Conclusions and Recommendations | Managing Risks and Issues

The review concluded that there had been substantial difficulties with the e-HR project and the factors which primarily accounted for these were identified as matters of governance, leadership, changes to specification and timetable, project planning and management consideration of risk in relation to cost, working relationships, communication and the performance of the contractor. Some of the difficulties could have been avoided if SE's established procedures and protocols for project management had been properly followed, but it seems the key action from which it was impossible to recover was the attempt to change the scope of the project so that it was better aligned to the HR transformation programme whilst simultaneously shortening the timescale for completion to May 2006. And all this without having undertaken full consideration of the associated risks and dependencies, rigorous project planning, meaningful and considered input from the Programme Board and without having the necessary building blocks in place to deliver related workstreams.

The recommendations were numerous and resonate with the good practice advice and guidance provided. An abbreviated list is set out below:

• Sound and clear governance arrangements need to be put in place, defining roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and authorities of staff at different levels, including 'agency contractors'.
• For any future e-HR procurement Scottish Procurement Division should be represented on the Project Board.
• The SE Centre of Excellence should issue advice and guidance about the composition of Programme and Project Boards and the roles of members, including the responsibilities of any 'non-Executive' members of such Boards.
• Absolute clarity must be achieved about what should now be included within the e-HR element and the HR transformation element. It would be sensible to undertake thorough site visits (to encompass the HR professional users, corporate users of management information, IT command and self-service users) in organisations with similar size, staffing structures, user requirements and culture to the SE before concluding what needs to be in the final scope cost and timing.
• The e-HR and HR Transformation Business case should be revisited in light of the current position on implementing HR transformation and after further consideration of the desired scope of any e-HR software solutions.
• Advice on best practice for establishing and maintaining effective joint teams of SE staff, agency contractors and suppliers should be drawn up for those involved in substantial projects such as this one.
• Communication and training strategies and detailed plans need to be worked up, and to maximise the chances of successfully impressing staff in the line the Programme Board will need to give a heavy emphasis to championing, with Departmental Management Boards and staff, the benefits of the new arrangements.
• The SE Centre of Expertise should consider whether to establish a more formal mechanism for drawing Accountable Officer attention to 'red' ratings in Gateway reviews.

In the light of the review and its recommendations, appropriate actions were taken to put the programme back on track.

---

Case Study 2: The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

This case study illustrates how the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) is managing a large, complex HR transformation and provides a more detailed insight into the governance arrangements that surround this £42 million programme.

The MPS is the largest of the police services that operate in greater London (the others include the City of London Police and the British Transport Police). It employs 32,000 officers, 14,000 police staff, 300 traffic wardens and 4,500 Police Community Support Officers as well as being supported by over 2,500 volunteer police officers in the Metropolitan Special Constabulary and its Employer Supported Policing programme. The Metropolitan Police Services covers an area of 620 square miles and a population of 7.2 million.

In 2006 the MPS embarked on a major HR transformation programme, as part of a wider Met Modernisation Programme (MMP) in order to:

• Further improve HR service delivery levels
• Streamline, and where possible, automate standard transactional and informational activities (self service)
• Provide quicker and more consistent HR support to Line Managers
• Remove duplication and bureaucracy and provide the benefits of economies of scale
• Move HR service delivery from being largely reactive to being strategic, pro active and aware of operational needs allowing for greater operational flexibility.

---

Martin Tiplady, the Director of HR at the MPS, recalls the rationale and origins of the programme:

We were characterised largely as an administrative processing and rather bureaucratic HR service and it was apparent that we had to do something about that in order to add greater value to the organisation. We also responded to Gershon's review of the effectiveness and efficiency of back-room services and basically we concluded that there were much cheaper ways of doing it.

I also recognised that unless we responded proactively then somebody from Her Majesty's Government might have come in to tell us how we should it. As it is, we are forecasting a saving of around £15 million per year, once the full effects of the transformation have come into force.

But this is simply the foundation layer that enables a different class of HR to emerge, which is about HR doing more of being in the driving seat in the business, securing better outcomes and customer focus; working with our managers to make then better leaders, better managers and easier ways of achieving more objectives and targets than anything else, that's the value added HR, which is what I'm used to and where I think we ought to be. Perhaps putting it another way, we should be more highly regarded for our input into the resourcing strategy for the 2012 Olympics than for our ability to design a new sickness form.