Summary

tfPVX5u-ucNB2dvpY2n3HT1PCfVPyAtYMSxG6gM0AX2cifrNCjJrAXnT4pauq59-P8yzZwiEemDgwQA0zS8hzaHC_5YMpN11tZyetEHSb9lxgUl-uYpCV5Cjd6Gspz3J
Edit Back

Properties

  • Meeting Date: 2025-03-17
  • Meeting Type: Call
  • Note Type: Summary
  • Attendees: Scott Warner, Lisa Law, Josh Ford, Mike Mecklenburg, Andrew Porter

1. Meeting Summary

I joined Lisa on a vendor follow-up call with Paylocity focused on pricing, implementation approach, Canadian payroll support, and overall fit versus our current HCM pain points. The key takeaway is that Paylocity appears to be a credible option for consolidating several disconnected processes into a more unified platform, with particular emphasis on improving service responsiveness, reducing manual work, strengthening workflows, and supporting both US and Canadian operations in a more integrated way.

Lisa reiterated that our goal is to complete vendor demos and have enough information to make a selection by next week. Paylocity acknowledged that timeline and indicated they can support it. They also suggested an implementation and service alignment call as an optional next step, but we agreed to hold off until after we complete the remaining vendor demo and internal review.

From my perspective, the most relevant parts of the discussion were around scalability, Canadian payroll support, implementation timing, and system governance. I asked specifically about Paylocity's ability to scale as the company grows, since that is one of the more common concerns in the market. Their team stated they are actively supporting much larger organizations than ours today, including clients in the 1,500 to 6,000 employee range and beyond, and they positioned the platform as suitable for continued growth, including international expansion. That addressed my primary concern at a high level.

On the Canadian side, Paylocity explained that while Canadian payroll services are still contractually handled through Blue Marble's legal entity today, the international payroll capability has effectively been folded into the Paylocity platform. Functionally, that means the user experience remains within one system, even though there is still a separate services agreement and data protection addendum for the international payroll component. I also confirmed that support for Canada would likely involve a dedicated Canadian payroll contact for urgent issues, which is reasonable given the complexity.

The pricing discussion was detailed, with separate components for US full-time employees, temporary employees, Canadian HR platform users, and Canadian payroll services. There are also optional items such as history imports, ACA filing support, workers' compensation reporting, RRSP reporting, and various usage-based fees. The proposal includes functionality that maps well to our needs, including payroll, time and attendance, HRIS, recruiting, onboarding, learning management, performance management, reporting, API access, and dedicated service support. I also confirmed that custom training content can be imported into their LMS, which is important for some of the internal training materials we have developed over time.

On timing, Paylocity believes an end-of-month decision with implementation kickoff around 5/4 would still leave enough runway for an 8 to 10 week implementation. I also flagged the need to carefully validate legal entity naming and data quality during implementation, as we have had recurring issues with invalid or inconsistent company names in prior HCM environments. They indicated that data extraction and review would be part of the implementation process, which should give us an opportunity to correct those issues up front.

Overall, I came away thinking Paylocity remains a viable finalist. The platform design and workflow structure continue to look strong to me, and the team's responses around scale, service model, and international payroll were helpful. We still need to complete the competitive review and compare pricing and functionality side by side before making a final recommendation.

2. Attendee List

  • Scott Warner
  • Lisa Law
  • Josh Ford
  • Mike Mecklenburg
  • Andrew Porter

3. Action Items

  • [Lisa Law] Complete the remaining UKG demo and finish side-by-side vendor comparison with internal stakeholders.
  • [Lisa Law] Determine whether an implementation and service alignment call with Paylocity is needed after internal review.
  • [Lisa Law] Follow back up with Josh when we are ready for next steps.
  • [Josh Ford] Update and resend the implementation timeline based on the revised decision pace and proposed kickoff timing.
  • [Josh Ford] Send the Paylocity pricing recap and proposal materials following the call.
  • [Josh Ford] Add performance management/process improvement needs into his written recap.
  • [Josh Ford] Leave ACA 1095 filing in the proposal for cost comparison, with the option to remove later if we continue using our broker for that service.
  • [Andrew Porter] Send Canadian payroll proposal documents and scope of services to Josh for consolidated follow-up.
  • [Scott Warner] Work with the team during implementation planning to validate legal entity naming and prevent recurring company name/data quality issues.
  • [Internal team] Review whether the department position history import and pay rate history import should remain in scope.
  • [Internal team] Review whether all proposed Canadian HR modules are necessary or whether some can be removed to reduce per-employee cost.
  • [Internal team] Compare Paylocity's ACA filing, Canadian payroll services, and optional reporting services against current broker/vendor arrangements for cost and responsibility alignment.

4. Relevant Timelines

  • By next week - Lisa wants both vendor demos completed and enough information assembled to support a decision.
  • End of month - Potential target to make a final vendor decision.
  • 2025-05-04 - Earliest referenced implementation kickoff timing if Paylocity is selected.
  • 8 to 10 weeks post-kickoff - Estimated implementation duration for the proposed scope.
  • Next week or later - Optional implementation/service alignment call could be scheduled if needed, but we elected to pause until after the remaining demo and internal review.
  • Ongoing during implementation planning - Legal entity naming and data review should be validated during extraction and configuration.

5. Additional Notes

  • Our core pain points as reflected back by Paylocity were consistent with what we have been evaluating: poor service from Paycor, too many disconnected systems, manual entries, limited workflows, onboarding inefficiencies, and process gaps around performance management.
  • Lisa noted that performance management is currently handled in spreadsheets. While not the top driver, this remains a meaningful process improvement opportunity.
  • Paylocity emphasized open API access, which could be useful for future IT integrations and data access requirements.
  • LMS includes safety training content such as OSHA-related modules, and they confirmed we can also import our own custom training materials.
  • Paylocity positioned service quality as a differentiator, including a dedicated account manager and more structured implementation resources with a project manager and subject matter experts.
  • Canadian payroll pricing is separate from the Canadian HR platform pricing. Functionally, the user experience is still intended to be seamless within Paylocity.
  • From a legal and compliance standpoint, the international payroll arrangement still requires a separate Blue Marble services agreement and data protection addendum for now.
  • I shared that I liked the overall system design and workflow structure. My main open concern had been scalability, and their response was generally reassuring.
  • We intentionally did not commit to another call immediately. Lisa wants to give stakeholders some breathing room after several weeks of vendor activity and account for spring break schedules.