Methods and approaches of implementation of HRM systems

What to begin with?

As well as at implementation of any CIS, before project implementation of deployment of a HRM system it is necessary to work accurately the concept in which all interrelations between different elements of the built information system will be strictly stated. The competent ideological basis will allow to reduce significantly an implementation time of a HRM system and to reduce risk of emergence of problems in the project progress.

Besides, formalization of necessary business processes not only will provide higher level of an organizational order, but also will allow the company to reduce the total cost of an implementation project due to reduction of cost of its consulting part. What would not be good and competent the integrator implementing a HRM system, features of functioning of the enterprise are known only by his relevant employees. And even if implementation is executed by forces of own IT department, the accurate activity description, subject to automation, will allow to avoid problems on later project stages. Therefore the HR department should be the most directly involved in an implementation project, especially at a stage of development of the concept mentioned above. The neglect development of the clear concept can reduce to zero all results of implementation of a HRM system.

Probability of successful implementation of a HRM system sharply increases if the organization formulates the strategy and requirements to a system even prior to works on project implementation. Approval of conditions is extremely important. It is important to be convinced that you completely understand what you pay for. Read a small print and if you do not know – ask.

As specialists of Carval in the report note "The guide to a right choice of the HRM solution" is necessary:

• In details to analyze requirements and to be convinced that in the course of formulation of requirements all "interested" structures are involved;
• Provide centralized operation with the project at all stages of implementation;
• Define level of training of personnel and its readiness for implementation of the HRM solution;
• Provide effective information exchange between all project participants;
• Be ready to need of future expenses on training, maintenance and additional modifications which were not considered at an initial stage;
• Remember that process of implementation can take more time, than it was supposed;
• Create the atmosphere of changes. Your employees should know that use of outdated techniques even if proved for many years, is not productive. The difficult period of implementation will be guarantee of future effective work;
• Use work of consultants from outside as the specialists having wide experience and knowledge in HRM;

Here several recommendations from the organizations which were carrying out implementation of HRM systems (on the given survey conducted by CIPD B 2002):

• Make sure that you precisely know that it is necessary for you from automation now and it will be necessary in the near future; extremely clearly to state these requirements to the supplier;
• Attract end users and other interested persons in decision making process.
• Provide interaction with IT specialists in spite of the fact that they are not HR professionals;
• Separate the main thing from minor: the "pleasant trifles" which do not have basic value can seriously influence the project budget;
• Draw close attention to the system of reporting, its analytical potential, flexibility, regularity and timeliness of updates, integrability with office applications

Automation and crisis

Need of automation is defined by requirements of the specific enterprise, and the crisis phenomena can affect only its financial opportunities. If the financial position of the company did not worsen, it will continue to work according to the plans, and implementation of ASUP will be one of the plans making these. I will notice that at any state of the economy each enterprise should increase efficiency of the financial and economic activity including due to application of modern HR-and IT technologies in the field of personnel management.

Otherwise, before starting the project of automation, it is necessary to count terms of return of investments and to estimate perspectives of increase in the project budget and the termination of its financing. Reduction of an implementation time will significantly reduce risk of failure, and decrease in a payback period will allow to select without loss of the overall cost efficiency additional financing for payment of the invited specialists and own employees. If implementation of a full-function HRM system is planned, it is reasonable to break the project into stages. Each of such stages should come to the end with commissioning of the next functional unit which will automate a certain part of business processes of personnel management.

To whom to entrust reengineering and writing of technical specifications?

By preparation for implementation projects of information systems traditionally there is a question of the one who will be engaged in the description and business process reengineering and drawing up technical specifications: own specialists or the invited consultants.

Arguments for benefit of both options are known. The specialists know specifics of the enterprise better, it is possible not to be afraid that they will allow disclosure of information, internal for the company, and they will bear real responsibility in case of incorrectly performed work. On the other hand, external consultants have considerably wide experience of the description and business process optimization and drawing up technical specifications and, most likely, are more competent of these questions as it makes a subject of their professional activity. They have "new view" on a thing, the knowledge base with ready answers to many questions arising in the company, etc.

Definite answer that — it is better, no. The decision should be made depending on a specific situation in the company. In general, two main factors should affect its result: the cost of the specified transactions and risk level of disclosure of intra-corporate information. If services of consultants are rendered cheaper than those costs which will incur the enterprise on payment of work of own specialists, and the risk connected with disclosure is small, it is rational to involve consultants. Otherwise it is necessary to execute everything independently.

Implement or "invite specialists"?

Abroad quite often the companies delegate "headache" on implementation of an information system to the specialized consulting organizations which undertake the solution of the lion share of the questions connected with the project.

On the one hand, such perspective is very tempting. In this case there is no need to distract or employ own specialists for execution of works in implementation, to carry out if necessary their retraining and also to perform management of the project. With the contractor all necessary conditions make a reservation, the technical specifications are approved and funds for payment of its services are allocated.

From other party, any consultant will not be able to guarantee a project success (it is only possible to estimate risks). And, if own employees directly bear responsibility for results of implementation, with the involved consultants all it is more difficult. Prove that the enterprise incurs losses because of incorrectly implemented automated system, but not because of own inefficient solutions, very not easy.

Therefore, in domestic practice consultants are charged with only the large projects which the customer is obviously not able to implement by own efforts. In other cases resort to assessment of two parameters mentioned above: cost and risks. As a rule, industrial enterprises (almost neavisimo from the size) and the enterprises of medium and small business prefer to implement an information system by own efforts.

Whether to use "shock therapy"?

Two alternative options of implementation of information systems are: soft junction to a new system and transition to its use "in one day". In the first case when entering a HRM system in commercial operation all transactions executed in it are duplicated in an old system or on paper. After employees completely master the new software and the automated business processes "will get used", final transition to work in a new system is performed. The alternative option, respectively, provides "burning of bridges" in the form of blackout of old information systems (or failure from manual execution of operations) and one-time transition to work with a new system.

In general, the decision on the choice of one of alternatives (or use of their "mix") should be accepted depending on the specific conditions which developed in the company. Gradation is less risky and sometimes allows to overcome conservatism of staff of HR department and also gives to personnel bigger time for adaptation to a new system and new rules. But one-time transition to use of a new system, on the other hand, stops at once all moods to delay the moment of change of rules of work, allows to take at once all advantage of the implemented product and does not require rather expensive duplication of all transactions.

As a rule, taking into account that business processes on domestic enterprises are ordered and documentary very infrequently and, occasionally, strongly depend on "a human factor", gradation to a new system is used. Sharp transition is used by the companies with the high level of the internal organization. However such approach is not dogma — "shock therapy" can just be used for acceleration of organizational conversions.