HRIS Performance Monitoring Plan

A human resources information system (HRIS) is an integrated system for managing information used
in HR decision-making. A complete HRIS links all human resources data from the time professionals
enter pre-service training to when they leave the workforce. HRIS performance measures are
benchmarks for evaluating how efficient and effective HRIS investments are and how they can be
improved to obtain better results to support HRIS strengthening objectives.
Continuous monitoring and evaluation is vital in determining what an HRIS is accomplishing, what
needs to be improved and whether results are being achieved. This document provides basic guidance
in the systematic monitoring and evaluation of an HRIS system. The goal of any performance
monitoring plan (PMP) is not to focus on what is wrong and condemn it; rather, it is to highlight the
positive aspects of the system that make it work, as well as to identify what went wrong as a basis for
improving the system.
Implementing a HRIS Performance Monitoring Plan
Ideally, a working groupoften a subcommittee of the Stakeholder Leadership Group (SLG)whose
members have a key interest in monitoring the HRIS strengthening process is responsible for
implementing the PMP. These stakeholders may include the HRIS manager, chief information officer,
chief security officer, SLG secretary or chair and other key representatives of the organization hosting
the information system (Chew 2008). This group will be responsible for managing the generic steps
necessary to implement the HRIS monitoring and evaluation plan (WHO 2004):
1.Develop a plan for the systematic monitoring and evaluation of the system:
What will be monitored and evaluated?
How will it be done?
Who will do it?
How frequently will it be conducted?
How will the results be systematically disseminated?
How will action resulting from the evaluation results be generated?
2.Identify the resources needed to implement the monitoring and evaluation plan
3.Prioritize the activities, based on availability of resources and need
4.Implement the monitoring and evaluation plan
5.Document and disseminate the results of monitoring and evaluation activities

6.Make recommendations based on the results of monitoring and evaluation activities.

We recommend institutionalizing monitoring efforts to ensure that it becomes a regular activity and
will be allocated the corresponding resources and technical expertise.
Suggestions for HRIS Performance Monitoring Indicators
At the end of this document is a set of suggested indicators for the quantitative and continuous
monitoring of HRIS performance. The proposed indicators generally fall in five categories:
1.System indicators
2.Security indicators
3.Data indicators
4.Stakeholder Leadership Group indicators
5.Usage indicators.
For each indicator, data collection must be as nonintrusive as possible and would ideally be automated.
In addition, country-specific laws and regulations concerning privacy or protection of individual rights
might apply to the HRIS and therefore would need to be examined and included.
HRIS Evaluation Strategy
In addition to continuous monitoring of system performance, periodic evaluation studies can be
conducted to assess the strengths and weaknesses of HRIS data supply and demand. Figure 1 is a
matrix that can be used to evaluate HRIS strengths or weaknesses on both the data supply and data
demand side (MEASURE/Evaluation 2007).

Figure 1: HRIS Evaluation Matrix (Source: MEASURE/Evaluation 2007)

Since "strengthening" is relative to the country's specific baseline conditions, the matrix helps to
contextualize results of strengthening activities relative to initial conditions. In the
MEASURE/Evaluation model, the data demand and information use (DDIU) assessment distinguishes
technical, individual and organizational factors applied on either the supply or the demand side, which
determine where a country might fall in this matrix.
An evaluation strategy includes conducting focus group and/or qualitative interviews focusing on four
key groups:
1.Development and management: HRIS program developers involved in maintaining the system
locally and project managers involved in managing the HRIS and responsible for compiling
results to be provided to decision-makers
2.Decision-makers and key stakeholders: Participants of the HRIS SLG and decision-makers who
have used the HRIS and can provide valuable input on how HR information was used in planning
3.HR personnel and common HR users: Users of human resources information on a daily or
regular basis, including personnel departments, heads of departments, council registrars and
regional health managers or matrons

4.Regional stakeholders: Individuals who are involved in strategic regional HRIS development,
such as participants in the WHO Observatory or the Eastern Central Southern African Health
Secretariat, as well as other senior-level stakeholders.
A list of suggested respondents includes the following:
Principal secretary (MOH)
Undersecretary/director general (MOH)
Chief nursing officer (MOH)
Chairperson of Stakeholder Leadership Group
Key additional members of Stakeholder Leadership Group
Members of regional health management team (nurse managers, regional health administrators,
etc.)
HR Unit principal personnel officer (MOH)
HR Unit senior manager, preferably from training/human resources development (MOH)
HR Unit record officer (MOH)
Key members of related ministries involved in HRIS or HRH
Planning Unit health planner (MOH)
Health Statistics Unit statistician (MOH)
HRIS consultants/advisors
HRIS system analyst (MOH)
Registrars of nursing and other councils.