HR Information Systems: : Stand and Deliver

Citation

Robinson, D. (1998), "HR Information Systems: : Stand and Deliver", Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 138-139. https://doi.org/10.1108/maj.1998.13.2.138.1

Computerised HR systems have traditionally had a bad press. They are contrasted unfavourably with other management systems, which appear to deliver to expectation. Most HR professionals could not live without their computerised system, yet few are wholeheartedly enthusiastic.

Overview

Most organisations have a computerised HR information system, and many are now abandoning their old, mainframe versions for a new, state‐of‐the‐art model. HR information systems are attractively packaged and slickly presented ‐ yet, back at the workplace, often fail to live up to their promises. Implementation delays, difficulties with gathering data, technical hitches and inadequate reporting facilities lead to disillusionment, frustration and a feeling that expectations have not been met.

Why is this? Explanations usually blame either HR professionals, or the systems themselves. In an attempt to disentangle myth from reality, IES examined six organisations as case studies. All have had an HR information system for years, and some are implementing a newer model. The wider picture, as represented by the results of several surveys, is also examined, as is the supplier’s perspective. Finally, some practical advice is offered, drawn from the good practice that has been encountered during this study.

The myths

Several themes emerge from discussions and articles about computerised personnel information systems.

•HR is a poor relation as far as investment in IT is concerned; other departments, particular those with a direct customer interface, do much better.

•HR systems are IT led, and HR professionals lack the confidence and expertise to get into the driving seat.

•A business justification, incorporating a cost benefit analysis and measurable success criteria, is rarely produced.

•These systems are perceived as endangering jobs, so are given a lukewarm reception within HR.

•HR systems are supposed to enable line managers to take over routine personnel administration ‐ but do they? And do line managers perceive any benefits?

•IT skills are not rated highly in HR, to the extent that people who specialise in this area are considered unsuitable for mainstream HR.

•HR professionals lack the imagination to use their systems as anything other than an automated filing cabinet.

•Implementation always hurts, is often late, and sometimes fails altogether.

The reality

It is encouraging to report that the experience of the six case study organisations do not support the myths.

•Investment levels appear to be higher now than at any time in the last ten years.

•In all cases, HR professionals are at the forefront of projects to develop existing systems, or implement new ones.

•Business justifications are the norm.

•HR practitioners are generally welcoming and enthusiastic about new HR systems, believing that these systems will help them to provide better quality information and advice.

•The newer systems ‐ which take advantage of E‐mail, Intranet and Workflow technology ‐ do at last enable line managers to perceive some benefit from routine personnel records administration.

•An embryonic career structure seems to be emerging for HR professionals who want to specialise in computerised systems ‐ and expertise in the newer systems is now a valued commodity.

•Lessons are being learned from earlier implementations, so that project plans are now more realistic and achievable.

The surveys

Recent surveys appear to bear out the case study findings. In particular, it seems that a lot of investment is happening now, or is planned for the next one to three years. HR professionals are leading projects to replace and implement, either alone or as part of a multi‐disciplinary team. They are also taking over activities previously considered to be the domain of IT ‐ such as liaison with system suppliers, security procedures and system enhancements. Indeed, there even seems to be a danger that the pendulum is swinging too far, and that IT advice is not being sought in areas where it would be beneficial.

What do organisations want?

The answer, from the Computers in Personnel 1997 (CiP 97) survey (a joint annual IES/IPD survey), is unequivocal. Five factors dominate:

1user friendliness;

2flexibility;

3ability to produce required reports ;

4ability to integrate/compatibility with other systems;

5functionality.

These demands seem to have arisen out of grappling with older systems that, while reliable, tend to be inflexible and difficult to use for generating reports. The CiP 97 survey identifies five drivers for change, which are prompting organisations to look for a new system:

•to improve the quality of reporting;

•the poor performance of existing systems;

•the devolution of HR responsibilities;

•the need to integrate payroll;

•business re‐engineering/cost efficiency.

The suppliers’ perspective

Suppliers have some very definite (and usually complimentary!) views about the HR profession. They are also clear about factors essential for a successful HR system implementation.

1Give and take on both sides.

2Identification of the business benefits from the outset.

3The need for realistic timetables and adequate resources, in particular staff who are dedicated to the project.

4An understanding, by HR professionals, that the newer packaged software incorporates best practice; there is no need for expensive customisation.

5A procurement process that is sufficiently imaginative to consider the needs of the whole organisation.

6A buy‐in from the whole organisation, in recognition of the fact that HR systems belong to everyone, not just the HR department.

Is there hope for the future?

The evidence would suggest that there is. HR professionals, at least in our case study organisations, seem willing to be bold when considering the future. Many “visions” now include the use of new technology, to change yesterday’s automated filing cabinet into tomorrow’s management system. The big challenge is how to fill the gap between current practice and the vision. Much investment will be needed in organisations to set up the infrastructure which the newer HR systems require to function to their full potential. Perhaps even more important is the will to make it happen, which HR professionals cannot do alone. Only with strong leadership from the top will work patterns and attitudes change, and systems come into their own.

Practical tips

•Define and review existing HR processes before starting to look for a new system.

•Listen to your supplier, who will have a shrewd idea of what is considered good HR practice in different types of organisation ‐ in the UK as well as outside.

•Justify your purchase to your organisation, even if you are not required to do so.

•Help your organisation to own the system. Do not even start unless everyone ‐ especially at the top ‐ is fully committed. And do not expect line managers to co‐operate unless they have the tools to do so.

•Ensure that the project is managed properly, with adequate resources.

•Be pessimistic about timescales; they usually expand, but rarely shrink!

•Value your HR “techies”, and encourage your organisation to see HR system expertise as a core competence for HR professionals.

•Monitor and evaluate the use and effects of your HR system, so that you can prove its worth and justify any further investment you need.

The study

The study was undertaken in response to evidence that many organisations are currently in the process of changing their HR systems, or plan to do so in the next year or two. The appearance on the market of new systems, which appear to be genuinely different from their predecessors, was another factor. The research was funded by members of the IES co‐operative research programme, several of whom participated in the study.

HR Information Systems: Stand and Deliver, D Robinson, IES (Institute for Employment Studies) Report 335, 1997. ISBN 1‐85184‐261‐6. £20.00