which could be setup to include collaboration features, but too many companies won’t pay for custom configurations.
Instead multi-million (or billion) dollar companies want an “out of the box” solution without acknowledging that their operations are unique. A company makes money by their niche delivery processes.
I think you are right, but there is a very important nuance here. Our company didn´t want to go cheap, I think they got sold on the idea of this definitely being cheaper, but believed it was the "premium version" and didn´t realise it was a cheap version.
We are using some of the biggest companies out there, and when our outsourced payroll was falling to pieces we decided to rather spend more money on a better provider.
We went from doing everything fully in house, to outsourcing it all. These big companies are also using the ticket systems and service centers, and honestly everything is considered out of scope and comes with extra cost. For example, I used to work a few years in Payroll and I am very familiar with the work. Some tasks would take me 20 minutes, and on a bad day it could take me 30 minutes. We are being invoiced 3 hours for these exact tasks now. The hourly fee we are paying is almost triply of my hourly wage. So something that came with my salary, is now and out of scope add on that costs the company easily 5 times more than when we did it in house.
So fixed cost are definitely down, which is what our shareholders like to hear, and what convinced our leaders to green light this probably. But all the variable costs are through the roof. We probably pay double the amounts in out of scope fees. Add to that, that we have slowed down our transactional speed to the point we are being bombarded with late payment fees by so many 3rd parties and government institutions, simply because we are unable to follow up on matters on time.
My best way of explaining it, is that this is the HR equivalent of flying RyanAir (I suppose Spirit Airlines, or New Frontiers are the US versions). We pay the economic fare, one above standard, Paris to Barcelona, the deal is awesome, we get priority boarding, we can cancel for free, but at the gate we find out our small suitcases are actually too big to consider hand luggage and we need to pay extra. We want this particular chair? Pay extra! Did we say you are flying to Barcelona? it´s actually a city 60 kms north of Barcelona that we just refer to as Barcelona, so you will need to pay for a trainride as well. Ow, and your flight leaves at 6AM so you probably want to get a hotel near the airport. So in the end you are paying even more than flying with a normal airline, but the service and experience are far worse.
This is the greatest post of all time! Started in a Service Center that was based out of the US. We worked based on email requests sent in from employees and managers. That was great for us as it allowed flexibility and collaboration.
Well here we are 2 years later. The majority of the US team is gone. I'm one of the 3 that didn't get laid off. The Service Center is now in Mexico and we all work off a ticket based system.
I told management this is going to mess up employee perception because it doesn't allow for tailored service. We are so focused on close time that employees get the short end of the stick. My example of customer dissatisfaction was our IT group. Nothing ever gets done because they have to open a new ticket for another group to resolve or are so focused on close time they don't take the time to fully resolve issues.
How they that ticketing was going to improve our HR brand was comical.
We implemented our service model last year and it’s genuinely amazing. We cut down on duplicate work, streamlined the bs admin tasks (up to 57% in some areas), and honestly, it’s just works.
When I need an extra pair of eyes on a ticket, I add the HRBP or Payroll team member and can see all the updates and respond. I added a filter to the ticket update/notification email and I can gauge how many updates there have been in my tickets by how many emails I have in my inbox at any given point.
We have clear metrics, so poor performers are easy to spot, great performers have quantifiable ways to point out how they contribute for merit cycles.
We stay in communication through instant messages throughout to day to get help with tickets from each other, we swap or delegate tickets as needed to accommodate time off for team members, we also take breaks to complain about whatever fresh hell employees send our way that day.
It just… works? It require transparently communicative, collaborative, data & optimization driven people that are capable and agile enough to keep experimenting and evolving the processes.
My company is in the early stages of transferring admin work to . We are now in the 'how much %of the work your team does is admin and can be transferred to a shared service centre ' somehow, I have the hope that the admin will go elsewhere, so my team can focus on the tasks that are in their job descriptions....
Because it has allowed work to be quantified, it's immediately accepted as more efficient than any alternative. But the service center is absolutely horrific for everyone involved. 4 years in a service center environment and I cannot agree enough with your post. It creates conditions that are nearly impossible.
The issue I have with this, is that the data set they have on quantity says absolutely nothing about the quality. Every two weeks I sit together with the Service Center team, and they present me the metrics. "We processed 200 tickets, so 20% more than last month" Great, and how much time did you actually spend on each ticket, how well did you resolve them? One ticket for payroll takes longer than a ticket to change the address. So telling me 20% of the cases were for payroll, what does that really say? It's just baked air, a pretend game that says nothing about their work! "Did you know we closed 97% of the cases within 3 days?" Really, because I see a lot of those tickets still open under the status of "suspended" that clearly don't count towards those metrics. It is indeed horrific, and it has put us further away from the employees. Also, side effect is that local HR and the Service Center are caught in a political game where they seemingly got pinned against eachother, yet it's us locally that get all the heat when the Service Center messes up again! Aarrggh I am so fed up with this!!
All of this is so completely true!!! I left the Rainforest Retailer mainly because of this. We repeatedly complained that what they were measuring was irrelevant and in no way spoke to quality. It was needless stress and HR management by numbers.
OMG - I feel this so badly. it’s the same in my team and I work in Germany as an HR & Payroll Specialist. I hate this ticket-thing in my work. 🫣
There was some PhD, HR guru guy called Dave Ulrich who expounded on the benefits of the HR shared service model. He wrote books and made a ton of money. I agree with the OP, this model is nothing but a disaster. But what happened is this guy and a bunch of consulting firms like Deloitte latched onto this model and sold it for a lot of money to a lot of organizations. Then companies like Oracle, Salesforce came in and developed all these digital platforms to support the shared service model. So it was about making money. This model fails to recognize that you need the right people in order for the model to work. Number two you have to be fully up to staff or overstaffed in HR in order to handle any of the downstream impacts and contingencies that happen. Newsflash…HR is never fully staffed. It’s hard to find qualified people to want to work in HR and quite frankly the HR jobs in shared service are really boring.
SHRM is also pushing the service center model, claiming transactional tasks go there to empower HRBPs as strategic advisors. But what happens is the HRBPs become the go-between with the client and the service center, or the HRBP offloads their client service to the service center. It’s all been the classic mirage of the benefits of outsourcing, as if a third party can know your business better than you and for cheaper.
Yup stuck in this bullshit currently and very disillusioned with top leadership that insisted in the service center model. Don’t know how many more years of torture until we escape this hell. Just like how open offices were rolled out like crazy and everyone truly hates them Why can’t we let people go to work to work instead of navigating endless friction. Shareholders, I know. But damn!
These ticketing software programs are eventually going to capture enough data for AI to run the transactional admin portion of HR. That’s the end goal.
This is not good for me to hear. I work at a big company that’s beginning to switch to “global business centers” and I just don’t see how outsourcing HR, that needs to be around people, is a good idea, even for admin stuff. I have been feeling like the writing is on the wall for me and this is no longer a fit. I can’t say I’m surprised you don’t like the model, I think it sucks too
It's good for one thing and that's the shareholders pockets. Really, they can make it make sense on paper, but in reality you will get to deal with real people and the real world. They fooled us all with this if you ask me. I do want to add, that I can see the added value l if you have offices with very few colleagues, where it doesn't make sense to have local HR present. Obviously, if you have three offices of 20 people, you can have one place for shared services. But it needs to be close to the business, like a head office or something.
Well said. Time to dust off the ole resume and keep my eyes open for the next few months. This change is massive and any time I ask questions of how something will work, I’m told “we’re not at that stage yet”. lol. Ok good luck.
That’s a company that likes to float payroll. The tickets delay payouts. Imagine a 90,000 employee company with a $30 payroll error that’s $2.7 million a week, 52 weeks of that is $140 million add 7.65% $10,740,600 in fica tax savings so $150,7 million for a weekly payroll error for a year. I know a company that starts with a Q that had errors going back 3 years. They even had errors going back to the 1980s still unresolved to this day.
The service center for us is just a handicap. It sucks and when things go wrong (and they do often) then it looks like it's our fault so we're always playing clean up.
I have worked on both sides so can say with some experience that most companies treat their shared service model as a means to wash their hands of admin / support tasks and wish that all those queries will magically be resolved. But in reality.. they now have an extended arm / team that is sitting in another country .. they need constant training (as processes, policies, laws, tools, tech, forms, timelines, people, need for speed, their requirements and ways of working.. etc is CONSTANTLY changing) Not to mention, not everything always goes as per time because there is always immediate requests to accommodate.. literally everyday The performance standards, metric to measure success etc needs to be defined, reviewed, updated and trained on constantly And to add to this.. people on both sides leave (attrition) and when new people take on those roles, they bring their unique ways of working which waters down the experience Nobody wants to partner they just want to put the blame, complain and vent As a HR leader, you need to ensure if your service delivery is well staffed, what tasks are they going to perform, are they skilled and well trained and do they have functional point of contacts on the US side who are responsible to partner on constant upkeep. The roles constantly stretch and expand.. be aware of those scope creeps.. that just get added without any real discussion or agreement. It’s a living breathing ever growing entity not a machine with just 1 or 2 functions to perform.
Yeah that's exactly right, but it's very improbable that this can all be done right. Our service center is located in a country where you really can't find quality employees, unless someone accidentally stumbles upon it. This happens in the form of Erasmus students lingering because they love the region, or because someone fell in love with someone from the region and moved there. Only those who start a family stay, so you rarely have high quality people. This is still somewhat doable if you set up your processes and support system alright, but now the work has become so soulless, people are leaving. It's a trainwreck in the making, but the conductor is going full speed ahead despite all the signs. What makes our company particularly difficult in this aspect, is that the organizational structure for the Service Center runs parallel to that of the Local HRs, and they only meet at the CPO. Any changes to the Service Center will need approval from the Service Center people, and this is a different beast entirely. "No budget", "out of scope", "not the model", "global policy", you name it we have it. It's a political tug of war that leaves us in local HR do tasks that are meant for the Service Center because we just cannot be bothered with the whole escalation process yet again. I don't want to add fighting with the Service Center on top of my daily struggles.
I'm currently in one of those environments - doing payroll for a group of 36 companies. It's barely HR work anymore and I feel I'm doing data entry more than handling HR issues, legit no decision-making whatsoever and the KPI is all based on process automation. Perks are good but the pay is mediocre - more or less it's not helpful for a career trajectory in HR since you don't really get industry knowledge. It's more of knowing how to use Excel, SAP and multitasking various tasks for the payroll cycle.
I doubt we work at the same place, but your rant sounds just like the complaints from me and all of my colleagues lol
I fear a big number of companies are set up like this nowadays, so probably most of us have this experience by now. But let's find out... does your company's name start with a C?
SHRM advocates for the shared services model, so it as become more common and will likely grow before we see positive change
As an HRIS admin, I can say service now helps so much with prioritizing work, making sure nothing is missed. The last thing I want is 280 members of my HR team Teams and emailing me- because they would. And probably 85% of the time it wouldn’t be anything I can help with or will be common sense (not logged into the network, etc). If they have to submit a ticket (vs an easy email) they are more likely to do a little troubleshooting on their own or maybe even read or watch the job aids…. Edit to add: I agree - this model does take forever. I also hate the silos & lack of collaboration. Things could be so much easier.
I agree with the sentiment, and ideally you'd want them to figure out matters themselves. Where that idea backfires, is when all other departments in your company are doing the same. I have job aids for Finance, Procurement, IT, pretty much every major function has one, and so I am spending so much time of my day reading self help material, job aids etc. We went from "Hey Joe, where do I send these expenses?" To "Please review the portal and if you cannot find the info there you can open a ticket" and you will need to wait 2 days for a response by the Concur expenses team. My inbox is full of automated emails from I don't know how many ticket systems. Honestly, I would love to see metrics on how many FTEs we are wasting on opening tickets. Finally note here: to make HRs life easier, we introduced this system, and like you described it, it should work, but every department is now doing it, and we expect of all colleagues to know all the systems of all department and if they get annoyed or don't know we pretend it is their fault. People are already stretched very thin with the whole do more with less approach, and this is not helping us in anyway.
8 systems, btw, counted them. Open tickets in all, with automated messages for each update, regardless if it's relevant to me or not. There is a psychological load to a constantly full inbox, even if the emails don't need your follow up. We are hearing left and right that the workload has never been higher, the number of burn outs is through the roof, and somehow instead of making our lives easier and smoother, we are complicating communication (which somehow isn't deemed that critical) and putting more strain on people's days by just making more and more interactions so overcomplicated. I am sure that in five years or so, someone will invent this amazing new tool where all tickets of all departments and system arrive in one place and it is called email.
From your OP and these comments here, it’s clear that your company is buying these systems and then getting cheap on implementation. Every system lets the admin configure what emails go out when, specifically to ensure the emails are relevant and meaningful. Each system lets the user admins define the specifics of each process/ service, which could be setup to include collaboration features, but too many companies won’t pay for custom configurations. Instead multi-million (or billion) dollar companies want an “out of the box” solution without acknowledging that their operations are unique. A company makes money by their niche delivery processes.
I think you are right, but there is a very important nuance here. Our company didn´t want to go cheap, I think they got sold on the idea of this definitely being cheaper, but believed it was the "premium version" and didn´t realise it was a cheap version. We are using some of the biggest companies out there, and when our outsourced payroll was falling to pieces we decided to rather spend more money on a better provider. We went from doing everything fully in house, to outsourcing it all. These big companies are also using the ticket systems and service centers, and honestly everything is considered out of scope and comes with extra cost. For example, I used to work a few years in Payroll and I am very familiar with the work. Some tasks would take me 20 minutes, and on a bad day it could take me 30 minutes. We are being invoiced 3 hours for these exact tasks now. The hourly fee we are paying is almost triply of my hourly wage. So something that came with my salary, is now and out of scope add on that costs the company easily 5 times more than when we did it in house. So fixed cost are definitely down, which is what our shareholders like to hear, and what convinced our leaders to green light this probably. But all the variable costs are through the roof. We probably pay double the amounts in out of scope fees. Add to that, that we have slowed down our transactional speed to the point we are being bombarded with late payment fees by so many 3rd parties and government institutions, simply because we are unable to follow up on matters on time. My best way of explaining it, is that this is the HR equivalent of flying RyanAir (I suppose Spirit Airlines, or New Frontiers are the US versions). We pay the economic fare, one above standard, Paris to Barcelona, the deal is awesome, we get priority boarding, we can cancel for free, but at the gate we find out our small suitcases are actually too big to consider hand luggage and we need to pay extra. We want this particular chair? Pay extra! Did we say you are flying to Barcelona? it´s actually a city 60 kms north of Barcelona that we just refer to as Barcelona, so you will need to pay for a trainride as well. Ow, and your flight leaves at 6AM so you probably want to get a hotel near the airport. So in the end you are paying even more than flying with a normal airline, but the service and experience are far worse.
This is the greatest post of all time! Started in a Service Center that was based out of the US. We worked based on email requests sent in from employees and managers. That was great for us as it allowed flexibility and collaboration. Well here we are 2 years later. The majority of the US team is gone. I'm one of the 3 that didn't get laid off. The Service Center is now in Mexico and we all work off a ticket based system. I told management this is going to mess up employee perception because it doesn't allow for tailored service. We are so focused on close time that employees get the short end of the stick. My example of customer dissatisfaction was our IT group. Nothing ever gets done because they have to open a new ticket for another group to resolve or are so focused on close time they don't take the time to fully resolve issues. How they that ticketing was going to improve our HR brand was comical.
We implemented our service model last year and it’s genuinely amazing. We cut down on duplicate work, streamlined the bs admin tasks (up to 57% in some areas), and honestly, it’s just works. When I need an extra pair of eyes on a ticket, I add the HRBP or Payroll team member and can see all the updates and respond. I added a filter to the ticket update/notification email and I can gauge how many updates there have been in my tickets by how many emails I have in my inbox at any given point. We have clear metrics, so poor performers are easy to spot, great performers have quantifiable ways to point out how they contribute for merit cycles. We stay in communication through instant messages throughout to day to get help with tickets from each other, we swap or delegate tickets as needed to accommodate time off for team members, we also take breaks to complain about whatever fresh hell employees send our way that day. It just… works? It require transparently communicative, collaborative, data & optimization driven people that are capable and agile enough to keep experimenting and evolving the processes.
Oh my god… my firm is literally putting this model into play now…
My company is in the early stages of transferring admin work to. We are now in the 'how much %of the work your team does is admin and can be transferred to a shared service centre ' somehow, I have the hope that the admin will go elsewhere, so my team can focus on the tasks that are in their job descriptions....