Introduction:

Part-1 in this series of introduced the idea that it takes the deliberate coordination of various participants both internal and external to the organization, to deploy HR Technology solutions successfully. When multiple constituents are involved in any initiative, it increases the possibility of gaps, that then can erode the level of success achieved, or alternatively lead to a failure. In this article, we will look at what are some the manifestations of failures in HR Technology initiatives. It is essential to recognize that failures can occur at any point in the HR Technology Lifecycle caused by activities pursued by the organization.

What is a failure?

Before we identify the indicators of a failed HR Technology initiative, we will first define what constitutes a failure. Any technology initiative is embarked on, to help solve a problem that is faced by a business. Simply put, a failure occurs when the technology initiative fails to solve the problem that it was intended to or meet the expectations that it was to fulfil for the organization. To better understand failures, we discuss the different manifestations that represent a HR Technology failure.

Manifestations of HR Technology Failures

In this section of the article, we look at the different manifestations of failures in HR Technology

The deployment of the solution is abandoned prior to go live: Although, not very common, it does occur. Organizations have been known to abandon the deployment of the selected solution, at a very late stage in the project, such as during user acceptance testing as the application does not meet their needs.

The HR organization is unprepared for the future state: HR Technology initiatives are usually undertaken to transform the HR Services delivered to the workforce and to the organization. Such initiatives generally entail a HR transformation as well. To deliver the services to the workforce and organization, the HR organization needs to be prepared for the change. This may require capability changes and if not addressed can lead to failures.

The deployed solution feels like there was no change from the prior application: Organizations embark on technology initiatives to create improvements such as increased transparency, increased process efficiency and so on. However, due to possible resistance to change from impacted areas of the organization, the HR function may request changes that make the new application resemble the old. This can lead to the feeling of dissolution with the change and raise questions on the justification of the spending.

The deployed solution fails to resolve the problem experienced by the organization: A lack of clarity on how the application roll out meets the expectations can create a situation where the success of the deployment is questioned. Alternatively, during the execution of the engagement, compromises made, may impact the outcome, and impede the ability to meet the expectations that were set at the beginning of the initiative.

The deployed solution is supported through workarounds: Any change or potential for change is met with resistance. When a new solution is deployed, it usually goes through a period of resistance before being accepted. To ensure that business as usual is not disrupted, the organization may put in place workarounds to mitigate this challenge. Often, these workarounds become de facto approaches setting the transformation effort back. In such situations, the transition to the future state could fail or face high degree of change resistance.

The deployed solution is replaced within a very short period: Any new solution that has been deployed for the organization requires a significant spend. Achieving the return on investment usually takes about 3 to 5 years. Organizations dissatisfied with the deployment, tend to believe that the reason that the deployment was not successful in meeting the objective, is due to the product and begin efforts to replace the product sooner. One may say that it is better to cut the losses than suffer, but the core reason for the failure may not be the product.

The project runs over the scheduled or planned time: One of the parameters of determining success of an initiative is whether the project was delivered within the planned timeframes. Often, we find that this is not the case in HR Technology deployments. Especially, if the project schedule changes often, it leads to lack of confidence in the solution. Lack of confidence in the solution leads to failure to adopt or high effort to make the change stick.

The functionality supports global requirements more than local requirements of the organization: In global organizations, when rolling out a single HR solution that supports the global and local needs of the organization, the balance between global and local requirements is often lost. If the initiative is executed with focus on global requirements vs balancing the needs between the global and local, the acceptance of the solution is impacted. Further, it leads to proliferation of point solutions in each of the locations, dependence on spreadsheets which defeats the purpose of information visibility.

There is significant expense and effort incurred by the organization to fix issues post go live: It is often seen that organizations spend a lot of time and money, on fixing issues that should have been identified prior to the rollout. When this occurs, the confidence in the solution is lower and increases the resistance to change.

There is a failure in downstream systems due to the deployment: A critical aspect of HR Technology deployments is that HR processes have touchpoints with various systems in the organization. Lack of diligence during discovery, compromises made, lack of requirement clarity can lead to failures in integration. When integrations fail, organizational processes suffer and can lead to poor data quality.

There is an overall lack of trust in the data by the leadership: The core value of a technology solution to support the HR processes is its ability to track the data about the workforce. When there are discrepancies pointed out by the business on the HR data during management meetings, it erodes the trust of the leadership on the data.

Why Should We Study Failures?

Successful HR Technology initiatives add value to an organization and have the potential of creating a transformative experience in an organization. However, failures have long standing impacts on the organization and especially the HR function. The true cost of failure of a HR Technology deployment goes beyond the application license cost, possible infrastructural expenses and professional service fees paid to the implementation partner.

In the next article we will explore the true cost of failure and the possible root causes for the failures.