TECHNOLOGY
clarity and provides a single reference point for users. Training should be treated as a continuous investment rather than a one-off exercise. Refresher sessions, role- specific guidance and easily accessible quick reference materials can help reduce reliance on informal workarounds. Data audits are essential where errors are recurring. Targeted data cleansing not only corrects problems but also rebuilds confidence in reporting and system outputs. Finally, structured feedback mechanisms should be introduced. Whether through regular forums, surveys or drop-in sessions, users must have a way to raise issues and, critically, must see evidence that their concerns are being acted upon. Change management principles to realign teams When adoption lags or different parts of the organisation begin developing inconsistent ways of working, effective change management becomes the lever which brings everyone back on course. The first step is to make adoption measurable and visible. By tracking usage, error levels and process compliance across the enterprise, leaders gain clarity on where the gaps are. Once surfaced, these gaps can be managed and addressed with purpose, rather than left hidden until they grow into larger problems. Leadership involvement is equally critical. A system change cannot be left solely in the hands of project teams. Senior leaders need to demonstrate visible sponsorship, reinforcing the value of the system and holding their managers accountable for adoption. Without this active engagement, the message that the system matters quickly loses momentum. Equally powerful is the role of local champions. People are often more willing to learn from trusted peers than to follow instructions from head office. When these champions are equipped with training, resources and recognition, they can become the first point of support for their colleagues, accelerating adoption where resistance may otherwise linger. Finally, behaviour must be reinforced and made accountable. Adoption rates should be part of performance reviews, teams who excel should be acknowledged and those that fall behind should be supported with further coaching or
retraining. This way, the new ways of working are embedded into daily practice, rather than treated as being optional.
cannot meet requirements, organisations may have to focus on the short-term while longer-term solutions are considered. An umbrella or overlay system can provide a single pane of glass across multiple tools. Aggregating data from the flawed system and any complementary platforms enables consistent reporting, reduces reliance on manual reconciliation and creates a more integrated user experience. This approach also provides future resilience, as the umbrella can remain in place even if the underlying systems are replaced. “Training should be treated as a continuous investment rather than a one-off exercise” Phased replacement is another approach. Rather than abandoning the entire platform, organisations can replace specific modules where the pain points are greatest, while still retaining components that function adequately. A best-of- breed model, in which specialist tools are integrated under a central reporting framework, can often deliver better results than a single monolithic solution. In more severe cases, escalation with the vendor or an early exit may be necessary. Although disruptive, staying with a system that’s fundamentally unfit can be more costly in terms of inefficiencies, errors and compliance failures than transitioning away. The balanced path forward System change reshapes how people work, how information is managed and how decisions are taken. Even when implementation is flawed, organisations have multiple paths to recovery. The ultimate goal isn’t to force a system to work at all costs, but to maintain accurate, reliable and compliant processes. These functions are too important to be compromised by poor implementation. By addressing challenges openly, reinforcing change through effective management and planning strategically, organisations can ensure system change delivers lasting value rather than becoming an ongoing burden. n
“One of the most common issues arises when the change in processes is underestimated”
When the system is still not delivering Even with robust change management, there are times when a system continues to fall short. At this point, escalation becomes necessary. Issues should be documented carefully, with clear evidence of their business impact, and raised formally with the vendor. Many suppliers will provide configuration adjustments, additional support or in some cases, contractual remedies when problems are escalated in this structured way. At the same time, it’s important to engage senior stakeholders internally. Presenting the situation as a question of compliance risk, financial exposure or operational disruption shifts the debate from user frustration to organisational risk, and this, in turn, secures leadership attention and resources. This is where an independent review can also offer clarity. External Consultants or Auditors bring an impartial perspective that can distinguish between challenges rooted in configuration, those caused by internal processes and those which stem from genuine limitations of the system itself. Where such reviews confirm that the system isn’t fit for purpose, alternative options should be considered. Replacement doesn’t have to be immediate or absolute. Organisations may choose to phase out certain modules, to supplement weak areas with complementary tools or to introduce an umbrella layer which provides unified reporting across multiple systems. These approaches can create stability in the short term while giving time to plan a more fundamental transition in the future. Options when the system isn’t fit for purpose Where it becomes clear that the system itself
53
| Professional in Payroll, Pensions and Reward |
Issue 116 | December 2025 - January 2026
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker