Note to HR faculty and instructors: SHRM cases and modules are intended for use in HR classrooms at universities. Teaching notes are included with each. While our current intent is to make the materials available without charge, we reserve the right to impose charges should we deem it necessary to support the program. However, currently, these resources are available free of charge to all. Please duplicate only the number of copies needed, one for each student in the class.
INSTR UCTOR Name Title Office Hours Phone E-mail Instant Messenger Classroom OVER VIEW This module introduces HR students and professionals to human resource management systems (HRIS) and project management and demonstrates the integration of these areas. LEAR NING OBJECT IVES At the end of this module, students will be able to: Describe the historical d nn evelopment of HRIS. nn Describe project management concepts as related to an HRIS integration project. nn Apply project management techniques to an HRIS integration process. nnUnderstand the business decisions that can be used with HRIS. n Describe global issues such as laws and cultures that affect HRIS. nn Refine skills of analysis, synthesis and communication concerning issues and ideas related to HRIS systems integration and project management. MO DULE DURAT ION This module is designed to be taught over four 50-minute classes. It can be adjusted as needed for classes of a different duration. Syllabus © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 3 CO URSE EXPECTAT IONS Attendance and participation are essential to a successful learning experience.
You are expected to actively participate in all parts of this course. A classroom is an environment to discuss and present new and creative ideas. Please extend the classroom etiquette to our virtual online environment. All written assignments are expected to be in APA style unless otherwise noted by the instructor. Papers should be typed, double-spaced, using a 12-point font and one-inch margins. Make sure to place your last name, the name of the course and assignment name in the title when you submit your work. For information on APA style, please see: Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed. . (2001). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
ACA DEM IC INTE GRITY Place comments here that are appropriate to your institution. INTELLECT UAL PRO PERT Y All materials in this course are copyrighted, including the course web site, syllabus, assignments, handouts and examinations. Copying course materials without the permission of the professor is prohibited. SUGGESTE D REA DINGS FOR ST UDENTS Ball, K. S. (2001). The use of human resource information systems: A survey. Personnel Review, 30(6), 677-693. Bedell, M. D. , Floyd, B. D. , Nicols, K. M. , & Ellis, R. (2007).
Enterprise resource planning software in the human resource classroom. Journal of Management Education, 31(1), 43-63. Haines, V. Y. , & Petit, A. (1997). Conditions for successful human resource information systems. Human Resource Management, 36(2), 261-275. Hendrickson, A. R. (2003). Human resource information systems: Backbone technology of contemporary human resources. Journal of Labor Research, 24(3), 381-394. Hosie, P. (1995). Promoting quality in higher education using human resource information systems. Quality Assurance in Education, 3(1), 30-45. Lengnick-Hall, M. L. , & Moritz, S. 2003). The impact of e-HR on the human resource management function. Journal of Labor Research, 24(3), 365-379. 4 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. Luthans, F. , Marsnik, P. A. , & Luthans, K. W. (1997). A contingency matrix approach to IHRM. Human Resource Management, 36(2), 183-199. Mayfield, M. , Mayfield, J. , & Lunce, S. (2003). Human resource information systems: A review and model development. Advances in Competitiveness Research, 11(1), 139-151. Panayotopoulou, L. , Vakola, M. , & Galanaki, E. (2005).
E-HR adoption and the role of HRM: Evidence from Greece. Personnel Review, 36(2), 277-294. Ruel, H. J. M. , Bondarouk, T. V. , & Van der Velde, M. (2007). The contributions of e-HRM to HRM effectiveness: Results from a quantitative study in a Dutch ministry. Employee Relations, 29(3), 280-291. Stroh, L. K. , & Caligiuri, P. M. (1998). Strategic human resources: A new source for competitive advantage in the global arena. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9(1), 1-13. Strohmeier, S. (2007). Research in e-HRM: Review and implications. Human Resource Management Review, 17, 19-37. Tansley, C. Newell, S. , & Williams, H. (2001). Effecting HRM-style practices through an integrated human resource information system: An e-greenfield site? Personnel Review, 30(3), 351-370. Tansley, C. , & Watson, T. (2000). Strategic exchange in the development of human resource information systems (HRIS). New Technology, Work and Employment, 15(2), 108-122. Teo, T. S. H. , Lim, G. S. , & Fedric, S. A. (2007). The adoption and diffusion of human resources information systems in Singapore. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(1), 44-62. © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph.
D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 5 Class 1: Introduction to the class and overview of learning objectives. HRIS – Human Resource Information Systems 1. HRIS defined. 2. History of HRIS. 3. Who uses HRIS? How is it used? 4. Benefits of HRIS. 5. Terminology: a. HRIS. b. ERB. c. SAP. Class 2: Project Management 1. Project management: a. Definition. b. Characteristics. 2. Process of project management: 3. Linear process: a. Waterfall model. b. Examples. 4. Cyclical project management process: a. Preferred for software development. 5. DANS Software development method: a. Blend of linear and cyclical. . DANS process. 6. Project management tools: a. Charts: Gantt, PERT, Fishbone, Event Chain, Run Chart. Module Outline 6 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 7. Project Management Software: a. Desktop. b. Web-based. c. Open source. Class 3: Managing Projects and HRIS 1. Managing a project. 2. Project team members and tasks: a. Project sponsor. b. Organizational management. c. Project manager. d. Team members. 3. Communication. 4. Project managers and leadership: a. Initiation. b. Project planning. c. Project execution. d.
Project control. e. Closure and evaluation. 5. Issues of project management for integrating an HRIS. Class 4: HRIS Implementation 1. Uses of HRIS: a. Traditional/administrative. b. Analytical. c. HRIS in business decision-making. 2. Application of HRIS in HR functional areas: a. Strategic management. b. Workforce planning and employment. c. HR development. d. Total rewards. e. Employee and labor relations. © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 7 f. Risk management. 3. Legal issues: a. Employee information. b. Privacy. c.
Security of data. 4. U. S. laws: a. Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). b. Electronic Communications Privacy Act. c. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). d. Sarbanes-Oxley Act. 5. Globalization: a. European Union Protection Directive. b. Canadian Privacy Laws. 6. Conflicts in globalization. 7. HR’s role in change management. Organizations in the Press (OIP) Discussion Board The discussion board is intended to promote student engagement, peer interaction and understanding of the materials. There is no prescribed length for postings; however, the quality of your thoughts is critical.
It is expected that students will monitor and post on the board throughout the week. This is an ongoing, asynchronous conversation, not a one-time stating of your thoughts. Students offering substandard or limited responses will be prompted to offer additional thoughts or risk losing points. Students will enrich their understanding of organizations by frequently making connections between principles discussed in class and actual situations in the working environment. In addition to relating class issues to their own work situation, students can make connections by noting articles in the press about project management and HRIS issues.
The instructor will assign one topic to each student, and the student will choose an article from the press relating to his or her assigned topic. Students should post the article for the entire class. The post should include a one-paragraph abstract of the article. In addition to the abstract, three discussion questions should be provided for class members to respond to generate discussion. Each student will be challenged to facilitate one online discussion on his or her assigned topic. Each class member must also participate in the online discussion every week.
Consistent and substantial participation is expected (I expect more than just ‘good job,’ ‘nice post’ or ‘great 8 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. points’). Discussions in the initial post can include, but are not limited to the following: Briefly state the key issues in the article. What additional information can you add? What connections can be made to the course information? What information is missing that would help better describe, explain or predict the situation? How can this relate to practice?
HRIS Case Study/Case Analysis Cases are representations of reality that place the student in the role of a participant in the situation. Case analysis is a task common to many forms of professional education in which students are asked to examine life-like situations and suggest solutions to business dilemmas. Cases may include a problem, a set of events or a particular situation in which something is clearly wrong. In this HRIS case study, students are asked to identify the basic problem and support the diagnosis with material from the case and the course. Many cases have no clearly defined problem.
In the analysis of such cases, the major task is explaining what is occurring and why. Students should read the case and answer the questions at the end. Answers should be between five and 10 pages. Papers should by typed, double-spaced, using a 12-point font and one-inch margins. Make sure you place your last name, the name of the course and assignment name in the title when you submit your work. Appropriately reference your paper in APA style. Evaluation Students will be evaluated on: Discussion boards. HRIS case analysis paper. Involvement (class and online). Notes to the Instructor
Please note: A student workbook does not exist for this integrated learning module/case study. You may create a student workbook by extracting those items students will need in order to complete the case. Discussion Board Assignment. The discussion board assignment is designed to be an ongoing activity throughout the course. However, if you prefer not to use an online discussion board, the same assignment could be adapted to the classroom by requiring students to provide an article that addresses the same issues that would be identified on the discussion board. Students would then lead a short in-class discussion on the article. ote note NOTE NOTE © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 9 Some possible topics: Privacy Issues 1. What are U. S. organizations doing to ensure the security of employee information in HRIS data bases? 2. Further discussion of U. S. laws regarding the protection of employee data. 3. How do other countries regulate the protection of employee information? 4. Research privacy laws in other countries and discuss what organizations are doing internationally with regard to protection of employee data. Project Management . Find examples of project management systems used in organizations. Who uses what and why? 2. What factors would be involved in an organization’s choice of a project management system? HRIS 1. Research available HRIS and discuss advantages and disadvantages of the different systems. 2. How is HRIS different in small organizations from those used in large organizations? HRIS Case Study – This assignment is intended to be a written paper. As time allows, it would be helpful to use the case as a class discussion either before or after students turn in their written analysis.
Possible Discussion Board Questions 1. What are your perceptions of an HRIS? In your own words, describe why an organization might want to implement an HRIS. The answer to this question will vary based on the type of organization and experiences of the students. Brainstorming is encouraged. This activity will give the instructor an idea of where the students stand in terms of knowledge and background. 2. List an HRIS you have heard about and describe the functions it offers. This question will generate a list of HRIS. Functions might include core administration, training and recruitment. 0 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 3. What can an HRIS do for an organization? Student responses to this question will vary but students should note the ways an HRIS system would affect HR. Students will most likely address administrative issues, training and recruitment. 4. List why your organization would want to use or does use an HRIS (if you have limited work experience, interview HR business professionals to help you). The answers to this question are integrated in the lecture topics. 5.
What is the difference between a stand-alone and an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system? 6. Provide specific examples of HRIS systems and provide the details (costs, system requirements and web site resources, etc. ). What are the strengths? What are the weaknesses? Respond to other students’ posts. The answers to this question will be found from online research and will be based on the specific systems students find. This could range from SAP to open source systems. 7. What are the desired skills for a person to have in order to effectively lead the implementation of an HRIS?
See lecture notes and have students provide information based on their knowledge. 8. As a group, decide which HRIS is a good choice for a large organization and which one is best for a small organization. Responses will range from a large system like SAP to a small, open source system. 9. What is the hardest for the HR professional to control: time, cost or scope? Time might be the hardest because payroll and administrative issues must occur in a timely manner. Other issues that affect time may include reporting to state and federal agencies. © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management.
James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 11 10. What can the HR professional do to ensure success in time, cost and scope? Making sure they are involved in the decisions with their IT professionals to understand the context of decisions. 11. There are many project management tools. This discussion board will help you explore resources available to support a project manager. Provide an example of a project management tool and how it could be used. Provide one software resource and list the strengths and weaknesses. Answers are available from online research. 12.
Create a list of critical risks and contingencies for an HRIS implementation. As a virtual team or individually, create an outline of how each phase of project management is affected. Risks are based on the phases. Each phase may generate different risks; however, you will notice that they typically relate to time, cost and scope. 12 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. Learning Objectives By the end of this case, students will: Understand how time, cost and scope affect the p nn roject management of an HRIS integration. n Identify potential problems in a global integration of an HRIS. nn Identify cultural issues present in a global integration of an HRIS. nn Describe why evaluation is important and how it could be done when integrating an HRIS. nn Identify the skills needed by employees when participating in a global HRIS integration. nn Analyze the case and identify lessons learned from the global integration of an HRIS. Background A global energy company incorporated in the United States has approximately 54,000 employees in more than 180 countries. The U. S. based human resource information system (HRIS) currently houses approximately 20,000 employee records and tracks both bi-monthly and bi-weekly payrolls. The system also tracks employees who are represented by a variety of unions. The U. S. -based HRIS is owned and operated by the HR functional group but supported by a different HR group within the information technology (IT) department. The IT support group has approximately 140 employees and contractors. The HR IT support manager reports to the IT support manager with a dotted line to the global HR manager.
There are plans to integrate the European division’s HRIS into the U. S. -based HRIS. The European division’s HRIS houses approximately 1,000 employee records and one union representing a small percentage of the 1,000 employees. The European HRIS is owned and supported by the HR group whose manager reports to the global HR manager. At the same time of the HRIS integration, a merger has caused changes to the existing U. S. -based HRIS. In addition, another part of the company is about to bring in 88 countries into the U. S. -based enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, including the HR portion.
The integrations have different timelines for completion, and coordination is critical so that changes that affect each of the integrations do not create problems that affect the current production system. HRIS Case Study © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 13 Description of Project Team The HR department in London owns and supports the European HRIS for the portion of the company that will be integrated into the U. S. HRIS. Their current system lacks proper controls and received an unsatisfactory internal audit.
It was determined that the system would require extensive changes and that it would be more cost effective to replace the system than to make the changes. The London-based HR office selected an HRIS implementation partner, Limited Experience, Inc. , to facilitate the integration. The firm has no knowledge of the U. S. -based system and has relatively little experience with integrating part of an HRIS into an already existing system. The London-based HR office has provided the project manager for the integration, Frankie. Frankie has knowledge of the European HRIS but no experience with IT projects and the current U.
S. -based HRIS. Limited Experience, Inc. has provided a co-project manager, Pat. Pat has never led a project of this size nor does Pat have knowledge of the U. S. system or how current HR projects would affect their project. In the end, Frankie and Pat ended up being co-project managers, though Frankie was more of the lead. Lyn was also hired by the London office to be the technical team lead. Lyn has no experience as a technical team lead on an IT project that uses this HRIS software and does not know the culture of the London-based group or the U. S. -based group.
Lyn comes from an organization where it is acceptable to yell at employees who do not meet expectations. This is not the culture for the HR organization in either London or the United States. Lyn also has no experience with the U. S. software or the U. S. technical team’s processes. A U. S. -based senior design analyst, Jamie, was added to the team on a consultation basis. Jamie travels between London and the United States, spending approximately 50 percent of the time in each location. Jamie has led similar projects, is familiar with other concurrent HR projects and is knowledgeable about the production support processes.
Jamie has no knowledge of the London-based HRIS. Jamie’s responsibility is to inform the project and HR leadership of any design issues that may cause concerns with the current production system or the concurrent projects. The project team consists of people from various HR groups within Europe. None of these team members have previous HR IT project experience. There are also people from the project implementation partner company on the team. Challenges of Integration For one of the first steps of the project, the team documented the current HR processes and systems.
As the team went through each process, the team member assigned to that particular area would describe and chart the current processes and the differences between the European and U. S. processes. After this documentation was completed, the project team invited subject matter experts (SMEs) to meetings lasting from half a day to three days to discuss the current processes and the effects of changing from the European processes to the U. S. processes. The U. S. senior 14 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. design analyst attended as many of these meetings as possible to ensure that the project team understood the current processes. However, the design analyst would often need to ask someone from the U. S. support team to clarify specific details. Because of the time difference between the London and U. S. teams, this often involved at least a one-day delay. When certain processes—such as reporting, payroll and interfaces—were analyzed or discussed, the senior design analyst encouraged that these areas be reviewed.
These areas were not reviewed in an appropriate manner because the project team manager (Frankie) and co-manager (Pat) were adamant that these areas didn’t need to be reviewed at the time. They said that reporting would be reviewed at each of the various SMEs meetings and that payroll was being outsourced and did not need to be reviewed at the project-team level. It was discovered much later in the project that reporting should have been analyzed earlier; much of the reporting is based on management needs and does not necessarily need to be created for a particular area.
Also, many of the codes that were used for reporting were not appropriate or consistent. For example, the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity report with the designation of African American was not relevant for European employees. Also, employees on family leave are designated as “on leave” for U. S. reporting, while European reporting requires they be designated as “active,” per HR Revenue and Customs (previously called the Inland Revenue Office). It was also later discovered that the payroll process should have been analyzed. Master data was collected in the HRIS, and certain fields had to be sent to an outsourced company.
The data needed to be interfaced back to the financial system for reporting requirements. In addition, audit and control requirements necessitated that additional payroll data be interfaced back to the new integrated HRIS. Also, the confidentiality of the payroll data required that specific encryption software be used. The outsourced company had never used the encryption software used in the U. S. system. At the end of the project, the outsourced company realized it had to obtain the encryption software, train their technical team to use it and design a process that would meet the U.
S. technical team’s standards. This required some project team members to travel to the United States to work with the U. S. network support team. As the project team progressed from documenting current processes and the effect of using U. S. processes, a methodology was created to determine what new coding would be acceptable for the global integration. If the project team leaders, the senior design analyst (with agreement from concurrent project team leaders) and the HR production support manager agreed on the new process, the coding or technical decision was implemented.
If there was no consensus, project team leaders and the senior design analyst would present options to the global HR manager and the HR IT support manager. The issues were often technical and complex. The project team would schedule meetings at times when the senior design analyst was unable to attend and then present the issue in a way that their preferred outcome would © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 15 be approved.
In many cases, the decisions turned out to be unworkable and were reversed, causing additional delays. One of the most difficult decisions during the integration was determining if a change was a legal requirement. SMEs would often say that the current process was required by law, but when they were asked to provide the actual law, it turned out that it was not a legal requirement but a preferred solution by current managers or employees. Some U. S. processes also thought to be legal requirements turned out not to be the case.
When the online interface for the HRIS was being designed, various issues arose. One issue was language. At the start of the project, it was thought that language would not be an issue because both groups spoke and wrote English. However, the spelling of many words was different, such as “center” or “centre” and sometimes different terms were used for the same meaning. It was decided to use U. S. English, a decision that was not popular with the project team. Another challenge of the online interface for the HRIS was to decide which data could be changed online by employees.
When a U. S. employee wanted to change an address, he or she could not change that information online because it may involve benefits changes. For example, if an employee moved from California to Texas, her current health care provider may not be available in Texas, requiring the employee to coordinate the address change with a medical plan choice. In addition, some address changes needed to allow for a new home address for tax purposes (versus a work address for a tax location) in the system.
For example, if an Atlanta, Georgia, employee moved to Aiken, South Carolina, so that his home address was in South Carolina and his work address was in Georgia, this tax combination may not be in the system, requiring a system change that would need to be created, tested and moved to production before the address change could be made. In Europe, however, address changes did not affect benefits or tax data. As the project team moved to the coding and testing phases of the project, it became apparent that having only one U. S. representative on the team was not sufficient.
Many decisions required involving multiple members of the current production support team. After various members met together, one person or a few people created the changes in the test system and tested the procedure. It would often take many tries before a successful test. By the end of the project, most of the London team spent two to four weeks in the United States to resolve issues that couldn’t be resolved with team members “across the pond. ” When the system went live, the current U. S. production support team sent a team to London to help resolve issues that arose during the first two weeks of implementation.
They had not met the entire project team or most of the SMEs located in London. During the time they spent in London, members of the U. S. production support team tried to quickly resolve production issues from the implementation, worked with new people and adjusted to the time difference. They also had to coordinate times to meet with their U. S. -based counterparts. Because of the time difference, these meetings often occurred during the U. S. -based team’s off hours. 16 © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph.
D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. What hours support would be available and who would provide what level of support was a lively discussion. In the first couple of weeks after going live, the U. S. support teams had representatives in Europe and were able to provide support during their work day. Once that time had passed, adequate support had to be provided for a much longer time than had previously been required. Conclusions The project was about three months late, over budget, and many items had to be fixed when the system went live.
Despite this, the London-based team had a party to celebrate their success, which included a dinner at an expensive restaurant and a limo ride home if necessary. They also received a handsome bonus. The U. S. team members and the global HR manager were not invited to the celebration or given bonuses. After the senior design analyst found out about the celebration, a U. S. celebration (consisting of a lunch) was held and a similar bonus awarded. The London project managers were invited but were unable to travel at the time.
The hot topic at the celebration lunch was how future project teams should be formed when other HR areas wanted to integrate their current system. The length of the answers to the questions should be between 5-10 pages. Please use the instruction from the syllabus for style and format. If time allows, have students discuss these questions in small groups prior to the writing assignment. Questions What are the major issues presented that affected t 1. he time, cost and scope of the project? 2. What are the minor problems presented that affected the integration? 3.
What are the cultural issues that are interwoven in this project that affected HR or IT? 4. What type of evaluation/closure would help in this project? 5. Who should be involved in future global integration projects? What skills should team members have and how should they be selected? 6. If you were to create some of your own “lessons learned,” what might they be and how would they affect future projects? © 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. James E. Bartlett, II, Ph. D. , and Michelle E. Bartlett, M. S. 17 Ambler, S. W. (2008). A manager’s introduction to the rational unified process (RUP). Retrieved from www. ambysoft. om/onlineWritings. html. Arnold, J. T. (June 2007). Moving to a New HRIS. HRMagazine, 52, 6, 125-132. Baars, W. (July 2006). Project Management Handbook: Version 1. 1. DANS – Data Archiving and Netwo