Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Arlington, VA 22209
Telephone: 571-303-3000
Fax: 571-303-3100
• Backed by a service
guarantee
www.executiveboard.com
All-Inclusive, Unlimited Access to a Comprehensive Suite of Services
Dynamically Delivered Through Multiple Channels
Implementation
Research Executive
Tools and
and Analysis Forums
Diagnostics
Identify Proven Solutions Frame Thoughts and Stimulate Ideas Save Time and Reduce Risk
• Best Practices • Senior Executive Retreats • Employee Survey and Analysis
• On-Demand Research • Member-Hosted Forums Tool
• Quantitative Analysis • Leadership Briefings • HIPO Identification Diagnostic
• Implementation Toolkits
Fact Brief
Determining the Scope and Structure of the HRIS Function
Profiled Key Questions:
Industry Employees Revenues
Institution
How do companies structure and staff the HRIS function?
A Media 50,000 – 100,000 $5 billion – $10 billion
B Health Care 10,000 – 50,000 More than $10 billion What are the responsibilities and goals of the HRIS function?
C Hospitality 10,000 – 50,000 $500M – $2 billion How do company leaders evaluate HRIS function performance?
D Telecommunications 2,000 – 10,000 $500M – $2 billion
E High-Tech 10,000 – 50,000 $5 billion – $10 billion
The structure, role, and expertise of the HRIS function determine its abilities to effectively manage the HRIS and generate strategic insight.
This brief examines how five organizations have organized and tasked the HRIS function to leverage HR and technical expertise, improve
service capabilities , and directly support the needs of business leaders throughout the organization.
EXECUTIVE S UMMARY
To effectively manage the enterprise HR Information Systems (HRIS), companies have created internal HRIS functions dedicated to overseeing implementation and expansion of
HRIS capabilities.3,43,These groups are structured according to organizational needs and employee capabilities, and typically fall under the HR department. Findings reveal that most
of the HRIS functions at profiled companies attempt to balance technical capabilities with strategic contribution. That said, HRIS functions at two profiled companies focus more on
technical elements of HRIS management to improve service and reporting capabilities. This research brief provides an overview of the structures and objectives of these two types
of HRIS functions.
Balanced HRIS Function Technical HRIS Function Methods for Measuring HRIS Function
Structures Structures Effectiveness
While a majority of profiled companies’ HRIS functions are The HRIS functions at two profiled companies align primarily Research indicates that companies evaluate HRIS function
dedicated to technical and strategic responsibilities, with technical objectives. These groups focus on technical performance in the following ways:
the structures in place typically vary based upon alignment with expertise to drive service delivery and data management
HR functions, scope of HR technology in place at the capabilities. Monthly Metrics Reports—Company A tracks service and
organization, and internal service requirements. reporting metrics to generate a monthly report distributed
Technical Bench StrengthThe HRIS team at Company C is throughout the company.
Consolidated HRIS Function—Company A recently a relatively small group, made up of five analysts with significant
consolidated its previously decentralized HR department. experience in HR technology and HRIS management. These Internal Service Evaluations —Company D’s HRIS function
The centralized structure results in one HRIS function analysts rotate system management work assignments to gathers service feedback from internal customers around
responsible for both technical and strategic objectives. develop expertise in all areas of HR, such as recruiting and service quality and speed.
compensation.
Dedicated Teams within the HRIS Function—Company B Company-Wide Performance Goal Surveys —Company B
has created four distinct groups within its HRIS function: Divided Technical Capabilities—Company D divides its HRIS conducts “blueprinting” interviews with business leaders to
§ Business System Services function into three teams: gather feedback on what leadership needs from the HR
§ Information Services § SAP function.
§ Human Capital Analysis § Technical
§ Technology Strategy § Transaction
The first two are dedicated primarily to technical and Each team focuses on the technical, administrative, or system
information services , while the latter two focus on more management duties around the SAP HRIS.
business support and strategy development.
Industry: Media
Company A Revenues: $5 billion - $10 billion
Employees: 50,000 - 100,000
Characteristics: The HR Decision Support function at Company A is composed of 11 corporate employees : the group head and assistant; four PeopleSoft analysts and a
manager to whom they report; a metrics specialist; a payroll specialist; a Web master; and an additional manager focusing on HR projects. The four
PeopleSoft analysts are all experienced in system navigation and training, and most come from an HR systems background. The project manager
balances both technical and business acumen, with experience in HR metrics and analytics.
Company A transformed the HR department in August 2005 to better support a proactive business orientation by consolidating a previously decentralized
department and outsourcing most of the highly technical elements of HR systems management, such as server maintenance and SQR programming,
to Hewitt Associates .
Implications: The 2005 transformation has realigned the HRIS function’s orientation away from the purely technical elements of HRIS management and toward a
proactive support of business unit needs. Maintaining PeopleSoft analysts enables the HRIS staff to build out PeopleSoft functionality to drive utilization
and further build out PeopleSoft capabilities based upon Company A’s needs.
ü Continue creation and posting of monthly metrics ü Enhance HR analytics and metrics reporting to drive
reports to HR intranet for company-wide HR staff use of HRIS capabilities for business goals
ü Provide PeopleSoft navigation/query training to ü Support Hewitt’s consolidation of data from all of
market groups Company A’s HR applications.
ü Standardize training, development, and ü Support PeopleSoft upgrades as determined by
communication processes for expanded HR Hewitt
applications and functionality
ü Support manager self -service roll-out with
communication, training, and design support around
interface
The figure below outlines the HR Decision Support function structure at Company A:
Company A
Industry: Media SVP, HR
Revenues: The HRIS assistant handles
$5 billion–$10 billion office management,
Employees: scheduling, and administrative
50,000–100,000 VP,
support for the HRIS function.
HR Decision Support
HRIS Function
HRIS: PeopleSoft Administrative
Employees: 11 Assistant
Characteristics: The HRIS function at Company B is staffed by 12 employees, all with backgrounds in HR and HR information technology/applications and with at least 5
years tenure with Company B. HRIS function staff work closely with systems analysts in the IT department as well as systems experts from
several outsourced service providers to meet organization HRIS technical demands . This group is divided into four main teams, two or which focus
primarily on technical capabilities for systems, reporting and data management, while the other two focus on HR analytics and technology strategy issues.
Implications: By defining responsibilities within the HRIS function that address both business strategy and technical services, Company B’s HR leadership has created
a function that can support both aspects of HRIS management. Full-time alignment with either technical or strategic elements dedicates resources,
ensures strong capabilities and expertise within the function, and enables function staff to collaborate effectively with internal/external service providers
and communicate system needs and HR goals .
ü Continued service improvement and ongoing cost ü Further build out consolidated HR/personnel data
reduction library with standardized data from the entire
organization
ü Further development of HR analytics capabilities
ü Reduce need for ad hoc reporting with increased
self-service capabilities and regular reporting
Company B
Head of HR
Industry: Health Care
Revenues:
Over $10 Billion
Employees: Head of Talent
10,000–50,000 Strategy & Services
HRIS Function
HRIS: PeopleSoft
Employees: 12 Head of HRIS
The Information Services Business Systems Services The Human Capital Analysis The Head of HRIS oversees Technology
group is responsible for oversees HRIS team provides expertise in Strategy and is responsible for aligning HR
ad hoc and data reporting enhancements, application human capital analysis, technology with business objectives and
and consulting around upgrades, and other proactive data mining, KPI and overseeing technical governance. The
PeopleSoft and other core administrative tasks not owned metrics analytics. Team Head of HRIS is responsible for defining and
HR applications, maintaining by IT. This group also offers members meet with HR planning the strategy , working with HR
application security, and application consulting/training Business Partners to provide leadership, business partners, and IT, and
developing an integrated HR and determines system insights relevant to specific maintaining oversight on the execution of
data repository. priorities and change plans. areas of the business. the technology plan.
Industry: High-Tech
Company E Revenues: $5 billion - $10 billion
Employees: 10,000 - 50,000
Characteristics: The Management of the HRIS at Company E is dispersed between three main groups within the organization:
§ Global System Administration (GSA)—Within the Finance department, GSA is dedicated to system administration, maintenance, and providing answers to “how to”
questions regarding PeopleSoft.
§ HR Enabling Technologies (HRET)—Responsible for general oversight and utilization of PeopleSoft, as well as implementation of new products and processes, this
group consists of business analysts responsible for providing expertise around system capabilities and operations to senior leadership. While HRET supports the entire
organization, the group works primarily with HR centers of expertise to determine business needs and evaluate and implement system enhancements to meet those
needs. The Director of HRET is currently involved in the development of an overall HR strategy, which will ensure HRET’s alignment of the technology with business
strategy.
§ HR Service Solutions (HRS D)—HRSD provides transactional support, including training and process evaluation, to HR Business Partners and field HR staff during
roll-out of new HR technologies and programs.
Data collection and entry for self-service transactions and remote employees is outsourced to Hewitt Associates.
Implications: The division of responsibilities around the HRIS provides the organization with clear pathways for working with HRIS and HR technology. The HR teams
provide relevant HR expertise, aligning with HR functions (e.g., compensation, recruiting) to build and modify technology applications to meet current
needs. The GSA team provides technical bench strength, focusing on technology issues and general applications issues for all of Company E.
Working together, the two main divisions bring their respective strengths to managing the HRIS, enabling high levels of HR-specific relevance and
technical expertise. That said, challenges arise in communicating needs and capabilities between the two divisions, as HR experts and technology
experts, by nature, possess different capabilities. These three groups collaborate to promote standardized technology strategies and meet the service
needs of the organization.
ü While Company E has designated no specific cost ü Provide HR technology perspective to influence
reduction benchmarks, the HRIS function continues to development of overall HR strategy
minimize costs of ongoing support through increased ü Generate an HR technology strategy to align with
automation and self-service. overall HR and CIO strategies
The figure below outlines the structure of the dispersed HRIS groups at Company E:
Industry: Hospitality
Company C Revenues: $500M - $2 billion
Employees: 10,000 - 50,000
Characteristics: Company C’s HRIS function comprises 5 employees primarily focused on technical issues related to management of the company’s PeopleSoft
system. HRIS function leaders look for employees with backgrounds in HR technology consulting and/or PeopleSoft implementation, and all
current function staff have this experience. Day-to-day work is primarily technical, which includes configuring systems and supporting system
developers. The HRIS Director rotates work assignments among the analysts, developing analyst strength in all areas of HRIS and HR
management (i.e., recruiting, compensation).
Implications: HRIS analysts support business strategy by leveraging technical expertise to address the needs of HR peers. Analysts with technical expertise are able
to provide testing and evaluation of small HRIS projects to improve functionality and drive full employee utilization of PeopleSoft’s capabilities. In addition,
Company C’s HRIS function is able to address most technical issues relatively easily, drawing upon functional staff expertise in HRIS systems and
interfaces. The HRIS function’s technical bench strength also allows the analysts to build foundational processes in reporting and change management,
as well as to support data collection throughout the organization.
ü Develop and communicate formalized reporting ü Use training and product support to educate
processes across the organization as a starting point organization HR staff around integrated HRIS platform
for standardized data collection capabilities to encourage data gathering and analysis
Potential Changes
q Increasing end-user awareness of self -service may increase demands for formal report creation
q Oracle/PeopleSoft changes requiring additional system education and evaluation
Figure 4: Function Structure—Ensuring HRIS Technical Bench Strength Across the Function at Company C
Company C
Industry: Hospitality Head of HR
Revenues:
$500M–$2 billion
Employees:
10,000–50,000 Head of HR
Design & Services
HRIS Function
HRIS: PeopleSoft
Employees: 5
Director, HRIS
One Business Analyst has In order to vary workloads and provide insight into cross
primary responsibility for the functional impact, HRIS analysts at Company C typically
performance management do not focus on one specific topic area, but instead rotate
tool, in addition to other responsibilities to increase overall knowledge of system
rotating tasks around the HRIS functionality and HR requirements
Industry: Telecommunications
Company D Revenues : $500M - $2 billion
Employees: 2,000 - 10,000
Characteristics: The HRIS function at Company D consists of 11 employees across three service groups : transactional, technical, and SAP. HRIS employees primarily
have technical backgrounds, with expertise in programming, database administration, and Web design. The function is responsible for providing HR
reports, maintaining integrity of the SAP system, and working with HR to provide process improvements and recommendations on how to simplify and
automate manual processes such as data entry.
Implications: HRIS staff provide a combination of technical capabilities to develop business-relevant tools and system functionality. By building administrative and
technology expertise into the HRIS function, Company D enables HRIS staff to focus on improving the system and the technical components of
self-service, and additional automation needed to improve reporting capabilities and drive utilization. As such, the function’s current focus on rebuilding
the HR intranet, creating new metrics dashboards for leaders, incorporating payroll data into SAP, and further building out a data warehouse for
consolidated data retrieval leverage the expertise of the staff to achieve goals as efficiently and cost effectively as possible.
ü Create new self -service and data collection ü Drive additional business focus by aligning function
dashboards for managers employee competencies and performance goals to
ü Transition remaining paper-based data collection overall business strategy
(e.g., performance management) to electronic, ü Implement and promote automated/self-service
automated applications processes (e.g., performance appraisal)
ü Further build out a central data entry point for ü Incorporate all payroll data into SAP
improved automation of data gathering
ü Rebuild and improve HR intranet
Figure 5: Function Structure—Dividing Technical Capabilities within the HRIS Function at Company D
Company D Head of HR
Industry:
Telecommunications
Revenues:
$500M - $2 billion
Employees: VP of HR
2,000–10,000
HRIS Function
HRIS: SAP Director, HRIS
Employees: 11
Transactional Technical
Analyst/Administrator Administrator
To evaluate performance of the HR Decision Support Table 1: HRIS and HRIS Performance Metrics
Metric Definition
group at Company A, function staff capture metrics
HR Technology Expense Rate Measures the portion of the organization’s overall technology expense devoted to HR
around service request timelines, service trends,
HR Technology Expense / technologies. Most useful for organizations that monitor technology spending by
and issue resolution. The HR Decision Support organizational function to weigh investment priorities.
Technology Expense * 100
leader generates a report every month highlighting
HRIS Average Days to Entry Indicates the average length of time that elapses between an action and the data entry
trends in service quality and delivery, which is of the transaction into systems. Most useful for organizations with reporting needs
delivered to the Senior Vice President of HR. This report is Total Days to Data Entry / requiring timelines or whose reporting and management have been hampered by
HRIS Transactions untimely data entry.
then compiled into a monthly newsletter detailing the
HRIS Late Transaction Rate Indicates the percentage of HRIS transactions that are entered after the prescribed
accomplishments of all HR centers of expertise (COEs) and target period. Target period for entering transactions may be based on a specified
distributed company-wide. The table to the right highlights Late HRIS Transactions / number of days after an action or on a month/quarter-end close date. Most useful for
HRIS Transactions * 100 organizations with reporting needs requiring transaction timelines.
some common HRIS and HRIS function performance metrics :5iv
HRIS Transaction Error Rate Measures the percentage of HRIS transactions that contain errors and provides an
indication of quality and of the relative volume of rework within the HR function.
Internal Service Evaluations HRIS Transaction Error / Most useful for organizations with poor HRIS capabilities, previous transaction quality
HRIS Transactions * 100 issues, or potentially understaffed HRIS functions.
HR leaders at Company D assess HRIS function performance with annual internal evaluations of HRIS staff individuals around the functions’ performance objectives
and service capabilities , such as overall service satisfaction and project delivery timelines . The function distributes these surveys to internal customers upon
completion of short- and long-term projects .
At Company B, HR leadership conducted a “blueprinting” survey—designed to help inform company strategies and functional objectives—that asked managers and senior leaders
to identify preferences in terms of developing and expanding the company’s HR capabilities. The survey found that internal customers would like HR to further develop HR
analytics and human capital measurement, and expand reporting capabilities. To meet these dem ands, Company B’s HR leaders are planning to dedicate additional resources
and align HR technology strategies to promote effective HR analytics.
Research Methodology The Corporate Leadership Council conducted a comprehensive search of published materials regarding the structure and scope of the
HRIS function, drawn from previous Corporate Executive Board research, trade press journals, other research organizations, and the
Internet. Council staff then interviewed human resources professionals at five organizations. This report represents the findings from
secondary and primary sources.
2. Who oversees the administration and management of the HRIS function? How is it structured?
4. How many employees staff the HRIS group, and do these people come from HR or technical backgrounds ?
5. What are the specific responsibilities of the HRIS function? Are these responsibilities primarily technical, strategic, or both?
6. What are the short- and long-term objectives of the HRIS function?
7. What metrics/feedback processes exist to determine how well the group performs its responsibilities?
8. What are some of the strongest successes or greatest challenges facing the HRIS group?
Guide to Tables and Figures Figure 1: Consolidating HRIS Function Capabilities at Company A Page 4
Figure 2: Dividing Technical and Strategic Capabilities at Company B Page 6
Figure 3: Dispersing HRIS Support at Company E Page 8
Figure 4: Ensuring HRIS Technical Bench Strength at Company C Page 10
Figure 5: Dividing Technical Capabilities at Company D Page 12
The Corporate Leadership Council (CLC™) has worked to ensure the accuracy of the information it
provides to its members. This project relies upon data obtained from many sources, however, and the
CLC cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information or its analysis in all cases. Furthermore, the CLC
is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. Its projects should not be
construed as professional advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. Members requiring
such services are advised to consult an appropriate professional. Neither Corporate Executive Board
nor its programs are responsible for any claims or losses that may arise from any errors or omissions in
their reports, whether caused by Corporate Executive Board or its sources.
1
Corporate Leadership Council, HR Information System Utilization Trends , Washington: Corporate Executive Board (October 2005).
2
CedarCrestone, "CedarCrestone 2005 HCM Survey," CedarCrestone.com (2005).
(Obtained through http://www.cedarcrestone.com/whitepapers.php). [Accessed 7 October 2006].
3
Corporate Leadership Council, HR Information System Utilization Trends .
5
CLC Metrics, The Metrics Standard, Washington: Corporate Executive Board (2005).