Your article, ‘Defence’s payroll system explodes’ on 22 July 2004 left me somewhat bemused. Apart from my disappointment at the absence of photos of smoke and flames, it seems that Defence’s new HR system problem is due simply to the quality of data migrated from their 20 ageing legacy systems
I refer to Wendy Attwater’s opinion, ‘The changing face of human resources’ in the 28 July 2004 issue. I would like to say that I found her article incredibly enlightening and refreshing. I can identify completely with what she was saying.
I am a recent graduate from the University of Sydney, having majored in HR, IR and management. In deciding to study these subjects my ultimate motive was to move into a field or area of expertise where I would be able to contribute to a business, rather than simply push paper around.
In completing my studies, I maintained a heavy focus on ‘business’ and the need for HR to be able to make a strategic and meaningful contribution to a business. Thankfully, the many lecturers in the Work and Organisational Studies Department of the Faculty of Economics and Business offered subjects with a strategic focus.
I have now been in the field of HR for 18 months, so am obviously very fresh and inexperienced. My current role as a HR coordinator is very administrative, with little opportunity to contribute to the business side of things. I am enthusiastic about HR, have a strong desire to achieve and a strong desire to contribute to the growth and success of an organisation.
However, I find it difficult to understand why many organisations do not see HR as anything other than an administrative function. At times it can be de-motivating. I can see so many opportunities in which HR can make a positive impact on a company, yet HR professionals appear to be restricted and hampered in what they can do.
Having said all this, reading her article has reassured me that I am on the right track and that I do have the right focus for a career in HR. With time, more experience and possibly an organisation which views HR in a different light, I believe that I will be able to acquire the skills she believes are necessary for a HR practitioner in today’s business environment.
Thank you again for her article. It has helped to inspire and motivate a HR graduate to continue on the path recently begun and to continue in my aspirations to make a positive and strategic contribution to a business by utilising my HR skills and knowledge.
– Daniel Sirone, HR coordinator, SGE Credit Union
Defence payroll system explosion bemusing
Your article, ‘Defence’s payroll system explodes’ on 22 July 2004 left me somewhat bemused. Apart from my disappointment at the absence of photos of smoke and flames, it seems that Defence’s new HR system problem is due simply to the quality of data migrated from their 20 ageing legacy systems. Well, there’s a startling insight! This used to be described using the simple euphemism of ‘GIGO’, or garbage in-garbage out.
If the most dramatic effect of migrating what must have been absolute shed loads of complex data on Defence’s 100,000 employees from over 20 legacy systems is an accounting error that needs to be validated by paper checks, then Defence is clearly doing the right thing by our service personnel. Despite the time and cost to implement the new system, the rationalisation of so many outdated legacy systems must also be saving taxpayers a motza, and I am all in favour of that!
– Bill Meldrum, Monash ACT
We eagerly await any news of the cost savings you predict. Given that Defence could face a payout of as much as $732 million, and that the project blew (no pun intended) its budget by $45 million, that’s going to take some efficiency savings to recoup.
–Human Resources
