Five Questions to Answer Before Your HRIS Implementation

A 2024 SHRM report found that nearly one in four organizations say their HR technology implementations failed to meet expectations. The reasons cited, including unclear objectives, data migration problems, and low user adoption, are rarely surprises that emerge during configuration. They trace back to questions that weren’t answered before the project started.

What follows are five of those questions. They are straightforward. Most leadership teams would agree they matter. The test is whether your organization can answer them clearly and consistently right now, before the vendor is selected, the partner is engaged, and the timeline is locked.

If the answer to any of these is uncertain, the implementation is carrying risk that will surface later, usually at a higher cost.

1. What does success look like in numbers you can measure after go-live?

Every HRIS business case includes objectives: consolidate platforms, reduce manual processing, improve data accuracy, enable better workforce reporting. The question is whether those objectives have been translated into specific, measurable benchmarks that the organization can evaluate six and twelve months after go-live.

If the goal is reduced processing time, what is the current processing time for key transactions? If the goal is improved data accuracy, what are today’s error rates? If the goal is better reporting, which leadership decisions are currently delayed because the data isn’t available?

Without these baselines, go-live becomes the default definition of success. Everything afterward gets categorized as maintenance, and the question of whether the system is delivering value never gets a clear answer.

If your leadership team cannot point to three to five measurable outcomes they expect the system to deliver, this question is unanswered.

2. Can you name the person who will own the system 90 days after the implementation partner leaves?

Implementation partners are contracted to get the system live. Their teams roll off shortly after go-live. Prosci’s benchmarking research found that only 33% of respondents considered their sponsors effective at building the coalition of support a change initiative needs to be sustained. When the partner leaves and that coalition doesn’t exist, the internal team inherits a system without the organizational backing to manage it.

Ownership means a specific person or team with authority over break-fix prioritization, release management, enhancement decisions, and cross-functional escalation. If the answer to "who owns Workday after the partner leaves?" is "the HRIS team" without further specificity, the answer is incomplete. If you cannot name the owner, describe their authority, and confirm they have the capacity and organizational support to take on steady-state operations, this question is unanswered.

3. Does your budget account for what the system costs to run, not just what it costs to build?

Implementation budgets are carefully planned. Post-go-live operating costs are frequently not. Industry data on ERP projects shows that most exceed initial budgets by a factor of three to four, with much of the overage concentrated after go-live.

Running a Workday environment involves break-fix support, biannual release testing, enhancement development, reporting, integration monitoring, data quality management, security administration, and ongoing user support. If your budget line ends at go-live, the organization will be making resource decisions under pressure during the period when the system most needs sustained investment.

If your business case does not include a line item for post-go-live operating costs covering at least the first 18 months, this question is unanswered.

4. Has someone assessed whether your team can operate what they’re about to inherit?

Subject matter experts participate in implementation through requirements gathering, testing, and validation. But participating in the build and operating a production system require different capabilities. Prosci’s readiness assessment framework evaluates organizational, project, and individual readiness as distinct dimensions, recognizing that gaps at any level can undermine adoption regardless of technical success.

In many Workday environments, HR teams inherit responsibility for configuration troubleshooting, data validation, and system-level decision-making that didn’t exist in their previous role. If no one has mapped the gap between what the team does today and what the system will require them to do after go-live, the organization is planning around an assumption rather than an assessment.

If you have not conducted a formal readiness assessment that identifies specific capability gaps and a plan to close them before go-live, this question is unanswered.

5. Is there an executive sponsor who understands their role extends past go-live?

Prosci’s benchmarking research found that 52% of executive sponsors did not adequately understand their role in managing the people side of change. The PCT Model positions leadership and sponsorship alongside project management and change management as equally critical to initiative success. When any one of those three is underweight, the change is at risk.

Executive sponsorship during an HRIS implementation means more than signing the project charter and attending steering committee meetings. It means actively resolving cross-functional disputes, securing resources when post-go-live needs exceed what was planned, holding the organization accountable for adoption, and staying engaged with system health long after the go-live celebration ends.

If your executive sponsor views their role as approving the project and being available for escalations, rather than actively leading the organizational change that the system requires, this question is unanswered.

The Cost of Starting Without Answers

None of these questions require months of analysis to answer. They require honest conversation among the leaders who will be accountable for the system’s success: the CHRO, the CFO, the CIO, and the operational leaders whose teams will use and manage Workday every day.

Organizations that answer these questions before the implementation starts are making a strategic investment in the project’s foundation. Those that defer them will encounter each one again, usually during the first year after go-live, when the cost of addressing them is higher and the options are more constrained. If your organization is evaluating a new HRIS or preparing for a Workday implementation, we help leadership teams pressure-test their readiness before the project begins. Let’s talk about what this looks like for your organization.

Contact us at info@abnormallogic.com.