Kronos Incorporated
 |
|
| Private | |
| Founded | October 31, 1977 |
| Founder | Mark S. Ain |
| Headquarters | Chelmsford, Massachusetts, United States |
|
Number of employees
|
5,000 (2016) |
| Parent | Hellman & Friedman |
| Website | Kronos.com |
Kronos Incorporated is a U.S.-based multi-national workforce management software and services company headquartered in Chelmsford, Massachusetts, United States, and employing more than 5,000 people worldwide.
Kronos was founded in 1977 by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) alumnus Mark S. Ain. Under Mark Ain's leadership, Kronos sustained one of the longest records of growth and profitability as a public company in software industry history. Ain's brother, Aron Ain, succeeded him as chief executive officer in 2005 with Mark Ain becoming executive chairman of the Board of Directors.
Originally a manufacturer of time clocks, the majority of Kronos revenue is now derived from software and services. The company provides cloud applications for workforce management and human capital management, as well as consulting, education, and support services to its customers.
In March 2007, Kronos was bought out for US$1.74 billion by the lead investor Hellman & Friedman and the secondary investor JMI Equity. In 2014, private equity firms Blackstone and GIC invested in Kronos alongside Hellman & Friedman and JMI Equity. In the transaction, Kronos was valued at $4.5 billion.[*]
Kronos has conducted 71 acquisitions, some of the most notable including:
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals enforced a subpoena seeking production of documents by Kronos, Inc., in an administrative charge before the EEOC alleging disability discrimination. The charge was brought by an individual job applicant against Kroger Food Co., who did not hire the job applicant and used a Kronos assessment as part of its hiring process. EEOC v. Kronos Incorporated, Civ. Act. No. 11-2834 (September 14, 2012, Third Circuit).
Kronos, which was not a party to the litigation, objected to the EEOC’s subpoena on the basis that the information requested was irrelevant, and production would require Kronos to disclose protected trade secret information. While the District Court sustained nearly all of these objections, the Third Circuit found that the District Court had abused its discretion in limiting the scope of the subpoena to documents pertaining to certain of the assessment tests.
...
Wikipedia