Premium Reports
Contact KLAS
 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report    Zoom in charts



Related Series

Nurse & Staff Scheduling 2021
Scheduling 2016 - Staff, Nurse, and Physician
Staff Scheduling 2010
Staff Scheduling 2009
Staff and Nurse Scheduling, Market Review 2006

Related Segments

Related Articles

 End chart zoom
Nurse & Staff Scheduling 2018 Nurse & Staff Scheduling 2018
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

Nurse & Staff Scheduling 2018
Cost-Reducing Convenience & Mobility

author - Tanya Egbert
Tanya Egbert
August 21, 2018 | Read Time: 4  minutes

KLAS will explore which nurse and physician staffing solutions are most successful in helping providers become more efficient with scheduling as to save time, and reduce overstaffing and overtime. Also, to differentiate vendors based on mobile applications, predictive scheduling, and acuity-based scheduling (nurse only).

looking forphysician scheduling

impact on reducing costs

ShiftWizard (an Up-and-Comer) & Kronos Significantly Reduce Overtime, Agency Costs

ShiftWizard and Kronos customers frequently report that their nurse and staff scheduling solutions help them avoid unnecessary overtime, float, and agency costs. Both solutions allow managers to see at a glance which available staff won’t incur overtime by picking up a shift and which have the specialty training or skills to float between units.

ShiftWizard, used most often by smaller organizations, is intuitive, easy to use, flexible, and, most important, inexpensive. Kronos is deployed more often by larger organizations, whose users praise the tight integration with Kronos’ Time and Attendance solution; the Kronos scheduling solution has a learning curve and is perceived as one of the more expensive solutions available. OnShift and Schedule360 are perceived as highly cost-effective solutions for reducing unnecessary labor costs. Despite claims of advanced workforce-optimization capabilities, Avantas and Cerner do not have the same impact as other vendors due to incomplete training, delayed innovation, and unresponsive support.

needed functionality vs mobile functionality

Schedule360 & ShiftWizard Incorporate Increasingly Important Mobile Functionality

The ability for nurses and staff to use mobile devices to self-schedule, swap or fill open shifts, and see schedule changes in real time is increasingly vital to organizations looking to increase efficiency and employee satisfaction and reduce costs. In fact, well-designed mobile access is often described as required functionality.

Neither Schedule360 nor ShiftWizard offers a mobile app (users log in to their servers via mobile websites instead), but this in no way dampens customer enthusiasm for the simplicity and convenience of their mobile functionality. Managers can send out bulk messages about open shifts or learning opportunities. In contrast, OnShift and Kronos users describe apps designed primarily for employees; their apps are less useful for managers, who often need to manage shifts at home or on the go. Many GE Healthcare Staffing and Scheduling customers have chosen not to purchase add-on mobile functionality because they perceive it as still incomplete. Avantas users are still waiting for an app and say the web-interface functionality is limited.

Kronos, Avantas, & Change Healthcare Most Competent at Meeting Needs of Larger Organizations

overall performance vs median bed size

Kronos, Avantas, and Change Healthcare (McKesson) have average overall performance relative to other vendors available, but they are the only ones to have demonstrated the ability to capably handle the complexity of larger organizations. While Cerner is also deployed at relatively large organizations, some customers have been unable to get the solution’s basic capabilities working. In addition to missing promised functionality, the Cerner solution is highly manual (leaving room for error), and Cerner’s support isn’t proactive or responsive.

GE Healthcare ShiftSelect customers are disappointed by the solution’s low product quality, lacking functionality, and inferior service. There is a significant difference between the service GE Healthcare provides for ShiftSelect customers and the service they provide for Staffing and Scheduling customers. Larger Staffing and Scheduling customers describe the vendor’s support as responsive and proactive. They are sometimes provided personal support liaisons, and they can participate in advisory boards to request enhancements. OnShift’s long-term care solution has demonstrated an ability to meet the needs of both small and large long-term care organizations.

Workload Balancing

Roughly half of respondents have attempted to integrate acuity into their scheduling solution for workload balancing. Feedback from the limited number of customers using QuadraMed—a specialized acuity-staffing vendor—suggests that they are the most satisfied customer base. QuadraMed claims to have a full scheduling solution, but KLAS only validated the solution being used to help with workload balancing.

vendors with strongest workload balance
accuracy of predictive schaduling

Predictive Scheduling Not Living Up to the Hype

Despite vendor promises of advancement in predictive scheduling and machine learning, human expertise is still more valuable than artificial modeling. Approximately 50% of ShiftWizard, GE Healthcare (ShiftSelect and Staffing and Scheduling), and Change Healthcare customers use their solutions for predictive scheduling.

GE Healthcare Staffing and Scheduling and Kronos customers describe a very manual process for creating schedules, and respondents often point out that the predictive scheduling is only as good as the data it consumes and the users who manage it. While predictive scheduling might not seem as useful for long-term care, OnShift’s custom dashboards allow customers to visualize gaps and overtime use and adjust accordingly. Cerner’s acuity mapping improves some customers’ experience with an otherwise challenging solution. Predictive scheduling is one of Avantas’ main selling points, but users are, on average, slightly less satisfied with Avantas’ predictive scheduling than users of other solutions.

author - Natalie Jamison
Natalie Jamison
author - Robert Ellis
Project Manager
Robert Ellis
 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report

This material is copyrighted. Any organization gaining unauthorized access to this report will be liable to compensate KLAS for the full retail price. Please see the KLAS DATA USE POLICY for information regarding use of this report. © 2024 KLAS Research, LLC. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: Performance scores may change significantly when including newly interviewed provider organizations, especially when added to a smaller sample size like in emerging markets with a small number of live clients. The findings presented are not meant to be conclusive data for an entire client base.