Lately we at Knowledge Infusion have been spending a ton of time working with HR and IT organizations trying to help them understand the best structure for their ownership and support of various HR technology initiatives.  The term HRIS has been out there for decades and when you look at the definition of IS it looks something like this:

Information systems are implemented within an organization for the purpose of improving the effectiveness and efficiency of that organization. Capabilities of the information system and characteristics of the organization, its work systems, its people, and its development and implementation methodologies together determine the extent to which that purpose is achieved

When HR defines a role as HRIS and/or depends on HRIS to develop its overall process approach to human resources, the outcomes of the HR function within an organization and the overall HR strategy, it takes a very myopic look at what HR truly needs to be successful in driving global processes, defining change and metrics to measure that change as well as structuring people in the HR function to meet a long-term HR strategy.

Leading edge HR organizations today are looking at focusing on what processes and people are needed to execute it's long term strategies and determining what level of IT support may be needed to ensure that technologies are an enabler of a HR strategy, not what is driving it.

The term HRIS still may live on within IT as the group that maintains and supports a HR technology implementation, but it is not the right placement, treatment or priority for a group responsible for implementing process transformation and change throughout a global enterprise.

Do you still use the term HRIS?  What does it mean in your organization?

Another infusion of knowledge...