Abstract:
A system and method that tracks surplus reduction actions is disclosed. Managers and other decision makers take various actions regarding employees. Actions are recorded and tracked in a data store. Included with the action is an identifier, such as a digital signature, of the decision maker that performed the action. Affected (i.e., surplus) employees are notified that they have been selected as surplus. Affected employees acknowledge such identification as well as any confidentiality and non-compete obligations. Affected employees electronically sign non-compete agreements and such digital signatures are also recorded in the data store evidencing the employees&#39; acknowledgment of such confidentiality and non-compete obligations. Electronic keys, such as user IDs and passwords, may also be sent to employees that acknowledge surplus actions and non-compete obligations. These electronic keys enable the affected employees to access materials, such as job databases and other relocation and employment information.

Description:
BACKGROUND 
     1. Field of the Invention 
     The present invention relates to a system and method for managing human resources for an organization. More particularly, the present invention relates to a system and method tracking and logging receipts and maintaining an audit trail during a resource reduction. 
     2. Description of the Related Art 
     Managers in modern business organizations have increasingly complex roles to perform in managing the various facets of the business organization. While managers differ greatly in the objectives and goals of their respective departments or areas, a key element that most managers deal with are the employees in their department or area and their efforts to retain a highly talented pool of employees while staying within given resource requirements, such as salary and stock budgets. Analyzing and assessing organizational goals and objectives is also important in determining which employees to retain during resource reduction exercises. 
     Periodically, due to business conditions and business performance, organizations trim their workforces by terminating (i.e., laying off) surplus employee resources. Reducing the number of employees is usually a management intensive task wherein managers determine which employees are laid-off and which employees are retained. The typical goal of resource reduction activities is to retain the higher skilled workers in a given skill group and level while reducing the number of lower skilled employees or those employees that detract from the achievement of overall organizational goals. 
     Using traditional human resources tools, managers manually and subjectively determine which employees should be laid-off. Whether the manager analyzes employees&#39; skills and past job performances is often a determination left to the individual managers. Because of this, managers&#39; biases towards or against various employees often plays a most key role in actual determinations. Higher level managers typically lack fundamental data needed to make detailed analyses of managers&#39; reduction decisions. Furthermore, higher level managers lack tools that would assist them in objectively reviewing managers&#39; decisions in an efficient and timely basis. Because of these challenges, more skilled employees may be removed from the organization leaving less skilled employees to take their jobs. This talent void can be detrimental to the organization&#39;s technical and financial well being. 
     Additionally, traditional systems evaluate individual employees differently even though groups of employees are in similar skill groups. Managers of employees often evaluate employees based upon review criteria that is established loosely, at best, by the organization. Each manager may evaluate employees in his or her area differently based largely upon criteria developed by the manager, rather than the organization. Even if standard evaluation criteria is provided to management, there is little ability for program administers to check whether managers are actually using the standard evaluation materials. 
     Furthermore, the impact of a resource reduction action is typically difficult to analyze and even more difficult to estimate beforehand. When conducting a resource reduction exercise, the organization usually has a vague idea of the savings that will be achieved and the costs, in terms of severance packages and diminished employees, of the resource reduction. Impact estimates are often use crude formulas that simply reduce a percentage of the overall workforce without taking into account individual salaries in surplus skill groups. Likewise, the impact of the actual resource reduction is often difficult to ascertain without compiling lists of affected employees. These lists often do not indicate the numbers of surplus employees that were identified in various skill groups and levels. 
     Finally, traditional systems have little ability to assure that surplus employees are individually notified and little, if any, data is maintained evidencing employees&#39; receipt of information regarding the resource reduction action. Some managers may fail to notify affected employees in a timely fashion and administrators of the resource reduction have little ability to ascertain which employees have been notified without manually surveying the affected employees. Surplus employees that are in possession of trade secrets or other confidential information are often not informed of their confidentiality, and often non-compete, obligations upon being laid-off from an organization. 
     What is needed, therefore, is a system and method that tracks and logs management notification of affected (i.e., surplus) employees. 
     SUMMARY 
     It has been discovered that a system and method that tracks surplus reduction actions addresses the aforementioned challenges. Managers and other decision makers take various actions regarding employees. These actions may include evaluating employees based on predefined criteria and identifying employees as surplus employees. Actions are recorded and tracked in a data store. Included with the action is an identifier of the manager, or decision maker, that performed the action. The identifier may include the decision maker&#39;s digital signature. Another action that is performed by the managers and decision makers is identifying those surplus employees that have knowledge of the organization&#39;s trade secrets or other confidential information. This identification is used in order to prepare non-compete agreements for such employees. 
     Affected (i.e., surplus) employees are notified that they have been selected as surplus. Affected employees, in turn, acknowledge such identification. The employees&#39; acknowledgements are also recorded and tracked. In addition, those employees with non-compete obligations electronically sign non-compete agreements and such digital signatures are also recorded in the data store evidencing the employees&#39; acknowledgment of such confidentiality and non-compete obligations. In one embodiment, electronic keys, such as user IDs and passwords, are sent to employees that acknowledge surplus actions and non-compete obligations. These electronic keys enable the affected employees to access materials, such as job databases and other relocation and employment information. 
     The foregoing is a summary and thus contains, by necessity, simplifications, generalizations, and omissions of detail; consequently, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the summary is illustrative only and is not intended to be in any way limiting. Other aspects, inventive features, and advantages of the present invention, as defined solely by the claims, will become apparent in the non-limiting detailed description set forth below. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       The present invention may be better understood, and its numerous objects, features, and advantages made apparent to those skilled in the art by referencing the accompanying drawings. The use of the same reference symbols in different drawings indicates similar or identical items. 
         FIG. 1  is a high level diagram showing various layers of management using information managed and maintained by the People Planner System; 
         FIG. 2  is a hierarchy diagram showing resources, such as money used for salaries, being distributed and spread from high levels of the organization to lower levels of the organization; 
         FIG. 3  is a data layer diagram showing various layer components being created to form an employee profile and how planning data is used to generate actual employment data; 
         FIG. 4  is a diagram showing a manager using the People Planner System to perform planning and analysis functions; 
         FIG. 5  is a diagram showing a manager using the People Planner System to perform compensation functions; 
         FIG. 6  is a flowchart showing the People Planner System being used to evaluate the performance of employees; 
         FIG. 7  is a flowchart showing a manager identifying employees&#39; motivators and inhibitors and the People Planner System used to determine flight risks of individual employees; 
         FIG. 8  is a flowchart used to group employees into contribution/flight risk quadrants for risk assessment; 
         FIG. 9  is a user interface and logic for organizational risk analysis concerning employees; 
         FIG. 10  is a flowchart used to analyze risk quadrants and act upon identified employees; 
         FIG. 11  is a flowchart used to analyze compensation of high contributing employees; 
         FIG. 12  is a flowchart used to analyze compensation of low contributing employees; 
         FIG. 13  is a flowchart showing details involved with comparing employees&#39; compensation using benchmark information; 
         FIG. 14  is a flowchart showing details involved with aggregate analysis of a department or area and comparison against budgetary requirements; 
         FIG. 15  is a flowchart for identifying key employees and performing retention analysis for identified employees; 
         FIG. 16  is a flowchart showing tracking of additional keywords by the People Planner System to track organizational events and reporting on employees based on the additional keywords; 
         FIG. 17   a  is a diagram of an employee managed in a matrix organization with multiple managers; 
         FIG. 17   b  is a flowchart used to evaluate and aware employees managed in a matrix organization with multiple managers; 
         FIG. 18   a  is a sample three tier hierarchy chart showing employees and two layers of management; 
         FIG. 18   b  is a diagram showing managers being excluded from a higher-level People Planner View; 
         FIG. 19  is a flowchart showing employees being selected and removed from a particular People Planner System view; 
         FIG. 20  is a high level flowchart showing automated activities involved in managing organizational resources; 
         FIG. 21  is a flowchart showing preprocessing activities performed in planning a resource reduction; 
         FIG. 22  is a flowchart showing the creation of evaluation templates for surplus employees in identified skill groups and levels; 
         FIG. 23  is a flowchart showing organizational areas being eliminated as part of an organizational resource reduction action; 
         FIG. 24  is a flowchart showing the identification of employees for further evaluation as part of an organization&#39;s resource reduction action; 
         FIG. 25  is a flowchart showing the evaluation of employees in identified skill groups and levels for resource reduction; 
         FIG. 26  is a flowchart showing the grouping and sorting of evaluated employees for resource reduction activities; 
         FIG. 27  is a flowchart showing the automated analysis of evaluated employees with respect to an organization&#39;s needs in terms of resources for various skill groups and levels; 
         FIG. 28  is a flowchart showing hierarchical management review of employees&#39; skill evaluations; 
         FIG. 29  is a flowchart showing more detailed hierarchical management analysis of employees&#39; skill evaluations; 
         FIG. 30  is a flowchart showing detailed hierarchical management analysis of employee evaluations identified as having low skills; 
         FIG. 31  is a flowchart showing detailed hierarchical management analysis of employee evaluations identified as having high skills; 
         FIG. 32  is a flowchart showing management&#39;s comparison of employees within similar skill groups and levels for surplus recommendations; 
         FIG. 33  is a flowchart showing project office review of surplus recommendations; 
         FIG. 34  is a flowchart showing legal review of surplus recommendations; 
         FIG. 35  is a flowchart showing financial impact estimation of a proposed surplus action prior to evaluation of employees&#39; skills; 
         FIG. 36  is a flowchart showing financial impact analysis of a surplus action after evaluating and recommending individual employees for surplus disposition; 
         FIG. 37  is a flowchart showing management notification of surplus employees; 
         FIG. 38  is a flowchart showing processing of surplus notification and non-compete obligations by affected employees; 
         FIG. 39  is a hierarchy chart showing relationships between processes involved in managing organizational resources; and 
         FIG. 40  is a block diagram of an information handling system capable of implementing the present invention. 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     The following is intended to provide a detailed description of an example of the invention and should not be taken to be limiting of the invention itself. Rather, any number of variations may fall within the scope of the invention which is defined in the claims following the description. 
       FIG. 1  is a high level diagram showing various layers of management using information managed and maintained by the People Planner System. Executive management  100  use People Planner System  170  to enter and view strategic employee data  105 . For example, executive management  100  may use People Planner System  170  to analyze potential skill deficits or receive rollup information regarding risk assessments. This information can be used by executive management  100  to allocate additional resources to problem areas. 
     Division management  110  use People Planner System  170  to enter and view division level employee data  115 . Division management  110  use People Planner System  170  similarly to executive management  100  except with a focus on the particular division within the organization. Again, problem areas reported by managers in employee evaluations and risk assessments can be used to provide additional resources to projects and to alert executive management to potential problems. In addition, employee analyses can be performed at high levels such as division management  110  and executive management  100  to determine whether employees with similar talents and experience levels are compensated and awarded similarly. Anomalies, such as poor performing employees receiving large salary increases and high performing employees receiving little or no salary increases can be identified, analyzed, and likely corrected. 
     Project managers  120  use People Planner System  170  to provide and view project level employee data  125 . Project managers, like division and executive managers, can view information about any employee (including managers) reporting to the project manager. While executive management and division management may focus more on spotting anomalies and analyzing summary data to identify potential problems, project managers may often view individual employee information, especially to determine whether employees are being compensated and rewarded consistently and fairly by the department managers. Project managers  120  may also hold management meetings where People Planner System data pertaining to the department managers is excluded so that the management team can focus on the employees within the project and determine whether the employees are being treated fairly or whether poorer performing employees in one department are being evaluated as higher contributors to higher performing employees in another department. Discrepancies such as these can be resolved dynamically by the project manager or one of the department manager changing employee data. The revised employee data can thereafter be viewed and discussed. The process of refining the People Planner System data continues until the management team is satisfied with the information pertaining to all employees in the project. 
     Department managers  130  (i.e., immediate managers, foremen, direct supervisors) use People Planner System  170  to enter and view department level employee data  135 . Department managers  130  use People Planner System  170  to evaluate employee performance, perform risk assessment, perform compensation and stock planning, complete or revise development plans for employees, perform retention plans for key employees identified as having executive potential or key technical potential, and provide additional data pertaining to employees that the manager wishes to attend HR programs or company events, such as special meetings, classes, or projects. 
     Human resources personnel  140  use People Planner System to assist various levels of management with personnel related questions and use People Planner System to view and enter human resources data  145 . While assisting various levels of management, human resources  140  uses their skill and experience with analyzing employee data to aid management in making employee decisions and to assist managers in using People Planner System  170  to appropriately analyze the People Planner System information pertaining to the managers&#39; employees. Human resources  140  also uses People Planner System to include new programs and events that can be used by managers with their employees. In addition, human resources  140  may determine when certain People Planner System functions take place. For example human resources  140  may determine when planning data is finalized and used as a basis for current, or actual, data to reflect employees&#39; compensation changes, stock awards, and the like. 
     Computer network  150  is used to connect the various managers to People Planner System  170 . Computer network  150  may be a local area network (LAN), a Wide Area Network (WAN), a mainframe computer with connected terminals, or a virtual private network (VPN) implemented over a public network such as the Internet. Computer network  150  receives People Planner requests  160  and passes the received requests to People Planner System  170 . People Planner System  170  processes the request and maintains employee database  190  to store the data. In one embodiment, employee database  190  is a Lotus Notes™ database. In large organizations, employee data may be divided among several databases for performance and utilization reasons. In a distributed model, employee data for a particular area, such as a project or company location, may be located on the same database for improved maintenance of related employee records and improved lower level analyses. Higher level analyses use information summarized from the distributed databases in order to provide executive management  100  and perhaps division management  110  strategic employee data  105  and division level employee data  115 . The People Planner System process request  160  and prepares and returns responses  180  which is viewed on the manager&#39;s display screen. 
       FIG. 2  is a hierarchy diagram showing resources, such as money used for salaries, being distributed and spread from high levels of the organization to lower levels of the organization. A limited amount of compensatory resources  200  are available to distribute to employees. The amount of compensatory resources  200  depends on the size and economic health of the organization. If fewer resources are available than in previous years, executive management  210  may be forced to lower salaries or reduce the number of employees through voluntary or involuntary measures. 
     Executive management  210  determines how the available compensatory resources will be spread among the various high level divisions of the organization. In the example shown in  FIG. 2 , three division salary data are determined by executive management  210  (division salary data  212 , division salary data  214 , and division salary data  216 ). The division salary data is written to budget files available to the division managers in the People Planner System. The People Planner System is used by executive management  210  to aid in the division salary determination by providing executive management  210  with current salary needs of the various divisions, summaries of the employees and locations of the various divisions, and risk analysis information pertaining to the various divisions. The risk analysis information may alert executive management  210  to a potential situation where key types of employees, such as those with sought after technical skills, are at risk of leaving the organization. This type of information may prompt executive management to allot more to divisions at risk so that such skilled employees can be better compensated to avoid potential attrition problems. In addition, the People Planner System includes projected or planning data that aids in determining appropriate percentages of increases that should be allocated to the various divisions. 
     The division management, in turn, use the provided division salary data to determine how to spread the division compensatory amounts to areas, such as projects, within the division. In the example shown, division management  220  receives division salary data  214  from executive management. Division management  220  uses the People Planner System to allocate division salary data  214  to the various projects included in the division. Once again, the People Planner System is used to provide division management  220  with current salary needs of the various projects, summaries of the employees and locations of the various projects, and risk analysis information pertaining to the various projects. Division managers also use projected, or planning, data included in the People Planner System that was provided by lower levels of management. The People Planner System is used to distribute budget amounts to the various project managers. In the example shown in  FIG. 2 , division management  220  provides salary budgeting data to three projects. The budgeting data is provided to the projects through the People Planner System (project salary data  222 ,  224 , and  226 ). 
     Project management uses the allocated project salary data to provide budget data to the various departments that are included in the project. The project manager&#39;s determinations are made at a more micro- rather than macro-level with individual employees&#39; needs often used as a basis for the project manager&#39;s decisions. Again, the People Planner System is used to provide management, in this case project manager  230 , with current salary needs of the employees, summaries of the employees and of the various departments, and risk analysis information pertaining to the various employees and projects. Project managers also use projected, or planning, data included in the People Planner System that was provided by immediate, or department, managers during prior planning cycles. The People Planner System is used to distribute budget amounts to the various department managers. In the example shown in  FIG. 2 , project manager  230  provides salary budgeting data to three departments using the People Planner System (department salary data  232 ,  234 , and  236 ). 
     Department managers receive budget data from their project managers and use the budget data to plan compensatory changes for individual employees in the department manager&#39;s department. In the example shown, department manager  240  receives department salary budget data  234 . The People Planner System is used to provide management, in this case department manager  240 , with current salary needs of the employees in the department, summaries of the employees, and risk analysis information pertaining to the employees. Department manager  240  uses the People Planner System to plan compensatory changes and to record the planned changes in order for the department manager and higher levels of management to analyze the planned changes in light of the budget restraints. 
     The People Planner System is also used to move budget amounts between divisions, projects, and departments. For example, if a given department was initially allocated more money than deemed needed (for example, based on employee contributions and comparison of the employees&#39; current salaries with those of employees in other departments), money that was initially allocated to the department may be reallocated by the project manager to a department that was initially under-funded. This same “give-and-take” can be applied to higher levels of the organization with the People Planner System used to identify possible areas for re-allocation and facilitate the transfer of budget amounts from one area to another. 
       FIG. 3  is a data layer diagram showing various layer components being created to form an employee profile and how planning data is used to generate actual employment data. Employee profile  300  includes actual and planning data corresponding to an employee. Actual data  305  includes information such as the employee&#39;s current salary and stock options that have been granted to the employee, the employee&#39;s current job title, level, and performance rating and any other information that the organization uses to track and assess employees. Actual data  305  may also include historical data, such as the employee&#39;s past salary levels, prior stock awards, and prior job titles, levels, and performance ratings. 
     The manager performs risk analysis  310  using the employee&#39;s actual data do determine the employee&#39;s value to the organization and the risk of the employee leaving the organization for other opportunities (see  FIGS. 7-10  for detailed descriptions of risk analysis using the People Planner System). The manager&#39;s risk analysis is provided to the People Planner System as risk planning data  315 . Employee profile  300  now has a richer set of data  320  for making further decisions regarding the employee&#39;s compensation and development. 
     Employee profile data  320  includes actual (or current) data as well as the risk planning data. This data is used by the manager in using the People Planner System&#39;s compensation planner  330 . Based on the employee&#39;s actual data and the risk analysis data the manager is better equipped to plan changes to the employee&#39;s compensation. At this stage, compensation planning data  335  may simply identify the employee for a certain level of salary increase (i.e., significant increase, increase, cost of living increase, and no increase) it may actually plan a certain dollar-amount salary change for the employee. Compensation planning data  335  is used by the People Planner System to create an even richer set of data ( 340 ) that now includes actual data, risk planning data, and compensation planning data. 
     Employee profile data  340  is used by the People Planner System for the manager&#39;s stock planning  350 . Actual data, risk planning data, and compensation planning data aids in the determination of whether to plan to give the employee stock options and, if so, how many options to plan on giving to the employee. Risk planning data is usually important during stock option considerations because the options typically vest over a period years providing an incentive for employees that may be at risk for leaving to stay in the organization until their options vest. In addition, the value of prior stock option awards is also useful in making the determination because prior options that are “under water” (i.e., the price of the option is now greater than the current price of the stock) have less influence on employees who are considering leaving the organization. In these situations, it may be prudent to grant additional options at the new (lower) current stock price to provide additional incentives to retain the employee. Stock planning data  355  is added to employee profile  300  creating an even richer set of employee profile data ( 360 ). 
     Compensatory considerations often include both compensatory planning considerations (step  330 ) as well as stock planning considerations (step  350 ). The manager may go back and forth between various stages in order to refine the data and better assess the employee&#39;s risk of leaving and the right mix of salary increases and stock option awards. For example, for a contributing employee that is at risk of leaving the organization, the manager may first decide to give the employee a significant increase in salary. However the employee&#39;s risk of leaving may be viewed as more important that the employee&#39;s current contribution. As such, the manager may decide to plan on giving the employee a sizable number of options that vest over a number of years and lower the salary increase to a standard increase, perhaps in light of salary budget constraints. The manager may go back and forth several times between compensation planning  330  and stock option planning  350  for a given employee until the manager feel she has the right mix. For additional assistance, the manager can use the People Planner System to engage the advice and experience of human resources personnel who are trained to help managers evaluate and analyze employee situations. 
     Employee profile  300  now includes employee data  360  which includes actual (current) employee data, risk planning data, compensation planning data, and stock planning data. Employee data  360  provides a picture for the manager to use in performing other activities such as development planning  364 , retention planning  374 , and identifying the employee for additional HR programs or organization events ( 382 ). Development planning  364  results in development planning data  368  which is added to the employee&#39;s profile data. Likewise, retention planning  374  results in retention planning data  378  and additional planning  382  results in additional employee data  386  which are each added to the employee&#39;s profile data. Retention planning  374  involves identifying employees with high potential early in the employee&#39;s career and establishing and tracking employee goals or milestones so that the full potential of such employees is realized by the organization (see  FIG. 15  for more details regarding retention planning). 
     Employee profile data  370  now includes actual (current) data, risk planning data, compensation planning data, stock planning data, development planning data, retention planning data, and additional planning data providing a large snapshot of the employee, the employee&#39;s current contributions, opportunities and challenges associated with the employee, and near- and far-term plans for the employee&#39;s career with the organization. 
     The data captured in employee profile  300  is analyzed in management meetings and often refined in light of the employee&#39;s contribution and expected value in comparison with that of other employees. The salary and stock option planning may have only indicated that the organization planned to give the employee a “significant increase” or “significant stock option award” without specifying the actual dollar amount of the increase or the actual number of shares and vesting period for stock. In this case, the planned salary increase and stock option award are converted to actual dollar and stock figures in light of the salary and stock option budgets. The planned amounts are then made effective at a certain point in time during roll-over process  390 . 
     During roll-over process  390  certain planning items, such as compensation and stock planning figures are moved to the employee&#39;s actual (current) data. Other items such as the employee&#39;s evaluation rating are also moved from planning areas to the actual data area. Prior actual figures are moved to historical actual data areas in order to keep a record of the employee&#39;s prior salaries, stock options, and evaluations. Short term planning data areas, such as the salary planning area and the stock planning area are cleared in order to prepare for the next planning cycle. The new actual data is used in a production environment to generate paychecks with the employee&#39;s new salary level and to generate stock option data that is provided to employees for acceptance of the newly granted options and eventual exercise of such options. Long term planning data, such as risk analysis data, development planning data, and retention planning data are retained for further refinement in future planning cycles so that the planning efforts of the manager are not lost or forgotten. In addition, when an employee moves from one department to another department (or when a new manager is assigned to a department) the new manager uses the People Planner System to view the planning and actual data established by the manager&#39;s predecessor, thus aiding and smoothing the transition from one manager to the next. 
       FIG. 4  is a diagram showing a manager using the People Planner System to perform certain planning and analysis functions. People Planner Data  400  includes employee profiles  410  and Human Resources program data  405  as well as other data. Employee profile data  410  includes planning factors  415  (such as risk planning data, salary and stock planning data, development planning data, etc.) corresponding to employees. Employee profile data  410  also includes actual data  420  (such as the current salary, stock option grants, evaluation rating, etc.) corresponding to employees. 
     Manager  425  uses various components of the People Planner System to make pre-planning requests  430  to pre-planning tool  435  included with the People Planner System. Pre-planning tool  435  reads HR program data  405  and employee profile data  410  alerting the manager of new human resources programs and identifying employees that, based on the HR program criteria, might be considered for various programs. Manager  425  may select one or more employees for the HR program and provide planning response  440  which is used by pre-planning tool  435  to retain the manager&#39;s selections in selected employee profiles  410 . 
     What-If Scenarios tool  450  is used by manager  425  to try various planning factors and explore the overall planning results without committing to the planning factors. For example, manager  425  may provide what-if request  445  to look at the department if everyone that is identified as being a high risk to leave the company was given a significant salary increase and an award of stock options. What-if results  455  would be returned to manager  425  by the what-if scenario tool and display the effect on the department. The manager may determine that too much of the salary budget would be used for these individuals and not leave enough for high contributing employees that are not at risk of leaving. Scenario tool  450  can be used repeatedly to help the manager gain an understanding of the effects of certain planning decisions. If manager  425  is satisfied with the scenario results, the planning factors used to create the results can be applied to employee profiles  410 . In addition, HR personnel can share the manager&#39;s online view of such scenario results and provide guidance for refining the planning factors. If the what-if results are not acceptable by manager  425  then the planning factors used by the what-if tool can be discarded and not applied to employee profiles  410 . 
     Employee analysis tool  465  is used by manager  425  to further analyze an individual employee or a group of employees included in employee profiles  410 . Manager  425  provides employee requests  460  to the employee analysis component of the People Planner System. Manager  425  uses employee analysis tool  465  to evaluate the contributions of the employee and determine whether the employee is a low or high contributor and whether a promotion should be planned for the employee. These determinations are provided in the manager&#39;s employee responses  470  that are used by employee analysis component  465  and retained in employee profile  410 . The manager&#39;s employee responses  470  may identify employees as low or high contributors and may also assign an evaluation rating (i.e., “A,” “B,” “C,” etc.) to the employee (see  FIG. 6  for further detail regarding employee evaluations using the People Planner System). 
     Risk assessment component  480  of the People Planner System is used by manager  425  to identify employees that are at risk of leaving the organization. Manager  425  provides risk requests  475  to risk assessment component  480  identifying one or more employees from employee profile  410 . Risk assessment tool  480  assists the manager in evaluating risks concerning employees. Manager&#39;s risk responses regarding such employees is used by the risk assessment tool to update the employee&#39;s risk planning data maintained in the employee&#39;s employee profile  410 . 
       FIG. 5  includes additional People Planner System tools used by managers to plan for employee salary changes, stock options, and other awards. People Planner Data  500  includes salary budget data  505 , available option data  510 , employee profiles  512  and award budget data  520 . Salary budget data  505  includes available salary data that has been allocated to the manager&#39;s area or department. Likewise, available option data  510  includes stock options available for the manager to grant to one or more employees. Employee profile data  512  includes planning factors data  516  and actual, or current, data  518 . Award budget data  520  includes budgets for both monetary awards  525  and non-monetary awards  530 . Non-monetary awards may include extra vacation days, admission to a special organizational event or program, lunch with an executive or the like. 
     Manager  540  uses salary tool component  550  of the People Planner System to plan salary changes for employees. Salary input  545  includes the salary changes requested by the manager. Salary tool  550  updates the appropriate employee profile planning factors  516  data for the selected employee. Salary tool  550  also provides manager  540  with updated salary planning data  555  comparing the manager&#39;s planning data for one or more employees with salary budget  505 . Salary tool  550  can also be used to compare employee&#39;s actual data  518  and planning factors  516  with organizational, regional, or national averages for people with similar skills and contribution levels. Salary tool  550  can also be used to analyze whether people are being compensated fairly. For example, salary tool  550  can aid the manager in identifying high contributors that are receiving small or no salary increases. On the other side, salary tool  550  can be used to identify low contributing employees that are planned to receive large or significant salary increases. 
     Stock option tool  565  is a People Planner System component to aid manager  540  in identifying employees that should receive stock options. Stock option tool  565  reads the available stock option budget data  510  which includes the amount of options that are available for the manager&#39;s employees. Stock option tool  565  also reads employee profile data  512 , particularly planning factors data  516  which includes risk planning data and contribution data corresponding to the employees. This information is used by manager  540  to determine whether the employee is a high contributor to the organization with critical skills and the flight risk the employee presents to the organization. Based on this analysis, manager  540  decides whether to plan to award the employee stock options and, if so, how many options to provide and the vesting period for the options (stock input  560 ). Updated stock data  570  is provided from stock option tool  565  to manager  540  in response to stock option input  560  provided by the manager. The manager can use the updated stock data to determine whether the stock planning data should be changed. 
     Awards tool  580  is a People Planner System component to aid manager  540  in identifying employees that should receive monetary and non-monetary awards. Awards tool  580  reads the available awards budget data  520  which includes the amount of monetary and non-monetary awards options that are available for the manager&#39;s employees. Awards tool  580  also reads employee profile data  512 , particularly contribution data corresponding to the employees. This information is used by manager  540  to identify employees that are planned to receive an award, the type of award the employee is planned to receive, and the amount of the award if the award is monetary (award input  575 ). This data is stored in the appropriate employee profiles  512 . Updated award data  585  is provided from awards tool  580  to manager  540  in response to award input data  575  provided by the manager. The manager can use the updated award data to determine whether the award planning data should be changed. 
       FIG. 6  is a flowchart showing the People Planner System being used to evaluate the performance of employees. Processing commences at  600  whereupon the first employee is selected (step  610 ) from department data  605  stored in the People Planner System. The manager analyzes the employee on a variety of planning factors. A determination is made as to whether the employee is a top contributor for the organization (decision  615 ). If the employee is a top contributor, decision  615  branches to “yes” branch  618  whereupon a flag is set in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data indicating that the employee is a top contributor (step  620 ). On the other hand, if the employee is not a top contributor, decision  615  branches to “no” branch  622  whereupon another determination is made as to whether the employee is a low contributor (decision  625 ). If the employee is a low contributor, decision  625  branches to “yes” branch  628  whereupon a flag is set in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data indicating that the employee is a low contributor (step  630 ). If neither flag is set (i.e. the low or high contributor flags) then the employee is deemed an average contributor to the organization. 
     The next decisions deals with the amount of pay increase to plan on giving the employee. A determination is made as to whether the employee should receive a significant, or high, increase in salary (decision  635 ). If the employee should receive a significant salary increase, decision  635  branches to “yes” branch  638  whereupon a flag is set in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data indicating that the employee should receive a significant salary increase (step  640 ). On the other hand, if the employee should not receive a significant salary increase, decision  635  branches to “no” branch  642  whereupon another determination is made as to whether the employee should receive no increase, or perhaps a salary reduction (decision  645 ). If the employee should receive no increase, or perhaps a salary reduction, decision  645  branches to “yes” branch  648  whereupon a flag is set in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data indicating that the employee should receive no increase, or perhaps a salary reduction (step  650 ). If neither flag is set (i.e. the significant increase or no increase flags) then the employee is planned to receive a normal salary increase. 
     A determination is made, based factors such as the employee&#39;s contribution to the organization, current level, and time spent at the current level, as to whether the employee should be promoted during the next cycle of promotions (decision  660 ). A higher level position often means greater potential salary and stock option awards. If the manager determines that the employee should be promoted based on various factors, decision  660  branches to “yes” branch  662  whereupon a flag is set in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data indicating that the employee should be promoted (step  685 ). On the other hand, if the manager does not decide that the employee should be promoted, decision  660  branches to “no” branch  668  bypassing the promotion setting step. 
     A determination is made, based factors such as the employee&#39;s skills, experience, contribution, and risk of the employee leaving the organization, as to whether the employee should receive stock options (decision  670 ). An employee with critical skills which are marketable to other competing organizations often receive stock options to provide an incentive for such employees to remain with the organization for the amount of time it takes for the options to vest. If the manager determines that the employee should receive stock options, decision  660  branches to “yes” branch  662  whereupon a flag is set in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data indicating that the employee should receive stock options (step  675 ). On the other hand, if the manager does not decide that the employee should receive stock options, decision  670  branches to “no” branch  678  bypassing the stock option setting step. 
     A determination is made as to whether there are more employees that the manager needs to evaluate (decision  680 ). If there are more employees, decision  680  branches to “yes” branch  685  which selects the next employee (step  685 ) from department data  605  and loops back to evaluate the employee. This looping continues until all employees have been evaluated, at which time decision  680  branches to “no” branch  688  whereupon processing ends at  695 . 
       FIG. 7  is a flowchart showing a manager identifying employees&#39; motivators and inhibitors and the People Planner System used to determine flight risks of individual employees. Processing commences at  700  whereupon the first employee is selected (step  705 ) from department data  702  stored in the People Planner System. 
     The manager selects the first motivator for the selected employee (step  710 ). As the name implies, motivators are factors that motivate the selected employee in his or her job. Examples of motivators include autonomy, base salary, communication, decision making authority, degree of challenge, geographic location, immediate management, monetary recognition, and opportunity for advancement. By the manager&#39;s understanding of the employee&#39;s likes and dislikes and from discussions or feedback received from the employee, the manager determines what motivates the employee and what inhibits, or hinders, the employee. If the selected employee is motivated by autonomy, the manager selects autonomy as a motivator and then applies a weight, or level of importance, to the motivator (step  715 ). If an employee is greatly motivated by autonomy, a greater weight is applied to the motivator. The motivator and corresponding weight are saved in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data for future use in calculating the employee&#39;s flight risk. 
     A determination is made as to whether there are other motivators corresponding to the employee (decision  720 ). If there are more motivators, decision  720  branches to “yes” branch  722  whereupon the next motivator is selected (step  725 ) and a weight is applied (step  715 ). This looping continues until there are no more motivators to apply to the employee at which time decision  720  branches to “no” branch  728  whereupon the process repeats for identifying inhibitors that apply to the employee. 
     The manager selects the first inhibitor for the selected employee (step  730 )). As the name implies, inhibitors are factors that inhibit the selected employee in his or her job. Examples of inhibitors include autonomy, base salary, communication, decision making authority, degree of challenge, geographic location, immediate management, monetary recognition, and opportunity for advancement. By the manager&#39;s understanding of the employee&#39;s likes and dislikes and from discussions or feedback received from the employee, the manager determines what inhibits, or hinders, the employee. If the selected employee is inhibited by opportunity for advancement, the manager selects opportunity for advancement as a inhibitor and then applies a weight, or level of importance, to the inhibitor (step  735 ). If an employee is greatly inhibited by opportunity for advancement, a greater weight is applied to the inhibitor. The inhibitor and corresponding weight are saved in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data for future use in calculating the employee&#39;s flight risk. 
     A determination is made as to whether there are other inhibitors corresponding to the employee (decision  740 ). If there are more inhibitors, decision  740  branches to “yes” branch  742  whereupon the next inhibitor is selected (step  745 ) and a weight is applied (step  735 ). This looping continues until there are no more inhibitors to apply to the employee at which time decision  740  branches to “no” branch  748 . 
     The employee&#39;s flight risk is calculated (step  750 ) after the employee&#39;s motivators and inhibitors have been identified and weighed. The calculation may be performed by the manager by displaying the list of the employee motivators and inhibitors arranged by weighted value and providing the manager with employee data, such as salary data and job descriptions, to aid the manager in determining a flight risk value by comparing and contrasting the employee&#39;s motivators and inhibitors with the employees current circumstances. The flight risk calculation can also be computed using historical modeling data to compare the employee&#39;s motivators, inhibitors, and current job situation with other that have left the company. A strong similarity between the employee&#39;s profile and employees that left the organization results in a higher flight risk, while a weaker similarity results in a correspondingly lower flight risk. 
     A determination is made as to whether there are more employees for which the manager needs to assess risk (decision  760 ). If there are more employees, decision  760  branches to “yes” branch  765  which selects (step  770 ) the next employee from department data  702  and loops back to analyze the employee. This looping continues until all employees have been analyzed, at which time decision  760  branches to “no” branch  775  whereupon processing ends at  795 . 
       FIG. 8  is a flowchart of logic used to group employees into contribution/flight risk quadrants for risk assessment. Processing commences at  800  whereupon the first employee is selected (step  810 ) from department data  805  stored in the People Planner System. 
     The employee&#39;s contribution level is assigned (step  820 ). In one embodiment, the employee&#39;s contribution level is assigned by performing an employee evaluation process integrated with the People Planner System, such as the process described in  FIG. 6 . The employee&#39;s flight risk is also assigned (step  825 ). In one embodiment, the employee&#39;s flight risk is assigned by performing an risk assessment process integrated with the People Planner System, such as the process described in  FIG. 7 . 
     Determinations are made based on the employee&#39;s contribution level and flight risk in order to assign a “risk quadrant” to the employee. Risk quadrants therefore include: employees with low contribution to the organization and high risk to leave the organization (quadrant “A”), employees with high contribution to the organization and high risk to leave the organization (quadrant “B”), employees with high contribution to the organization and low risk to leave the organization (quadrant “C”), and employees with low contribution to the organization and low risk to leave the organization (quadrant “D”). Grouping employees into risk quadrants aids management, especially upper management, in analyzing large groups of employees, such as a site location, and determining whether future attrition problems are likely based on the percentage of employees in quadrant “A” and especially quadrant “B.” If problem areas exist, management can analyze employees in a given quadrant to determine if common inhibitors or motivators exist that can be used to encourage employees to remain with the organization. 
     A determination is made as to whether the selected employee&#39;s contribution to the organization is “high” (decision  830 ). If the manager indicates that the selected employee&#39;s contribution is high, decision  830  branches to “yes” branch  832  whereupon a decision is made as to whether, based on the employee&#39;s inhibitors and motivators, the employee presents a flight risk to the organization (decision  835 ). If the employee presents a flight risk, decision  835  branches to “yes” branch  838  whereupon the employee is assigned (step  840 ) to quadrant “B” indicating a high contributor presenting a high flight risk to the organization. On the other hand, if the employee does not present a flight risk, decision  835  branches to “no” branch  842  whereupon the employee is assigned (step  845 ) to quadrant “C” indicating a high contributor presenting a low flight risk to the organization. 
     Returning to decision  830 , if the selected employee&#39;s contribution to the organization is not “high”, decision  830  branches to “no” branch  848  whereupon a decision is made as to whether, based on the employee&#39;s inhibitors and motivators, the employee presents a flight risk to the organization (decision  850 ). If the employee presents a flight risk, decision  850  branches to “yes” branch  852  whereupon the employee is assigned (step  855 ) to quadrant “A” indicating a low contributor presenting a high flight risk to the organization. On the other hand, if the employee does not present a flight risk, decision  850  branches to “no” branch  858  whereupon the employee is assigned (step  860 ) to quadrant “D” indicating a low contributor presenting a low flight risk to the organization. 
     A determination is made as to whether there are more employees that need to be assigned to a risk quadrant (decision  870 ). If there are more employees, decision  870  branches to “yes” branch  875  which selects (step  880 ) the next employee from department data  805  and loops back to assign the employee to a risk quadrant. This looping continues until all employees have been analyzed, at which time decision  870  branches to “no” branch  885  whereupon processing ends at  895 . 
       FIG. 9  is a user interface and logic for organizational risk analysis concerning employees. Screen  900  shows a risk analysis summary showing the percentage of employees that were assigned to the various risk quadrants. Screen  900  includes groupings  910  and summary data  950 . The user selects one of the groupings and a summary data item. Selected grouping  920  and selected data  940  are used by summary process  930  to create new summary process  960  which has new groupings  980  based upon the previously selected grouping. New summary  960  also includes new summary data  970  based upon the previously chosen grouping and summary data item. The new summary, including new groupings  980  and new summary data  970  are displayed in screen  990 . In the example shown, the user selected the grouping  985  (“Employees by Division”) and selected the “B” quadrant. The division breakdown for the “B” quadrant is therefore shown in screen  990 . Further groupings and selected data items can be selected to more fully understand the risk analysis data. 
       FIG. 10  is a flowchart used to analyze risk quadrants and act upon identified employees. Processing commences at  1000  whereupon the first risk quadrant (i.e. Quadrant “A”) is selected (step  1010 ). The selected quadrant is displayed to the manager (step  1020 , see  FIG. 9 , screen  900  for an example quadrant view). The manager analyzes the risk quadrant data to determine whether changes are needed (step  1025 , see  FIG. 9 , screen  990  for an example of analyzing risk quadrants). Risk quadrants can be analyzed down to viewing the group of employees that are included in a particular risk quadrant. A determination is made by the manager is changes are needed to any employees within the currently viewed risk quadrant (decision  1025 ). If changes are needed, decision  1025  branches to “yes” branch  1028  whereupon an employee in the risk quadrant is selected (step  1030 ). A determination is made as to whether changes are needed to the employee&#39;s incentives (decision  1040 ). If changes are needed to the selected employee&#39;s incentives, decision  1040  branches to “yes” branch  1048  whereupon the manager makes changes to the employee&#39;s planned nomination for stock options or other non-monetary award incentives designed to retain employees (step  1048 ). If changes are not needed to the selected employee&#39;s incentives, decision  1040  branches to “no” branch  1058  bypassing changes to the employee&#39;s stock options and non-monetary awards. 
     Another determination is made as to whether to edit the employee data, such as risk planning data (decision  1060 ). This determination may be in light of seeing the employee in a quadrant that does not match manager&#39;s knowledge of the employee or in light of new information learned about the employee&#39;s inhibitors or motivators. In addition, this decision might be made because of a recent or dramatic change in the employee&#39;s contribution or value to the organization based on newly acquired skills or experiences. If changes are needed to the employee&#39;s People Planner Data, decision  1060  branches to “yes” branch  1068  whereupon the manager edits one or more employee planning factors (step  1070 ). On the other hand, if the manager does not need to edit the employee&#39;s planning factors, decision  1060  branches to “no” branch  1072  bypassing the edit employee planning factors step. 
     After changes are made to the selected employee the quadrant data view is updated to reflect the changed information (step  1075 ) and processing returns (loop  1078 ) to view the quadrant information. This looping continues until no changes are needed, at which point decision  1025  branches to “no” branch  1082 . 
     A determination is made as to whether there are more quadrants to analyze (decision  1085 ). If there are more quadrants to analyze, decision  1085  branches to “yes” branch  1088  whereupon the next quadrant is selected (step  1090 ) and processing loops back to analyze the selected quadrant. This looping continues until there are no more quadrants to analyze, at which point decision  1085  branches to “no” branch  1092  and risk analysis processing ends at  1095 . 
       FIG. 11  is a flowchart used to analyze compensation of high contributing employees. The immediate (i.e., department) manager may perform the analysis in addition to higher level managers and HR personnel checking the fairness of employee evaluations. 
     Processing commences at  1100  whereupon the People Planner System selects top contributing employees that have not been identified as having critical skills (step  1105 ). Top contributing employees often have critical skills that make them valuable, and therefore high contributors, to the organization. This selection helps management analyze why an employee has been identified as a top contributor without critical skills. It may be that the employee&#39;s critical skills were not noted or that the employee was incorrectly identified as a top contributor. In some cases, it may simply be that an employee without critical skills is a top contributor because of the employee&#39;s work ethic and ability to handle more tasks in a high quality manner. The selected employees are displayed to the manager (step  1110 ). The manager views the selected employees and can view detailed data regarding the employees. A determination is made as to whether an employee&#39;s data in the People Planner System needs to be changed in light of the displayed data (decision  1115 ). If an employee&#39;s data needs to be changed, decision  1115  branches to “yes” branch  1118  whereupon an employee is selected and data pertaining to the employee is changed (step  1120 ) and processing loops back to re-analyze the group in light of the changed data. This looping continues until no employee data needs to be revised, at which time decision  1115  branches to “no” branch  1122 . 
     Another selection identifies employees having critical skills that have not been identified as top contributing employees (step  1125 ). This is the reverse situation as the selection performed in step  1105 . The selected employees are displayed to the manager (step  1130 ). The manager views the selected employees and can view detailed data regarding the employees. A determination is made as to whether an employee&#39;s data in the People Planner System needs to be changed in light of the displayed data (decision  1135 ). If an employee&#39;s data needs to be changed, decision  1135  branches to “yes” branch  1138  whereupon an employee is selected and data pertaining to the employee is changed (step  1140 ) and processing loops back to re-analyze the group in light of the changed data. This looping continues until no employee data needs to be revised, at which time decision  1135  branches to “no” branch  1142 . 
     A further selection identifies employees identified as top contributing employees that are not receiving a significant pay increase (step  1145 ). Top contributing employees need to be rewarded for their efforts. In some cases, analysis of an employee in this group may reveal an employee that, for some reason, is currently overpaid in light of the employee&#39;s position, job title, and level and therefore does not require a significant salary increase. In other cases, an oversight may have occurred in not planning significant salary increases for top contributing employees. The selected employees are displayed to the manager (step  1150 ). The manager views the selected employees and can view detailed data regarding the employees. A determination is made as to whether an employee&#39;s data in the People Planner System needs to be changed in light of the displayed data (decision  1155 ). If an employee&#39;s data needs to be changed, decision  1155  branches to “yes” branch  1158  whereupon an employee is selected and data pertaining to the employee is changed (step  1160 ) and processing loops back to reanalyze the group in light of the changed data. This looping continues until no employee data needs to be revised, at which time decision  1155  branches to “no” branch  1162 . 
     Another selection identifies employees identified as top contributing employees that are not receiving a grant of stock options (step  1165 ). Top contributing employees need to be rewarded for their efforts and stock options present an incentive for such top contributing employees to remain at the company. In some cases, analysis of an employee in this group may reveal an employee that does not warrant a stock option grant. For example, an high contributing employee with little flight risk may prefer awards and greater salary increases instead of stock options. In other cases, an oversight may have occurred in not planning stock option awards for top contributing employees. The selected employees are displayed to the manager (step  1170 ). The manager views the selected employees and can view detailed data regarding the employees. A determination is made as to whether an employee Is data in the People Planner System needs to be changed in light of the displayed data (decision  1175 ). If an employee&#39;s data needs to be changed, decision  1175  branches to “yes” branch  1178  whereupon an employee is selected and data pertaining to the employee is changed (step  1180 ) and processing loops back to re-analyze the group in light of the changed data. This looping continues until no employee data needs to be revised, at which time decision  1175  branches to “no” branch  1182  whereupon this phase of compensation planning ends at  1195 . 
       FIG. 12  is a flowchart used to analyze compensation of low contributing employees and to query additional anomalies with high and low contributors. The immediate (i.e., department) manager may perform the analysis in addition to higher level managers and HR personnel checking the fairness of employee evaluations. 
     Processing commences at  1200  whereupon the People Planner System selects low contributing employees that have been identified as having critical skills (step  1205 ). Low contributing employees often do not have critical skills. This selection helps management analyze why an employee has been identified as a low contributor with critical skills. It may be that the employee&#39;s critical skills were incorrectly noted or that the employee was incorrectly identified as a low contributor. In some cases, it may simply be that an employee with critical skills is a low contributor because of the employee&#39;s work ethic or attitude and inability to handle tasks in a quality manner. The selected employees are displayed to the manager (step  1210 ). The manager views the selected employees and can view detailed data regarding the employees. A determination is made as to whether an employee&#39;s data in the People Planner System needs to be changed in light of the displayed data (decision  1215 ). If an employee&#39;s data needs to be changed, decision  1215  branches to “yes” branch  1218  whereupon an employee is selected and data pertaining to the employee is changed (step  1220 ) and processing loops back to re-analyze the group in light of the changed data. This looping continues until no employee data needs to be revised, at which time decision  1215  branches to “no” branch  1222 . 
     Another selection identifies employees identified as low contributing employees that are receiving a significant pay increase (step  1225 ). Low contributing employees typically are not rewarded as handsomely as higher contributing employees. In some cases, analysis of an employee in this group may reveal a low contributing employee that, for some reason, is currently underpaid in light of the employee&#39;s position, job title, and level and therefore requires a significant salary increase. In other cases, an oversight may have occurred in planning significant salary increases for low contributing employees. The selected employees are displayed to the manager (step  1230 ). The manager views the selected employees and can view detailed data regarding the employees. A determination is made as to whether an employee&#39;s data in the People Planner System needs to be changed in light of the displayed data (decision  1235 ). If an employee&#39;s data needs to be changed, decision  1235  branches to “yes” branch  1238  whereupon an employee is selected and data pertaining to the employee is changed (step  1240 ) and processing loops back to re-analyze the group in light of the changed data. This looping continues until no employee data needs to be revised, at which time decision  1235  branches to “no” branch  1242 . 
     A further selection identifies employees identified as low contributing employees that are receiving a grant of stock options (step  1245 ). Analysis of these employees may reveal an employees that do not warrant stock option grants. It may also be revealed that some employees in this group are not low contributors and have been identified as such incorrectly. The selected employees are displayed to the manager (step  1250 ). The manager views the selected employees and can view detailed data regarding the employees. A determination is made as to whether an employee&#39;s data in the People Planner System needs to be changed in light of the displayed data (decision  1255 ). If an employee&#39;s data needs to be changed, decision  1255  branches to “yes” branch  1258  whereupon an employee is selected and data pertaining to the employee is changed (step  1260 ) and processing loops back to re-analyze the group in light of the changed data. This looping continues until no employee data needs to be revised, at which time decision  1255  branches to “no” branch  1262 . 
     Further top and bottom contributor queries can be performed to further identify anomalies with the planning factors currently in place for individual employees (step  1270 ). People Planner Data pertaining to these employees can be changed as needed to better reflect the employees&#39; contributions and rewards and compensation for such contributions (step  1280 ). Compensation planning thereafter ends at  1295 . 
       FIG. 13  is a flowchart showing details involved with comparing employees&#39; compensation using benchmark information. Processing commences at  1300  whereupon the first employee in a group, such as a department or project, being analyzed is selected (step  1310 ). From prior People Planner System processes, the employee should already have a job level and job title, however if the employee is new or otherwise does not have a level and job title this data is supplied to the People Planner System and stored in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data area (step  1320 ). In addition, compensation levels should already be set for the employee&#39;s current compensation and salary planning data for the employee&#39;s next pay increase may already be stored in the People Planner System. If the employee does not have a current salary, then the employee&#39;s current compensation amounts are entered into the People Planner System (step  1325 ). 
     The employee&#39;s job title and level (i.e., “Senior Programmer”) are converted to a corresponding national or geographic job title and level (i.e., “software programmer with 5 or more years of experience”) using a table relating the company&#39;s job titles and levels to nationally recognized titles and levels (step  1330 ). The national job title and level is used to search (step  1340 ) national or geographic employment data  1335  for national averages and other data about national salary ranges for the job title and level (i.e., average salary for first, second, third and fourth quartiles, etc.). Other averages are retrieved from the People Planner System for the salary data regarding the employee&#39;s job title and level within the organization (step  1350 ). This data may be for the organization as a whole, the employee&#39;s site, project, or department or combinations thereof. 
     Variances between the employees actual (and possibly planned) compensation and various retrieved national and organizational benchmarks is displayed to management or human resources personnel (step  1360 ). Large variances indicating that an employee is underpaid may warrant changing the employee&#39;s planning data, for example to identify the employee for a significant increase, to get the employees salary in line with the benchmark data. A determination is made as to whether the employee&#39;s data needs to be revised (decision  1370 ). If the employee&#39;s data needs to be revised, decision  1370  branches to “yes” branch  1372  which loops back to enable management or human resources to reset employee information (i.e., compensation amounts) and redisplay the new planning factors in comparison with the available benchmarks. This looping continues until no further revisions to the employee&#39;s data are needed, at which point decision  1370  branches to “no” branch  1378  whereupon a determination is made as to whether there are more employees to analyze (decision  1380 ). 
     If there are more employees to analyze, decision  1380  branches to “yes” branch  1385  which selects the next employee (step  1390 ) and loops back to perform a comparison analysis for the selected employee. This looping continues until no more employees in the selected group need to be processed, at which time decision  1380  branches to “no” branch  1392  and processing ends at  1395 . 
       FIG. 14  is a flowchart showing details involved with aggregate analysis of a department or area and comparison against budgetary requirements. Processing commences at  1400  whereupon various compensation counters, such as total pay increases, total stock options, total promotions, and total awards, are initialized to zero (step  1410 ). People Planner Data for all employees within a particular group, such as a project or department, are selected from the People Planner Data (step  1420 ). The first employee from the selected group is selected (step  1425 ). The counters for planned pay increases, stock options, promotions and awards are accumulated by adding the current value of such counters to the planned pay increase, planned stock option grant, planned promotion, and planned awards for the currently selected employee (step  1430 ). A determination is made as to whether more employees exist in the group to be processed (decision  1440 ). If more employees exist, decision  1440  branches to “yes” branch  1445  and the next employee in the group is selected (step  1450 ) and processing loops back to add the selected employees compensatory information to the running totals stored in the counters. This looping continues until all employees in the group have been processed and all planned pay increases, stock awards, promotions, and awards have been totaled. When all employees have been processed, decision  1440  branches to “no” branch  1452  whereupon budget amounts are retrieved (step  1450 ) from group budget data  1455  (such as a department or project budget). Variances between the planned salary increases, stock awards, promotions, and awards and budgeted amounts are calculated and displayed (step  1470 ). A determination is made, based on the displayed variances, as to whether changes are needed to employee planning factors to rectify any variances (decision  1475 ). If changes are needed, decision  1475  branches to “yes” branch  1478  which allows management or human resources personnel to select one or more employees (step  1480 ), increase or decrease planned salary increases, stock awards, promotions, and awards (step  1485 ), and loop back to the beginning to reprocess the group and determine any further variances and changes needed. This looping continues until variances have been rectified and further changes to employee data is not needed, at which point decision  1475  branches to “no” branch  1492  and processing ends at  1495 . 
       FIG. 15  is a flowchart for identifying key employees and performing retention analysis for identified employees. Processing commences at  1500  whereupon a first employee is selected (step  1510 ) from employee data  1505 . A determination is made as to whether the selected employee is a technical employee or identified as a potential executive candidate (decision  1520 ). If the employee is identified as a possible key technical employee, decision  1520  branches to “yes” branch  1528  whereupon the employee&#39;s technical experience is identified and stored in the People Planner System (step  1530 ). On the other hand, if the employee is identified as a potential executive candidate, decision  1520  branches to “no” branch  1522  whereupon the employee&#39;s skill and areas of expertise are identified (step  1525 ). 
     The next career goal for the selected employee is identified (step  1540 ) along with the expected amount of time planned for the employee to achieve the next goal (step  1545 ). The employee&#39;s ultimate goal (i.e., “Chief Technical Architect,” “Division Vice President,” etc.) is identified (step  1550 ) along with the expected amount of time planned for the employee to achieve the ultimate goal (step  1555 ). A mentor, such as an experienced employee in the organization, is identified for the employee (step  1560 ). In addition, special certification or training planned for the employee to reach the goals is identified (step  1570 ) along with any additional comments regarding the employee&#39;s potential. The identified information is stored in the employee&#39;s People Planner Data and used for long term management and direction of the employee. 
     A determination is made as to whether other potential key technical or executive candidates exist in the group (decision  1580 ). If more candidates exist in the group, decision  1580  branches to “yes” branch  1585  which selects the next employee candidate (step  1590 ) and loops back to process the next candidate. This looping continues until no more candidates are identified whereupon decision  1580  branches to “no” branch  1592  and processing ends at  1595 . 
       FIG. 16  is a flowchart showing tracking of additional keywords by the People Planner System to track organizational events and reporting on employees based on the additional keywords. Keywords can be added to the People Planner System to track data such as employees attending an important conference, employees selected for a special organizational retreat, employees nominated for special awards, or any other number of items that the organization wishes to track for employees. 
     Processing commences at  1600  whereupon an administrator defines one or more keywords in the People Planner System (step  1610 ). The People Planner System includes a notice area where notices about new keywords and other People Planner System changes are disseminated to management. An email message or the People Planner System notice area is used to inform management of the new keywords (step  1620 ). Management selects an employee for one of the newly defined keywords (step  1625 ). The keyword is set, or flagged, in the People Planner Data corresponding to the selected employee (step  1630 ). A determination is made as to whether more employees should be selected for the newly added keyword (decision  1640 ). This determination can be made over an amount of time and may be made by several different managers when analyzing their employees. If more employees should be selected for the keyword, decision  1640  branches to “yes” branch  1645  whereupon the next employee is selected for the keyword (step  1650 ) and processing loops back to set the keyword in the People Planner Data corresponding to the selected employee. This looping continues until no more employees are selected for the keyword whereupon decision  1640  branches to “no” branch  1655 . Depending on the keyword a deadline may be established for a keyword so that employees are identified for the keyword before the deadline. For example, to prepare for a conference, a deadline typically exists for registering for the conference. At some point, a People Planner System administrator selects all employees that were selected for a particular keyword and reports or special processing takes place with the selected employees (step  1660 ). For example, if the keyword corresponds to a conference, the People Planner System would process the selected employees and send registrations for each employee to the conference coordinators. A determination is made as to whether the keyword corresponds to a one time event or an ongoing activity or event (decision  1670 ). If the keyword does not correspond to a one time event, decision  1670  branches to “no” branch  1672  bypassing the release of keyword space from the People Planner System. On the other hand, if the keyword corresponds to a one time event, decision  1670  branches to “yes” branch  1678  whereupon a People Planner System administrator retains a copy of a report or data file with the employees selected for the keyword (step  1680 ) and the administrator releases the data space used to store the keyword data so that it can be used for other keywords (step  1690 ). Keyword processing thereafter ends at  1695 . 
       FIG. 17   a  is a diagram of an employee managed in a matrix organization with multiple managers. In the example shown, employee  1700  reports to three different managers—manager A ( 1710 ), manager B ( 1720 ), and manager C ( 1730 ). Also shown are the effort, or activity, levels that the employee is expected to provide to the various managers&#39; departments. In the example shown, employee  1700  spends fifty percent of his time working for manager A ( 1710 ), twenty percent of his time working for manager B ( 1720 ), and thirty percent of his time working for manager C ( 1730 ). 
       FIG. 17   b  is a flowchart used to evaluate and aware employees managed in a matrix organization with multiple managers. Processing commences at  1750  whereupon the first manager evaluates the employee and provides salary increase, stock award, award, and evaluation ratings for the employee. The manager&#39;s evaluation is multiplied (step  1760 ) by a multiplier corresponding to the amount of work the employee performs for the manager (i.e. the work percentage discussed in  FIG. 17   a ). Likewise, the manager&#39;s planning of the employee&#39;s pay increase is computed (step  1765 ), along with a stock award computation (step  1770 ), and an awards computation (step  1775 ). A determination is made as to whether additional managers need to evaluate the employee (decision  1780 ). If additional managers need to evaluate the employee, decision  1780  branches to “yes” branch  1782  whereupon the next manager evaluates the employee (step  1785 ) and processing loops back to multiply the next manager&#39;s evaluations and preplanning data with the multiplier corresponding to the manager. When all managers that manage the employee have performed evaluations, decision  1780  branches to “no” branch  1788  whereupon the employees total evaluation, salary increase, stock award, and other awards is computed by adding the various factors computed for each manager (step  1790 ). The People Planner System can also facilitate communication between managers that each manage a given employee so that a fair assessment of the employee&#39;s contributions can be made in light of the employee&#39;s efforts and complexity involved in working in multiple areas. 
       FIG. 18   a  is a sample three tier hierarchy chart showing employees and two layers of management. Project manager  1800  has three managers reporting to her (department manager A ( 1805 ), department manager B ( 1810 ), and department manager C ( 1815 )). Each of these department managers have three employees reporting to them. Employees  1  ( 1820 ),  2  ( 1822 ), and  3  ( 1824 ) report to department manager A ( 1805 ); Employees  4  ( 1826 ),  5  ( 1828 ), and  6  ( 1830 ) report to department manager B ( 1810 )); and Employees  7  ( 1832 ),  8  ( 1834 ), and  9  ( 1836 ) report to department manager C ( 1815 ). If project manager  1800  wants to hold a management meeting to discuss employee contributions and planning factors, sharing her view with the department managers would allow the department managers to see confidential salary, compensation, and evaluation information pertaining to the other department managers. Instead, project manager  1800  can “exclude” the department managers from her view of people planner data to allow the management team to analyze the employee planning factors and evaluations without showing information regarding the department managers.  FIG. 18   b  shows high level exclusion processing and  FIG. 19  shows detailed processing involved with setting up shared views and excluding certain employees from the viewed information. 
       FIG. 18   b  is a diagram showing managers being excluded from a higher-level People Planner View. The project manager&#39;s normal view ( 1850 ) lists employees reporting to the project manager from the example shown in  FIG. 18   a  including three department managers and nine employees reporting to the department managers. Exclude managers process  1855  is performed to create a new project managers view ( 1860 ) which lists the employees without listing the department managers. A granting process ( 1865 ) allows the project manager to share the new project manager&#39;s view ( 1860 ) with the department managers. The result is a shared project manager&#39;s view ( 1870 ) viewable by the project manager ( 1875 ), department manager A ( 1880 ), department manager B ( 1885 ), and department manager C ( 1890 ). 
       FIG. 19  is a flowchart showing employees being selected and removed from a particular People Planner System view. Processing commences at  1900  whereupon a list of all reporting employees is displayed on the manager&#39;s display device (step  1905 ). The project (or higher level) manager selects the first employee (such as a reporting manager) to excluded from a new view (step  1910 ). The People Planner Data associated with the selected employee is excluded from the new view (step  1915 ). A determination is made as to whether the manager wants to exclude more employees (such as the department managers) from the new view (decision  1920 ). If the manager wishes to exclude more employees, decision  1920  branches to “yes” branch  1925  whereupon the next employee (i.e., the next department manager) is selected (step  1930 ) and processing loops back to excluded the selected employee from the new view. This looping continues until there are no more exclusion to process, at which time decision  1920  branches to “no” branch  1935 . 
     A determination is made as to whether the manager wishes to save the new view or revise the manager&#39;s current view (decision  1940 ). If the manager wishes to create a new view, decision  1940  branches to “yes” branch  1945  whereupon the manager provides a new view name to identify the view (step  1950 ) and the new view is saved using the new view name (step  1955 ). On the other hand, if the manager simply wants to revise her current view, decision  1940  branches to “no” branch  1960  whereupon the revised view is saved (step  1965 ). 
     The employees granted access to the view will often be the employees whose People Planner Data has been excluded from the view. The excluded employees can automatically be granted access to the new view or the project manager can select employees individually. 
     The manager selects a first employee (i.e., a department manager) to grant access to the new or revised view (step  1970 ). The selected employee is granted access to the new or revised view (step  1975 ). A determination is made as to whether additional grants need to be given for the new or revised view (decision  1980 ). If more grants need to be given, decision  1980  branches to “yes” branch  1985  whereupon the next employee is selected for granting access to the new or revised view (step  1990 ) and processing loops back to grant the selected employee access to the view. This looping continues until there are no more employees that need access to the view, at which time decision  1980  branches to “no” branch  1992  and processing ends at  1995 . 
       FIG. 20  is a high level flowchart showing automated activities involved in managing organizational resources. Processing commences at  2000  whereupon resource management preprocessing activities are invoked (predefined process  2010 , see  FIGS. 21-23  for processing details). 
     Preprocessing activities determine which organizational areas, skill groups, and levels are affected by a workforce reduction. During a workforce reduction employees are identified as surplus employees (i.e., laid-off), and certain organizational areas may be eliminated. After the organizational areas, skill groups, and levels have been identified, employees in the identified areas with matching skills and levels are evaluated (predefined process  2020 , see  FIGS. 24 and 25  for processing details) to determine which employees will be identified as surplus employees. Typically immediate supervisors or management evaluates the employees. 
     The evaluations are reviewed, usually by higher levels of management and possibly by a “project office” that includes human resource professionals that manage the surplus reduction action. Hierarchical review (predefined process  2030 , see  FIG. 28  for processing details) includes in-depth review of employees&#39; evaluations by higher management layers, identification of employees as surplus employees, as well as project office and legal review of employees recommended for surplus by management. 
     A determination is made as to whether the employee&#39;s evaluation should be revised based on a variety of factors (decision  2040 ). If the evaluation should be revised, decision  2040  branches to “yes” branch  2044  which loops back to re-evaluate the employee with guidance provided by management, the project office, or legal review. On the other hand, if the evaluation does not need to be revised, decision  2040  branches to “no” branch  2048  whereupon the proposed surplus reduction is analyzed (predefined process  2050 , see  FIG. 36  for processing details) to determine the costs and benefits of performing the surplus reduction. 
     A determination is made as to whether the proposed surplus reduction needs to be revised (decision  2060 ) based upon analyzing the resource reduction impact. For example, it may be determined that too many employees have been identified as surplus that may detrimentally affect the organization because of the sudden loss of skills. Alternatively, it may be determined that too few employees have been identified as surplus resulting in less compensation savings than expected. If the proposed resource reduction needs to be revised, decision  2060  branches to “yes” branch  2064  which loops back to adjust surplus parameters and re-evaluate employees based on the readjusted parameters. On the other hand, if the proposed resource reduction does not need to be revised, decision  2060  branches to “no” branch  2068  whereupon affected employees are notified and the notification and acknowledgement are tracked and recorded (predefined process  2070 , see  FIGS. 37 and 38  for processing details). Processing subsequently ends at  2095 . 
       FIG. 21  is a flowchart showing preprocessing activities performed in planning a resource reduction. Processing commences at  2100  whereupon the organization&#39;s financial data ( 2110 ) is analyzed (step  2105 ). A determination is made as to whether the organization needs to reduce resources in order to reduce costs and improve the organization&#39;s financial performance (decision  2115 ). If the organization does not need to reduce resources, decision  2115  branches to “no” branch  2118  and processing ends at  2120 . On the other hand, if the organization does need to reduce resources, decision  2115  branches to “yes” branch  2128  whereupon resource reduction preprocessing continues. 
     Organizational data  2125 , describing areas of the organizations such as departments, projects, divisions, and functions, are read and analyzed (step  2130 ). Areas that are no longer needed by the organization are identified for elimination (step  2140 ) and stored with other areas identified for elimination in eliminated areas data store  2145 . Areas with surplus resources are also identified (step  2150 ) and stored in surplus areas data store  2155 . 
     Surplus resources may include particular skill groups that have more employees than needed by the organizational area. For example, a software development area may have a larger percentage of business planners than is needed to perform the software development activities. In addition, specific skill groups can be identified as having surplus resources. For example, a project developing software using primarily Java may have a larger percentage of Visual Basic™ programmers than needed to perform the Java development. These surplus skill groups are identified by analyzing the areas with surplus resources (step  2160 ) and the resulting analysis is stored in surplus skill groups data store  2165 . 
     In order to identify which individual employees should be eliminated as surplus resources, evaluation templates are built for each identified skill group that was found to include surplus resources (predefined process  2170 , see  FIG. 22  for further processing details) and stored in a library of evaluation templates  2175  which will be used by management to evaluate employees. 
     Using the identified skill groups, employee data, and planned amount of surplus reduction, an estimated planned surplus impact can be generated (predefined process  2170 , see  FIG. 35  for processing details) to estimate percentages of employees in various skill groups and levels that will be identified as surplus in order to attain certain cost savings for the organization. In addition, resource reduction program costs, such as severance packages for employees identified as surplus, can be estimated during predefined process  2170 . Preprocessing activities thereafter end at  2195 . 
       FIG. 22  is a flowchart showing the creation of evaluation templates for surplus employees in identified skill groups and levels. Processing commences at  2300  whereupon a skill code for a template is received (input  2205 ) by a template creator. A template creator is a person that determines what factors are used to evaluate a particular skill group and level. For example, a junior level programmer may be reviewed against factors such as “Understands Java programming fundamentals” and “Able to prepare Java source code based on design documentation.” Likewise, a senior programmer may have review factors such as “Expertise in all facets of Java,” “Mastery of software design implementation,” and “Ability to lead software team in design goals.” 
     The input code received from the user is used to locate (step  2220 ) an existing skill code and its corresponding review factors from templates data store  2210 . Templates data store may be implemented using a database, such as Lotus Notes™ or another database product. A determination is made as to whether the skill code was found in the template data store (decision  2225 ). If the skill code was found, decision  2225  branches to “yes” branch  2228  whereupon the current review factors corresponding to the skill code are retrieved (step  2230 ) and the display factors are displayed to the user allowing the user to modify and/or delete current review factors corresponding to the skill code (step  2235 ). On the other hand, if the skill code was not found, decision  2225  branches to “no” branch  2238  whereupon a new set of review factors is initialized for the new skill code and the new skill code is included in the templates data store (step  2240 ). 
     A determination is made as to whether the skill code that the user entered is related to one or more skill codes (decision  2245 ). For example, different levels of Java programmers may have similar review factors, with higher level programmers being evaluated against “mastery” of certain factors while lower level programmers may be evaluated against a lower threshold, such as “understanding” or “ability.” In addition, higher level skills may have additional review factors corresponding the responsibilities not required of lower level employees, such as team leading and management responsibilities. The determination as to related or similar skill groups may be determined based on a skill code naming convention (e.g., all skill codes beginning with “PRG” are deemed to be have similar or related factors), additional, the user could be prompted to retrieve additional skill code templates from which the user could copy review factors and paste into the skill template upon which the user is working. If there are related or similar review factors in other skill groups, decision  2245  branches to “yes” branch  2248  whereupon a skill code is entered (step  2250 ) and the review factors corresponding to the entered skill code are retrieved (step  2255 ). A determination is made as to whether there are more templates that the user wishes to retrieve (decision  2260 ). If there are more templates that the user wishes to retrieve, decision  2260  branches to “yes” branch  2261  which loops back to retrieve the next template. This looping continues until all desired templates are retrieved whereupon decision  2260  branches to “no” branch  2262 . On the other hand, if there are no related or similar review factors from which the user can copy review factors, decision  2245  branches to “no” branch  2263  bypassing steps taken to load related templates. 
     The user can add, edit, or delete review factors that correspond to the desired skill code. A user action is received (input  2264 ). A determination is made as to whether the user is modifying an existing review factor (decision  2265 ). If the user is modifying an existing review factor, decision  2265  branches to “yes” branch  2268  whereupon review factors from loaded templates are displayed (step  2270 ), the user selects one of the displayed review factors (input  2272 ), and the user changes the selected review factor (input  2275 ). On the other hand, if the user wishes to enter a new review factor without copying from an existing template, decision  2265  branches to “no” branch  2278  and the new review factor is provided by the user (input  2280 ). 
     The modified or added review factor is stored along with the skill code in the template data store (step  2285 ). A determination is made as to whether the user wants to modify, add, or delete review factors corresponding to the current template (decision  2290 ). If the user wants to perform further actions to the current template, decision  2290  branches to “yes” branch  2292  which loops back to process the user&#39;s next action. This looping continues until the user no longer wishes to add, delete, or modify review factors corresponding to the current skill code, at which time decision  2290  branches to “no” branch  2294  and processing ends at  2295 . 
       FIG. 23  is a flowchart showing organizational areas being eliminated as part of an organizational resource reduction action. Processing commences at  2300  whereupon the first eliminated area is retrieved (step  2310 ) from eliminated areas data store  2305 . The eliminated areas were previously identified during preprocessing activities (see  FIG. 21  for details). 
     Employee data  2315  includes data about employees in the organization including data regarding the area, such as department, project, function, and division data that is used to locate the first area in the selected eliminated area (step  2320 ). A determination is made as to whether an employee was found in the selected eliminated area (decision  2330 ). If an employee was found, decision  2330  branches to “yes” branch  2335  whereupon data for the located employee is added (step  2340 ) to eliminated employees data store  2345 . The next employee in the eliminated area is located (step  2350 ) from employee data  2315  and processing loops back to decision  2330 . When an employee record is not found for the eliminated area, decision  2330  branches to “no” branch  2355  whereupon data regarding the next eliminated area is retrieved (step  2360 ) from eliminated areas data store  2305 . 
     A determination is made as to whether data for the next eliminated area was found (decision  2370 ). If another eliminated area was found, decision  2370  branches to “yes” branch  2380  whereupon processing loops back to process the employees within the eliminated area. This looping continues until there are no more eliminated areas to process, at which time decision  2370  branches to “no” branch  2390  whereupon processing of eliminated areas ends at  2395 . 
       FIG. 24  is a flowchart showing the identification of employees for further evaluation as part of an organization&#39;s resource reduction action. Processing commences at  2400  whereupon the first surplus area is located (step  2410 ) from surplus areas data store  2405 . Surplus areas data stores  2405  includes data regarding surplus areas that were identified during preprocessing activities (see  FIG. 21  for further details). 
     The first employee that works in the selected surplus area is located (step  2420 ) by reading employee data store  2415  that includes data about employees in the organization, including the area (i.e., department, project, function, division) for which the employee works along with the employee&#39;s skill group (i.e., the type of job the employee has such as a programmer, business planner, manager, etc.) and the employee&#39;s level (i.e., senior programmer, associate programmer, junior programmer, etc.). A determination is made as to whether an employee was found in the surplus area (decision  2425 ). If an employee was found, decision  2425  branches to “yes” branch  2428  to further analyze and process the employee. On the other hand, if an employee was not found, decision  2425  branches to “no” branch  2465  to analyze the next surplus area. 
     If an employee was found in the surplus area, decision  2425  branches to “yes” branch  2428  whereupon the employees skill group is matched (step  2430 ) against the identified surplus skill groups  2435 . During preprocessing activities, certain skill groups were identified for reduction (see  FIG. 21  for further details). For example, a surplus area may need to reduce the number of business planners that are employed by the area but not need to reduce the number of programmers. In addition, levels of employees may be targeted for reduction so that the number of junior business planners is reduced while the number of senior business planners is not reduced. 
     A determination is made as to whether the selected employee&#39;s skill group (and level if applicable) is found in the list of surplus skill groups (decision  2440 ). If the employee&#39;s skill group was not found in the list, decision  2440  branches to “no” branch  2442  bypassing the step of adding the employee to the affected group. On the other hand, if the employee&#39;s skill group was found in the list, decision  2440  branches to “yes” branch  2444  whereupon data regarding the employee (e.g., the employee&#39;s employee number and other identifying information) is added (step  2445 ) to affected group data store  2450 . Affected group data store  2450  includes data about employees that will be evaluated to determine which employees from the affected group will be laid-off (i.e., identified as surplus employees, see  FIGS. 24-27  for details regarding evaluations of affected employees). Regardless of whether the employee is in an affected skill group, processing loops back (loop  2455 ) to locate the next employee in the area (step  2460 ) and determine whether another employee was found in the area (decision  2425 ). This looping continues until no more employees are found in the affected area, at which point decision  2425  branches to “no” branch  2465  whereupon the next surplus area is located (step  2470 ) from surplus area data store  2405 . 
     A determination is made as to whether a next surplus area is found (decision  2475 ). If a next surplus area is found, decision  2475  branches to “yes” branch  2480  which loops back to process the employees in the next area and determine which of those employees are added to the affected group. This looping continues until there are no more surplus areas to process at which point decision  2475  branches to “no” branch  2485  whereupon the affected employees are evaluated (predefined process  2490 , see  FIG. 25  for details) and processing ends at  2495 . 
       FIG. 25  is a flowchart showing the evaluation of employees in identified skill groups and levels for resource reduction. Processing commences at  2500  whereupon a first department within the identified surplus area is retrieved (step  2510 ). A determination is made as to whether a department was found within the identified surplus area (decision  2515 ) as processing will continue until all departments in the identified surplus area have been processed. When there are no more departments to process, decision  2515  branches to “no” branch  2518  whereupon processing ends at  2520 . On the other hand, while there are departments to process, decision  2515  branches to “yes” branch  2522  whereupon a first employee from within the selected department is retrieved (step  2525 ) from affected employees data store  2530 . 
     A determination is made as to whether an employee was found within the selected department (decision  2535 ) as processing of the department will continue until all employees within the department have been processed. If there are no more employees within the selected department, decision  2535  branches to “no” branch  2590  which locates (step  2595 ) the next department from surplus areas data store  2505  and loops back to process the next department until all departments have been processed. On the other hand, if an employee from the selected department was found in affected group data store  2530 , decision  2535  branches to “yes” branch  2538  in order to process the selected employee. 
     A template corresponding to the selected employee&#39;s skill group and level (e.g., junior programmer, senior business analyst, etc.) is retrieved (step  2540 ) from evaluation templates data store  2545 . A first review factor is selected from the retrieved evaluation template (step  2550 ). The reviewer, usually the employee&#39;s manager or supervisor, evaluates the selected employee using the criteria set forth in the selected review factor (step  2555 ). A determination is made as to whether there are more review factors in the evaluation template to use in the employee&#39;s evaluation (decision  2560 ). If there are more review factors, decision  2560  branches to “yes” branch  2562  which loops back to select the next review factor from the evaluation template (step  2565 ) and evaluate the employee using this review factor. This looping continues until there are no more review factors to use from the selected evaluation template, at which point decision  2560  branches to “no” branch  2568  whereupon the employee&#39;s evaluation is stored (step  2570 ) in evaluated employees data store  2575 , and the next employee in the selected department is located (step  2580 ) from affected group data store  2530  and processing loops back to process the next employee. This looping continues until there are no more employees in the selected department to process, at which time decision  2535  branches to “no” branch  2590  to locate the next department within the surplus area. 
       FIG. 26  is a flowchart showing the grouping and sorting of evaluated employees for resource reduction activities. Processing commences at  2600  whereupon a first surplus skill group is located from surplus skill groups data store  2605 . A determination is made as to whether a surplus skill group as located (decision  2615 ) as processing continues until all skill groups have been processed. If the next skill group is not located (i.e., all skill groups have been processed), decision  2615  branches to “no” branch  2618  whereupon the employees are analyzed (predefined process  2620 , see  FIG. 27  for further details) and processing ends at  2622 . 
     On the other hand, if a surplus skill group was found, decision  2615  branches to “yes” branch  2624  whereupon the first level within the skill group is selected (step  2625 ) from job levels data store  2630 . A determination is made as to whether a first (next) job level for the selected skill group was found (decision  2635 ) as all levels for the selected skill group are processed. 
     A job level within a skill group often notes an employee&#39;s experience or proficiency at within the skill group. For example, a new programmer may have a level of “Junior,” with an intermediate programmer having a level of “Associate,” and an experienced programmer having a level of “Senior.” In addition, some organizations give employees numeric or alphanumeric levels to note experience, such as level “1” being a junior level ranging to higher numbers (i.e., level “10”) for more experienced levels. 
     If the job level was found for the selected skill group, decision  2635  branches to “yes” branch  2638  to process the skill group/level combination. Employees with the selected skill group and level are selected (step  2640 ) from evaluated employees data store  2645 . The selected group is then sorted by the employees&#39; evaluation in order to further evaluate employee needs (step  2650 ). In a database environment, the group could be selected and sorted with an SQL query statement (e.g., “SELECT * FROM EVALUATED_EMPLOYEES WHERE SKILL_GROUP=“PROGRAMMER” AND LEVEL=“JUNIOR”, ORDER BY EVALUATION). 
     The next level within the skill group is located (step  2680 ) for processing from job levels data store  2630  and processing loops back to process the next level. This looping continues until a next job level is not located, at which point decision  2635  branches to “no” branch  2690  whereupon the next surplus skill group is located (step  2695 ) from surplus skill groups data store  2605  and processing loops back to process the next skill group. This looping continues until there are no more skill groups to process, at which point decision  2615  branches to “no” branch  2618  whereupon the grouped and sorted employees are analyzed (predefined process  2620 , see  FIG. 27  for processing details) and processing thereafter ends at  2622 . 
       FIG. 27  is a flowchart showing the automated analysis of evaluated employees with respect to an organization&#39;s needs in terms of resources for various skill groups and levels. Processing commences at  2700  whereupon the first surplus skill group and level are selected (step  2710 ) from surplus plan data store  2720 . Surplus plan data store  2720  includes surplus planning data for various skill groups and levels that are developed during resource reduction planning. As shown, skill group “A” (i.e., “programmers”) has a planned reduction of 5% for level  1  employees and a reduction of 14% for level  2  employees, while skill group “B” (i.e., “business planners”) has a planned reduction of 17% for level  1  employees and a reduction of 12% for level  2  employees. 
     Employees with the selected skill group and level are selected (step  2725 ) from sorted employees data store  2730 . The surplus percentage of employees is selected from the group based upon the employees&#39; evaluations (step  2740 ) so that those employees with worse evaluations are recommended for surplus before employees with better evaluations. The selected percentage of employees is stored (step  2750 ) in recommended surplus data store  2760 . Recommended surplus data store  2760  thus includes a list of employees that are recommended for surplus based upon the surplus percentage for the employees&#39; skill group and level and the employees&#39; evaluations. 
     The next level within the skill group is selected (step  2765 ) from surplus plan data store  2720 . A determination is made as to whether a next level was found (decision  2770 ). If it was found, decision  2770  branches to “yes” branch  2772  which loops back to process the selected level. This looping continues until all levels within the selected skill group have been processed, at which time decision  2770  branches to “no” branch  2776  to process the next skill group. 
     The first level within the next skill group is selected (step  2780 ) within surplus plan data store  2720  (step  2780 ). A determination is made as to whether a next surplus skill group was found (decision  2785 ). If a next skill group was found, decision  2785  branches to “yes” branch  2788  which loops back to process the first level within the selected skill group. This looping continues until there are no more skill groups to process, at which time decision  2785  branches to “no” branch  2792  and processing ends at  2795 . 
       FIG. 28  is a flowchart showing hierarchical management review of employees&#39; skill evaluations. Line management processing commences at  2800  whereupon the manager evaluates the selected employee (predefined process  2804 , see  FIG. 25  for processing details). The manager may receive a review of the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee from reviewing management or from the personnel project office managing the resource reduction (step  2808 ). A determination is made as to whether the manager receives instructions or recommendations to rework the employee&#39;s evaluation (decision  2810 ). For example, the manager may have given a low evaluation to an employee with a stellar work history that is receiving stock options. In this instance, it is very likely that the manager erred in evaluating the employee and the employee&#39;s evaluation should be reworked. In this case, decision  2810  branches to “yes” branch  2812  to re-evaluate the selected employee. On the other hand, if the manager does not receive a rework instruction or recommendation from reviewing management or the project office, decision  2810  branches to “no” branch  2814  and processing ends at  2816 . 
     Reviewing management processing commences at  2820  whereupon reviewing management receives an employee evaluation from a manager along with the manager&#39;s digital signature authenticating the evaluation (step  2824 ). The reviewing manager(s) analyze the evaluation (predefined process  2828 , see  FIG. 29  for processing details). The reviewing manager(s) determine whether to agree with the manager&#39;s evaluation based upon the analysis (decision  2832 ). If the reviewing manager(s) do not agree with the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee, decision  2832  branches to “no” branch  2834  whereupon a message is returned to the manager instructing the manager to rework the evaluation (or further explain the manager&#39;s evaluation) along with a digital signature authenticating the source of the message (step  2836 ) and reviewing manager processing ends at  2868 . 
     On the other hand, if the reviewing manager(s) agree with the manager&#39;s decision, decision  2832  branches to “yes” branch  2838  whereupon the employee is compared to other employees within the same skill group and level to determine whether to recommend the selected employee for surplus (predefined process  2840 , see  FIG. 32  for processing details). A determination is made as to whether reviewing management wishes to recommend the selected employee for surplus (decision  2844 ). If management does not wish to recommend the employee for surplus, decision  2844  branches to “no” branch  2846  and reviewing management processing of the employee ends at  2868 . On the other hand, if reviewing management does wish to recommend that the selected employee be laid off (e.g., surplus), decision  2844  branches to “yes” branch  2848  whereupon the recommendation is sent to the project office for further review along with a digital signature authenticating the sender of the message (step  2852 ). The reviewing management receives the project office&#39;s action (step  2856 ). A determination is made by the reviewing management as to whether the surplus recommendation was accepted by the project office (decision  2860 ). If the recommendation was not accepted, decision  2860  branches to “no” branch  2862  which loops back to re-analyze and re-evaluate the employee. On the other hand, if the recommendation was accepted, decision  2860  branches to “yes” branch  2864  and reviewing management processing of the employee ends at  2868 . 
     Project office processing commences at  2870  whereupon the project office receives a surplus recommendation for an employee along with a digital signature authenticating the reviewing management that made the recommendation (step  2872 ). The project office reviews the recommendation (predefined process  2876 , see  FIG. 33  for processing details). Legal review of the surplus recommendation is also performed (predefined process  2880 , see  FIG. 34  for processing details) to determine whether the determination may violate any applicable employment laws. A determination is made as to whether the project office agrees with the surplus recommendation (decision  2884 ). If the project office does not agree with the surplus recommendation, decision  2884  branches to “no” branch  2886  whereupon the recommendation is returned to the reviewing management with comments and possible instructions along with the project office&#39;s digital signature authenticating the project office as the sender of the message (step  2888 ) and project office processing of the employee ends at  2895 . On the other hand, if the project office agrees with the surplus recommendation, decision  2884  branches to “yes” branch  2890  whereupon the selected employee is added to the list of surplus employees (step  2992 ) and project office processing of the employee ends at  2895 . 
       FIG. 29  is a flowchart showing more detailed hierarchical management analysis of employees&#39; skill evaluations. Processing commences at  2900  whereupon a determination is made as to whether the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee identified the employee as having relatively low skills for the employee&#39;s skill group and level (decision  2905 ). If the employee was identified as a low-skills employee in the manager&#39;s evaluation, decision  2905  branches to “yes” branch  2908  for low-skill analysis. On the other hand, if the employee was not identified as a low-skills employee, decision  2905  branches to “no” branch  2928  for higher skill analysis. 
     Branch  2908  leads to an analysis of the low-skills evaluation (predefined process  2910 , see  FIG. 30  for processing details). A determination is made as to whether the analysis also revealed that the employee has relatively low skills for the skill group and level (decision  2915 ). If the analysis determined that the employee has low skills, decision  2915  branches to “yes” branch  2918  whereupon a flag is set indicating that the analysis agrees with the manager&#39;s evaluation (step  2920 ). On the other hand, if the analysis did not determine that the employee had low skills, decision  2915  branches to “no” branch  2922  whereupon the flag is set indicating that the analysis did not agree with the manager&#39;s evaluation (step  2925 ). 
     Returning to decision  2905 , branch  2928  leads to an analysis of the high-skills evaluation (predefined process  2930 , see  FIG. 31  for processing details). A determination is made as to whether the analysis also revealed that the employee has relatively high skills for the skill group and level (decision  2935 ). If the analysis determined that the employee has high skills, decision  2935  branches to “yes” branch  2938  whereupon a flag is set indicating that the analysis agrees with the manager&#39;s evaluation (step  2940 ). On the other hand, if the analysis did not determine that the employee had high skills, decision  2935  branches to “no” branch  2942  whereupon the flag is set indicating that the analysis did not agree with the manager&#39;s evaluation (step  2945 ). 
     A determination is made as to whether the analysis agreed with the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee (decision  2950 ). If the analysis agreed with the manager&#39;s evaluation, decision  2950  branches to “yes” branch  2952  whereupon analysis of the manager&#39;s evaluation ends at  2990 . On the other hand, if the analysis did not agree with the manager&#39;s evaluation, decision  2950  branches to “no” branch  2958  whereupon the evaluation is discussed with the manager (step  2960 ) to determine whether other factors exist warranting the manager&#39;s evaluation. The discussion may be telephonic or via electronic messaging and the results may be stored along with the manger&#39;s original evaluation. A determination is made as to whether the reviewing management now agrees with the manager&#39;s evaluation given the additional information (decision  2970 ). If the reviewing management now agrees with the manager&#39;s evaluation, decision  2970  branches to “yes” branch  2975  whereupon the flag indicating agreement is switched indicating that reviewing management now agrees with the manager&#39;s evaluation (step  2980 ) whereupon processing ends at  2990 . If the reviewing management still does not agree with the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee, decision  2970  branches to “no” branch  2985  whereupon the agreement flag remains “no” and processing ends at  2990 . 
       FIG. 30  is a flowchart showing detailed hierarchical management analysis of employee evaluations identified as having low skills. Processing commences at  3000  whereupon planning data and actual data corresponding to the employee is retrieved (step  3010 ) from employee data store  3005 . 
     An agreement flag is initiated to “yes” indicating that the reviewing management assumes that the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee is acceptable (step  3012 ). A determination is made as to whether the employee has been identified as a “top contributor” by the manager (decision  3015 ). If the employee has been identified as a top contributor, decision  3015  branches to “yes” branch  3018  whereupon the agreement flag is set “no” (step  3020 ). On the other hand, if the employee has not been identified as a top contributor, decision  3015  branches to “no” branch  3022  whereupon the agreement flag is not changed. 
     A determination is made as to whether the employee is receiving or has been recommended for stock options by the employee&#39;s manager (decision  3025 ). If the employee is receiving stock options or has been recommended for stock options, decision  3025  branches to “yes” branch  3028  whereupon the agreement flag is set to “no” (step  3030 ). On the other hand, if the employee is not receiving stock options and has not been recommended for stock options, decision  3025  branches to “no” branch  3032  whereupon the agreement flag is not changed. 
     A determination is made as to whether the employee has been recommended for a significant salary increase by the employee&#39;s manager (decision  3035 ). If the employee has been recommended for a significant salary increase, decision  3035  branches to “yes” branch  3038  whereupon the agreement flag is set to “no” (step  3040 ). On the other hand, if the employee has not been recommended for a significant salary increase, decision  3035  branches to “no” branch  3042  whereupon the agreement flag is not changed. 
     A determination is made as to whether the employee has been identified as having skills critical to the success of the organization (decision  3045 ). If the employee has been identified as having skills critical to the success of the organization, decision  3045  branches to “yes” branch  3048  whereupon the agreement flag is set to “no” (step  3050 ). On the other hand, if the employee has not been identified as having skills critical to the success of the organization, decision  3045  branches to “no” branch  3052  whereupon the agreement flag is not changed. 
     A determination is made as to whether the employee has been recommended for a promotion (decision  3060 ). If the employee has been has been recommended for a promotion, decision  3060  branches to “yes” branch  3065  whereupon the agreement flag is set to “no” (step  3070 ). On the other hand, if the employee has not been recommended for a promotion, decision  3060  branches to “no” branch  3075  whereupon the agreement flag is not changed. 
     Other determinations can be used, such as analyzing the employee&#39;s prior job performance evaluations, to also aid in determining whether the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee as a low-skilled employee is correct or whether such decision warrants further in-depth review. Processing thereafter ends at  3095 . 
       FIG. 31  is a flowchart showing detailed hierarchical management analysis of employee evaluations identified as having high skills. Processing commences at  3100  whereupon planning data and actual data corresponding to the employee is retrieved (step  3110 ) from employee data store  3105 . 
     An agreement flag is initiated to “yes” indicating that the reviewing management assumes that the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee is acceptable (step  3112 ). A determination is made as to whether the employee has been identified as a “low contributor” by the manager (decision  3115 ). If the employee has been identified as a low contributor, decision  3115  branches to “yes” branch  3118  whereupon the agreement flag is set “no” (step  3120 ). On the other hand, if the employee has not been identified as a low contributor, decision  3115  branches to “no” branch  3122  whereupon the agreement flag is not changed. 
     A determination is made as to whether the manager planned on giving the employee no salary increase (decision  3135 ). If the employee was scheduled to receive no salary increase, decision  3135  branches to “yes” branch  3138  whereupon the agreement flag is set “no” (step  3140 ). On the other hand, if the employee was scheduled to receive a salary increase, decision  3135  branches to “no” branch  3142  whereupon the agreement flag is not changed. 
     Other determinations can be used, such as analyzing the employee&#39;s prior job performance evaluations, to also aid in determining whether the manager&#39;s evaluation of the employee as a high-skilled employee is correct or whether such decision warrants further in-depth review. Processing thereafter ends at  3195 . 
       FIG. 32  is a flowchart showing management&#39;s comparison of employees within similar skill groups and levels for surplus recommendations. Processing commences at  3200  whereupon employees with the same skill group and level are selected (step  3205 ) from sorted employees data store  3210 . Sorted employees data store  3210  includes employees grouped by skill group and level and sorted by the employees&#39; evaluations. 
     The managers&#39; evaluations of the selected employees are displayed to the manger(s) determining whether to retain or surplus employees (step  3215 ). The first review factor corresponding to the selected skill group and level is selected (step  3220 ). The subject employee&#39;s evaluation is compared to the other selected evaluations based on the review factor (step  3225 ). The analysis can include review of both objective and subjective measures corresponding to the employees. A determination is made as to whether there are more review factors to use for analysis (decision  3230 ). If there are more review factors to consider, decision  3230  branches to “yes” branch  3232  which loops back to select the next review factor for the selected skill group and level (step  3235 ) and analyze the employee based on the next review factor. This looping continues until all review factors have been considered, at which point decision  3230  branches to “no” branch  3238 . The reviewing manager(s) form an initial recommendation (step  3240 ) as to whether the selected employee should be laid-off (i.e., surplus employee). The system&#39;s automated recommendation is retrieved (step  3245 ) from recommended surplus data store  3250  (see  FIG. 27  for details in the formation of the recommended surplus list). 
     A determination is made as to whether the managers initial recommendation is the same as the automated recommendation (decision  3255 ). If the recommendations are the same, decision  3255  branches to “yes” branch  3258  whereupon the initial recommendation is finalized (step  3260 ) and processing returns at  3295 . On the other hand, if the initial recommendation is not the same as the automated recommendation, decision  3255  branches to “no” branch  3265  whereupon another determination is made as to whether the managers agree with the automated recommendation (decision  3270 ). If the managers agree with the automated recommendation, decision  3270  branches to “yes” branch  3290  which loops back to re-analyze the subject employee. This looping continues until either the managers&#39; recommendation is the same as the automated recommendation (i.e., decision  3255  branches to “yes” branch  3258 ) or the managers no longer agree with the automated recommendation (i.e., decision  3270  branches to “no” branch  3275 ). On the other hand, if the managers do not agree with the automated recommendation (i.e., the managers&#39; initial recommendation is preferred), decision  3270  branches to “no” branch  3275  whereupon the initial recommendation is finalized (step  3280 ) and processing returns at  3295 . 
       FIG. 33  is a flowchart showing project office review of surplus recommendations. Project office review processing commences at  3300  whereupon the project office receives a surplus recommendation for an employee (step  3305 ). Corporate surplus guidelines data store  3315  that define parameters corresponding to the resource reduction are read (step  3310 ). A determination is made as to whether the employee recommended for surplus is in one of the affected areas (decision  3320 ). If the employee is not in one of the affected areas, decision  3320  branches to “no” branch  3322  whereupon the surplus recommendation is rejected and returned to management with instructions for reworking the recommendation (step  3380 ) and processing returns at  3395 . 
     On the other hand, if the employee is in one of the affected areas, decision  3320  branches to “yes” branch  3324  whereupon a determination is made as to whether the employee&#39;s skill group falls within the selected skill group (decision  3324 ). If the employee&#39;s skill group (and optionally the employee&#39;s level) are not within an affected skill group, decision  3325  branches to “no” branch  3326  whereupon the surplus recommendation is rejected and returned to management with instructions for reworking the recommendation (step  3380 ) and processing returns at  3395 . 
     On the other hand, if the employee&#39;s skill group falls within the selected skill group, decision  3325  branches to “yes” branch  3328  whereupon the employee&#39;s evaluation is analyzed by the project office (predefined process  3330 , see  FIG. 29  for processing details). A determination is made as to whether the employee&#39;s evaluation is acceptable (decision  3340 ). If the evaluation of the employee is not acceptable, decision  3340  branches to “no” branch  3342  whereupon the surplus recommendation is rejected and returned to management with instructions for reworking the recommendation (step  3380 ) and processing returns at  3395 . 
     On the other hand, if the evaluation of the employee is acceptable, decision  3340  branches to “yes” branch  3348  whereupon the employee&#39;s evaluation is compared to other employees in the same skill group and level (predefined process  3350 , see  FIG. 32  for processing details). A determination is made as to whether the project office agrees with management&#39;s surplus recommendation for the employee (decision  3355 ). If the managers&#39; recommendation is not acceptable, decision  3355  branches to “no” branch  3356  whereupon the surplus recommendation is rejected and returned to management with instructions for reworking the recommendation (step  3380 ) and processing returns at  3395 . 
     On the other hand, if the managers&#39; surplus recommendation is acceptable, decision  3355  branches to “yes” branch  3358  whereupon the employee is analyzed (step  3360 ) using additional corporate surplus guidelines set forth in corporate surplus guidelines  3315 . A determination is made as to whether the surplus recommendation is acceptable in light of any additional corporate surplus guidelines (decision  3370 ). If the surplus recommendation is not acceptable, decision  3370  branches to “no” branch  3372  whereupon the surplus recommendation is rejected and returned to management with instructions for reworking the recommendation (step  3380 ) and processing returns at  3395 . On the other hand, if the surplus recommendation is acceptable, decision  3370  branches to “yes” branch  3374  whereupon a flag is set indicating that the project office agrees with the managers&#39; surplus recommendation regarding the employee and processing returns at  3395 . 
       FIG. 34  is a flowchart showing legal review of surplus recommendations. Legal review processing commences at  3400  whereupon the employee&#39;s employment data is reviewed (step  3405 ) using local employment laws (data store  3410 ) applicable to the employee and the organization. Some laws may require additional severance compensation or benefits be provided to the employee based on the employee&#39;s employment factors. For example, a local law may require employees to receive a minimum of four weeks of severance pay regardless of the number of years the employee has been employed by the organization. Any additional compensation needed to comply with laws is stored in additional compensation data store  3415 . Likewise, the individual employee&#39;s employment data is reviewed against state and national laws (steps  3420  and  3430  and respective data stores  3425  and  3435 ) to determine whether additional compensation needs to be allocated and included in additional compensation data store  3415  in order to process the surplus recommendation. In addition, the individual employee data is reviewed using local, state/provincial and national laws to ensure that the employee can be laid off without violating applicable laws. 
     A determination is made as to whether the surplus recommendation for the individual employee can be processed without violating any local, state/provincial, or national laws (decision  3440 ). If processing the surplus recommendation would violate any applicable laws, decision  3440  branches to “no” branch  3442  whereupon the surplus recommendation is rejected and returned to management to rework along with guidance pertaining to the laws in question (step  3445 ) and legal review processing returns at  3495 . 
     On the other hand, if processing the individual employee surplus recommendation does not violate any applicable laws, decision  3440  branches to “yes” branch  3448  in order to aggregate the employees and perform further legal analyses. The employee&#39;s data record is moved from retained employees data store  3455  to surplus employees data store  3460  (step  3450 ). The surplus employees data store is compared with the retained employees data store to ensure that protected classes of employees are not being discriminated against in violation of any applicable laws (step  3465 ). The retained employees and surplus employees are analyzed using local, state/provincial, and national laws (steps  3470 ,  3475 , and  3480  respectively). 
     A determination is made as to whether the recommendation to surplus the employee violates any applicable laws when reviewing aggregate employee groups (decision  3485 ). The analysis of aggregate groups of employees may be delayed until all employees have been analyzed and a complete list of employees recommended as surplus is provided by management. If the recommendation to surplus the employee violates any applicable laws when reviewed as a group, decision  3485  branches to “no” branch  3488  whereupon the employee data record is moved (step  3490 ) from surplus employees data store  3460  back to retained employees data store  3455 , the surplus recommendation is rejected and returned to management to rework along with guidance pertaining to the laws in question (step  3445 ) and legal review processing returns at  3495 . On the other hand, if the recommendation to surplus the employee does not violate any applicable laws when reviewed as a group, decision  3485  branches to “yes” branch  3492  whereupon processing returns at  3495 . 
       FIG. 35  is a flowchart showing financial impact estimation of a proposed surplus action prior to evaluation of employees&#39; skills. Impact estimation processing commences at  3500  whereupon general severance provisions are established for the organization (step  3505 ) and stored in general severance provision data store  3510 . General severance provisions may include benefits and compensation the organization plans on providing to surplus employees that are laid off. For example, an organization may plan on giving each surplus employee two weeks of pay for every year they have worked for the company and six months of medical benefits so that the employees can locate and transition to different jobs with less personal impact on the affected employees. 
     Organizational data includes affected area data store  3525  and employee data store  3515  that includes compensation information for current employees. Surplus areas are selected (step  3520 ) as well as skill groups and levels (steps  3530  and  3535 ). The surplus percentage for the skill and level are determined and stored (step  3540 ). An expected savings (i.e., annual salary savings) is calculated by computing the average compensation paid to employees of the given skill group and level by the estimated number of surplus employees that will be reduced based on the surplus percentage. A determination is made as to whether the general severance provisions are planned for the selected skill group (decision  3550 ). If the general severance provisions are planned for the selected skill group, decision  3550  branches to “yes” branch  3552  whereupon an estimated cost to surplus the planned percentage of employees is calculated using the general severance provisions (step  3555 ). For example, if the average number of years worked and weekly salary within a given skill group and level is 10 years and $500, respectively, and the organization plans on providing surplus employees with 2 weeks pay for each year they have worked, then the estimated cost to surplus the group of employees would be 20 weeks of pay multiplied by the $500 average weekly salary for an estimated cost of $10,000 for each surplus employee within the skill group and level. Therefore, if the organization plans on laying off 15 such employees, the planned cost would be approximately $150,000. 
     On the other hand, if general severance provisions are not used for the affected skill group and level, decision  3550  branches to “no” branch  3558  to process the different severance provision. For example, an organization may wish to provide increased severance benefits to a particular group of employees for certain business reasons. These severance provisions for the given skill group and level are provided and stored (step  3560 ). An estimated cost to surplus the planned percentage of employees is calculated using the special severance provisions (step  3565 ). 
     A determination is made as to whether there are more affected levels within the skill group to process (decision  3570 ). If there are more affected levels, decision  3570  branches to “yes” branch  3572  whereupon processing identifies the next level within the skill group (step  3575 ) and loops back to estimate savings and costs for the next level. This looping continues until there are no more affected levels for the skill group, at which point decision  3570  branches to “no” branch  3578 . A determination is made as to whether there are more affected skill groups to process within the affected organizational areas (decision  3580 ). If there are more affected skill groups, decision  3580  branches to “yes” branch  3582  whereupon processing identifies the next skill group within the affected area (step  3585 ) and loops back to estimate savings and costs for the next skill group. This looping continues until there are no more affected skill groups, at which point decision  3580  branches to “no” branch  3588 . A total estimated savings and cost are displayed for all affected skill groups and levels (step  3590 ). 
     A determination is made as to whether the planned resource reduction needs to be changed (decision  3595 ). For example, an organization may need to reduce costs by $1 million and the estimated savings only indicates that $900 thousand in salaries will be saved by the planned resource reduction. In this case, more employees will have to be identified as surplus by increasing the surplus percentage for one or more skill groups and levels. In addition, costs to perform the resource reduction may have a budget of $500,000 but, using the planned severance provisions the costs are estimated at $600,000. In this case, the severance provisions can be reduced, for example 2 weeks pay for every year worked with a maximum of 10 weeks of pay per employee, to reduce the severance costs. If estimated savings and/or costs need to change, decision  3595  branches to “yes” branch  3596  which loops back to revise and edit severance provisions and surplus percentages. This looping continues until the estimated costs and savings are acceptable, at which point decision  3595  branches to “no” branch  3598  and processing ends at  3599 . 
       FIG. 36  is a flowchart showing financial impact analysis of a surplus action after evaluating and recommending individual employees for surplus disposition. Impact analysis processing commences at  3600  whereupon a first surplus employee is selected (step  3605 ) from surplus employee data store  3615 . A total cost and a total savings amount are each initialized to 0 (step  3620 ). Savings is calculated as the current total savings amount plus the amount saved based on the selected employee&#39;s salary (step  3630 ). A determination is made as to whether the selected employee receives an alternate severance package rather than the general severance package (decision  3635 ) based on the employee&#39;s skill group and/or the employee&#39;s level. If the employee receives an alternate severance plan, decision  3635  branches to “yes” branch  3638  whereupon the alternate severance formula is selected (step  3640 ) from severance provisions data store  3610 . On the other hand, if the employee does not receive an alternate severance plan, decision  3635  branches to “no” branch  3642  whereupon the general severance formula is selected (step  3645 ) from severance provisions data store  3610 . 
     Any additional compensation payable to the employee is retrieved (step  3650 ) from additional compensation data store  3625 . Additional compensation may be payable, for example, to satisfy various employment laws pertaining to laying off the particular employee (see  FIG. 34  for details). The amount of severance payable to the employee is calculated by using the selected employee&#39;s employment data (i.e., compensation), the selected severance formula, and any additional compensation (step  3655 ). The total cost is calculated by adding the severance cost for the selected employee to the current total cost (step  3660 ). A determination is made as to whether there are more surplus employees (decision  3670 ). If there are more surplus employees, decision  3670  branches to “yes” branch  3675  which selects the next surplus employee (step  3680 ) and loops back to calculate the savings and cost pertaining to the next selected employee. This looping continues until there are no more surplus employees, at which point decision  3670  branches to “no” branch  3685  whereupon the total savings and severance costs are displayed (step  3690 ) and processing ends at  3495 . 
       FIG. 37  is a flowchart showing management notification of surplus employees. Employee notification processing commences at  3700  whereupon a manager selects a first surplus employee (step  3704 ). The manager, with possible assistance from other employees in the organization, determines whether a non-compete agreement is needed between the employee and the organization (step  3708 ). A non-compete agreement may be needed if the employee is in possession or knowledge of organizational trade secrets and the disclosure of the trade secrets to competitors would be detrimental to the organization. 
     A determination is made as to whether a non-compete agreement is needed (decision  3712 ). If a non-compete agreement is needed, decision  3712  branches to “yes” branch  3714  and the necessary non-compete provisions are added to the employee&#39;s data for processing by the employee (step  3716 ). On the other hand, if a non-compete agreement is not needed, decision  3712  branches to “no” branch  3718  which bypasses the step of adding non-compete provisions to the employee&#39;s data. 
     A notification is prepared (with or without a non-compete agreement depending on decision  3712 ) and the notification and surplus information materials are provided to the employee (step  3720 ). The manager marks the notification by digitally signing a notification which is included in a surplus data store along with a timestamp corresponding to the manager&#39;s notification (step  3724 ). A determination is made as to whether there are more employees for the manager to notify (decision  3724 ). If there are more employees to notify, decision  3724  branches to “yes” branch  3730  which loops back to process and notify the next employee. This looping continues until there are no more employees to notify, at which time decision  3728  branches to “no” branch  3734  whereupon the manager receives any notices regarding notifications from the project office (step  3736 ). A determination is made as to whether any project office notifications are received (decision  3740 ). If any project office notifications are received, decision  3740  branches to “yes” branch  3742  which selects the employee data corresponding to the notification (step  3744 ) and loops back to notify the selected employee. On the other hand, if the manager does not receive any project office notifications, decision  3740  branches to “no” branch  3746  and the manager&#39;s employee notification processing ends at  3748 . 
     Employee notification processing commences at  3750  whereupon the employee receives and processes the surplus notice provided by the manager (predefined process  3752 , see  FIG. 38  for processing details). The notice from the manager may be an electronic notice that has been digitally signed by the manager so that the employee can authenticate the sender of the notice. Employee processing thereafter ends at  3756 . 
     Project office notification processing commences at  3760  whereupon the project office waits for a period of time to allow mangers to notify surplus employees (step  3764 ). After the time period elapses, the project offices selects surplus employees that have not yet been notified (step  3768 ). A determination is made as to whether the list of non-notified employees is empty (decision  3772 ). If the list is empty, decision  3772  branches to “yes” branch  3774  and project office notification processing ends at  3776 . 
     On the other hand, if the list of non-notified surplus employees is not empty, decision  3772  branches to “no” branch  3778  whereupon the first employee in the list is selected (step  3780 ). A notification is prepared, digitally signed, and sent to the selected employee&#39;s manager informing the manager that the employee needs to be informed concerning the resource reduction (step  3784 ). A determination is made as to whether there are more surplus employees in the list that have not been notified (decision  3788 ). If there are more surplus employees in the list, decision  3788  branches to “yes” branch  3790  whereupon processing loops to select (step  3792 ) and notify manager of the next employee in the list. This looping continues until there are no more employees in the list, whereupon decision  3788  branches to “no” branch  3794  which loops back to wait for another time interval (step  3764 ) before checking to see if all surplus employees have been notified by their management. This looping continues until the list of non-notified surplus employees is empty, at which point decision  3772  branches to “yes” branch  3774  and processing ends at  3776 . 
       FIG. 38  is a flowchart showing processing of surplus notification and non-compete obligations by affected employees. Surplus employee processing commences at  3800  whereupon the employee receives (step  3805 ) original surplus notice  3810  from the employee&#39;s management. The employee processes the notice (step  3815 ). In one embodiment, the notice is an electronic message that is processed by opening the message. 
     A determination is made as to whether a non-compete agreement is included in the surplus notice (decision  3820 ). If non-compete provisions are included, decision  3820  branches to “yes” branch  3822  whereupon the non-compete provisions and the surplus information is displayed to the employee (step  3825 ). On the other hand, if non-compete provisions are not included, decision  3820  branches to “no” branch  3828  whereupon the surplus information is displayed to the employee (step  3830 ). Surplus information may include information about the employee&#39;s severance benefits as well as a termination date. 
     The employee is prompted for a response, such as a digital signature, after viewing the information (step  3835 ). A determination is made as to whether the employee signed the document indicating the employee&#39;s acknowledgement to the surplus information and agreement to any included non-compete provisions (decision  3840 ). If the employee signed the document, decision  3840  branches to “yes” branch  3844  whereupon the employee&#39;s digital signature is stored along with any non-compete provisions (step  3845 ) and the employee is sent a key (step  3850 ), such as a userid/password, to use to access special surplus benefits systems and data that assist the employee in locating employment either within or outside the organization as well as transition information. On the other hand, if the employee does not sign the document, decision  3840  branches to “no” branch  3842  which bypasses steps  3845  and  3850 . Surplus employee processing thereafter ends at  3855 . 
     Management processing commences at  3860  whereupon the manager waits for a sufficient time for notified employees to sign the documents concerning surplus information and/or non-compete obligations (step  3865 ). After the waiting period elapses, employees that report to the manager that have non-compete obligations that have not been signed by the respective employees are selected (step  3870 ). A determination is made as to whether the list of employees is empty (decision  3875 ). If the list is not empty, decision  3875  branches to “no” branch  3882  whereupon the first employee in the list is selected (step  3880 ) and a notification is prepared and sent (step  3885 ) from the manager to the employee asking the employee to sign the document acknowledging the employee&#39;s non-compete obligations. 
     A determination is made as to whether there are more employees in the list to notify (decision  3890 ). If there are more employees, decision  3890  branches to “yes” branch  3892  which selects (step  3895 ) and notifies the next employee from the list. This looping continues until there are no more employees to notify, at which point decision  3890  branches to “no” branch  3896  which loops back to wait for a time interval (step  3865 ) and recheck the employee data to determine whether all employees with non-compete obligations have signed documents acknowledging such obligations. This looping continues until the list of employees that have non-compete obligations and have not signed acknowledgements is empty, at which point decision  3875  branches to “yes” branch  3878  and processing ends at  3899 . 
       FIG. 39  is a hierarchy chart showing relationships between processes involved in managing organizational resources. Resource reduction processing (module  3900 , see  FIG. 20 ) includes modules for preprocessing surplus data (module  3910 , see  FIG. 21 ), work elimination (module  3920 , see  FIG. 23 ), evaluation (module  3930 ), reviewing (module  3940 , see  FIG. 28 ), impact analysis (module  3950 , see  FIG. 36 ), and employee notification (module  3960 ). 
     Preprocessing module  3910  further includes modules to build evaluation templates (module  3912 , see  FIG. 22 ), and to estimate the impact of the resource reduction (module  3914 , see  FIG. 35 ). 
     Evaluation module  3930  includes modules to identify affected employees (module  3932 , see  FIG. 24 ), to evaluate the identified employees (module  3934 , see  FIG. 25 ), to sort the evaluated employees (module  3936 , see  FIG. 26 ), and to analyze the evaluated employees (module  3938 , see  FIG. 27 ). 
     Review module  3940  includes modules to analyze employees by management (module  3941 , see  FIG. 29 ), to compare employees with one another in order to make surplus recommendations (module  3944 , see  FIG. 32 ), for project office review of surplus recommendations (module  3946 , see  FIG. 33 ), and for legal review of surplus recommendations (module  3948 , see  FIG. 34 ). Analyze employees module  3941  further includes modules for analyzing low skilled employees (module  3942 , see  FIG. 30 ), and for analyzing high skilled employees (module  3943 , see  FIG. 31 ). 
     Notice module  3460  includes modules for notifying employees (module  3462 , see  FIG. 37 ) and for receiving acknowledgements from employees (module  3464 , see  FIG. 38 ). 
       FIG. 40  illustrates information handling system  4001  which is a simplified example of a computer system capable of performing the present invention. Computer system  4001  includes processor  4000  which is coupled to host bus  4005 . A level two (L2) cache memory  4010  is also coupled to the host bus  4005 . Host-to-PCI bridge  4015  is coupled to main memory  4020 , includes cache memory and main memory control functions, and provides bus control to handle transfers among PCI bus  4025 , processor  4000 , L2 cache  4010 , main memory  4020 , and host bus  4005 . PCI bus  4025  provides an interface for a variety of devices including, for example, LAN card  4030 . PCI-to-ISA bridge  4035  provides bus control to handle transfers between PCI bus  4025  and ISA bus  4040 , universal serial bus (USB) functionality  4045 , IDE device functionality  4050 , power management functionality  4055 , and can include other functional elements not shown, such as a real-time clock (RTC), DMA control, interrupt support, and system management bus support. Peripheral devices and input/output (I/O) devices can be attached to various interfaces  4060  (e.g., parallel interface  4062 , serial interface  4064 , infrared (IR) interface  4066 , keyboard interface  4068 , mouse interface  4070 , and fixed disk (FDD)  4072 ) coupled to ISA bus  4040 . Alternatively, many I/O devices can be accommodated by a super I/O controller (not shown) attached to ISA bus  4040 . 
     BIOS  4080  is coupled to ISA bus  4040 , and incorporates the necessary processor executable code for a variety of low-level system functions and system boot functions. BIOS  4080  can be stored in any computer readable medium, including magnetic storage media, optical storage media, flash memory, random access memory, read only memory, and communications media conveying signals encoding the instructions (e.g., signals from a network). In order to attach computer system  4001  another computer system to copy files over a network, LAN card  4030  is coupled to PCI-to-ISA bridge  4035 . Similarly, to connect computer system  4001  to an ISP to connect to the Internet using a telephone line connection, modem  4075  is connected to serial port  4064  and PCI-to-ISA Bridge  4035 . 
     While the computer system described in  FIG. 40  is capable of executing the invention described herein, this computer system is simply one example of a computer system. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that many other computer system designs are capable of performing the copying process described herein. 
     One of the preferred implementations of the invention is an application, namely, a set of instructions (program code) in a code module which may, for example, be resident in the random access memory of the computer. Until required by the computer, the set of instructions may be stored in another computer memory, for example, in a hard disk drive, or in a removable memory such as an optical disk (for eventual use in a CD ROM) or floppy disk (for eventual use in a floppy disk drive), or downloaded via the Internet or other computer network. Thus, the present invention may be implemented as a computer program product for use in a computer. In addition, although the various methods described are conveniently implemented in a general purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured by software, one of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that such methods may be carried out in hardware, in firmware, or in more specialized apparatus constructed to perform the required method steps. 
     While particular embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described, it will be obvious to those skilled in the art that, based upon the teachings herein, changes and modifications may be made without departing from this invention and its broader aspects and, therefore, the appended claims are to encompass within their scope all such changes and modifications as are within the true spirit and scope of this invention. Furthermore, it is to be understood that the invention is solely defined by the appended claims. It will be understood by those with skill in the art that is a specific number of an introduced claim element is intended, such intent will be explicitly recited in the claim, and in the absence of such recitation no such limitation is present. For non-limiting example, as an aid to understanding, the following appended claims contain usage of the introductory phrases “at least one” and “one or more” to introduce claim elements. However, the use of such phrases should not be construed to imply that the introduction of a claim element by the indefinite articles “a” or “an” limits any particular claim containing such introduced claim element to inventions containing only one such element, even when the same claim includes the introductory phrases “one or more” or “at least one” and indefinite articles such as “a” or “an”; the same holds true for the use in the claims of definite articles.