Matching a Human Resources information system with a specific business’s needs can be problematic. Too many people mean too many things by HRIS: from an in-house proprietary system, to software purchased on the market, to systems interfacing with SaaS providers.
Unless the business is able to assess its needs clearly and fully, it will comparison-shop at a disadvantage. It may settle for a starter program of core personnel functions (HRMS) that lacks the scalability to grow with the business. Or, it may have expectations of the system’s ability to track applicants, analyze resumes, or manage talent. Any shopping should begin with resources like the compareHRIS.com HRIS Selector Tool.
Comparative shopping
Assessment includes data on the number of employees and the weights you assign to diverse needs like training, self-service, etc. The approach is analytic and informative and a good first step. The analysis does the legwork for you and adds dimension to your needs. It helps you differentiate one provider from another based on the same criteria and compares apples to apples.
Taking ownership
There is a difference between knowing how a system works and understanding what it can do. For example, HR management will not likely operate the system. Some HR tech will be the operational liaison; senior and mid-managers will interface with it for their silo interests; and employees will punch in for self-service. HR management will then monitor system performance, reporting, and outcomes.
But, it falls to HR leadership to grasp and exploit the system’s full potential. For example, a quality HRIS system will calendar and count completed training sessions. However, other cross-functions will align training with talent management needs. It will correlate the training completion with employee performance assessments. And, it will communicate the nature and availability of training sessions through the system.
Just in time
The HR leadership proves itself by taking that data and functionality and doing more with it. An HRIS system is a vehicle that works both ways. It discovers employee and operational needs, and it offers aligned solutions. For example, management can wait for employees to notice the available training, but quality leadership will use the system to facilitate a training push. The same system that schedules and records completed training can put the training in the employee’s lap, so to speak. The system will navigate, assimilate, and integrate the current needs of employee, operation, and corporation goals to present just-in-time learning. It pushes the training package into the employee’s court, enabling the employee to develop his/her talent profile, satisfy the line manager’s problems, improve the employee’s performance assessment, and move the business forward.
Efficiency is not a leadership metric.
The advent of HRIS and the exponential development of HRIS functionalities task Human Resources leadership with comprehending its potential while putting it to use. Increased departmental efficiency is usually the main selling point to justify investment in the venture. Efficiency and cost-effectiveness were the originating motives, and they have a way of dominating the installation, implementation, and utilization. The CFO is happy, the CEO is happy, and the stockholders are happy.
However, the role of HR leadership is to maximize system utility and potential. When effectiveness is measured in employee retention and productivity, the HRIS pays for itself very quickly.
