WORKDAY INSIGHTS

Most UK organisations will select an SI through rigorous procurement, assign internal resources, and build a governance structure. What most won't do is put anyone on their side of the table whose sole job is to protect the organisation's interests throughout delivery. That gap is where independent oversight sits.

Your SI produces the status reports, runs the steering committees, and defines what on track looks like. That is a structural conflict of interest. Here is why independent Workday advisory changes the dynamic, and what it actually involves.

Most Workday go-live problems are not caused by a bad cutover day. They are caused by months of decisions, deferred risks, and advice that was never truly independent. Here is what a successful go-live actually requires

The implementation delivers the platform. What happens in the twelve to twenty-four months after go-live determines whether the organisation gets genuine return on a multimillion-pound investment or simply replaces one system with another and calls it transformation

Most organisations don't admit a failing Workday implementation fast enough. The silence is expensive. Here's a practical, no-nonsense guide to Workday project recovery, from root cause diagnosis to getting back on track.

Your SI has done this 50 times. Has anyone on your side of the table actually led a Workday deployment before? That expertise gap is where budgets overrun, timelines slip, and change orders go unchallenged.

Choosing the right AMS vendor for your Workday implementation can make or break your project. This guide cuts through the noise and gives you a structured, experience-driven approach to evaluating vendors, avoiding common pitfalls, and selecting a strategic partner who will keep your project on track and within budget.

Different clients. Different industries. Different implementation partners. Same problems. After 14 years leading Workday programmes on both sides of the table, these are the five lessons I'd want every organisation to hear before they start.

Six months after go-live, most Workday teams are in trouble and don't realise it yet. The implementation partner has rolled off. Feature releases are piling up. Enhancement requests are growing faster than anyone can triage. And the operating model that looked sensible during hypercare is quietly buckling.

A good generic PM will build a detailed plan and track status. But if they don't understand Workday's configuration sequence, testing dependencies, and cutover failure points, the plan falls apart three months in - and by then you've lost weeks and budget.

Every Workday programme I've seen had talented people working hard. Status meetings happening. Slides updated. Risks listed. But when something went wrong, no one could answer one question: who actually owns the outcome? That's not a people problem. That's a design problem.

Your SI is measured on utilisation, margin, and throughput. That doesn't make them bad actors — it makes them a business. But when one vendor controls the plan, the resources, and the change narrative, governance becomes theatre. Here's what real oversight looks like.

I worked with a client who budgeted $3.2 million for their Workday implementation. Eighteen months later, they'd spent $4.7 million. When I asked their CFO what happened, she pulled out a folder containing 23 change orders. Here's what nobody told her: most of them were preventable.

Workday implementations fail due to leadership, not technology. Learn how to hire a Workday project leader who protects your budget, timeline, and outcomes

If you are evaluating Workday Post Production or Managed Services Vendors - here is a list of questions that you should be asking

Consider these top 10 tips when embarking upon your Workday Implementation Journey.