Case study on human resource information system (hris) team organization breakdown

Organization chart for the implementation of the project

Note: the chart is hierarchical in a nature, it starts from the top leadership to the junior employee in the hierarchy. Due to the repetitive and overlapping nature of some tasks, the same employee may be assigned two or more tasks. This is also in recognition of the multiskilling ability of employees especially in the new industrial development.

Flow organizational chart diagram:

Project Sponsor
(Genhardt)

Project Manager Project Analysts

(Myself) (Jenkins)
↓

Human Resource Representative Finance Coordinator Purchasing Representative

(Burrici) (Barnett) (Barnett)
↓
Database Admin Bus. Analysts Q. A. Manager Testing Coordinator Systems Engineering
(Jenkins) (Myself) (Marshall) (Anderson and Guerts) (Jenkins)

The roles of each position, a basic definition and utility of the position in the implementation of the plan.

Project Sponsor
He is the overall head of the project plan implementation. The buck stops at him. However, his responsibilities are more of ceremonial and relate to ensuring that the entire company adopts and embraces the plan. He also plays arbitral role and arbitrates in cases of disagreements and conflicts at the top level. In the same vein, he represents the face of the Board of Directors and acts as their voice in the project plan roll out. He takes no orders from any of the other employees in the program but consults heavily and must take into consideration advise and requests conferred upon him by the immediate officers in the planed project. At the same time, he must open his doors for any suggestions from any members within or without the project but related to the plans or affected by the implementation. He also reconciles the project with the overall company values, core objectives and philosophies. The project manager must convince him or her about all the fundamental moves before implementation. He, therefore, plays more of a figure image position and is utilized only at times of conflict, crisis or disagreements in the implementation process.

Project Manager

The project manager is the main engine of the project. He or she plays all the executive roles in the project execution. He coordinates, plans, organises and controls the roll out process. He also ensures he consults widely with all related and affected departments, builds consensus for the project both at the top hierarchy of the organization and at the bottom of the hierarchy. He is accessible by all the employees throughout the working time. In addition, the project manager would be responsible for the reconciliation of any conflicting measures, proposals and objectives. While he must own the project and ensure it works within the timelines, budgets and meets its objectives, he must also adopt an inclusive and sensitive approach that allows employee participation and makes them feel like the owners of the project. In the long run, the project manager plays the role of a logistics manager. He ensures all logistics are in place for the successful implementation and continued application of the plan. In the event of failures, setbacks or limitations, the project manager would be in-charge of addressing the systemic issues while at the same time ensure provision of backup services so as to enable continuity in operations. It should be noted that this is the only assignment that is executed singularly without multitasking with other assignments.

Human Resource Representative

This employee plays another essential role. He represents two contrasting interests. One, she is in-charge of the employee concerns in relation to the project. In that vein, she consults with the project manager in attempts to ensure the interests of employee both at individual level and at the collective levels are addressed. She, therefore, takes up any issue raised by employees with the project manager and sees to it that a lasting, favourable and convenient solution is effected into the implementation. On the other hand, she also represents the project plan and by extension the project manager to the employees. In that breadth, she takes up any issues raised by the project manager in relation to employees. This could be employee attitudes, reception, reaction and adoption. She may develop a channel that allows a project manager and the employees a direct avenue for interaction especially in regards to reconciling the interests of either parties. However, she remains the overall in-charge of employee relations. This position is essential for the information system is intended to tackle employee factors such as payroll management, database collection, et al. She in that light remains instrumental for the successful implementation of the plan.

Finance Coordinator and the Purchasing Representative

These functions overlap and would, therefore, be executed by the same officer. The roles in this case relate to financial and purchasing management. The officer in this case must consult heavily with the project manager. The failure of a project often arises from financial constraints or imprudence. In this light, therefore, the finance representative must reconcile the financials with the project objectives and determine the viability. He must equally contain costs and ensures the minimum costs approach is entertained by the project manager. In this vein, the project manager must deposit with the finance representative proposal in due time before any implementation begins. The finance manager reconciles the proposals and then equally consults with the project manager. The two would handle the budget constraints as well as the activity timing in a bid to meet the deadlines. After productive consultation among the duo, the finance representative pursues the purchasing and avails to the project manager all requisite material for implementation of the project. In addition, it is the finance manager who tackles financial negotiations with third parties, issues of reimbursements, among other costs. The two officers must consult even two to three times a day.

Project Analyst, Database Administrator and Systems Engineering

This roles overlap and in the spirit of multiskilling and economisation through maximization of potential, the three functions should be discharged by the Information Technology Director. The project analysts facilitates the project through a comprehensive analysis of the project. He computes scenarios, performs simulations and evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the plan. In this execution, he works together with the project manager. Together, they tackle all the pre, during and post implementation technical aspects and concerns of the project. The database administrator is the overall in-charge of the technical execution, running and maintenance of the system. It is the administrator who facilitates the interaction between the end users in this case the employees and management with the system. He entertains proxy settings, passwords, firewalls and protection mechanisms. He is also in-charge of the updating process of the system. He is utilised for his knowledge of the information technology and the organizational infrastructure. Systems engineering entertains the procedural, technical and professional utility of the project. The information director with all the equipment at his disposal is able to navigate through system and facilitate its application by the organization.

Quality Assurance Manager

This role entails facilitating quality. It envisions minimization of errors and breakdowns, creation of stability and development of a coordinated and smooth flow of the plan. The project manager best executes this role as an opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness and address the shortfalls that the initial plan did not forestall.

Test Coordinators

This role entails the testing and application of the program and plan in the organisational setup. It aims at ensuring the system is user friendly and able to interact smoothly with the employees and other end users. For the testing to be realistic, the plant manufacturing manager would best test the plan’s programs and report directly to the project manager of its responses.

Justification for recommendation of team members (see table above for the team members recommended)

CEO Genhardt has the overall understanding of not only management, but management at the company. He brings on board substantial knowledge and competencies of management. The project manager is the expert in the game and brings forth experience and competencies in information technology application. Jenkins the director of information technology is a trained information technology professional and brings on board his competencies in the field. Burrici the human resource manager brings on board the understanding of employees and the nature of employee management and integration systems necessary. Barnett brings on board his wide experience and competency in finance and accounting. Rylee and Guerts are essential for their on the ground presence and would enable a successful test of the system from within.

References

Archibugi, D., & Juma , C. (2012). Economy, international trade and competitiveness. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 2-5.
Birge, Z. L., & Giles, L. (2006). Implementing and Sustaining E-Learning in the Workplace. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 4(2), 1-12.
Boone, L. E., & Kurtz, D. L. (2011). Contemporary Business. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Brux, J. M. (2010). Economic Issues and Policy. New York: Cengage Learning.
Ezigbo, C. A. (2013). Achieve Organisational Effectiveness by Decentralisation. International Institute of Science, Technology and Education , 40(2), 11-35.
Genways. (n. d.). Genscoop. Genways, 5(4), 1-23.
Merkley, R. J. (2009). Describing Human Resource Development in Illinois Social Service Organizations. New York: ProQuest.
Peters, T., & Stephen, J. (2010). An Evaluation of the Impact of ICT Diffusion. Journal of Information Technology Impact, 10(1), 25-34.
Subirana, B., Eckes, C., Herman, G., Sanjay, S., & Micheal , B. (2007). Measuring the Impact of Information Technology on Value and Productivity using a Process-Based Approach: The case for RFID Technologies. Boston: Centre For Cordination Science.
Venables, A., & Tan, G. (2009). Realizing Learning in the Workplace in an Undergraduate IT Program. Journal of Information Technology Education, 1-10.