Clouds Connected · Case study
Delivery studyHealthcare

One request now provisions a new hire across four email domains and three lines of business, for a healthcare provider that was onboarding by hand from a checklist.

Power Apps and Power Automate onboarding, leave of absence and termination for a multi-site healthcare provider running outpatient pharmacy, clinic and inpatient services across four separate email domains.

Client
Canadian multi-site healthcare provider
Sector
Healthcare
Engagement
Power Platform automation of new-hire onboarding, leave of absence and termination
Period
July 2023 – August 2024
Anonymised

The client is anonymised, and every figure on this page traces to dated project correspondence. Quotes are verbatim, with their clearance status shown against each one. Named references are available on request. Nothing here has been estimated or rounded up.

In brief

Power Automate employee onboarding: what this engagement covered

The challenge

The provider runs outpatient pharmacy, clinic and inpatient services across multiple brands and four separate email domains. A new pharmacy technician in Ontario, a clinic nurse in British Columbia and an inpatient staff member in New Brunswick each needed a different set of accounts, a different mailbox domain, and a different combination of clinical systems switched on before their first shift.

That work was being done by hand, per hire, per site, by people reading a checklist. Manual onboarding fails in a particular direction: the accounts that get missed are the ones the person does not need on day one, so nobody notices until a nurse cannot reach a system three weeks in.

There was also a constraint nobody had priced. Discovery established that fewer than 10% of existing directory records carried a manager, and every approval and every notification in an onboarding workflow routes on that attribute. The automation everyone had in mind could not be built on the directory as it stood.

The solution

The platform choice was corrected before anything was built. The engagement arrived framed around Microsoft Forms, with the client planning to author forms elsewhere and import them. Forms will not carry a multi-branch approval process with conditional system provisioning, and it was said early: "We are not even using Forms. We must use PowerApps." Correcting a platform assumption during scoping costs a conversation. Correcting it during UAT costs the project.

The process was modelled as fourteen discrete steps before a flow was authored. Each step was written down with its actor, its trigger, its target and the notifications it fires, and issued back to the client as a numbered set of questions. Do the reminders at 7 and 28 days fire from the start date, or from the end of a 90-day probation? Does the hiring manager get copied when HR is notified? Those questions are unglamorous, and each one is a defect that never happened.

The manager-attribute gap was raised as a client decision rather than silently worked around. Inferring approvers from site or job title would have produced a workflow that appeared to work while routing approvals to the wrong people.

Delivery was phased along the client's own risk appetite: onboarding for the first line of business went live in January 2024, clinic onboarding followed on 10 June 2024, and leave of absence and termination, the two processes with the sharpest access-control consequences, came third in August 2024.

The results

3 lines of businesspharmacy, clinic and inpatient, each with its own provisioning rules
4 email domainsresolved inside the workflow, so the requester no longer needs to know which convention applies
14 process stepsmodelled, questioned and confirmed with the client before build
3 phasesonboarding, clinic onboarding, then leave of absence and termination

A hiring manager now completes one request. The workflow resolves the brand, provisions the accounts, issues credentials, tracks the checklist and chases the reminders, and at the other end of the employment relationship the termination path revokes what the onboarding path granted.

DimensionBeforeAfter
OnboardingBy hand, per hire, per site, from a checklistOne request; the workflow resolves brand, accounts and systems
Email domainsThe requester had to know which of four conventions appliedResolved inside the workflow
Directory readinessFewer than 10% of records carried a managerRaised as a client decision before any flow was authored
OffboardingThe failure that shows up in an auditA termination path that revokes what onboarding granted

Technologies

Questions we get asked

Power Automate employee onboarding: common questions

How long does a Power Automate onboarding build take?
It depends on how many provisioning paths the process has to serve, and on whether the directory can route approvals before you start. This engagement ran from July 2023 to August 2024 and was delivered in three phases: onboarding for the first line of business in January 2024, clinic onboarding on 10 June 2024, and leave of absence and termination in August 2024. Fourteen process steps were modelled, questioned and confirmed with the client before any flow was authored.
Should employee onboarding be built on Microsoft Forms or Power Apps?
Forms will not carry a multi-branch approval process with conditional system provisioning. This engagement arrived framed around Microsoft Forms and the platform assumption was corrected during scoping rather than during UAT. Correcting it in scoping costs a conversation; correcting it in UAT costs the project.
What blocks an onboarding workflow before you start building?
Usually the directory. Fewer than 10% of records here carried a manager, and every approval and notification in an onboarding workflow routes on that attribute. Inferring approvers from site or job title instead produces a workflow that appears to work while routing approvals to the wrong people, so the gap was raised as a client decision.
How do you automate onboarding across multiple brands and email domains?
Resolve the brand inside the workflow rather than at the request form. A hiring manager completes one request; the workflow resolves which of four email conventions applies, provisions the accounts for that site's clinical systems, issues credentials, tracks the checklist and chases the reminders.
Why does manual onboarding fail in healthcare specifically?
It fails in a particular direction. The accounts that get missed are the ones the person does not need on day one, so nobody notices until a nurse cannot reach a system three weeks in. The reverse failure, accounts that outlive the employee, is the one that shows up in an audit, which is why the termination path was built to revoke what the onboarding path granted.
Related work

Other engagements like this one

Work with us

Two ways this usually starts

For consulting partners

SharePoint delivery under your paper

Nine of the ten engagements in this library were contracted through a systems integrator, an ISV or a managed provider, with Clouds Connected as the named SharePoint delivery lead. Your client relationship, your invoice, our platform depth — white-label delivery, escalation cover, or a fixed-scope block of hours.

Every study here is anonymised by default, which is also how we work inside your accounts.

For direct clients

Upgrades, migrations, recovery, patching

SharePoint Server and Microsoft 365 platform work on estates that cannot simply be rebuilt: version upgrades, tenant and content migrations, disaster recovery design and drills, performance root-cause diagnosis, and scheduled security patching on a standing cycle.

Regulated utilities, financial services, aerospace and healthcare. Based in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada; delivery across North America.

Provenance

Where these facts come from

Reconstructed from project correspondence, September 2021 to September 2026. Every figure on this page traces to a dated message, and the source citation for each sits in the accompanying fact sheet. Nothing has been estimated, rounded up, or written on the client’s behalf.

Clouds ConnectedHealthcare · Power Platform onboarding automation