Major issues in integrating HRIS across London and U.S. operations

Integrating a Human Resource Information System

What are the major issues presented that affected the time, cost and scope of the project?

Hiring unknowledgeable team

In order to facilitate an HRIS partnership, the HR office based in London chose Limited Experience Inc., for the purpose of integrating. Apart from having meager knowledge about the system based in the U.S., the firm possesses comparatively limited experience on how to integrate aspects of an HRIS into a system already in existence. The project manager in charge of matters of integrating the systems, Frankie, sent by the HR office based in London has a wealth of experience of HRIS in Europe but very scanty knowledge of the present HRIS based in the U.S. And other IT undertakings. The assistant project manager sent by the firm, Pat, has no previous knowledge of fronting a project of this magnitude; neither does he understand how the U.S. system functions nor the implications of what the present project will have on the system. Another professional hired by the London based office, Lyn, to be a team leader, has never headed any IT project that applies HRIS software as a team leader. She hardly has insider knowledge of the group based in the U.S. And neither does she understand the ethics of the team based in London.

Delayed report analysis

The realization came much later during the course of the project that reporting should be handled earlier; majority of the reporting is done to satisfy the management requirements and isn't needed for a certain area. Apart from that, most of codes employed for reporting were not suitable and dependable. For instance, U.S.U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity report with relation to African-Americans was not applicable to European employees. Apart from that, in U.S., the employees on leave are labeled as 'on leave', while in case of Europe, such employees are labeled as 'active', as per HR Revenue and Customs (previously called the Inland Revenue Office).

Delayed payroll analysis

Much later into the project the realization came that payroll process must have been analyzed earlier. HRIS pooled in the Master data while some fields were left for an outsourced firm. The information was to be recorded in the financial system to satisfy reporting requirements. Apart from that, extra payroll data was transmitted in the new integrated HRIS as per the audit and control requirements. The payroll data required confidentiality which invoked the usage of encryption software. The encryption software used in U.S. systems was never used by the outsourced firm. After the project was completed, the outsourced firm made a decision to acquire the encryption software. Consequently, the technical team would be trained and develop a process which satisfies the technical team standards of USA. Hence, certain project team members traveled to U.S. And worked with U.S. network support team.

Complex technical issues

While the project team worked on the documenting present processes along the lines of U.S. processes, a method was created to decide the coding which would be suitable to facilitate global integration.

When the senior design analyst, project team leaders (in complete agreement with project team leaders) and HR production support manager settled on a certain process the decisions was put in effect. The meetings of the project team were initiated at times when senior design analyst wasn't able to attend and demonstrate the problem in such a manner that their desired solution was approved. In most cases, decisions weren't feasible and were withdrawn consequently which caused further postponement. When non-consensus could be reached then senior design analyst and project team leaders would present their options in front of HR IT support manager and global HR manager.

Legal requirements

Certain U.S. processes deemed as legal actually weren't as such. During the course of the integration process, the most delicate question was that of change being a legal requirement. SME's stated that it was stipulated by the law; when its evidence was brought it, the real law indicated that change wasn't a legal requirement after all, but more of a convenient solution perceived by present employees / managers.

Question 2: what are the minor problems presented that affected the integration

When the online interface for the HRIS was being designed, various issues arose. The issues are highlighted below.

a. Language

As the project began, the general view was the language barrier wouldn't be an issue since both groups could read and write English fluently. But, spellings of both groups were different for instance 'center' and 'centre' and in other cases, different words had a same meaning. In the end, U.S. English was chosen to be used which wasn't welcomed by the project team.

b. Deciding the data that can be changed online by employees

The online interface provided a challenge to HRIS was that of alteration of data online by employees. The U.S. employees couldn't change their information since it could involve changes in benefits.

Question 4: what type of evaluation/closure would help in this project?

Perpetual closure is adequate for a project. Perpetual project closing explains the situation where certain projects become elongated and seem to continue with no end in sight. The root cause of this phenomenon is constant delays and add-ons to a project. Hence, small changes are required continuously to boost the project's end result. These small changes are add-ons which were intended for the project such as product design and strengthening the software with extra features. The usage of add-ons constantly means the project scope was defined poorly, but this can be prevented by clearly defining scope of a project and its restrictions. The project managers make use of multiple alternatives to evade projects from becoming perpetual.

The project managers can restrict time, budget and resources or redefine the scope of the project to enable its completion. These changes are made to a project so as to complete it as soon as possible for cutting down the additional consumption of cost and time whilst completing a project. Certain projects don't work out but it's a rarity. Sometimes, a project is abandoned due to unmanageable side effects. The changes in the organizational direction are vital for a project team since this change can make a big effect. In most cases, small changes are made on a long duration of time, but in some cases, major changes in a firm necessitate prompt priority shifts. During this period of change, ongoing processes are either cancelled or altered. A project may begin with high priority, but can get cancelled during the course of its duration since conditions change.

Question 5: Who should be involved in future global integration projects? What skills should team members have and how should they be selected?

Based on the size of the company, the complication of adaptation and the budget available, the tasks can completed by vendor staff, in house employees, third party vendors, consultants or a blend of these. The in house project team is still needed even in the case of hiring consultants and vendors for inputting their experience and knowledge. According to experts, the leadership of a project team is jointly owned by IT and HR representative. If possible, the team's project leader must be ready for a full time conversion because with a dedicated project team, the project will reach completion faster. Meanwhile, not all the team members on conversion need to be available full time. One may call it in only when milestones are reached. For instance, during the implementation phase, the team can facilitate the help of end users for validation (Arnold, 2007). Outsourcing is another viable option. It's highly suggested that clients don't facilitate expertise building conversion programs. Via outsourcing, one can finish projects at a fairly lower price instead of working on it in-house.

The project team must have the skill to accept each other, regardless of different backgrounds and interests. They should be willing to listen to new ideas, different views and diversity of people within one project team. They are open to ideas from others and listen to them patiently. They are well aware of the fact that individual expression must be appreciated in order to maintain unity in a group. With the attainment of goals, the team members will back up their team members. They will demonstrate a sense of loyalty within a team and keep the spirit of the group alive whilst assisting the team members facing problems during the project. Apart from that, team members trust each other enough to voice their ideas and thoughts. Hence, a feeling of mutual trust develops since team members are open, honest yet remain within professional boundaries. Trust blossoms as team members show personal liability for their respective job descriptions.

Question 6: If you were to create some of your own "lessons learned," what might they be and how would they affect future projects?

Lessons learned means that the knowledge acquired during the course of the project by the team members of the project and after its completion ponder over the entire project and its results. The lessons can consist of including / copying the processes which worked seamlessly with the project and apply it on future projects as well. Lessons can also mean learning which methods works well in a project and produces better results. Lessons also take in consideration the milestones achieved after the completion of a project. It's imperative to record milestone during long duration projects, since employees tend to forget the events of few months. Hence, most project managers learn their lessons early on. The project manager can take lessons from the project team first and then from the shareholders as well. The project manager should first and foremost send an email to the project team members and stakeholders to pinpoint plausible project issues. Consequently, the next step is to organize a meeting where each participant jots down his/her issues in plain view of project team members. After all the participants have jotted down their major issues, the team members can decide the top five issues or maybe top ten in a big project. Hence, the project manager deals with one issue at a time by cross questioning its identification, cause and how to prevent it in their future projects. Correspondingly, the participants can also jot down the successes during the course of a project and examine their causes. Hence, they advise on which methods to employ to imitate the success of previous project in a future project (Kloppenborg, 2009).

But, in order to make the most of these lessons, a system must be devised for documenting and openly sharing those lessons. The first issue is to record all the lessons for open access to all workers. Some companies make the use of shared folders, separate databases and wikis to satisfy this need. Most companies that work well with lessons learned have an employee in place who owns the lessons learned database. The owner is thereby sent new lessons by each project team after collecting their lessons. The owner then contrasts both new and old lessons and takes relevant action to change, integrate or further add to the lessons. Hence, the database expands as new and unique lessons are added. Each lesson is coded according to the nature of the project, the phase in project's life cycle, problems occurring and so on, are quite viable for project teams when they encounter similar problems and search the database for a solution. Hence, making use of the lessons learned, the project management process is enhanced overall. The completion of the project consists of making sure that required work has been completed, resources are reassigned and documentation has been completed (Kloppenborg, 2009).