Usman Sadiq, Ahmad Fareed Khan, Khurram Ikhlaq, Superior
University
Bahaudin G. Mujtaba, Nova Southeastern University
Abstract
Owing to the revolution in information technology, the face
of the contemporary workplace has changed and systems have been made more
effective by introducing new techniques. Majority of the organizations have now
understood the importance of information storage and retrieval. In this paper,
we focus on how modern technology is helping in ensuring effectiveness of HR
functions. Human Resource Information System (HRIS) is an opportunity for organizations
to make the HR department administratively and strategically participative in
operating the organization. The main objective is to understand the extent to
which HRIS is being used in increasing the administrative and strategic
functions of the HR department. For this purpose, we have conducted a survey of
18 HR Managers from various private corporations operating in Lahore, Pakistan.
The results show that HRIS is positively used as a tool to achieve greater
administrative efficiency by adding value in the department. However, all of
its benefits are difficult o quantify. HRIS utility as a strategic tool is
still not been fully recognized, and this is preventing the system to be used
to its fullest potential. Suggestions and recommendations are provided.
Keywords: Human resources, Human Resource InformationSystem (HRIS), private sector banks, Lahore, Pakistan.
Introduction
The addition of information technology to the human resource
industry has revolutionized the contemporary workplace. HR professionals now
have an increased capacity not only to gather information, but also to store
and retrieve it in a timely and effective manner. This has not only increased
the efficiency of the organization but also the effectiveness of management
functions. New technology has also created opportunities for higher levels of
stress for younger and older workers alike (Mujtaba, Afza, and Habib, N.
(2011), unethical temptations and behaviors (Mujtaba, 2011), and opportunities
for better leadership practices (Mujtaba and Afza, 2011). The twenty-first
century is characterized as the knowledge century (Chin-Loy and Mujtaba, 2007).
Most of the organizations are now dependent upon knowledge workers and thus on
effective knowledge management practices. Today, knowledge management offers a
unique
Journal of Business Studies
Quarterly 2012, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 77-91
concept considered by many in
the industry as progressive and “soft” in application, primarily because of the
intangible elements of knowledge (Mujtaba, 2007, p. 201). The ability to not
only attract and hire but also to retain and properly utilize these individuals
is crucial knowledge for the survival and success of the organization. In this
globalized world, a department that is increasingly becoming central to the
implementation of organization policy is the HR department. So the HRIS is now
considered an integral part of every organization (Waytt, 2002). More and more
organizations are now developing information technology which can help the
organization achieve its goals in a timely manner. These information systems
can then help the organization make more strategic decisions.
HRIS is an effective tool that
can be used for streamlining the administrative functions of the HR department.
This can be achieved by creating an elaborate and relevant database. The data
that an effective HRIS would have on individual employees can include training
completed, awards received, projects participated in and finished successfully,
level of education attained, number of years of service, skills, competencies,
etc. By using this data the HR department can make a contribution towards
strategy formation within an organization. With an efficient HRIS in place, the
development of HR systems becomes easier (Dessler, Griffiths, and Walker,
2004).
The history of HRM is said to
have started in England in early 1800s during the craftsmen and apprenticeship
era, and then further developed with the arrival of the Industrial Revolution
in the late 1800s. In the 19th
century, Frederick W. Taylor suggested
that a combination of scientific management and industrial psychology of
workers should be introduced. In this case, it was proposed that workers should
be managed not only for the job and its efficiencies but also for the
psychology and maximum well-being of the workers. Moreover, with the drastic
changes in technology, the growth of organizations, the rise of unions and
government’s concern and interventions resulted in the development of personnel
departments in the 1920s. At this point, personnel administrators were called
‘welfare secretaries’ (Ivancevich, 2007).
HRM is said to have started
from the term ‘Personnel Management’ (PM). The term ‘PM’ emerges after the
Second World War in 1945 as an approach by personnel practitioners to separate
and distinguish themselves from other managerial functions and make the
personnel function into a professional managerial positions. Traditionally, the
function of PM is claimed to ‘hire and fire’ employees in organizations other
than salary payments and training. But there were many criticisms and concerns
of ambiguity expressed about the purpose and role of PM to HRM (Tyson, 1985)
Therefore, the term HRM gradually tended to replace the term PM (Lloyd and
Rawlinson, 1992). However, writers argue that the term HRM has no appreciable
difference from PM as they are both concerned with the functions of obtaining,
organizing, and motivating human resources required by organizations. At the same
time, writers are defining the terms HRM and PM in many different ways (Beer
and Spector, 1985). The rebranding of the term from PM to HRM was done due to
the evolvement and changes in the world of management and therefore, a
contemporary term would seem appropriate that can encompass new ideas, concepts
and philosophies of human resources (Noon, 1992, Armstrong, 2000). Indeed, some
writers comment that there are ‘little differences’ between PM and HRM and it
has been criticized as pouring ‘old wine into new bottle’ with a different
label (Legge, 2005). Whether HRM is considered to be different than personnel
management is a continued debate on both its meaning and practices (Marchington
& Wilkinson, 2002; Legge, 2005).
Strategic Human Resource
Management (SHRM) has grown considerably in the last years. Schuler, Dolan and
Jackson (2001) described the evolution of SHRM from personnel management in
terms of a two-phased transformation: first from personnel management to traditional
human resource management (THRM), and then from THRM to SHRM. To improve
performance and create a competitive advantage, a firm’s HR must focus on a new
set of priorities. These new priorities are more strategic oriented and less
geared towards traditional HR functions such as staffing, training, appraisal,
and compensation. Strategic priorities include team-based job designs, flexible
workforces, quality improvement practices, employee empowerment, and
incentive-based compensation. SHRM is designed to diagnose strategic needs and
plan talent development, which are required to implement a competitive strategy
and achieve operational goals (Huselid, Jackson and Schuler, 1997).
HRIS has a very humble historical
origin. Although there were some exceptions, prior to World War II HR
professionals (then referred to as "personnel" staff) performed basic
employee record keeping as a service function with limited interaction on core
business mission. Initial efforts to manage information about personnel were
frequently limited to employee names and addresses, and perhaps some employment
history often scribbled on 3x5 note cards (Kavanaugh, Gueutal and Tannenbaum,
1990). Between 1945 and 1960, organizations became more aware of human capital
issues and began to develop formal processes for selection and development of
employees. At the same time, organizations began to recognize the importance of
employees’ morale on the firm’s overall effectiveness. While this period of
change in the profession did not result in significant changes in HRIS
(although employee files did become somewhat more complex), some believe that
it set the stage for an explosion of changes that began in the 1960s and 1970s
(Kavanaugh, Gueutal and Tannenbaum, 1990).
During the next twenty years
(1960 to 1980) HR was integrated into the core business mission and, at the
same time period, governmental and regulatory reporting requirements for
employees also increased significantly. The advent and widespread use of
mainframe computers in corporate America corresponded with this regulatory
increase and provided a technological solution to the increased analytical and
record-keeping requirements imposed by growing regulation of employment and a
host of new reporting requirements (e.g., affirmative action, EEO, OSHA, etc.).
The Human Resource Department became one of the most important users of the
costly computing systems of the day, often edging other functional areas for
computer access. Although HRIS systems were computerized and grew extensively
in size and scope during this period, they remained (for the most part) simple
record-keeping systems (Kavanaugh et al., 1990). According to Kovach and
colleagues, HRIS is considered as a systematic procedure for collecting,
storing, maintaining, and recovering data required by an organization about
their human resources, personnel activities and organizational characteristics
(Kovach, Hughes, Fagan and Maggitti, 2002).
The rationale for the
implementation of HRIS varies between organizations. Some use it to reduce
costs, others to facilitate better communication, and some use it to re-orient
HR operations to increase the department’s strategic contribution (Parry, Tyson,
Selbie, & Leighton 2007). HRIS provides management with strategic data not
only in recruitment and retention strategies, but also in merging
HRIS data into large-scale corporate strategy. The data collected from HRIS
provides management with decision-making tool. An HRIS can have a wide range of
usage from simple spread sheets to complex calculations performed easily (Parry
2010). Through proper HR management, firms are able to perform calculations
that have effects on the business as a whole. Such calculations include
health-care costs per employee, pay benefits as a percentage of operating
expense, cost per hire, return on training, turnover rates and costs, time
required to fill certain jobs, return on human capital invested, and human
value added. It must be noted that none of these calculations results in cost
reduction in the HR function (DeSanctis, 1986: 15). The aforementioned areas,
however, may realize significant savings using more complete and current data
that can be made available to the appropriate decision makers. Consequently,
HRIS is seen to facilitate the provision of quality information to management
for informed decision-making. Most notably, it supports the provision of
executive reports and summaries for senior management and is crucial for
learning organizations that see their human resources as providing a major
competitive advantage. HRIS is therefore, a medium that helps HR professionals
perform their job roles more effectively (Grallagher, 1986; Broderick and
Boudreau, 1992). HRIS can be implemented at three different levels, i.e. the
publishing of information, the automation of transaction, and finally
transforming the entire working of the HR department so it plays a more
strategic role and adds more value to the organization (Lengnick-Hall and
Moritz 2003). It is, however, very difficult to ascertain the value addition
made by HRIS on the revenues and profits of an organization since strategic
HRIS is beneficial in facilitating the decision-making process. These decisions
can result in greater employee motivation and satisfaction and both are
extremely difficult to quantify (Kovach, Hughes, Fagan, Maggitti, 2002).
Mayfield and Lunce (2003) came to a similar conclusion that while
administrative activities can be quantified and measured such as reduction in
turnover and efficiency of HR department, it is very difficult to attribute
certain gains such as motivation and morale directly to the implementation of
HRIS. As opposed to administrative HRIS, it is complex to establish a
definitive link between organization benefits and HRIS deployment.
The literature shows many
previous related studies in HRIS, however, most of them were theoretical (Ngai
and Wat, 2006). In addition, most studies were conducted in the context of
developed countries' organizations. Ngai and Wat (2006) conducted a survey of
the implementation of HRIS in Hong Kong organizations. They found that the
greatest benefits of the implementation of HRIS were the quick response and
access to information that it brought, while the greatest barrier was the
insufficient financial support. In addition, Ngai and Wat (2006) reported many
other previous related studies conducted in HRIS implementation. For example, a
study of Martinson's (1994) aimed to compare the degree and sophistication in
the use of IT between Canada and Hong Kong. Martinson found that the use of
HRIS was less widespread in Hong Kong than in Canada, while IT for HRM was
applied more in Hong Kong than in Canada. Ball (2001) conducted a survey in
order to explore the uses of HRIS in smaller UK organizations and found that
smaller organizations were less likely to use HRIS.
Moreover, Burbach and Dundon
(2005) conducted a study to assess the strategic potential of HRIS to
facilitate people management activities in 520 organizations in the Republic of
Ireland. They found that foreign owned large organizations adopted HRIS more
often than smaller Irish owned organizations. They also found that HRIS
technologies were used for administrative rather than strategic decision-making
purposes. Another recent study conducted by Delorme and Arcand (2010), aimed to
elaborate on the development of the roles and responsibilities of HR
practitioners from a traditional perspective to a strategic perspective, found
that the introduction of new technologies in the organization affected the way
HR
professionals accomplished
their tasks within the HR department and the rest of the organization. The
study of Krishnan and Singh (2006) explored the issues and barriers faced by
nine Indian organizations in implementing and managing HRIS. The main HRIS
problems were lack of knowledge of HR department about HRIS and lack of
importance given to HR department in these organizations. Cooperation is
required across various functions and divisions of the organization for proper
implementation of HRIS.
The data used in this research
is qualitative and specifically gathered by the authors for this study. A
survey was developed and given to the Human Resource Directors of private banks
working in Lahore (Punjab), Pakistan. The objective was to assess the
administrative and strategic impact of HRIS in Pakistan. Pakistan is a country
going through developments, opportunities and challenges like any other nation
in today’s twenty-first century competitive global workplace (Yasmeen, Begum,
and Mujtaba, 2011). As such, this study of human resources professionals and
the implementation of new technology can be a good initiative towards
efficiency and productivity.
A Likert-type items on a five
point scale and open-ended questions were employed on the survey to measure the
perceptions of the HR directors in regard to the impact of the HRIS on HR
processes, the time spent on various HR activities, the expense of HR
activities, levels and use of information within the organization, the role of
the HR department, and strategic decision making. From the 20 surveys given to
HR professionals, eighteen completed and usable surveys were used for drawing
conclusions in this study. The questionnaire used in this survey was adopted
from a study completed by Beadles, Jones and lowery (2005). There is a
considerable gap in previous researches when it comes to analyzing the impact
of HRIS on Pakistan’s banking sector. This study aims to bridge some of that
gap.
Table 1:
Satisfaction with HRIS
Items
|
% Agreed
|
Overall I am satisfied with
our HRIS.
|
37.5
|
The employees of HR
department appear to be satisfied with our HRIS.
|
50.0
|
Our HRIS has met our
expectations.
|
50.0
|
Our HRIS could be better
utilized.
|
100.0
|
This research was exploratory
and primarily descriptive in nature. The intent was to discover whether HR
directors perceived that human resource information systems were proving
beneficial in regard to its strategic impact on the organization. The survey items
are contained in Figures. The results of the survey are contained in Tables
(1-7). The survey items were divided into categories concerning satisfaction
with the HRIS (Table 1); the impact of the HRIS on HR processes (Table 2); time
savings due to the HRIS (Table 3); the effect of the HRIS on expenses (Table
4), information effects (Table 5), decision-making (Table 6); and the strategic
impact of the HRIS and the impact of the HRIS on the role of the HR function in
the organization (Table 7). We had a relatively small sample size as mentioned
above. Therefore, we used frequency tables to measure the percentage of
favorable responses to a series of questions assessing HR directors’
perceptions of HRIS. The expressed results are the percentage of respondents
for each item who either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement.
Table 1 displays the
satisfaction of management with the HRIS system. The results show that, only
about half were satisfied with the HRIS, and a similar number of respondents
concurred that the system was up to their expectation. The percentage of people
actually being satisfied was just above one-third, and all employees agreed that
their HRIS could be put to better use. These studies indicated that the
satisfaction with regards to HRIS was mixed. And almost all of the respondents
felt that it could be better utilized. These results do not take into
consideration whether the staff had been trained properly in the use of HRIS,
nor were they properly briefed about the systems utility.
Table 2: HR
Process
Items
|
% Agreed
|
Our HRIS has improved the
recruitment process.
|
75.0
|
Our HRIS has improved the
training process.
|
50.0
|
Our HRIS has improved the
data input process.
|
75.0
|
Our HRIS has improved the
data maintenance process.
|
87.5
|
Our HRIS has helped with
forecasting staffing needs.
|
87.5
|
Our HRIS has decreased paper
work.
|
87.5
|
With regard to HRIS
contribution in streamlining various HR processes, nearly 88% respondents
agreed that administrative processes such as decrease in paperwork, forecasting
staffing need and data maintenance had indeed improved. Furthermore, 75% of the
employees surveyed agreed that data input and recruitment process had been made
more efficient. On the question of HRIS having a considerable impact on the
training process, the response in favor of it was 50%.
Table 3: Time
Savings
Items
|
% Agreed
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on recruiting.
|
75.0
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on training.
|
37.5
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on making staff decisions.
|
75.0
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on inputting data.
|
62.5
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on communicating information within our institution.
|
50.0
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on processing paper work.
|
75.0
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on correcting errors.
|
62.5
|
Time saving is one of the
barometers against which the efficiency of any IS system can be gauged. This
study showed that 75% of the respondents believed that the system had a
positive impact on some administrative functions such as time spent on recruiting,
routine staff decisions, processing of paper work, and error correction.
However, only half believed that it had actually helped in improving the
communication of information within the organization. Only a third of the
surveyed employees believed that HRIS decreased the time spent on training.
Table 4: Cost
Savings
Items
|
% Agreed
|
Our HRIS has decreased cost
per hire.
|
37.5
|
Our HRIS has decreased
training expenses.
|
12.5
|
Our HRIS has decreased
recruiting expenses.
|
37.5
|
Our HRIS has decreased data
input expense.
|
62.5
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
overall HR staff’s salary expense.
|
37.5
|
When it came to the actual cost
saving from the HRIS in the organization, the results were pretty similar to
previous researches, such as the one carried out by Beadles (2005). Only 37.5%
of the respondents believed that the HRIS had actually decreased the cost of
hiring, the recruitment expenses or the salary of HR staff. Even a lower
percentage (12.5%) of respondents thought that training expenses were reduced;
however, 62.5% of the respondents believed that administrative tasks such as
data input expenses did come down.
Table 5:
Information Effects
Items
|
% Agreed
|
Our HRIS has improved our
ability to disseminate information.
|
37.5
|
Our HRIS has provided
increased levels of useful information.
|
75.0
|
The information generated
from our HRIS is shared with top administrators.
|
87.5
|
The information generated
from our HRIS is underutilized by top administrators.
|
50.0
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has increased coordination between HR department and top
administrators.
|
62.5
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has added value to the institution.
|
87.5
|
The adequate storage and timely
retrieval of information is a hallmark of an effective IS system. 75% of the
respondents believed that HRIS indeed provided useful information, while a
greater number (87.5%) of the respondents believed that the information received
through HRIS added value. Whereas an identical percentage (87.5%) felt that
generated information was being shared with the top management and only half
(50%) believed that this information was actually being utilized by the
administrator. These results indicate a lack of willingness to use the
information as a strategic tool.
Table 6:
Decision-Making
Items
|
% Agreed
|
Our HRIS has made our HR
decision-making more effective.
|
37.5
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution decide on employee raises.
|
37.5
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution to make more effective promotion
decisions.
|
25.0
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution decide when to hire.
|
25.0
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution make better decisions in choosing better
people.
|
37.5
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution decide when training and skill
development are necessary.
|
37.5
|
With regard to HRIS helping
management in making better decisions, the findings support the results of
Beadles (2005) that HRIS is not considered a decision-making instrument. Only a
third of the total respondents believed that HRIS contributed to making
decisions more effective, and an equal numbered believed that HRIS played a
significant role in the selection of better candidates or improving training
and development of the staff. Even a lower percentage (25%) said that hiring
decisions were made using information available through HRIS. This would
indicate that HRIS was viewed rather favorably as an administrative tool, but not
a strategic one.
Table 7:
Strategic Impact and Role of HR
Items
|
% Agreed
|
Our HRIS has made the HR
department more important to the institution.
|
87.5
|
Overall our administration
thinks that HRIS is effective in meeting strategic goals.
|
37.5
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has improved the strategic decision making of top
administrators.
|
62.5
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has made HR a more strategic partner in the institution.
|
87.5
|
Our HRIS has promoted our
institution’s competitive advantage.
|
37.5
|
In terms of whether HRIS has
enhanced the strategic role of the HR department, 87.5% respondents believed
that HRIS increased the importance of HR department and made it a strategic
partner, whereas only 37.5% believed that HRIS gave a competitive edge to the
institution or was effective in helping the organization meet its strategic
goals. However, 62.5% did believe that HRIS improved the strategic
decision-making of the top administrators.
Recommendations
In terms of limitations, it
should be noted that local banks were included in the survey. The research was
limited to Pakistan’s banking sector only. The data was only collected from
managers. Professional staff members in lower ranks could also be included in
future studies as they might have a different view on the use and benefits of
HRIS. The number of foreign banks operating in Pakistan is not very high and
therefore their input was not included in this study. Other sectors such as
textile, manufacturing and private academic institutions also use HRIS to a
varying degree, and they can be part of future research studies.
Hiring is usually the last and
final step of the recruitment process. Recruitment is one of the most important
and fundamental functions of the HR department. An effective recruitment
strategy can lead to the hiring of the best candidate. This in turn can
contribute not only in keeping cost down, but also in facilitating the
processes of succession planning, employee retention, greater employee
motivation, and reduced turnover. This is, however, contingent on the HR
department having complete information about the nature, demands and
construction of the job on one hand but also the knowledge about the personal
competencies that are required to fulfill those jobs on the other. The survey
showed that only 37.5% of the respondents believed that HRIS played a role in
finding suitable candidates, while an equal number believed that HIRS actually
brought down the cost of recruitment and the cost per hire. Even a lower number
(25%) believed that HRIS was instrumental in deciding when to hire.
The reason for these low
statistics, when it comes to hiring the right people, can be structural (the
size of the organizations), as well as cultural (accepted behaviors within an
organization) or simply representative of ground realities (the external
environment within which the organization operates). With inadequate background
checks and lack of proper references, employers tend to hire people through
informal networks of personal contacts. In this scenario, the HRIS system is of
little importance and any real relevance. On the administrative side regarding
choosing the best people, the problem might be a lack of user preference in the
context of using the HRIS, but greater emphasis would be on how the
organization is operated. It can be
that, top management simply
regards the HR department as merely an administrative tool rather than a
serious participant in setting the strategic priorities of the organization. On
the HRIS side, if profiles are not properly made and maintained then the
selection of the best candidate is difficult. A proper employee’s profile
should consist of number of years with the company, projects participated in,
training attended, certifications completed, awards won, and targets achieved.
Future employee aspirations, goals and milestones need to be put in the system.
The system must also support a proper succession plan, which would indicate the
positions to be vacated, and the basic criteria against which a potential
successor would be evaluated. When the profiles of employees can be linked to
the succession planning tree, then this can facilitate at least internal
hiring, at the right place with minimal cost.
One of the lowest percentages
in the survey was the attitude of respondents when it came to their perception
about the utility of HRIS with respect to the training function of the HR
department. Whereas 50% believed that HRIS improved the training process, only
37.5% believed that the information generated form HRIS was helpful in
identifying the proper time to implement a training program. Only 12.5% of the
participants believed that HRIS had played a role in decreasing the cost of the
training program. The conclusion which can be drawn from this feedback can
indicate structural problems as there might not be a proper training needs
assessment form made available. However, other important reasons can be as
follows:
The HIRS is
not mature enough to have the capacity of properly incorporating the training
needs of employees.
The HRIS workers are not fully trained about the usage of
HRIS as a tool to increase the efficiency of the training process.
Since training has more strategic function as compared to
administrative one, it is being ignored.
The training needs assessment forms have not been properly
developed. In order to rectify this situation, HR managers need to envision
HRIS as an important component of the training process. This can be achieved by
carefully assessing what the training needs of employees are and then updating
those needs in the profile of each employee.
Once the majority of the training needs have been
ascertained, then a training schedule can be designed accordingly.
This schedule would then be keyed into the employee’s
profile, so that HR is aware of exactly what type of training is required, the
time it would take to complete it, as well as its frequency and the overall
cost. This would in return also allow the HR department to monitor which
employee has completed various training programs and whether that particular
training helps employees in better performing their jobs. If all these appear
in the employees’ profiles, then not only each employee’s progression, but also
the streamlining of the training process which can include duration,
objectives, outcomes, relevance, and effectiveness can be ascertained.
One of the major roles of HRIS
system is to improve communication between HR and other departments, facilitate
effective decision making make effective decisions and gain a competitive
advantage for the organization. Only 37.5% of the respondents surveyed believed
that HRIS was fulfilling this goal. Whereas 87.5% believed that information was
being shared between top administrators, only 50% of these administrators were
actually using this information. Only half of the
people that were surveyed thought that HRIS lived up to their expectations,
whereas all 100% agreed that HRIS can and should be better utilized.
Regarding strategic
consideration, it is safe to assume from the results that HRIS will continue to
play a more administrative rather than a strategic role within most
organizations. This trend can be reversed if the available information is
disseminated to other employees within the organization. However, management
has to make sure that the right information reaches the right people. In
addition it costs the organization both time and money when employees have to
look through stacks of information to identify which is most relevant to them.
This in turn impairs the employee’s ability to think strategically. This
problem can be overcome by providing relevant information access to each
department.
The extent to which HRIS can
provide a competitive advantage to any organization is contingent on the role
of the HR department within that organization. In institutions where HR is
mostly confined to a personnel or employee advocate role, it is difficult to
see how even the most effective HRIS can contribute towards increasing the
competitive advantage of the organization. The reports that are generated might
not be user-friendly and that might be the reason why the information generated
by the system is not being properly utilized to its fullest potential. The
reason can be that people are not encouraged to read the reports and then make
tactical decisions, based on the information provided. Overall, more needs to
be done and further research needs to be conducted to discover how HRIS can be
better utilized to strategically benefit the entire organization.
Conclusion
The result supports the finding
that HRIS is mostly being employed as an administrative tool more than a
strategic one. The holistic view of the role that HRIS can play in improving
the efficiency and integration of HR department into a more strategic role was
missing. The respondents could not establish a direct link between HRIS and its
impact on their routine work. There was a lack of clarity as to the exact value
the HIRS system would add to the organization. This relates back to the earlier
literature, that the benefits of HRIS are difficult to quantify, and cannot be
displayed in monetary terms. Neither cost saving, strong communication nor
effective recruitment decisions were linked directly to HRIS. So even though
HRIS appears to have tremendous promise it has not been fully utilized
according to its potential. However, more research should be done in other
sectors to see whether these finding are similar in different industries.
References
Armstrong, Michael (2009). A
Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (11th ed).
London: Kogan Page.
Beer, M. and Spector, B.
(1985). Corporate wide transformation in HRM. In Walton R. E. and
Lawrence P. R. (Eds) HRM: Trends and Challenges. Boston, MA: Harvard University
Business School Press. pp. 219-253.
Broderick R., Boudreau J.W.
(1992). Human resource management, information technology and the competitive
advantage, Academy of Management Executive 6 (2), 1992, 7–17.
Ball, K.S. (2001). The use of
human resource information systems: a survey. Personnel Review, 30, 677-93.
©JBSQ 2012 87
Beadles, Nicholas C. M. (2005).
The Impact of Human Resource Information System: an Explorartory Study in
Public Sector. Communications of IIMA, 39-46.
Burbach, R. and Dundon, T.
(2005). The strategic potential of human resource information systems: evidence
from the republic of Ireland. Intentional Employment Relations Review,
11(1\2), 97-117.
Chin-Loy, C. and Mujtaba, B. G.
(2007). The Influence of Organizational Culture on the Success of Knowledge Management
Practices with North American Companies. International Business and
Economics Research Journal, 6(3), 15-29.
Dessler,G., Griffiths,J. and B.
Lloyd-Walker(2004), Human Resources Management, 2nd ed. Frenchs Forest,
New South Wales: Pearson Education Australia, 2004, pp. 97–99.
Delorme, M. and Arcand, M.
(2010). HRIS implementation and deployment: a conceptual framework of the new
roles, responsibilities and competences for HR professionals. International
Journal of Business Information Systems, 5, 148-161.
DeSanctis, Gerardine (1986).
Human Resource Information Systems- A Current Assessment. MIS Quarterly, 10(1),
15-27.
Gallagher, M. (1986), Computers
in Personnel Management, Heinemann, UK.
Huselid, M.A., Jackson, S.E.
and Schuler, R. S. (1997). Technical and Strategic Human Resource Management
Effectiveness as Determinants of Firm Performance. Academy of Management
Journal, 40, 171–188.
Hendrickson R. Anthony (2003).
Human Resources Information Systems: Backbone Technology of Contemporary Human
Resources. Journal of Labor Research, 24(3), 382-394.
Ivancevich, J. M. (2007). Human
Resource Management. New York: New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Kavanagh, M. J., Gueutal, H.
G., and Tannenbaum, S. I. (1990). Human resource information systems:
development and application. Boston, Mass: PWS-Kent Publications Co.
Kovach, K.A., Hughes, A.A.,
Fagan, P., & Maggitti, P.G. (2002). Administrative and strategic advantages
of HRIS. Employment Relations Today, 29, 43-8.
Krishnan, S., & Singh, M.
(2006). Issues and concerns in the implementation and maintenance of HRIS.
Issues and concerns in the implementation and. Indian institute of management
ahmedabad-380015. Research and Publication Department in its series IIMA
working papers with number WP2006-07-01.
Lloyd, C. And Rawlinson, M.
(1992). New technology and human resource management in Blyton, P. and
Turnbull, P. (eds) Reassessing Human Resource Management. London: Sage
Publications. pp. 185-199.
Legge, K. (2005). Human
Resource Management: Rhetorics and Realities (Anniversary Ed). Basingstoke:
Palgrave MacMillan.
Marchington, M. and Wilkinson,
A. (2002). People Management and Development. (2nd Ed) London, CIPD.
Martinsons, M. G. (1994).
Benchmarking human resource information systems in Canada and Hong Kong. Information
& Management, 26, 305-16.
Mujtaba, B. G. (2011). A
Cross-Cultural Comparison of Business Ethics Study with Respondents from
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and the United States. International Leadership
Journal, 3(1), 40-60.
Mujtaba, B. G. (2007). Workplace
Diversity Management: Challenges, Competencies and Strategies. Llumina
Press: Florida.
Journal of
Business Studies Quarterly 2012, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 77-91
88
Mujtaba, Bahaudin G. and Afza,
Talat (2011). Business Ethics Perceptions of Public and Private Sector
Respondents in Pakistan. Far East Journal for Psychology and Business, 3(1),
01-11.
Mujtaba, B. G., Afza, T., and
Habib, N. (2011). Leadership Tendencies of Pakistanis: Exploring Similarities
and Differences based on Age and Gender. Journal of Economics and Behavioral
Studies, 2(5), 199-212.
Noon, M. (1992) HRM: A map,
model or theory? in Blyton, P. And Turnbull, P. (Eds) Reassessing Human
Resource Management. London: Sage Publications.
Ngai, E.W. and Wat, F.K.
(2006). Human resource information systems: a review and empirical analysis. Human
Resource Information Systems, 35, 298-314.
Parry, E., Tyson, S., Selbie,
D., & Leighton, R. (2007). HR and Technology: Impact and Advantages.
London: Charted Institute of Personnel and Development.
Perry. E. (2010). The benefits
of using technology in human resource management. IGI global. Cranfield
School of Management.
Schuler, R.S., Dolan, S.L. and
Jackson, S. (2001). Trends and emerging issues in human resource management:
global and Trans cultural perspectives – introduction. International Journal
of Manpower, 22(3), 195-197.
Schuler R. S., Jackson S.E.,
and Storey J. J. (2001). HRM and its link with strategic management, in: J.
Storey (Ed.), Human Resource Management: A Critical Text, second ed.,
Thomson Learning, London. 2001.
Tyson, S. (1995). Human
Resource Strategy: Towards a general theory of human resource management.
London, Pitman.
Yasmeen, G., Begum, R., and
Mujtaba, B. G. (June 2011). Human Development Challenges and Opportunities in
Pakistan: Defying Income Inequality and Poverty. Journal of Business Studies
Quarterly, 2(3), 1-12.
Wyatt Watson. (2002). e-HR:
Getting Results Along the Journey – 2002 Survey Report. Watson Wyatt
Worldwide.
©JBSQ 2012 89
Appendix
Dear
Participant,
We are the
students of MSBA from Superior University, Lahore. We are conducting a research
which aims to assess the Impact of Human Resource Information System (HRIS) on
the HR Department in the banking sector of Pakistan.
This research
is purely for academics purposes. It should not take more than 10 minutes to
fill out this questionnaire. We are assuring you that all the information
provided in this survey will be kept confidential and anonymous. Your
cooperation in this regard is highly appreciated.
Name /
Title: _______________________________
(Optional)
Designation:
___________________________
Occupation:
1. Private Job 2.
Government 3. Business 4. Any other _______
Qualification:
1. M. Phil 2.
Masters 3. Graduation
Scale: SA= Strongly Agree A=Agree N=Neutral
DA=Disagree SDA=Strongly Disagree
Sr. No
|
Statements
|
SA
5
|
A
4
|
N
3
|
DA
2
|
SDA
1
|
|
1.
|
I am actively involved with
the Human Resource Information System (HRIS).
|
||||||
2.
|
Overall I am satisfied with
our HRIS.
|
||||||
3.
|
The employees of the Human
Resources (HR) department appear to be satisfied with our HRIS.
|
||||||
4.
|
Overall we are satisfied with
the modules we have installed and are available for use.
|
||||||
5.
|
Our HRIS has met our
expectations.
|
||||||
6.
|
Our HRIS could be better
utilized.
|
||||||
7.
|
Our HR employees understand
how to use the Human Resource Information System.
|
||||||
8.
|
Our HRIS has made our HR
decision-making more effective.
|
||||||
9.
|
Our HRIS has made the HR
department more important to the institution.
|
||||||
10.
|
We are satisfied with the
deployment of our HRIS.
|
||||||
11.
|
We are satisfied with the
support we have received from our information technology (IT) department.
|
||||||
12.
|
We are satisfied with the
support we have received from the software vendor.
|
||||||
13.
|
We are satisfied with the flexibility of the system.
|
||||||
14.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the time spent on recruiting.
|
||||||
15.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on training.
|
||||||
16.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on making staff decisions.
|
||||||
17.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the time spent on inputting data.
|
||||||
18.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on communicating information within our institution.
|
||||||
19.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on processing paperwork.
|
||||||
20.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
time spent on correcting errors.
|
||||||
21.
|
Our HRIS has decreased cost per hire.
|
||||||
22.
|
Our HRIS has decreased training expenses.
|
||||||
23.
|
Our HRIS has decreased
recruiting expenses.
|
||||||
Journal of
Business Studies Quarterly 2012, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 77-91
90
24.
|
Our HRIS has decreased data input expense.
|
25.
|
Our HRIS has decreased the
overall HR staff’s salary expense.
|
26.
|
Our HRIS has improved our
ability to disseminate information.
|
27.
|
Our HRIS has provided
increased levels of useful information.
|
28.
|
Our HRIS has improved the recruitment process.
|
29.
|
Our HRIS has improved the
training process.
|
30.
|
Our HRIS has improved the
data input process.
|
31.
|
Our HRIS has improved the
data maintenance process.
|
32.
|
Our HRIS has helped with
forecasting staffing needs.
|
33.
|
Our HRIS has decreased
paperwork.
|
34.
|
Our HRIS has increased
security concerns.
|
35.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS is shared with top administrators.
|
36.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS is underutilized by top administrators.
|
37.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has increased coordination between HR department and top
administrators.
|
38.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has added value to the institution.
|
39.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution decide on employee raises.
|
40.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution to make more effective promotion
decisions.
|
41.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution decide when to hire.
|
42.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution make better decisions in choosing better
people.
|
43.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS helps our institution decide when training and skill
development are necessary.
|
44.
|
Overall our administration
thinks that HRIS is effective in meeting strategic goals.
|
45.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has improved the strategic decision making of top
administrators.
|
46.
|
The information generated
from our HRIS has made HR a more strategic partner in the institution.
|
47.
|
Our HRIS has promoted our
institution’s competitive advantage.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment