Failures of the Personnel Payroll Attendance and Recruitment System
Rose C. Masiku, Olutosin Babatunde, Jose Mira Uguina and Lanre Shonowo B00031200, B00029719, B00054480 and B00014109
Department of Business School of Business & Humanities
Institute of Technology, Blanchardstown
Word Limit for Assignment: 1,500 Actual Word Count: 1,344
Bachelor of Business
05/ 10/ 2012
ESTABLISHING PROJECT EXPECTATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION & EXECUTION
The purpose of our project is primarily to outline reasons why in our opinion the Health Service Executive (HSE) Personnel Payroll Attendance and Recruitment System (PPARS) in the Irish healthcare sector failed. The methodology behind this new system was to bring all the various health board and interrelated agencies under a general strategic human resource management (SHRM) in order to achieve a common goal. However, the PPARS failed in its initial scope, implementation and in various aspect which will be examined in our report.
In order for any project to be successful there must be a project manager in place to monitor the development of the project. A project Manager was delegated for the monitoring and development of the PPARS. However, he was not given the power to make and enforce any decisions across the agencies. There were other national project directors and national project team but none of them had the authority to give a specific time for when the implementations could take place. Or stop the project when it started to go wrong. ESTABLISHING PROJECT EXPECTATIONS
“Initial expectations can be defined as part of the project initiation process. This is the time when the expected scope, high-level requirements and success factors are defined. The overall objective of the project is outlined in such a way that it is understandable to all involved”. (Moran, 2012) The HSE desired to build a system which could homogenize health care human resource (HR) and payroll system for the Irish health sector. This system was anticipated to be used by all health agencies and providers within Ireland. However, the system did not deliver the expected results. This is because enough time was not spent on the implementation stage. In addition, the managerial team frequently changed their plans because of cost constraints and did not deal with issues as they arose. RISK MANAGEMENT
“Perhaps the most famous law of all is Murphy’s Law, which is usually stated as, “Whatever can go wrong will.”” (Lewis, 1998) . However, one must be prepared for hazards that may arise in the organisation. In PPARS risk assessment techniques were simply disregarded and contingency plans were not put in place. PLANNING
Planning adequately is an integral part of any project in order for it to run efficiently. “The primary purpose of planning is to establish a set of directions, in sufficient detail to tell the project team exactly what must be done, and what resources to use in order to produce the deliverables of the project successfully.” (Meredith, 2003) Management are accountable for carrying out a detailed analysis of resources required for a successful project. This analysis of resources should include personnel, time and funding and all should be budgeted for. Conversely, in the case of PPARS management underestimated the implementation duration and cost of this project. A comprehensive cost analysis had not been properly executed before implementation. According to the PPARS report ‘no detailed breakdown of costs was provided, estimates were not linked to the organisational or functional scope of the project and the extent of the necessary investment in process...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document