Adoption and Success of e-HRM in A Cloud Computing Environment: A Field Study

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/332127127
Adoption and Success of e-HRM in a Cloud Computing

Environment: A Field Study
Article in International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing · April 2019

DOI: 10.4018/IJCAC.2019040101
CITATIONS READS
11 1,718
4 authors, including:
Jose Albors Klaus Peter- Schoeneberg

Universitat Politecnica de Valencia (U.P.V.) Beuth Hochschule für Technik Berlin
153 PUBLICATIONS 2,272 CITATIONS 17 PUBLICATIONS 107 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
M Rosario Perello-Marin
Universitat Politècnica de València
45 PUBLICATIONS 251 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Teaching Management and related subjects View project
Actional Intelligence View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Jose Albors on 26 August 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing
Volume 9 • Issue 2 • April-June 2019
Adoption and Success of e-HRM in

a Cloud Computing Environment:
A Field Study
Robert-Christian Ziebell, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain
Jose Albors-Garrigos, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain
Klaus-Peter Schoeneberg, Beuth University of Applied Sciences, Berlin, Germany
Maria Rosario Perello Marin, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain
ABSTRACT
This qualitative study examines the digitisation of HRM in a cloud-based environment. The influencing
factors for the transformation from conventional HRM to eHRM are examined with a special focus
on the success factors from a strategic to the operational level. Additionally, an in-depth analysis of
the currently existing and new HR metrics which emerge during the transformation takes place. The
study is based on interviews with HR experts with extensive experience in transforming and working
with the new technology. Active participation of the HR department is relevant for the success of
the digital transformation HRM project. HR metrics have not been applied extensively so far and are
used less for controlling and optimizing HR processes. New metrics would increase the acceptance
of the new technology and thus the success of the overall HR transformation. The main contribution
is related to the field of HR software adoption of cloud-based solutions.
Keywords
Cloud-Based Environment, e- HRM, HR Metrics, HRM Project
1. INTRODUCTION
The research on electronic human resources management (e-HRM) covers two separate fields
of academia and management in practice whose boundaries, regrettably, are not clearly defined:
Information technologies (IT) and human resources management (HRM).
The National Institute of Standards and technology (Mell & Grance, 2011) defines cloud
computing as “…a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a
shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g. networks, servers, storage, applications, and
services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service
provider interaction.”
Thus, the aim of the article is twofold. First, to identify success factors that contribute to the
HR digitization in a cloud environment, from the perspective of the business department. Second,
to recognise key performance indicators which would enable the measurability of success. Both
objectives have been examined separately.
This research follows a qualitative approach and is based on a case study methodology. The
researchers have considered five on-going cases of e-HRM implementation and have interviewed
DOI: 10.4018/IJCAC.2019040101

Copyright © 2019, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

1
seven managers working for the firms involved. This article focuses on the internal drivers and
success factors of e-HRM transformation and, on the other hand, regarding the metrics area, carries
out an inventory of the currently measured HR key performance indicators (from now on KPI) and
their applications. Finally, new relevant metrics are identified that are made possible by digitizing
multiple HR processes in a single cloud-based e-HRM solution. The common database enables new
approaches to the definition of KPIs (e.g. combining performance with recruitment KPIs).
This study is organized in the following way: first, it discusses the practical and theoretical
context of e-HRM. Once the research gaps have been identified, the research hypotheses are shown
and debated. Then, the research methodology is presented and justified. Next, the case studies and
interviews are examined concluding with the research conclusions. Finally, academic, and management
implications are discussed.
2. THEORETICAL CONTEXT
2.1. The Digital Transformation of HR

The digital transformation of companies is progressing, and the digitization of HR processes is a part
of it (Bondarouk & Ruël, 2009; Stone & Deadrick, 2015) impacting the way HR are developed (Stone
and Dulebohn 2013). The Sierra-Cedar 2017-2018 HR Systems Survey (Harris & Spencer, 2018)
shows that the planned adoption rates for workforce management or talent management have risen to
more than 80%. It also demonstrates a clear tendency for workforce and talent management systems
to be transformed into a cloud-based Software as a Service solution (from now on HR Cloud), where
over 50% of the HR technology environment is already implemented. Harris and Spencer (2018) state
that the mapping of HR core and talent management processes in HR Cloud solutions has increased
by 4% to 63% and by 5% to 79% respectively since 2017 until now. On the other hand, on-premise
implementations of HR core processes have fallen by 11% to 33% and talent management by 5%
to 19% during the same period. This report also concludes that an average user experience score of
3.51 points, which is 0.61 points higher than comparable on-premise solutions, also speaks in favor
of an HR Cloud environment, and companies that have a comparatively high cloud adoption rate
tend to see their requirements met there. These HR Cloud conversion projects take a long time and
tie up many external and internal resources (Harris & Spencer, 2018). Consequently, this raises the
question of how to measure success after implementation and which influencing factors exist during
the digital transformation of HR processes in cloud-based solutions.
2.2. Impact of Technology on HR and Outcome

How is technology influencing the HR field? Cloud technology, as well as its use to re-engineer
processes in the human resources management, that is to say: the HR process landscape, is still
relatively new (Jafari Navimipour, Rahmani, Navin, & Hosseinzadeh, 2015; Lin & Chen, 2012).
Stone et al. (2015) note that “technology has had a dramatic impact on the field of HR, and as
technology evolves it is likely to move the field in some very new directions in the future”. He also
notes that there are still many unanswered questions as to whether the primary goals of HR will be
achieved. Other authors suggest that the research is still in its “infancy” (Stone & Dulebohn, 2013).
Also, Boselie and Paauwe (2005) find that the quality of HR work makes a direct contribution to the
financial competitiveness of a company and thus directly contributes to the long-term viability of an
organization. Boselie and Paauwe (2005) also indicated that e-HRM would not make a significant
value contribution to corporate performance. Bondarouk and Ruël (2013) examine the impact of
e-HRM on strategic HR issues such as the transformation of HR into a strategic partner and conclude
that e-HRM contributes here.
However, what is the influence of the technological evolution pointed out by Bondarouk et al.
(2017)? Marler and Fisher (2013) conclude that there are “no studies [which] directly examined the
2
relationship between e-HRM adoption and any kind of organizational performance measures such as
competitive advantage, organizational performance, reduced costs, or improved HR outcomes such as
increased human capital, reduced turnover or increased organizational commitment or job satisfaction.”
This statement generally refers to the digitization of HR processes, rather than the transformation
into an HR Cloud environment. There seems to be a disparity between the rapid adoption of e-HRM
in practice (Harris & Spencer, 2018) and its coverage in scientific studies. Garbarino-Alberti (2013)
points out, however, some of the benefits for small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Nevertheless, in
spite of the absence of published research covering a holistic approach, there are studies that focus on
the use of e-HRM for selected HR sub-processes in different industries and target groups (Dhamija,
2012; Nagendra & Deshpande, 2014; Nura & Osman, 2013; Troshani, Jerram, & Rao Hill, 2011).
Other studies examine the implications of implementing e-HRM in general (Grant & Newell, 2013;
Obeidat, 2016; Theriou & Chatzoglou, 2014; Varma & Gopal, 2011) as well as on the limitation
of these solutions (Stone et al. 2015). Other authors have suggested a direct link between e-HRM
adoption and the quality of human resources management (Nura & Osman, 2012).
2.3. Innovation Adoption

As in the case of the majority of innovations, adoption is a crucial aspect to be considered (Rogers,
2010). To begin with, models have been utilized for the support and facilitation of innovative
technology adoption. For the specific question of software adoption, common models such as the
Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1986, 1989) are used. This model evaluates the attitudes
toward using an approach through its perceived usefulness as well as perceived ease of use and has
already been successfully applied in the e-HRM context (Voermans and Veldhoven 2007). However,
this adoption tends to be based on daily operational use of the system, which means that the strategic
influencing factors and implications are less emphasized. Other models such as the Technology
Organization Environment Framework (Tornatzky, Fleischer, & Chakrabarti, 1990), which measures
the company’s impact on the adoption and implementation of innovations, are also used in e-HRM
context (Alam, Masum, Beh, & Hong, 2016).
But should the opinions of staff be considered in software adoption and do they have a specific
role? In this direction, another less technical approach to evaluating the adoption of e-HRM is the
TOP (Technology, Organisation, and People) framework (Bondarouk, Parry, et al., 2017). In applying
this framework, it was found that technology and organization are prerequisites, but ultimately
people make the difference in adopting e-HRM. Maier et al. (2013) developed a research model that
investigates the impact of e-HRM implementations in organizations on employee satisfaction and
employee turnover. The basis for their model was the Technology Acceptance Model, which was
extended by work-related consequences (e.g. turnover).
But still, a technical focus has its advocates. Some authors recommend that technology and
organization should be considered separately when adopting e-HRM successfully, and the mutual
dependencies should be examined more clearly (Dery, Hall, Wailes, & Wiblen, 2013). Other
approaches such as the St. Gallen Management Model (Rüegg-Stürm & Grand, 2016), which is
already used in the ERP environment to evaluate influencing factors (Schoeneberg, 2011), have not
yet been applied in the e-HRM field. We could conclude according to Bondarouk et al. (2017) that
“we still lack a comprehensive understanding of the factors affecting the adoption and consequences of
e-HRM.” In this respect, another researcher, Strohmeier (2007), stresses there is a lack of a “systematic
categorization and consideration of relevant technologies.”
2.4. Metrics
Management performance cannot be considered without metrics (Van Looy & Shafagatova, 2016).
We must define first the difference between HR metrics and analytics. Lawler et al. (2004) distinguish
between “HR Analytics” and “HR metrics”. HR metrics are measures of key HRM outcomes,
classified as efficiency, effectiveness or impact. In contrast, HR Analytics do not measure but rather
3
represent statistical techniques and experimental approaches that can be used to show the result of
HR activities. Despite this distinction between HR metrics and HR Analytics, there still is definitional
ambiguity in the literature.
In the context of HR metrics, Dulebohn and Johnson (2013) point out that while a broad range
of measurable numeric HR figures or ratios has been developed, the actual application of these HR
figures to provide added value for HR has so far been neglected. Furthermore, the research in this area
proves to be unclear. Marler and Boudreau (2017) go one step further by concluding that despite the
evidence linking the adoption of HR Analytics to organizational performance, the instances where
HR Analytics have been adopted as well as academic research are rather limited. Baesens et al. (2016)
underpin this by arguing that the practical application of HR analytics has not had too much success
despite the investments in that field. Furthermore, they point out that these metrics are not applied
only for statistical purposes but also to provide more profound insights into the business.
This aspect has opened the discussion on the mentioned concept of HR analytics. Ostermann
et al. (2009) suggest a targeted benchmarking of e-HRM systems with other business information
systems or functions based on metrics to support the decision to buy a new e-HRM, providing a
significant incentive for implementation, design or maintenance activities to ensure better HR and
overall business performance, ultimately. Van den Heuvel and Bondarouk (2017) argue that HR
analytics has matured both in the field of business as well as research. They also conclude that it has
hitherto tended to have an experimental status in companies, but that it will also have a predictive
function in the long term until 2025, driven by technological progress, in addition to a robust analysis.
These authors also state that “fragmented and outdated IT landscapes characterize current system
support for HR analytics.” With the advent of new HR Cloud solutions, which cover a wide range
of HR processes due to a disjointed landscape, a considerably broader, but above all a cross-domain
database (Ziebell, Schultz, Albors Garrigós, & Schoeneberg, 2016) is being offered, for which previous
stand-alone solutions could only provide rudimentary support. If HR analytics is such a trendy topic
(Rasmussen & Ulrich, 2015), and there is technical availability of data, why is there relatively little
research and only limited practical application if that means better organisational performance and
the repositioning of HR as a strategic partner (Fecheyr-Lippens, Schaninger, & Tanner, 2015; Lawler
et al., 2004; Russell & Bennett, 2015)?
3. PROPOSALS OF HYPOTHESES
The previous review uncovers various research gaps, primarily regarding the adoption of HR Cloud
solutions and the HR metrics discussion.
Current studies focus on individual personnel processes, such as recruitment (Laumer, Maier, &
Eckhardt, 2014; Maier et al., 2013), and analyze the subsequent changes. However, the literature has
not yet examined the adoption of e-HRM systems that cover the whole spectrum of HR processes in
one solution and the resulting impact on the stakeholders.
This latter aspect, the effect of e-HRM on stakeholders was dealt with in an exploratory study
carried out by Bondarouk and Ruël (2013) studying the impact of e-HRM in a government office
with positive results on the opinion of most stakeholders.
Other authors such as Laumer et al. (2010) carried out a Delphi study within German managers
to test their opinion on the e-HRM impact: focussed on positive results on staff retention, internal
and external employer branding, filling vacancies and best use of scarce resources, etc. In the same
direction, Laumer et al. (2014) examined the combined effects of e-HRM adoption and the application
of “business process management” on secondary service processes. These authors suggested that
the standardization and digitization of HR secondary processes required a deeper understanding of
business process management and business process modeling. The implied process standardization in
turn is a paradigm of the HR Cloud through its limited configuration possibilities (Ziebell et al., 2018).
But are there studies based on real cases and not solely on opinions? Eckhardt et al. (2014) point
out that there are only a few research contributions on e-HRM digital transformation and its impact
4
on individuals, on business processes as well as on digitation technology. Therefore, few studies

focus on the effects of e-HRM transformation of the recruiting process driven by external factors.
There is a research gap here, as the internal drivers are briefly outlined. Furthermore, this survey was
based on only one firm. Laumer et al. (2010) also focus on external factors and neglect internal ones.
Bondarouk and Ruël (2013) also invite further studies to be conducted of organizations to examine
the strategic contribution of e-HRM. This strategic contribution also includes the conversion of the
HR department into a strategic business unit which is examined in this research. The actual key
performance indicators can be used in a benchmark exercise (Ostermann et al., 2009), but the new
proposed KPIs also offer the opportunity to shed more light on relevant but previously unobserved
aspects. Both, actual and derived KPIs contribute directly to the lack of studies identified by Paauwe
(2009), which can link HR practices to both past outcomes and subsequent performance.
Thus, the scientific contribution of this study is relevant, as well as its management implications.
The consideration of the influencing factors such as employees, organizational culture, the firm
environment, customers and other stakeholders, technology, etc. can make a valuable contribution
to successful HR process digitization in a cloud environment.
In conclusion, this study is the first one to deal with process digitization in cloud-based solutions.
This technical innovation has limitations (e.g. limited freedom in process definition), but also offers
opportunities to rethink HR in general. This applies not only to process design but also to its evaluation.
The focus of this paper is on these advantages and disadvantages as well as the experience people have
with the transformation of the HR processes into cloud-based solutions. These matters are examined
here for the first time and close a further research gap.
The following research questions have therefore been determined based on the literature review:
Question 1: Which factors from an HR perspective contribute to a successful HR Cloud transformation?

The following themes should also be considered: HR digitization strategies, drivers, and obstacles;
prioritizing HR processes by stakeholders, etc.
Question 2: Do companies use HR key performance indicators for HR process control/optimization
and does the new HR Cloud technology contribute to this by providing new KPIs? HR KPIs
are currently measured; new KPIs can be provided by the HR management in a cloud-based
environment in the future; these new metrics impact the acceptance of an HR Cloud solution.
To answer these questions, three hypotheses based on the current state of research have been
formulated.
There is a broad research in the field of general technology adaptation (Davis, 1986; A. Lin &
Chen, 2012; Oliveira & Martins, 2010; Thong, 1999; Venkatesh, Thong, Statistics, Xu, & Acceptance,
2016) and also in the special field of e-HRM adoption (Alam et al., 2016; Bondarouk, Parry, et al.,
2017; Florkowski & Olivas‐Luján, 2006; Strohmeier & Kabst, 2009; Teo, Lim, & Fedric, 2007).
Findings are that the adoption of e-HRM depends on a wide variety of influencing factors. Two
of the relevant topics here include the active participation and attitudes of employees (Amalou-Döpke
& Süß, 2014; BarNir, Gallaugher, & Auger, 2003; Bondarouk & Brewster, 2016; Fisher & Howell,
2004; Reichers, Wanous, & Austin, 1997; Rogers, 1995; Teo et al., 2007; Voermans & Veldhoven,
2007) as well as a highly professional (i.e. in time and budget) implementation (T. Bondarouk, 2011;
Harris & Spencer, 2018; Khan, Hussainy, Khan, & Khan, 2017; Tansley & Newell, 2007).
The bandwidth of the HR processes to be digitized is also addressed in various articles, although
there is disagreement about how many processes are ultimately to be implemented in solutions. Some
authors advocate a broad approach (Angrave, Charlwood, Kirkpatrick, Lawrence, & Stuart, 2016;
Ziebell et al., 2018), others suggest a constraint to a few processes (Gueutal & Stone, 2005; Parry,
2011). The impact of the overall digital HR transformation is also explored by various articles (Grant
& Newell, 2013; Obeidat, 2016; Parry, 2011), which explore positive aspects such as the increase
in HR service quality (T. Bondarouk, Harms, & Lepak, 2017; Devaraj, Krajewski, & Wei, 2007;
5
Laumer et al., 2014), process efficiency (Dhamija, 2012; Kumar & Lalitha, 2016) or cost reduction
outcomes (Lepak & Snell, 1998; Marler, 2009; Ruël, Bondarouk, & der Velde, 2007). The analysis
of these three factors dominates the studies.
From these aspects, the first hypothesis is derived.
Hypothesis 1: The success of an HR Cloud transformation depends on active participation in the
fundamental digitization decision and the comprehensive, problem-free, time-acceptable digitization
of a large part of the HR processes in an HR Cloud environment. It will have a positive influence on
how people work in the HR department.
Research regarding metrics is diverse. The literature states that e-HRM enables companies
to measure several KPIs which are increasing steadily (Angrave et al., 2016; Beatty, Huselid, &
Schneier, 2003; Carlson & Kavanagh, 2008; Strohmeier & Piazza, 2013) although it is not entirely
clear which impact these measurements have, how to apply them (Bassi & McMurrer, 2016; Wei,
Varshney, & Wagman, 2015) and what to use them for (Amalou-Döpke & Süß, 2014; Baesens et al.,
2016; Dulebohn & Johnson, 2013; Gardner, Mcgranahan, & Wolf, 2011; King, 2016; Lawler et al.,
2004; Levenson, 2018; McIver, Lengnick-Hall, & Lengnick-Hall, 2018; Patre, 2016; Rasmussen &
Ulrich, 2015; Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015).
On the other hand, Amalou-Döpke and Süß (2014) argue that HR measurement improves the
quality of HR work in general as KPIs enable HR to justify its effort while being able to control which
is the proper effect. More concluding, Russell and Bennett (2015) state that better data leads to better
overall performance. Based on these research results, the following second hypothesis is derived.
Hypothesis 2: There are many HR metrics that are already used today to control and optimize
HR processes.
The last hypothesis is composed of partial aspects of the two above hypotheses, with a special
emphasis on the technological aspect of cloud technology. Cloud technology, its perception and
adoption is researched widely (A. Lin & Chen, 2012; Low, Chen, & Wu, 2011; Park & Ryoo, 2013)
while there are few articles dealing with e-HRM based on such solutions (Jafari Navimipour et al.,
2015; Stone et al., 2015; Zapotocny, 2015; Ziebell et al., 2018). Angrave et al. (2016) argue that
several HR processes are consolidated in cloud-based solutions which offer a broader set of data and
the general trend to transform into such solutions is confirmed by Harris and Spencer (2018). The
new technology thus potentially offers new possibilities for measurement and evaluation, which in
turn has a positive impact on HR work. Conversely, does this contribute to the acceptance of new
cloud solutions? This assumption is reflected in the third hypothesis.
Hypothesis 3: The HR Cloud enables the derivation of new HR figures, which is accompanied
by a higher acceptance of the new HR Cloud technology.
The validation of the hypotheses would serve to identify the strategic and operational factors that
contribute to a successful HR Cloud transformation from the perspective of the HR department. From
the management perspective it serves to derive practicse to increase acceptance during and after the
successful completion of the project. To what extent does the new technology influence the working
method? The aim of the inventory of the currently measured HR indicators is to give an insight into
the practical work of HR in companies and thereby show how sparsely spread the actual measurement
of HR work through KPIs is. Thus, an objective evaluation of the valuable contribution of HR or a
benchmarking becomes much more difficult. Another goal is to derive new KPIs which, based on
the current measured critical figures in combination with success factors, should be an indicator of
what appropriate measures can be, both for an HR Cloud transformation and for successful HR work
in the future.
In summary, the practical digitization of HR processes in an HR Cloud environment will continue
to increase and the research gap results from the fact that the influencing factors of the transformation
into this new technological environment and its impact have not been investigated in-depth. The same
statement applies to the new analytical possibilities offered by the technology and how this can be
used to improve HR.
6
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1. Methodology Selection

This study was conducted using a qualitative or theory-generating approach. The methodology used
for data collection is expert interviews, and the subsequent evaluations are of qualitative content.
Both data collection and assessment are carried out using the procedure model for qualitative research
using expert interviews and qualitative content analysis by Gläser and Laudel (2010).
The reason to conduct expert interviews lies in the relatively new topic and the resulting limited
access to a large group of experts (Gummesson, 2006).
The survey methodology describes which experts were interviewed for which reasons. Also, the
process of compiling the questionnaire and the interview guideline will be explained as well as the
concrete implementation of the interviews.
An expert interview to collect data is a proven means of answering the research hypotheses
(Gläser & Laudel, 2010). These expert interviews are used to record the interpretations, views, and
attitudes of the interviewees, which in turn provide insights that would not be available merely through
observation or document study (Mayring, 2016). An expert describes the interview partner’s specific
role as a source of specialist knowledge and practices (Gläser & Laudel, 2010).
The following criteria, in order of priority, form the basis for the selection of the experts:
1. The expert is employed by a company that already has an HR Cloud solution in place or where
the HR Cloud implementation project is already in an advanced stage.
2. The expert is familiar with HR metrics and is ideally involved in the definition of HR KPIs.
3. The expert works in the HR department, not in IT (optional).
4. The expert works in a management position (optional).
Criteria 1 and 2 ensure that both, the cloud technology and the KPI know-how are available.
Criterion 3 guarantees that the respondent does not have an overly technical view of the HR Cloud but
can instead make a beneficial assessment from the HR point of view. The last criterion serves to obtain
the broadest possible knowledge about the operational and strategic use of the HR Cloud solution.
Based on these criteria, 32 possible Germany-based interview partners from 16 individual
companies from eight different industries were identified, three of which took part in a pre-test and
seven of which were again included in the primary survey, which corresponds to an overall response
rate of more than 30%. All seven interviewed experts have succeeded in meeting criteria 1 and 2.
Criterion 3 matches 85% of respondents. The last rule, namely to have a management position, is
fulfilled by 43% of the respondents. The other 47%, however, have a holistic view of the topic, as they
were able to gain extensive insights into the issue, for example as part of the HR transformation project.
Table 1 gives an overview of the seven interviewed experts from five different companies. This
includes the anonymized position title, which on the one hand enables comparability of the interviewees
and on the other hand does not reveal the identities of the experts. The first column “ID” serves for
the allocation of the individual statements in the analysis.
The preference for the SAP SuccessFactors solution is high. More than 85% of the companies
surveyed employ more than 10,000 people and are therefore considered to be “large firms,” which in
turn rely on permanent HR Cloud solutions (e.g. Workday, SuccessFactors, Oracle Cloud) available
on the market (Harris & Spencer, 2018). All companies are based in Germany, which is traditionally
a strong market for SAP solutions, and finally, the authors have a well-developed network of SAP
implementations based on their practical expertise.
7
Table 1. Overview of the interviewed experts
4.2. Questionnaire and Interview Guidelines

4.2.1. Variables
Variables are stored as additional information when coding the interviews. In this way, it is possible
to compare and segment certain findings. The following variables have been defined:
• Company size (#employees):

• small (8,000-14,999)
• medium (15,000-74,999)
• large (75,000-149,999)
• Management position: yes or no
• Industry:
• Banking
• Energy Supply
• IT Services
• Retail
• Transportation
These three variables were adopted because it was expected that the answers to the questions
might be different regarding company size, position in the hierarchy and industry. Also, the information
provided by all experts was rated equally.
Two documents, a questionnaire and an interview guideline were prepared and used for data
collection. In developing the survey and the interview guideline, particular attention was paid to
compliance with ethical standards regarding research process transparency and the handling of
personal data (Gläser & Laudel, 2010).
4.2.2. Interview Guidelines

The interview guidelines and their references were the following (Table 2):
The purpose of the questionnaire was to explain the research topic to the interviewee, to verify
that he or she met the expert criteria and to obtain data on the current HR KPIs in advance.
Data collection to answer the research question was carried out through semi-structured expert
interviews based on the above interview guideline (Bogner, Littig, & Menz, 2014). The structure
of the interview guidelines was developed from the pre-defined question categories and the derived
hypotheses. In general, when designing the questions, attention was paid to creating a suggestion
for the interviewee to tell a story (Gläser & Laudel, 2010). For example, the questionnaire asked in
advance what the expert sees as their personal added value and valuable contribution to their current
position. This question is referred to again in the guidelines when asked how they would like to
8
Table 2. Interview guideline references
Question Reference
Would you consider the cloud transformation project a (Alam et al., 2016; Bondarouk, Ruël, & van der Heijden,
success? 2009; Bondarouk & Ruël, 2009; Masum, Kabir &
Chowdhury, 2015)
Which was the digitation strategy followed by your firm? (Bondarouk, Parry, et al., 2017; Francis, Parkes, &
Reddington, 2014; Grant & Newell, 2013; Harris &
Spencer, 2018)
Which did you consider were the main drivers of the (Dery et al., 2013; Francis et al., 2014)
digitation process in your case?
Did your firm prioritize any process in your project? (Holm, 2014; Dhamija, 2012; Dulebohn & Johnson, 2013)
What were the main challenges and obstacles in your (Baesens et al., 2016; Bondarouk & Ruël, 2009; Heikkilä,
project? Brewster, & Mattila, 2014; Stone et al., 2015)
What were the man tools used and the main HR processes (Harris & Spencer, 2018; Ziebell et al., 2018)
in the digitisation project?
Did you utilize any given criteria or solution for your (Davis, 1989; Dery et al., 2013; Schoeneberg, 2011;
project such as SAP SuccessFactors or other HR Cloud Strohmeier, 2007; Ziebell et al., 2016)
solutions?
What were the main changes carried out during the project (Harris & Spencer, 2018; Ziebell et al., 2018)
implementation?
Were the actual KPIs utilized to control and optimize the (Dulebohn & Johnson, 2013; Fecheyr-Lippens et al., 2015;
HR processes? Marler & Boudreau, 2017)
From which sources did you obtain the KPIs? Which are (Ziebell et al., 2018)
the most relevant KPIs?
Do you expect them to have an impact in the future? (Holm, 2014; Chhinzer & Ghatehatehorde, 2009; Lawler
et al., 2004; Lin & Chen, 2012; Lin, 2011; Maier et al.,
2013)
measure this. All interviews were transcribed, omitting the non-verbal elements (e.g. gestures or
clearing the throat) and time stamped so that it was possible to trace who said what and at what time.
These transcriptions served as a basis for the following evaluation.
4.3. Evaluation Methodology

A content-structured content analysis was used to analyse the transcribed interviews. A combination
of the approaches of Schreier (2012) as well as Gläser and Laudel (2010) was applied. The evaluation
was computer-assisted.
Coding allows categorization and enables the search for patterns that facilitate analysis (Saldaña,
2015). The given structure of the interview guidelines was helpful in determining the main categories,
and the subcategories contained in them could be derived from the findings as well. In addition to the
definition of the groups, extraction rules were defined which specified the allocation of the statements
to the individual categories (Bogner et al., 2014; Krippendorff, 2012).
The questionnaires containing personal data and further details about the company were included
as additional figures to the analysis and served as supplementary information for interpretation.
The actual metrics were evaluated separately. Among other things, these were assigned to
the individual HR processes clusters (see Figure 1 adapted and translated by permission from
Springer Vieweg, Cloud Computing – Die Infrastruktur der Digitalisierung, (Vom traditionellen
Personalmanagement hin zu e-HRM in der Cloud Implementierungsansätze einer digitalen
Transformation) (Ziebell et al., 2018) @2018) and their absolute frequencies, separated by the
company, was analysed.
9
Figure 1. HR process cluster (Ziebell et al., 2018)
5. RESULTS
The combined results of the expert interviews, the questionnaire responses, and the actual KPIs are
discussed in the following sections. A total of seven transcribed interviews, seven questionnaires and
four spreadsheets with the actual HR metrics were evaluated.
5.1. The Success of the Cloud Transformation

Hypothesis 1: The success of an HR Cloud transformation depends on active participation in the
fundamental digitization decision and the comprehensive, problem-free, time-acceptable digitization
of a large part of the HR processes in an HR Cloud environment. It will have a positive influence on
how people work in the HR department.
The following main categories were used to answer the hypothesis, for the evaluation:
• Digitisation strategy
• The driver of digitization in the organization
• Prioritisation in the implementation process
• Stumbling blocks and obstacles during implementation
• HR process cluster and place of digitization
• Criteria for solution selection and implementation period
• Change and evaluation of the working method
5.1.1. Digitisation Strategy

After the analysis of the digitization strategy pursued by the companies, the following four sub-codes
emerged: “fundamentally digitizing,” “increasing efficiency,” “standardization & harmonization”
and “data quality.”
10
Both the “increase in efficiency” and the “standardization & harmonization” have been most
frequently cited as strategic reasons for the digitization of HR processes, while the approach adopted
here is that primarily processes in the company are to be digitized and the improvement of data quality
has only been mentioned once in each respective case.
This means to create more consulting, more conception, more value-added and to outsource the
processes, which in the end are only transactional, not to other functions but to outsource them to
technology. [IP2]
So, the strategy is to use standardized, a standard solution, a standard IT solution to map the HR
processes in it[...] [IP5]
On a strategic level, none of the interviewees denied the influence of digitization on increasing
efficiency
5.1.2. The Driver of Digitization in the Organization

This category indicates which organizational unit or individual has driven the topic of HR digitization.
Only one of the respondents stated that the primary driver of HR digitization was the IT department.
In all other cases, it was driven by the HR department, by the HR director, CHRO, a dedicated change
officer at board level or the board itself.
[…] HR itself, so I consider myself as a driver. [IP4]
Nevertheless, the reasons for the selection are also affected by strict IT policies, which also
influence the subsequent implementation project.
Well, there was just this standard software, so we wanted to have a horizontally integrated software,
not “best of breed”[…] [IP4]
5.1.3. Prioritisation in the Implementation Process

In addition to the strategic component, operational selections for prioritizing the processes to be
digitized were also examined. This resulted in the following three sub-categories of prioritization:
“logical dependencies of processes & holistic approach,” “efficiency increase & process harmonization”
and “hierarchy promoter or unknown.”
The most frequently cited aspect of operational prioritization is increasing efficiency and process
harmonization, which is consistent with the statements on the digitization strategy. Individual HR
processes (e. g. recruitment), which are end-of-lifecycle or depict a process not working at its best, are
discussed to be digitized anew. Also, complex processes or those with a high impact are mentioned
as the goal of digitization. The logical interdependencies between the processes also influences their
prioritization. The clear focus on higher quality HR work is also mentioned several times.
Thus, more consulting activities in the HR function, less operational, administrative, manual activities
in the process. [IP2]
Technical requirements for prioritization were only mentioned regarding the logical dependencies
of the processes among themselves resulting from it.
[…] if you don’t have employees, you don’t need to track performance. So, there is an inherent logic
in the software. [IP4]
11
Two experts noted that prioritization is also being affected by corporate policy or hierarchy.
5.1.4. Stumbling Blocks and Obstacles During Implementation

The analysis of the project implementation challenges resulted in the following sub-codes: “cultural
change,” “technical restrictions,” “resources and know-how,” “works council and co-determination,”
“functional conception,” “internal organization and governance” and “costs.”
The most frequent statements could be assigned to the following three categories (classified by
occurrence): “cultural change”, “technical limitations” as well as “resources and know-how”.
The subject of change is addressed several times by all experts; there was only one exception.
[…] stumbling blocks are concrete[...] employees’ passion for such topics. [IP4]
So, there are those who have been working with certain systems for a long time and are not necessarily
affine to change them now. [IP4]
[…] many things are changing, the appetite for change is extremely overstretched, the employees
from all target groups and levels have […] not much time for even more topics, but it is also enough
for them.[IP7]
Then the topic of change in the company […] should not be underestimated. [IP5]
The technical limitations were also mentioned, with one exception, by all respondents.
[…] we wanted to continue this logic of course, and we noticed relatively quickly that even what
we had planned and written in technical terms could not be realized at all in many respects. This
means systemic restriction for us, which of course always leads to disappointment and for me, being
a constraint is a disappointment because it doesn’t work as expected and that is a dissonance which
has to be processed first. [IP2]
this fundamental decision [...] we have to act with standard software and not ‘best of breed,’ we have
been handcuffed somehow from the beginning. [IP4]
Only one expert, in whose company the implementation is currently running, explicitly denies
these technical restrictions.
Technique [...] I don’t see it as an obstacle in case the question comes up. [IP6]
The topic of resources and know-how is also addressed by all experts with one exception.
Stumbling blocks are main resources, i.e., the amount and qualification of resources [IP4]
The subject of “works council and co-determination” is exclusively mentioned by the three
experts from the medium and large companies.
[...] perhaps one last obstacle, how do I manage to work with our employee representative bodies
[…] [IP6]
When it comes to the functional conception of the HR processes, the thing mentioned most of all
were the difficulties arising from the technical restrictions are mentioned. Occasionally, the unclear
internal organization was referred to and one expert pointed out that the topic of cost allocation was
discussed once again during implementation.
12
5.1.5. HR Process Cluster and Place of Digitization

The main category “HR process cluster and place of digitization” is divided into the sub-code cloud,
on-premise and other solutions which also reflect the systematic mapping of the HR processes. These
other solutions are proprietary stand-alone solutions or process mapping on a spreadsheet. In the
sub-codes, a further distinction is made between the individual HR business processes. Based on the
analysis, the following table provides an overview of the implementation status of the HR processes
in the companies based on more than 300 KPIs. The processes that have already been digitized are
highlighted in green; the ones marked in yellow are in the planning stage.
Figure 2 shows that HR processes have already been digitized in the HR Cloud and future
digitization will also take place there. No planned on-premise HR digitization projects have been
mentioned. It is also noticeable that in the talent management cluster, especially the performance
and goal management processes are the focus of attention, while in the workforce planning cluster,
the recruiting process is emphasized. Analytics was only mentioned once as being digitized. It was
also pointed out that many Excel-based solutions still exist in parallel.
In the course of our project, we are of course also in the process of recording which systems are in
use where. There’s still a lot of it in Excel [IP7]
Overall, the HR Cloud has given an impetus for migrating and adapting existing HR processes
and digitizing new ones.
5.1.6. Criteria for Solution Selection and Implementation Period

Of the companies surveyed, three are already using an SAP SuccessFactors HR Cloud and another
company is currently implementing this solution. Only one company is currently using another HR
Cloud solution (Lumesse ETWeb), that will be replaced by the Workday HR Cloud, which is already
in an advanced implementation stage.
Figure 2. HR Process implementation status
13
Most respondents stated that several HR Cloud solutions were looked at in advance, but that
two categories were the relevant selection criteria. First, the “functionality and coverage of corporate
needs,” and second, the “specifications from non-HR areas.” The first included the general scope of
the HR Cloud as well as the integrative coverage of the respective processes.
In essence, there aren’t many solutions that meet the requirements [IP2]
One expert also mentioned economic reasons and the flexibility of switching to other solutions.
The specifications from non-HR areas related to the IT architecture and data protection requirements
and were mentioned by two experts.
It can be summarized that the focus of the selection criteria, despite some restrictive specifications
from other areas, was on the functional coverage of the HR processes and that the HR department
could participate actively in the selection.
The stated implementation period for the HR Cloud solutions varied among companies. While
three companies reported that one year had been set aside for the simple implementation, the
preparation time ranged between four months and six years. An expert stated that the application
itself took only four months, but negotiations with the works council took over a year.
And then the roll-out began for employee groups that are relevant to codetermination, and then the
negotiation of co-determination simply dragged on for a relatively long period. So, over another year,
until we had the co-determination on board. [IP5]
One expert reported that the implementation project has been ongoing for the last six years.
5.1.7. Change and Evaluation of the Working Method

The change in working methods can be divided into two categories: on the one hand, the difference
in the efficiency and quality of HR and on the other side, the way how the HR Cloud, including the
constraints and possibilities offered, is managed. Only two experts stated that they had not noticed
any change at all, one of them said that it was not his working method that had changed but that of
the entire HR department. One of them could not see any change because he has always worked in
the HR Cloud.
In the context of increasing efficiency, reference was made several times to reducing transactional,
operational activities and refocusing on value-enhancing activities.
So, the real non-value-adding activities have been reduced to a small amount. [IP2]
The quality of the data was also mentioned, which was used to measure and optimize HR
processes and, above all, to improve the internal HR consulting quality. Regarding the last, skepticism
is expressed as to the extent to which the data currently available there offer an additional benefit.
I think we now have the data available in a different way, but it’s not that I feel we have a new insight.
[IP4]
Regarding the handling of the HR Cloud solution, attention is drawn to the forced process
standardization and the associated communication within the organization. It is also expected that
regular releases and exchange with other users of the same solution will lead to process improvements
and more innovation.
14
We are curious to see what else is coming, we know about the release updates and see it as an
opportunity […] [IP3]
Explicit reference is also made to the new cooperation with the IT department, which will be
involved earlier when adjustments are to be made. Those who are already actively using an HR Cloud
solution generally view the change in their working methods positively, while pointing out that they
want to see even more positive changes in the future.
5.2. Actual KPI Used to Control and Optimize HR Processes

Hypothesis 2: There are many HR metrics that are already used today to control and optimise HR
processes.
In assessing this hypothesis, there was an analysis of the filled in spreadsheet templates along with
the actual KPIs, as well as consideration of the following main categories derived from the interviews:
• Overview and types of actual KPIs

• Sources of actual KPIs
• Distribution, use, and influence of actual KPIs
5.2.1. Overview and Types of the Actual KPIs

Of the five companies, only four handed over the currently measured KPIs in the spreadsheet template
and one named the KPIs during the interview. A total of 336 different KPIs were handed over from
all three HR process clusters, 85% of which were provided by a single company, followed by 10%
from a second company and 5% cumulated from the other companies.
The following figure 3provides an overview of the number of KPIs for each HR process, grouped
by company,
Most key figures are measured in the HR processes “Compensation & Benefits” (Comp & Ben),
“Personnel Administration & Organisational Management” (PA & OM) and “Time & Attendance.”
By breaking down the key figures into the three HR process clusters, the following picture emerges.
It shows that most of the KPIs come from the area of operative HR core processes. On closer
inspection, the following distribution of the key data within this area is shown.
Most of the key figures are currently measured in the companies surveyed in the process area
of “Compensation and Benefits.”
Half of the respondents stated that they receive technical KPIs such as user numbers and response
times in addition to the business KPIs. However, these are usually requested and supplied on demand.
Figure 3. Overview of the survey results
15
Also, four companies are already measuring cross-domain KPIs. However, these are collected
with great effort and are mostly correlated manually.
Then, however, days of illness should also be recorded, absences in general, which again comes more
from the whole topic of time management, and the topic of time management is based on a wide variety
of systems. So, the master data we may still have globally in a system, but the time management,
which is almost in every country in a different system. And that makes it very time-consuming. [IP7]
5.2.2. Sources of Actual KPIs

The sources of the actual KPIs are roughly divided into three areas: respectively the HR Cloud, other
systems, a department or a mix of the three are the origins of the metrics.
“We take them out of the system ourselves, or else ask relevant stakeholders. So, to give such an
example, if we now want to consider the rate of dismissal or new appointments at the management
level, then we currently ask the subsidiaries.” [IP5]
All respondents stated that they had to access at least two different sources to obtain their metrics,
so far there is no single system that meets this requirement as of today.
5.2.3. Distribution, use, and Influence of Actual KPIs

The experts stated that the KPIs currently being collected are distributed at the same level, for
example to inquiring about business units or the upper management level, for example, to economic
committees. Three experts stated that the key figures are further processed in reports (e. g. annual
reports, diversity reports).
Four of the five companies indicated that key figures are used to control HR processes or to
improve HR processes.
“What is my relationship from recruiter to support, to Active Source, that’s an implication. Another
implication is business partner management, i.e. in the topic of low performance, high-performance
management potential candidates, and we conclude our development programs that we set up and
then control our own, our training.” [IP2]
However, this control only takes place in some processes and not across the entire process
landscape.
When asked about the impact on work quality, the picture was split.
Limited, so it’s flanking numbers, these numbers don’t control me, I don’t use them for control because
they come too unreliable. [IP4]
It should influence my very personal quality of work because […] I am nowadays responsible for
our Shared Service Centre […] and in this role the whole thing lives of course from quality and
efficiency [IP6].
Four experts stated that the influence of key performance indicators was noticeable, three denied
they had influence or weighted it as low.
5.3. New KPIs Enable the Acceptance of New Technologies

Hypothesis 3: The HR Cloud enables the derivation of new HR figures, which is accompanied by a
higher acceptance of the new HR Cloud technology.
16
The following categories resulting from the interview were considered for the analysis:
• Conceptual consideration of KPIs in the project scope

• Assessment and use of cross-domain domain KPIs
• Successful work, its measurement, and display by derived KPIs
• Influence on acceptance of the cloud solution
5.3.1. Conceptual Consideration of KPIs in the Project Scope

Three companies indicated that key figures were considered in the implementation project.
Interviewees from this group stated that the metrics were a key selection criterion for the HR Cloud
solution and provided an added value.
To put it this way, as an icing on the cake, this evaluation mechanism comes at the top, where we say,
so now we have to collect or process HR data on a broad scale, and from this, we want to extract
KPIs that speak as much as possible for the company. [IP4]
Two of the respondents stated that the topic of KPIs is in the status of ideas or should only be
implemented in the future, with one pointing out that the KPIs already delivered by the on-premise
system would be enough at present.
5.3.2. Assessment and use of Cross-Domain KPIs

All respondents rate the use of cross-domain KPIs as positive or even mandatory.
[...] that’s why I think it is imperative to link KPIs. [IP2]
Two basic benefits of these KPIs have been identified. The increase in the transparency of
dependent processes, with one expert, explicitly pointing out that this also clearly demonstrates and
justifies the complexity of HR work in general and its valuable contribution in the company:
Mainly to represent the value added of HR, because we do these processes to achieve something, and
if we could report on these overall processes or maybe even, what do you call cross-domain related
reports, we could also portray the complexity of our work differently. [IP4]
The further processing of these data for enhanced optimization (i.e. through the application of
artificial intelligence) is also mentioned as a vision for the future.
The second benefit is improved control and optimization of HR processes. All companies see
potential here, starting with the fact that the elaborate creation of KPIs is no longer necessary, up to
the adaptation of complex process chains. The respondents also expect an improvement in the overall
database collected, as the linking of key figures across several processes also reveals weak points in
the data (e.g. the number of vacancies filled cannot be greater than the number of people recruited
internally and externally).
5.3.3. Successful Work, its Measurement, and Display by Derived KPIs

All experts stated that customer satisfaction is the essential criterion for measuring success in their
work. This specific degree of satisfaction varies depending on the individual position of the expert,
e.g. adoption of the HR Cloud is relevant for the project experts while the quality of the HR services
provided is essential to HR General Management.
17
As a result, some of the derived KPIs are used to measure customer satisfaction. Three experts want
to measure employees’ mood images and how they can change because of individual influences. Key
figures in the context of talent management are also addressed either in combination with workforce
planning or mixed with the efficient core processes.
Examples of this are the following desired process ratios, some of which are combined:
• Filling vacancies from recruitment combined with performance and potential values
• Performance assessments and succession planning in combination with development figures
• Potential applicants for job families and the use of talent pools to fill vacancies
• Movements of an employee within the organization
• Fill levels of talent pools in combination with performance and potential values
• Job evaluations in combination with performance and possible values
• Comprehensive competence evaluations to fit into positions
• Assessment methods in conjunction with performance values
• Learning outcomes and their influence on potential assessment compensation in combination
with performance and likely assessments Positions in combination with compensation
One expert also referred to other technical KPIs that measure, for example, the length of time a
person spends in HR processes, with a focus on the end user’s use of the system.
Regarding the way in which the KPIs are presented, there is agreement that either a web-based
solution or an own (mobile) application is required. Extended possibilities of evaluation, such as time
filtering and selection of individual business processes (e.g. display of the recruitment KPIs of the
last 3 months) as well as simulations (e.g. that involve questions such as: “are vacancies filled faster
if a new recruiting channel is selected?”) are requested.
5.3.4. Influence of New KPIs to the Acceptance of the Cloud

All experts admit that the new key figures would generally have a positive impact. Emphasis is
placed on the increased acceptance and confidence of the end customer. The improved possibility of
consultation is also mentioned here.
[…] from my point of view, being able to deal with their teams much more autonomously or self-
sufficiently and being able to say that I have a situation here, what do I do with them now? I think
that would strengthen both the cloud and the HR function […] [IP4]
The availability of the data alone is seen by an expert as positive.
Yes, I am experiencing the experience on a small scale, which would have an immense acceptance,
because I notice more and more when people know what they are filling the tool with data for, and
when something happens to the data, it increases acceptance to an extreme degree. [IP5]
Only a slightly negative vote indicates that key figures are generally positive, but other preparatory
work is necessary.
I think it would be a so-called ‘nice to have’ […] I believe that our acceptance is something that has
to be picked up elsewhere - not with the key figures. [IP7]
18
6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Conclusions are derived from the analysis of the three hypotheses and their contribution to research are
discussed. Finally, an outlook on potential further research opportunities will be given. The derivations
resulting from the analysis of the respective categories and subcategories are described hereafter.
6.1. The Success of the Cloud Transformation
Hypothesis 1: The success of an HR Cloud transformation depends on active participation in

the fundamental digitization decision and the comprehensive, problem-free, time-acceptable
digitization of a large part of the HR processes in an HR Cloud environment. It will have a
positive influence on how people work in the HR department.
Considering all factors influencing the hypothesis, the following can be stated:
• The topic of standardization and efficiency improvement is reflected and positively accepted
from the strategic level, through the selection criteria of an HR Cloud solution down to the
operative level.
• The HR department itself is the main driver of digitization, with a clear focus on process
improvement and harmonization. It can be assumed that the HR department itself will largely
prioritize process digitisation, especially to increase process efficiency and to shift focus to the
more strategic aspects of HR. It is interesting to note that it is assumed that the automation of
operative HR tasks leads directly to a more strategic focus, which contradicts the findings of
Marler (2009).
• Cultural change and technical restrictions are the potential stumbling blocks, with HR being
responsible for the first one. Medium-sized and large companies explicitly cite negotiations with
the works council as a further challenge which leads to the assumption that co-determination
gains influence as the size of the company increases.
• The cost aspect has only been mentioned once, although this is the main driver for selecting a
talent management solution, according to the study by Harris and Spencer (2018).
• Many HR processes have already been migrated to the HR Cloud, and further process migrations
are pending. Prioritisation is managed by HR.
• The HR Cloud transformation is accompanied by a positive change in the working methods,
especially the increase in efficiency of HR processes and the new approach to the solution itself.
In conclusion, it seems as if HR itself is the most significant success factor for a successful HR
Cloud transformation and, above all, accompanying change management has a meaningful influence.
Heikkilä et al. (2014) state that top management is often not involved in the decisions to introduce
e-HRM and that external consultants replace the scarce internal resources (e.g. IT experts, HR process
owners) and that they are also responsible for the implementation. The findings of this study are that
the problems of limited resources have been addressed several times, but an explicit assumption of
responsibility must be seen at both the operational and strategic management level. Concerning the
influence of the technology on the introduction of enterprise software, some studies present it either
as high (Alam et al., 2016) or as non-decisive (Teo et al., 2007). The experts stated in the study that
the HR Cloud has technical limitations (e.g. the lack of the possibility of a completely free process
design or the perceived loss of control over the data through remote storage in the cloud), which can
be attributed to a lack of experience with the new technology.
The Sierra-Cedar 2017-2018 HR Systems Survey (Harris & Spencer, 2018) finds that 70%
of companies that have a high level of cloud adoption approach the adoption of the cloud in HR
management consistently, so awareness seems to be there. Close cooperation with the IT department
19
for a deeper understanding of the solution also seems to be helpful. As far as decision factors are
concerned, the findings are similar to those of Schalk et al. (2013), which have identified the increase
in efficiency and repositioning of HR in the company using three case studies.
6.2. Actual KPI is Used to Control and Optimize HR Processes
Hypothesis 2: There are many HR metrics that are already used today to control and optimise HR
processes.
Looking at the delivered key figures and the interviews, an ambiguous picture emerges when analysing
the hypothesis:
• Although many key data have been collected in quantitative terms, they are not widely distributed
across all HR process clusters. The number of core operating figures, such as compensation, is
predominant.
• The compilation of these key figures takes time and effort, and the use of process control and
optimization is limited. The derivation of concrete options for action takes place, but only once
was it explicitly pointed out that the HR process has been improved by using key figures.
• The key figures are used to control operations, but not over the entire process landscape, but in
individual HR processes.
• While half of the respondents see HR metrics as influencing the quality of work, the other half
denies this or consider it to be of low impact. Here the divided picture shows up again.
HR KPIs are documented in the companies surveyed. However, this is by no means the case
in all already digitized HR processes, but only in selected individual processes. Besides, the range
of crucial figures recorded in these processes is limited with a strong focus on operative HR core
processes (refer to figure 3). Even if these key figures are already used for controlling and optimizing,
this only affects one part of the HR process map. The fact that only half of the respondents also see
a connection between the key figures and the quality of work shows the overall significance of the
topic. These findings are in line with the Sierra-Cedar Report (Harris & Spencer, 2018), which states
that just under 40% of companies conduct any form of analytics at all. Also, the figures collected there
are mainly used in the context of compliance as well as risk mitigation and as a (cost) benchmark.
The latter is indicative of the long-standing paradigm that the only purpose of HR is to improve a
financial outcome (Bondarouk & Brewster, 2016). This paradigm explains why many more KPIs
were reported in the operative HR core and compensation cluster than in the talent management area.
6.3. New KPIs Enable the Acceptance of New Technologies
Hypothesis 3: The HR Cloud enables the derivation of new HR figures, which is accompanied by a
higher acceptance of the new HR Cloud technology.
The last hypothesis can be contrasted by looking at the following points:
• Most of the companies investigated in this study have thought of KPIs during the HR Cloud
transformation project (confirming Harris and Spencer (2018)).
• All respondents see cross-domain KPIs positively and see the possibilities of process optimization
at the same time.
• Customer satisfaction is the driver for all experts, and the measurement of customer satisfaction
is aimed for.
20
• The combination of KPIs from all HR process clusters enables a large quantity of derived KPIs
that make the entire HR process chain measurable. This transparency also contributes to customer
satisfaction.
• All experts see a positive correlation between the new KPIs and the acceptance of the cloud
solution.
From these points, it can be concluded that the experts are aware that new KPIs can be generated
from the HR Cloud and this directly contributes to customer satisfaction. These key figures only need
to be developed conceptually and then implemented. It is remarkable, however, that the relationship
between actual KPIs and the quality of work seems not to be as clear to the experts as it is to potential
new KPIs.
7. CONTRIBUTION TO RESEARCH, LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
By identifying success factors for HR Cloud transformations, a detailed review of the actual KPIs
and the analysis of potential new vital figures, this study contributes to both research and practice.
The identification of the influencing factors offers the possibility to take them into account in
the context of practice transformation and to mitigate the resulting risks. This contribution to the
research is achieved by examining the adoption of e-HRM software in a cloud-based environment.
There is no limitation to a specific HR process; there is a holistic assessment of the HR Cloud solution
from an HR point of view. The focus on the new HR Cloud technology will also become relevant for
research and practice, as software manufacturers increasingly rely on cloud solutions (Wagner, 2018)
for mapping HR processes. The on-going substitution of legacy on-premise systems for HR Cloud
solutions will lead to a further increase in HR Cloud transformation projects in the medium term.
This study also contributes to the field of HR analytics, both in research and in practical terms.
On the one hand, an explicit reference is made to HR figures and their impact on the business, but
on the other hand, their use is limited in practice. In this case, the study provides ideas on how key
figures can be thought of differently and how critical figures generated by the new technology can
be used profitably.
The limitations of this study resulted from the number of available HR experts, all of whom came
from Germany and mostly use SAP Success Factors as an HR Cloud solution. Although the experts
interviewed have a broad perspective on HR digitization in their companies due to their exposed
position, this view is still limited and biased due to the pre-selection with a focus on HR experts in
management positions. A multi-stakeholder approach can provide further insights (Bondarouk &
Brewster, 2016; Bondarouk et al., 2009) as well as focusing on other employees working with e-HRM
(Francis et al., 2014). The experience gained in day-to-day work is also limited, as the implementation
projects have only been completed recently. The database of the currently recorded key figures is also
limited to the interviewed companies. Here, more key figures were expected than delivered and the
analysis was therefore limited. In principle, the temporal component is also a further limiting factor,
since the faster development of HR Cloud solutions compared to on-premise systems influences the
results of this study.
Future research in the field of software adoption may be based on the categories derived from
this study. These could be used in a quantitative study, in which a wide range of end users of an
HR Cloud are surveyed. These end users can be segmented according to different aspects, such as
geography, business unit or cloud solution. A prerequisite is the increased maturity and adoption of
HR Cloud solutions in companies.
21
REFERENCES
Alam, M. G. R., Masum, A. K. M., Beh, L. S., & Hong, C. S. (2016). Critical factors influencing decision to
adopt human resource information system (HRIS) in hospitals. PLoS One, 11(8), 1–22. doi:10.1371/journal.
pone.0160366 PMID:27494334
Amalou-Döpke, L., & Süß, S. (2014). HR measurement as an instrument of the HR department in its exchange
relationship with top management: A qualitative study based on resource dependence theory. Scandinavian
Journal of Management, 30(4), 444–460. doi:10.1016/j.scaman.2014.09.003
Angrave, D., Charlwood, A., Kirkpatrick, I., Lawrence, M., & Stuart, M. (2016). HR and analytics: Why HR is set
to fail the big data challenge. Human Resource Management Journal, 26(1), 1–11. doi:10.1111/1748-8583.12090
Baesens, B., Winne, S., & Sels, L. (2016). Is Your Company Ready for HR Analytics? MIT Sloan Management
Review.
BarNir, A., Gallaugher, J. M., & Auger, P. (2003). Business process digitization, strategy, and the impact of firm
age and size: The case of the magazine publishing industry. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(6), 789–814.
doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00030-2
Bassi, L., & McMurrer, D. (2016). Four lessons learned in how to use human resource analytics to improve the
effectiveness of leadership development. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 10(2), 39–43. doi:10.1002/jls.21471
Beatty, R. W., Huselid, M. A., & Schneier, C. E. (2003). New HR metrics: Scoring on the business scorecard.
Organizational Dynamics, 32(2), 107–121. doi:10.1016/S0090-2616(03)00013-5
Bogner, A., Littig, B., & Menz, W. (2014). Interviews mit Experten. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-19416-5
Bondarouk, T. (2011). Theoretical Approaches to e-HRM Implementations. In Electronic HRM in Theory and
Practice (Vol. 8). doi:10.1108/S1877-6361(2011)0000008005
Bondarouk, T., & Brewster, C. (2016). Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(21), 2652–2671. doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1232296
Bondarouk, T., Harms, R., & Lepak, D. (2017). Does e-HRM lead to better HRM service? International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 28(9), 1332–1362. doi:10.1080/09585192.2015.1118139
Bondarouk, T., Parry, E., & Furtmueller, E. (2017). Electronic HRM: Four decades of research on adoption
and consequences. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(1), 98–131. doi:10.1080/0958
5192.2016.1245672
Bondarouk, T., Ruël, H., & van der Heijden, B. (2009). e-HRM effectiveness in a public sector organization:
A multi-stakeholder perspective. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(3), 578–590.
doi:10.1080/09585190802707359
Bondarouk, T. V., & Ruël, H. J. M. (2009). Electronic Human Resource Management: Challenges in the digital
era. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(3), 505–514. doi:10.1080/09585190802707235
Bondarouk, T. V., & Ruël, H. J. M. (2013). The strategic value of e-HRM: Results from an explanatory study
in a governmental organisation. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(2), 391–414. doi:
10.1080/09585192.2012.675142
Boselie, P., & Paauwe, J. (2005). Human resource function competencies in European companies. Personnel
Review, 34(5), 550–566. doi:10.1108/00483480510612512
Carlson, K. D., & Kavanagh, M. J. (2008). HR Metrics and Workforce analytics. In Human Resource Information
Systems (pp. 387–421). Basics, Applications, and Future Directions.
Chhinzer, N., & Ghatehatehorde, G. (2009). Challenging relationships: HR metrics and organizational financial
performance. The Journal of Business, 8(1), 37–48. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2009.09.014
Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems:
Theory and results. Management, (April), 291.
22
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease Of Use, And User Acceptance. Management
Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339. doi:10.2307/249008
Dery, K., Hall, R., Wailes, N., & Wiblen, S. (2013). Lost in translation? An actor-network approach to HRIS
implementation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 22(3), 225–237. doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2013.03.002
Devaraj, S., Krajewski, L., & Wei, J. C. (2007). Impact of eBusiness technologies on operational performance:
The role of production information integration in the supply chain. Journal of Operations Management, 25(6),
1199–1216. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2007.01.002
Dhamija, P. (2012). E-Recruitment: A Roadmap Towards E-Human Resource Management. Journal of Arts.
Science & Commerce, 3(3(2)), 33–39.
Dulebohn, J. H., & Johnson, R. D. (2013). Human resource metrics and decision support: A classification
framework. Human Resource Management Review, 23(1), 71–83. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.06.005
Eckhardt, A., Laumer, S., Maier, C., & Weitzel, T. (2014). The transformation of people, processes, and IT in
e-recruiting. Employee Relations, 36(4), 415–431. doi:10.1108/ER-07-2013-0079
Fecheyr-Lippens, B., Schaninger, B., & Tanner, K. (2015). Power to the new people analytics. The McKinsey
Quarterly, 51(1), 61–63. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/
power-to-the-new-people-analytics
Fisher, S. L., & Howell, A. W. (2004). Beyond user acceptance: An examination of employee reactions to
information technology systems. Human Resource Management, 43(2–3), 243–258. doi:10.1002/hrm.20018
Florkowski, G. W., & Olivas‐Luján, M. R. (2006). The diffusion of human‐resource information‐technology
innovations in US and non‐US firms. Personnel Review, 35(6), 684–710. doi:10.1108/00483480610702737
Francis, H., Parkes, C., & Reddington, M. (2014). E-HR and international HRM: A critical perspective on the
discursive framing of e-HR. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(10), 1327–1350. doi:
10.1080/09585192.2013.870309
Garbarino-Alberti, H. (2013). IT Governance and Human Resources Management: A Framework for SMEs.
International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals, 4(3), 40–57. doi:10.4018/
jhcitp.2013070104
Gardner, N., Mcgranahan, D., & Wolf, W. (2011). Question for your HR chief: Are we using our ‘people data’
to create value? The McKinsey Quarterly, (2): 1–5.
Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2010). Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente
rekonstruierender Untersuchungen (4. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: VS Verl. für Sozialwiss. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-
91538-8
Grant, D., & Newell, S. (2013). Realizing the strategic potential of e-HRM. The Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, 22(3), 187–192. doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2013.07.001
Gueutal, H. G., & Stone, D. L. (2005). The Brave New World of eHR: Human Resources Management in the
Digital Age. Management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gummesson, E. (2006). Qualitative research in management: Addressing complexity, context and persona.
Management Decision, 44(2), 167–179. doi:10.1108/00251740610650175
Harris, S., & Spencer, E. (2018). The Sierra-Cedar 2017–2018 HR Systems Survey 20th Annual Edition.
Heikkilä, J.-P., Brewster, C., & Mattila, J. (2014). Micro-Political Conflicts and Institutional Issues During e-HRM
Implementation in MNCs: A Vendor’s View. In Human Resource Management and Technological Challenges
(pp. 1–21). Cham: Springer International Publishing; doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02618-3_1
Holm, B., A. (. (2014). Institutional context and e-recruitment practices of Danish organizations. Employee
Relations, 36(4), 432–455. doi:10.1108/ER-07-2013-0088
Jafari Navimipour, N., Rahmani, A. M., Navin, A. H., & Hosseinzadeh, M. (2015). Expert Cloud: A Cloud-based
framework to share the knowledge and skills of human resources. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 57–74.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.001
23
Khan, H., Hussainy, S. K., Khan, K., & Khan, A. (2017). The applications, advantages and challenges in the
implementation of HRIS in Pakistani perspective. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management
Systems, 47(1), 137–150. doi:10.1108/VJIKMS-01-2016-0005
King, K. G. (2016). Data Analytics in Human Resources: A Case Study and Critical Review. Human Resource
Development Review, 15(4), 487–495. doi:10.1177/1534484316675818
Krippendorff, K. (2012). Content Analysis: An Introduction To Its Methodology (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
Kumar, T. P., & Lalitha, D. S. (2016). E- Recruitment Practices in Indian Banking Industry- with Special reference
to Axis bank Private limited in Guntur District. International Journal of Technical Research & Science, 1(8),
219–226.
Laumer, S., Eckhardt, A., & Weitzel, T. (2010). Electronic Human Resources Management in an E-Business
Environment. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 11(4), 240–250.
Laumer, S., Maier, C., & Eckhardt, A. (2014). The impact of human resources information systems and business
process management implementations on recruiting process performance : A case study. In Twentieth Americas
Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–12). doi:10.1007/s11573-014-0758-9
Lawler, E. J., Levenson, A., & Boudreau, J. W. (2004). Effective Organizations HR Metrics and Analytics – Uses
and Impacts. Human Resource Planning, 27(4), 27–35.
Lepak, D. P., & Snell, S. A. (1998). Virtual HR: Strategic human resource management in the 21st century.
Human Resource Management Review, 8(3), 215–234. doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(98)90003-1
Levenson, A. (2018). Using workforce analytics to improve strategy execution. Human Resource Management,
57(3), 685–700. doi:10.1002/hrm.21850
Lin, A., & Chen, N. C. (2012). Cloud computing as an innovation: Perception, attitude, and adoption. International
Journal of Information Management, 32(6), 533–540. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.04.001
Lin, L.-H. (2011). Electronic human resource management and organizational innovation: The roles of information
technology and virtual organizational structure. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(2),
235–257. doi:10.1080/09585192.2011.540149
Low, C., Chen, Y., & Wu, M. (2011). Understanding the determinants of cloud computing adoption. Industrial
Management & Data Systems, 111(7), 1006–1023. doi:10.1108/02635571111161262
Maatman, M. (2006). Measuring the effectiveness of e-HRM: the development of an analytical framework for
the measurement of e-HRM and its application within a Dutch Ministry. University of Twente. Retrieved from
http://essay.utwente.nl/583/1/scriptie_Maatman.pdf
Maier, C., Laumer, S., Eckhardt, A., & Weitzel, T. (2013). Analyzing the impact of HRIS implementations on
HR personnel’s job satisfaction and turnover intention. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 22(3),
193–207. doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2012.09.001
Marler, J. H. (2009). Making human resources strategic by going to the Net: Reality or myth? International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(3), 515–527. doi:10.1080/09585190802707276
Marler, J. H., & Boudreau, J. W. (2017). An evidence-based review of HR Analytics. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 28(1), 3–26. doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1244699
Marler, J. H., & Fisher, S. L. (2013). An evidence-based review of e-HRM and strategic human resource
management. Human Resource Management Review, 23(1), 18–36. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.06.002
Masum, A. K. M., Kabir, M. J., & Chowdhury, M. M. (2015). Determinants that influencing the adoption of
E-HRM: An empirical study on Bangladesh. Asian Social Science, 11(21), 117–124. doi:10.5539/ass.v11n21p117
Mayring, P. (2016). Einführung in die qualitative Sozialforschung (6th ed.). Beltz.
McIver, D., Lengnick-Hall, M. L., & Lengnick-Hall, C. A. (2018). A strategic approach to workforce analytics:
Integrating science and agility. Business Horizons, 61(3), 397–407. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2018.01.005
Mell, P., & Grance, T. (2011). The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing Recommendations of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology. Nist Special Publication, 145, 7. doi:10.1136/emj.2010.096966
24
Nagendra, A., & Deshpande, M. (2014). Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) in HR Planning and
Development in Mid to Large Sized Organizations. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 133, 61–67.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.169
Nura, A. A., & Osman, N. H. (2012). The Proposed Relationship connecting e-HRM adoption, Performance
Management System and Effective Decision making in Higher Educational Institutions in Nigeria. European
Journal of Business and Management, 4(18), 202–210.
Nura, A. A., & Osman, N. H. (2013). Gauging the effect of performance management and technology based human
resource management on employee retention: The perspective of academics in higher educational institutions in
Sokoto State Nigeria. Asian Social Science, 9(15), 295–304. doi:10.5539/ass.v9n15p295
Obeidat, S. M. (2016). The link between e-HRM use and HRM effectiveness: An empirical study. Personnel
Review, 45(6), 1281–1301. doi:10.1108/PR-04-2015-0111
Oliveira, T., & Martins, M. F. (2010). Understanding e‐business adoption across industries in European countries.
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 110(9), 1337–1354. doi:10.1108/02635571011087428
Ostermann, H., Staudinger, B., & Staudinger, R. (2009). Benchmarking Human Resource Information Systems. In
Encyclopedia of Human Resources Information Systems (pp. 92–101). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-
1-59904-883-3.ch014
Paauwe, J. (2009). HRM and Performance: Achievements, Methodological Issues and Prospects. Journal of
Management Studies, 46(1), 129–142. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00809.x
Park, S. C., & Ryoo, S. Y. (2013). An empirical investigation of end-users’ switching toward cloud computing:
A two factor theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 160–170. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.032
Parry, E. (2011). An examination of e-HRM as a means to increase the value of the HR function. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(5), 1146–1162. doi:10.1080/09585192.2011.556791
Patre, S. (2016). Six Thinking Hats Approach to HR Analytics. SA Journal of Human Resource Management,
3(2), 191–199. doi:10.1177/2322093716678316
Rasmussen, T., & Ulrich, D. (2015). Learning from practice: How HR analytics avoids being a management
fad. Organizational Dynamics, 44(3), 236–242. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2015.05.008
Reichers, A. E., Wanous, J. P., & Austin, J. T. (1997). Understanding and Managing Cynicism about
Organizational Change. The Academy of Management Executive, 11(1), 48–59. Retrieved from https://www.
jstor.org/stable/4165371
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. Macmillan Publishing Co.
Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of Innovations (4th ed.). Simon & Schuster.
Rüegg-Stürm, J., & Grand, S. (2016). The St. Gallen Management Model: English translation of the fourth
generation of the German text. Haupt Verlag.
Ruël, H. J. M., Bondarouk, T. V., & der Velde, M. (2007). The contribution of e-HRM to HRM effectiveness.
Employee Relations, 29(3), 280–291. doi:10.1108/01425450710741757
Russell, C., & Bennett, N. (2015). Big data and talent management: Using hard data to make the soft stuff easy.
Business Horizons, 58(3), 237–242. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2014.08.001
Saldaña, J. (2015). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (3rd ed.). Sage Publications Ltd.
Schalk, R., Timmerman, V., & den Heuvel, S. (2013). How strategic considerations influence decision making
on e-HRM applications. Human Resource Management Review, 23(1), 84–92. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.06.008
Schoeneberg, K.-P. (2011). Kritische Erfolgsfaktoren von IT-Projekten: Eine empirische Analyse von ERP-
Implementierungen am Beispiel der Mineralölbranche.
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. London: SAGE Publications, Inc.
25
Snell, S. A. (1995). Managing the impact of information technology on human resource management. In G.
Ferris, S. Rosen, & D. T. Barnum (Eds.), Handbook of human resource management (pp. 159–174). Blackwell
Human Resource Management.
Stone, D. L., & Deadrick, D. L. (2015). Challenges and opportunities affecting the future of human resource
management. Human Resource Management Review, 25(2), 139–145. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.003
Stone, D. L., Deadrick, D. L., Lukaszewski, K. M., & Johnson, R. (2015). The Influence of Technology on the
Future of Human Resource Management. Human Resource Management Review, 25(2), 216–231. doi:10.1016/j.
hrmr.2015.01.002
Stone, D. L., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2013). Emerging issues in theory and research on electronic human resource
management (eHRM). Human Resource Management Review, 23(1), 1–5. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.06.001
Stone-Romero, E. F., Stone, D. L., & Salas, E. (2003). The influence of culture on role conception and role
behavior in organizations. Applied Psychology, 52(3), 328–362. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00139
Strohmeier, S. (2007). Research in e-HRM: Review and implications. Human Resource Management Review,
17(1), 19–37. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2006.11.002
Strohmeier, S., & Kabst, R. (2009). Organizational adoption of e-HRM in Europe: An empirical exploration of
major adoption factors. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(6), 482–501. doi:10.1108/02683940910974099
Strohmeier, S., & Piazza, F. (2013). Domain driven data mining in human resource management: A review of
current research. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(7), 2410–2420. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.10.059
Tansley, C., & Newell, S. (2007). Project social capital, leadership and trust. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
22(4), 350–368. doi:10.1108/02683940710745932
Teo, T. S. H., Lim, G. S., & Fedric, S. A. (2007). The adoption and diffusion of human resources information
systems in Singapore. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(1), 44–62. doi:10.1177/1038411107075402
Theriou, G. N., & Chatzoglou, P. D. (2014). The impact of best HRM practices on performance – identifying
enabling factors. Employee Relations, 36(5), 535–561. doi:10.1108/ER-02-2013-0025
Thong, J. (1999). An integrated model of information systems adoption in small businesses. Journal of
Management Information Systems, 15(4), 187–214. doi:10.1080/07421222.1999.11518227
Tornatzky, L. G., Fleischer, M., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (1990). The processes of technological innovation.
Lexington Books.
Troshani, I., Jerram, C., & Rao Hill, S. (2011). Exploring the public sector adoption of HRIS. Industrial
Management & Data Systems, 111(3), 470–488. doi:10.1108/02635571111118314
Ulrich, D., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2015). Are we there yet? What’s next for HR? Human Resource Management
Review, 25(2), 188–204. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.004
van den Heuvel, S., & Bondarouk, T. (2017). The rise (and fall?) of HR analytics. Journal of Organizational
Effectiveness: People and Performance, 4(2), 157–178. doi:10.1108/JOEPP-03-2017-0022
Van Looy, A., & Shafagatova, A. (2016). Business process performance measurement: A structured literature
review of indicators, measures and metrics. SpringerPlus, 5(1), 1–24. doi:10.1186/s40064-016-3498-1
PMID:27812439
Varma, S., & Gopal, R. (2011). The implications of implementing electronic- human resource management
(e-HRM) systems in companies. Journal of Information Systems and Communication, 2(1), 10–29.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., Statistics, B., Xu, X., & Acceptance, T. (2016). Unified Theory of Acceptance
and Use of Technology: A Synthesis and the Road Ahead. Jais, 17(5), 328–376. doi:10.17705/1jais.00428
Voermans, M., & Van Veldhoven, M. (2007). Attitude towards E-HRM: An empirical study at Philips. Personnel
Review, 36(6), 887–902. doi:10.1108/00483480710822418
Wagner, R. (2018). DSAG Roadmap Webinar “SAP Human Resources.”
26
Wei, D., Varshney, K. R., & Wagman, M. (2015). Optigrow: People Analytics for Job Transfers. In
Proceedings - 2015 IEEE International Congress on Big Data, BigData Congress 2015, 535–542. doi:10.1109/
BigDataCongress.2015.84
Zapotocny, M. (2015). Human Resource Information Systems: The current problems and future challenges.
In Innovation Vision 2020: From Regional Development Sustainability To Global Economic Growth (pp.
2606–2614).
Ziebell, R.-C., Schoeneberg, K.-P., Schultz, M., Garrigós, J. A., Perello-Marin, M. R., Albors Garrigós,
J., & Perello Marin, M. R. (2018). Vom traditionellen Personalmanagement hin zu e-HRM in der Cloud
Implementierungsansätze einer digitalen HR-Transformation. In S. Reinheimer (Ed.), Cloud Computing - Die
Infrastruktur der Digitalisierung (pp. 113–139). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. doi:10.1007/978-
3-658-20967-4_9
Ziebell, R.-C., Schultz, M., Albors Garrigós, J., & Schoeneberg, K.-P. (2016). HR-Cloud-Transformation –
Vorgehen und Erfolgsfaktoren. HMD Praxis Der Wirtschaftsinformatik, 53(6), 802–814. doi:10.1365/s40702-
016-0251-8
Robert-Christian Ziebell has a diploma in computer sciences from University of Applied Sciences Wedel, Germany
and MBA from IE Business School, Madrid, Mr. Ziebell is an IT manager in a retail company in Germany and holds
a doctorate degree from Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain. He has experience as a project and program
manager of more than ten years.
Jose Albors-Garrigos is actually an Emeritus professor at the Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV) in Spain.
Dr. Albors is an Industrial engineer from Univ. Pol. de Madrid where he was awarded a PhD degree and an MBA.
With more than 25 years of professional experience in engineering Dr. Albors joined UPV in 1995 becoming Full
professor in 2010. He has ample academic and research experience in the fields of innovation and technology
management as well as knowledge management where he has been a consultant and researcher. He has published
more than 80 articles in international journals and 150 papers in international conferences.
Klaus-Peter Schoeneberg is a Professor at Beuth University of Applied Sciences in Berlin. He obtained a B.Sc.
in Business Management and a PhD in Business Economics from the University of Hamburg, Germany. He has
sample experience in the private sector as an IT management expert in international projects like Shell Germany
Oil Co., Dresden Bank as well as an IT Business Consultant.
Professor Perello is an associate professor at Universitat Politècnica de València. An Industrial engineer by

education, Dr. Perello has a PhD in Business Management from Universitat Politècnica de València.
27
View publication stats

Adoption and Success of e-HRM in A Cloud Computing Environment: A Field Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adoption and Success of e-HRM in A Cloud Computing Environment: A Field Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adoption and Success of e-HRM in A Cloud Computing Environment: A Field Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Adoption and Success of e-HRM in a Cloud Computing

Article in International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing · April 2019

Jose Albors Klaus Peter- Schoeneberg

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Teaching Management and related subjects View project

Actional Intelligence View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Adoption and Success of e-HRM in

2.1. The Digital Transformation of HR

2.2. Impact of Technology on HR and Outcome

2.3. Innovation Adoption

on individuals, on business processes as well as on digitation technology. Therefore, few studies

Question 1: Which factors from an HR perspective contribute to a successful HR Cloud transformation?

4.1. Methodology Selection

Table 1. Overview of the interviewed experts

4.2. Questionnaire and Interview Guidelines

• Company size (#employees):

4.2.2. Interview Guidelines

Table 2. Interview guideline references

4.3. Evaluation Methodology

Figure 1. HR process cluster (Ziebell et al., 2018)

5.1. The Success of the Cloud Transformation

5.1.1. Digitisation Strategy

5.1.2. The Driver of Digitization in the Organization

[…] HR itself, so I consider myself as a driver. [IP4]

5.1.3. Prioritisation in the Implementation Process

5.1.4. Stumbling Blocks and Obstacles During Implementation

5.1.5. HR Process Cluster and Place of Digitization

5.1.6. Criteria for Solution Selection and Implementation Period

Figure 2. HR Process implementation status

5.1.7. Change and Evaluation of the Working Method

5.2. Actual KPI Used to Control and Optimize HR Processes

• Overview and types of actual KPIs

5.2.1. Overview and Types of the Actual KPIs

Figure 3. Overview of the survey results

5.2.2. Sources of Actual KPIs

5.2.3. Distribution, use, and Influence of Actual KPIs

5.3. New KPIs Enable the Acceptance of New Technologies

• Conceptual consideration of KPIs in the project scope

5.3.1. Conceptual Consideration of KPIs in the Project Scope

5.3.2. Assessment and use of Cross-Domain KPIs

[...] that’s why I think it is imperative to link KPIs. [IP2]

5.3.3. Successful Work, its Measurement, and Display by Derived KPIs

5.3.4. Influence of New KPIs to the Acceptance of the Cloud

The availability of the data alone is seen by an expert as positive.

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

6.1. The Success of the Cloud Transformation

Hypothesis 1: The success of an HR Cloud transformation depends on active participation in

6.2. Actual KPI is Used to Control and Optimize HR Processes

6.3. New KPIs Enable the Acceptance of New Technologies

The last hypothesis can be contrasted by looking at the following points:

7. CONTRIBUTION TO RESEARCH, LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

Professor Perello is an associate professor at Universitat Politècnica de València. An Industrial engineer by

You might also like