CHALLENGES OF ADOPTING HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION …

CHALLENGES OF ADOPTING HUMAN RESOURCE

INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN THE INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY IN KENYA: A SURVEY OF

SELECTED IT FIRMS

BY

SEIF JUNE KAGEHI

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY-

AFRICA

SUMMER 2015

CHALLENGES OF ADOPTING HUMAN RESOURCE

INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN THE INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY IN KENYA: A SURVEY OF

SELECTED IT FIRMS

BY

SEIF JUNE KAGEHI

A Project Report Submitted to the Chandaria School of Business

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of

Executive Masters in Organizational Development (EMOD)

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY-

AFRICA

SUMMER 2015

ii

STUDENT’S DECLARATION

I, the undersigned, declare that this is my original work and has not been submitted to any

other college, institution or university other than the United States International

University Africa for academic credit.

Signed: ________________________ Date: _________________________

June Seif Student ID: 643901

This project has been presented for examination with my approval as the appointed

supervisor.

Signed: __________________________ Date: _________________________

Dr. Teresia Linge

Signed: __________________________ Date: _________________________

Dean, Chandaria School of Business

iii

COPYRIGHT

©Copyright Seif June Kagehi, 2015

All Rights Reserved

iv

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study was to determine the challenges faced in the adoption of HRIS.

The research questions that guided the study were: To what extent do organizational

characteristics affect HRIS adoption among IT companies? To what extent does HR

involvement affect HRIS adoption among IT companies? To what extent does top

management involvement affect HRIS adoption among IT companies?

The study used a descriptive research design approach. The population size was 128.

Stratified random sampling was used to select the sample for the study. The sample size

of the study was 64. Data was collected using a self-administered questionnaire. All the

completed questionnaires were entered into IBM SPSS 20.0 statistical software.

Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis and multiple regression were conducted to

analyze the data. Results were presented in tables showing frequencies and percentages.

Findings on organizational characteristics and HRIS adoption indicated that IT planning

was a key factor to be considered in HRIS adoption. The findings also showed that

organizational culture greatly affected adoption of HRIS. The study established that an

open and flexible culture enabled easy adoption of HRIS. Organization change was also

seen a key determinant for adoption of HRIS. Unwillingness to accommodate change

among staff and management was seen to slow down adoption of HRIS. Staff

involvement was also found to be a key factor for HRIS adoption.

Findings on HR involvement and adoption of HRIS, indicate that most respondents felt

that the existence of a formal HR department increased adoption of HRIS since HR and

IT department’s collaboration was key HRIS adoption. Expertise of HR professionals was

also seen as a key factor for HRIS adoption since the HR department provided the human

resource information required for HRIS adoption. Full involvement of HR staff in the

adoption of HRIS was seen to make the process much easier and more efficient.

The findings on top management involvement and HRIS adoption indicate that that top

managers had the final say on whether to implement HRIS or not. Majority of the

respondents were of the opinion that a positive attitude and commitment among the

managers was key in implementation of HRIS. The findings also show that top

v

management were the key resources involved in approving finances which is an important

factor for the adoption of HRIS.

The study concludes that organizational characteristics, HR involvement and top

management support greatly affected adoption of human resource information system.

Scarce resources, large number of transaction volumes, unskilled workforce and lack of

proper planning slow down the adoption of human resource information system.

Additionally, resistance to change among employees slows down implementation of

HRIS.

The study recommends that organizations should allocate adequate resources for adoption

of human resource information system. Organizations in the information technology

industry should conduct regular training on the intended purpose of the integration so as

to equip employees with the necessary skills to facilitate information system. The

management in the IT industry should ensure that the new roles of human resource staff

are within their human resource areas of expertise which should reduce resistance to

change. Top Management should ensure there is coordination of all factions so as to

allow a seamless and smooth process of adoption of human resource information system.

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to express my sincere appreciation to the many people that have devoted their time

during the different stages of this research to give me support and ideas.

Special thanks to my supervisor Dr. Linge, for her guidance, encouragement and keen eye

to details that enabled me to put my best effort into ensuring that I delivered a well done

project.

I am also grateful to my family members and in a special way, my mom and brothers who

always supported and cheered me on as I ventured into this work. I am also grateful to my

fellow students; particularly Dr Muya and Hellen Kangiri for helping me in with the final

touches on my project and last but not least my group members Joyce, Anne, Koech,

Dorkas and Joan for their support and encouragement throughout the project, I would

never have made it this far without you guys.

Finally, my greatest thanks are to the Almighty God who has given me the physical

health, spiritual nourishment and willpower to succeed.

vii

DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my late father Seif Alugongo who would have been so proud of

the woman I have become today. His insight and intelligence were always resourceful.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STUDENT’S DECLARATION............................................................................................ ii

COPYRIGHT......................................................................................................................... iii

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................ iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................... vi

DEDICATION ...................................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ xi

CHAPTER ONE ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background of Study ......................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................. 5

1.3 Purpose of Study ................................................................................................................ 6

1.4 Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 6

1.5 Significance of Study ......................................................................................................... 6

1.6 Scope of Study.................................................................................................................... 7

1.7 Definition of Terms............................................................................................................ 7

1.8 Chapter Summary............................................................................................................... 8

CHAPTER TWO .................................................................................................................... 9

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................... 9

2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 9

2.2 Organizational Characteristics and HRIS Adoption ........................................................ 9

2.3 Human Resource Involvement and HRIS Adaptation ................................................... 14

2.4 Top Management Involvement and Adoption of HRIS ................................................ 19

2.5 Chapter Summary............................................................................................................. 22

ix

CHAPTER THREE ............................................................................................................. 23

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 23

3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 23

3.2 Research Design ............................................................................................................... 23

3.3 Population and Sampling Design .................................................................................... 23

3.4 Data Collection Methods ................................................................................................. 25

3.5 Research Procedures ........................................................................................................ 26

3.6 Data Analysis Methods .................................................................................................... 26

3.7 Chapter Summary............................................................................................................. 27

CHAPTER FOUR ................................................................................................................ 28

4.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS......................................................................................... 28

4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 28

4.2 General Information ......................................................................................................... 28

4.3 Organization Characteristics and HRIS Adoption ......................................................... 33

4.4 Human Resource Involvement and HRIS Adaptation ................................................... 37

4.5 Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adaptation .................................................. 40

4.6 Inferential Analysis .......................................................................................................... 44

4.7 Chapter Summary............................................................................................................. 47

CHAPTER FIVE .................................................................................................................. 48

5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................ 48

5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 48

5.2 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 48

5.3 Discussion ......................................................................................................................... 49

5.4 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 53

5.5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 55

x

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 57

APPENDIX II: LETTER .................................................................................................... 60

APPENDIX III: QUESTIONNIARE ................................................................................ 61

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Target Population ................................................................................................. 24

Table 3.2: Sample Size Distribution ..................................................................................... 25

Table 4.1: Response Rate....................................................................................................... 28

Table 4.2: Age of Respondents.............................................................................................. 29

Table 4.3: Highest Education Level ...................................................................................... 29

Table 4.4: Working Experience ............................................................................................. 30

Table 4.5: Lack of Management Support ............................................................................. 30

Table 4.6: HRIS Cost ............................................................................................................. 31

Table 4.7: Lack of Reliable Vendor ...................................................................................... 31

Table 4.8: Resistance from Employees ................................................................................. 32

Table 4.9: Lack of Technical Expertise ................................................................................ 32

Table 4.10: HRIS Improves Efficiency................................................................................. 33

Table 4.11: HRIS and Strategic HRM .................................................................................. 33

Table 4.12: Organization Resources ..................................................................................... 34

Table 4.13: Organization IT Planning................................................................................... 34

Table 4.14: IT Planning Benefit ............................................................................................ 35

Table 4.15: Organization Culture .......................................................................................... 35

Table 4.16: Organization Flexibility ..................................................................................... 36

Table 4.17: Organization Size ............................................................................................... 36

Table 4.18: Business Size Turnover...................................................................................... 37

Table 4.19: Organizational Change ....................................................................................... 37

Table 4.20: Human Resource Existence ............................................................................... 38

Table 4.21: HR Roles ............................................................................................................. 38

Table 4.22: Collaboration of HRM and IT ........................................................................... 39

Table 4.23: HR Roles Related to HRIS Outcome ................................................................ 39

Table 4.24: HR Expertise....................................................................................................... 40

xii

Table 4.25: HR New Role...................................................................................................... 40

Table 4.26: Top Management as Final Decision Makers .................................................... 41

Table 4.27: Positive Attitude of Top Management .............................................................. 41

Table 4.28: Top Management Commitment ......................................................................... 42

Table 4.29: Top Management Innovativeness ...................................................................... 42

Table 4.30: CEO’s Innovative Desire ................................................................................... 43

Table 4.31: CEO’s IT Knowledge......................................................................................... 43

Table 4.32: CEO’s IT Experience ......................................................................................... 44

Table 4.33: Leadership Culture ............................................................................................. 44

Table 4.34: Pearson Correlation between Organization Characteristics, HR Involvement,

Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption ........................................................... 45

Table 4.35: Model Summary for Organization Characteristics, HR Involvement, Top

Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption ................................................................... 46

Table 4.36: Coefficients on Organization Characteristics, HR Involvement, Top

Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption ................................................................... 47

1

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study

Human Resource information is key to making effective strategic decisions. Therefore,

the use of Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) has been advocated as an

opportunity for human resource (HR) professionals to contribute to organizational

strategy. According to Lengnick-Hall, Mark and Moritz (2003), HRIS is a system used to

acquire, store, manipulate, analyze, retrieve and distribute pertinent information about an

organization’s human resources. It is often regarded as a service provided to an

organization in the form of information. Human resources and information technology are

the two elements that many firms are learning to use as strategic weapons to compete

(Ball, 2001). HRIS are expected to make the HR function more efficient. HRIS are

designed to support the planning, administration, decision making and control activities

of human resources management (Brown, 2002).

Lengnick-Hall and Moritz (2003) posit that HRIS needs to be implemented at three

different levels: the publishing of information, the automation of transactions and finally

a change the way human resource management is conducted in the organization by

transforming HR into a business strategic partner. In their view, the evolution of HR as

promoted by HRIS evolves from information to automation and from automation to

transformation. The type of business is also a factor in IT adoption, as the industry in

which a company operates plays an important role in HRIS adoption (Rashid and Ai-

Qirim, 2001).

Companies in high-technology sectors, such as telecommunications, use more elaborate

HR information systems, often adopting HRIS earlier than other sectors in order to

maintain a ‘high-tech’ appearance (Galanaki, 2002). Industries with a high proportion of

clerical work, such as banking, promise an uncomplicated adoption, since there is a high

share of workplace computers and computer literate employees. In contrast, industries

with mainly non-clerical tasks, like building construction, do not generally consider

workplace computers and computer literacy as a characteristic of their task structure

(Arad, Hanson and Schneider, 1997). While both the manufacturing and service industries

2

express an intention to adopt ICT, the greatest move toward this trend is found in service-

based small and medium sized enterprises(Organization’s) (Vincent, 2007). Despite these

findings, some literature has expressed doubt on whether sectoral differences in HRIM

adoption actually exist (Ball, 2001).

Successful organizations have the capacity to absorb innovation into their organizational

culture and management processes, furthering the argument that the success of

organizational adoption behavior is based, to some extent, on the culture of the

organization (Lammiman, 1997). According to Tushman and O’Reilly (1997), corporate

culture lies at the heart of organization innovation. Adopting HRIS can be challenging as

it can be costly and it can take long periods of time before espoused pre-adoption benefits

become available after HRIS are fully assimilated (Ashbaugh and Miranda, 2002). In

particular, HRIS adoption in the public sector may be even more challenging than the

private sector for several reasons.

First, public sector organizations have different underlying goals to those operating in the

private sector, in that the former may have multiple intangible goals (e.g. health,

education), unlike the latter that are typically driven by economic viability

considerations(Kamal, 2006). Second, unlike private sector organizations that generally

adopt innovations proactively, due to a bureaucratic culture, public sector organizations

generally introduce innovations reactively. That is, they wait for evidence to become

available to justify adoption decisions. Additionally, due to budget timing restrictions,

public sector organizations may be subject to constraints of budgeting cycles which may

be dictated by political influences or periodic changes in political priorities (Virginia,

Maria and Ana, 2007).

There are an abundance of challenges to HRIS adoption by organizations worldwide

stemming from both internal and external factors. Lack of internal capabilities, high cost

of HRIS acquisition, and lack of information about suitable HRIS solutions and

implementation are some of the factors. It is observed that electronic human resource

management (e-HRM) is gaining importance (Cedarstone, 2005) and the use of web

based technologies for human resource management practices, policies and processes is

increasing within organizations. In spite of (e-HRM) systems that are being used with

3

increasing frequency in organizations, there is relatively little research about e-HRM

adoption and usage within the organization.

The primary objective of this study is to identify multiple factors and examine their

contribution to the challenge of HRIS adoption keeping in view that this was emerging

field necessary to be adopted for market competitiveness. The further sub objectives are

to examine the relationship of organizational culture on adoption of HRIS in

organizations and to study the relationship of support of top management and HRIS

expertise and support on adoption of HRIS in organizations (Naser, 2014).HRIS is a key

management tool which collects, maintains, analyses and reports information on people

and jobs. It is a system because it integrates all the relevant data, which otherwise might

have been lying in a fragmented and scattered way at various points in the larger system;

converts this data into meaningful conclusions or information and makes it accessible to

the persons, who need it for their decisions (Kamel and Abdullah, 2014).

A Human Capital Management Solution, Human Resources Management System

(HRMS) or Human Resources Information System (HRIS), as it is commonly called is

the crossing of HR systems and processes with information technology (Alireza and

Payvand, 2012). The wave of technological advancement has revolutionized each and

every space of life today, and HR in its entirety was not left untouched by it. What started

off with a simple software to help improve the payroll processing of an organization, or a

software to track the employee work timings has grown to become the Human Resources

systems that helps improve the process efficiency, reduces the cost and time spent on

mundane tasks and at the same time improved the overall experience of the employees

and the HR professionals. In short, as the role of Human Resources function evolved, HR

technology systems also changed the role they were playing (Randi and Steve, 2013).

The function of human resources (HR) departments is administrative and common to all

organizations. Organizations may have formalized selection, evaluation, and payroll

processes. Management of "human capital" progressed to an imperative and complex

process (Ahmer, 2013). The HR function consists of tracking existing employee data

which traditionally includes personal histories, skills, capabilities, accomplishments and

salary. To reduce the manual workload of these administrative activities, organizations

began to electronically automate many of these processes by introducing specialized

4

human resource management systems. Human resource management systems encompass:

Payroll, Time and attendance, Performance appraisal, Benefits administration, HR

management information system, Recruiting/Learning management, Performance record,

Employee self-service, Scheduling, Absence management and Analytics (Dennis, 2015).

Since the launch of celebrated mobile money transfer service M-Pesa five years ago,

Kenya has been labeled the ‘Silicon Savannah’ and an ‘ICT hub’ with its supposed

technology revolution that has overshadowed other African countries (Ahmer, 2013).

Yet, outside the tech-focused business incubation centers and conferences, many struggle

to ‘feel’ the revolution. In the last five years about half a dozen tech incubation hubs have

sprouted in Nairobi, numerous ICT events and competitions have been held, and millions

of dollars in grant funding has been released (Ananya&Nur, 2013).

Hundreds of young Kenyans have joined the technology bandwagon, building startups

and creating various forms of ICT enabled products. The government too is dancing to

the tune, issuing grants and loans to startups, financing and organizing stakeholder

meetings and conferences, documenting policy and designing and investing in multi-

billion dollar projects that it claims will make Kenya the ultimate ICT destination. One of

the Kenyan administration’s flagship projects is the development of the US$10 billion

Konza Technology City outside the capital Nairobi, which is expected to attract

international investors (Rand and Zu’bi, 2014).

The Silicon Savannah hype has been fuelled by the media, technology entrepreneurs,

startups and the government. For a while it worked; investors flocked to the iHub, a co-

working space that has become Kenya’s unofficial tech headquarters, but soon enough,

they too began grumbling. Except for grants and donor funding, very little actual

investment has been pumped into local technology startups. Investors say they can’t find

investment-ready businesses in Silicon Savannah’s river of startups (Kamel and

Abdullah, 2014).

Kenya’s information technology project provides a platform for the African community

to establish technological connectivity by harnessing the power of community organizing

and IT (information technology).Two well-known technology aid organizations, iHub and

Ushahidi, are at the forefront of technology-led community engagement in Kenya. One of

5

the first African information technology systems began with the launching of Ushahidi in

2008 (Dennis, 2015). Based in Kenya, Ushahidi is essentially a software development

team organized by volunteers, journalists, software designers, and development

community supporters who are dedicated to increasing information transparency with the

help of innovative software applications. One of the first data systems created by

Ushahidi to keep Kenyan informed was an interactive map that pinpoints locations where

violent uprisings occurred (Naser, 2014).

1.2 Problem Statement

Human resource information system (HRIS) is a complex and scientific process that

requires using specific methods and techniques of that field of science from thematic

experts and expert who are familiar with the research methodology, organization

characteristic factors affect the implementation of human resource information system.

Bigger organization experience difficulties implementing HRIS since decision take long

to be made. Poor planning, resistance to change and organization culture has been

indicated by Vincent (2007) as the reason for failure on HRIS implementation in most IT

firms. There is lack of appropriate and effective HRIS adoption in Kenya. Problems

related to time management, requiring the cooperation of other sectors and departments,

lack of adequate support from the information technology (IT) are among issues that

affect the adoption of HRIS (Bader, 2012).

Dennis (2015) argues that information technology companies in Kenya lack open and

flexible corporate cultures which slows the adoption of HRIS. Many IT companies are

small with large volumes of documents and unskilled workforce which slows down HRIS

adoption. A survey conducted by Murat & Nihat (2014) shows that obstacles to adoption

of human resources information system is failure by the management to involve human

resource department. This has led to failure by HR staff to provide crucial information

and documents that are crucial for its adoption.

Top management support is critical in preparing and adoption of new human resource

information systems (Vincent, 2007). Asafo-Adjei (2007) has argued that the expenditure

of setting up and maintaining human resources information systems can be so high that it

may end up as the main obstacle to its implementation. Lack of financial support by top

6

managers is considered as one of the greatest obstacles to accessing advantages and

strengths of human resources information system. Poor top management attitude, lack of

desire for growth, low expertise, lack innovativeness and poor leadership negatively

affects HRIS adoption Rifatand Yazzan (2004).

The study focused on the effect of organizational characteristics, HR involvement and top

management involvement on the adoption of HRIS in IT companies in Kenya, there are

few known studies that have been conducted to conclusively address the challenges faced

in the adoption of Human Resource Information systems, thus there exists a gap on

challenges emanating from organization characteristics, human resource involvement and

top management support when it comes to HRIS adoption.

1.3 Purpose of Study

The purpose of this study was to determine the challenges faced in the adoption of

Human Resource Information systems.

1.4 Research Questions

1.4.1To what extent do organizational characteristics affect HRIS adoption among IT

companies?

1.4.2 To what extent does HR involvement affect HRIS adoption among IT companies?

1.4.3 To what extent does Top Management involvement affect HRIS adoption among IT

companies?

1.5 Significance of Study

The study would be of significance to Human Resource Managers, IT companies and

people within the field of research.

1.5.1 Human Resource Managers

The Human Resource Managers will be able to have a better understanding of how best to

implement and integrate HRIS among IT companies.

7

1.5.2 IT Companies

The management of IT companies will be at a position to know the best criteria to use

when dealing with management problems and how this can be effective.

1.5.3 Other Researchers

The study findings are of great importance to the researchers, as they will gain both

theoretical and practical knowledge on the challenges faced in the adoption of Human

Resource Information systems.

1.6 Scope of Study

The study was carried out in selected IT companies in Kenya. The selected IT companies

have their offices in Nairobi County. The target population was HR staff members from

the selected companies. The total population size was 128. The timeframe of the research

was between January 2015 and April 2015.

The study was limited to a particular industry sector (IT) and only covered Nairobi

County thus subjecting the study to bias as it does not address the challenges in other

industries as well as other counties in Kenya. The other limitation of the study was that

the time span allocated was short and the researcher could therefore not widen the study.

In order to address the issue of time, collaboration was done with HR contacts in the

companies who would champion on getting quick feedback on data collected.

1.7 Definition of Terms

1.7.1 Human Resource Information System

An integrated system used to gather, store and analyze information regarding an

organization’s human resource (Hedrickson, 2003).

1.7.2 Adoption

Commitment to implement innovation with the emphasis on the decision to adopt.

(Rogers, 2003). Using innovations as intended by the designers (Boving and Bodker,

2003.)

8

1.7.3 HR

The people that staff and operate an organization (Tracey, 2003).

1.7.4 Top Management

Individuals that influence organizational performance through decisions that they make

(Hambrick and Mason, 1984).

1.8 Chapter Summary

This chapter presents the background study. It identifies the problem statement, states the

purpose of the study and the research questions that guided the research project. It also

presents the significance of the study, scope and definition of terms used. Chapter two

presents the literature review based on the research questions and provides a theoretical

background of the study. Chapter three presents the research methodology. Chapter four

presents the results and findings of the study. Chapter five presents the discussion,

conclusion and recommendations for action and further studies.

9

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The chapter reviews existing research literature on organization characteristics HRIS

adoption, HR involvement and HRIS adoption and top management involvement and

HRIS adoption.

2.2 Organizational Characteristics and HRIS Adoption

Prior research on HRIS within organizations have revealed a number of organizational

characteristics as potential determinants of the adoption process which include business

size, IT planning, organizational culture and organizational change (Bader, 2012, Ahmer,

2013, Niisha and Mona, 2012, Vincent, 2007). Strategically, IT tools are employed within

organizations in order to achieve pre-determined business strategy. Therefore,

organizations’ investments in IT are strongly affected by their strategic context, such as

cost reduction versus value added strategies.

According to Nguyen, many businesses adopt new IT merely to keep up with other

organizations which have implemented these technologies. Under such circumstances,

lack of definition or strategy of the purposes of IT adoption will lead to project failure

(Syeda, Sajid and Syed, 2012). The elements earlier mentioned above play an important

role when it comes to understanding organization characteristics within the context of

HRIS adoption.

2.2.1 Organization Business Size

Organization size is defined by Naser (2014) as an organization’s resources, transaction

volumes, or total workforce. It plays an important role in innovation adoption because

increasing size creates a ‘critical mass’, which justifies the acquisition of particular

innovations and necessitates adoption behavior. Business size definable by turnover

and/or number of employees is one of the most important determinants of IT adoption.

The importance of firm size is partly due to its role as the source of the firm’s capabilities.

10

Another rationale, however, is the fact that firm’s resources, including financial and

human capital, might be an approximation of firm size. Light, Idisemi, Craig and Hanifa

(2013) survey points out that business size is the most important discriminator between

adopters and non-adopters of IT within Singaporean small businesses. Likewise, an

investigation by Harman, Sunita and Sekh (2011) of rural small businesses revealed that

even within the small business category, firm size is the most important determinant to

the adoption of IT. This finding is reinforced by a study of Premkumaron on IT adoption

within 207 Organizations who indicated that larger firms in the small business group have

a higher inclination to adopt communication technologies than smaller ones. Organization

size, supporting organization settings including a skilled workforce are important factors

in successful innovation adoption (Kamel and Abdullah, 2014).

According to Bader (2012), all HRIS types were not created equally and they don’t need

to be, as the HRIS usage depends greatly on the firms’ size. The reason can be explained

with an example, a major HRIS like People Soft can be installed by a company consisting

of 25 employees but the huge expense would be difficult to justify. Similarly, a large

multinational company could create a database program just to access and perform the

functions necessary to 25 employees but the huge expense would be difficult to justify.

Similarly, a large multinational company could create a database program just to access

and perform the functions necessary to operate, but it would be unmanageable and very

limited solution.

Thus, it is clear that effective HRIS requires a balance between technical and critical

information needs of the HR function according to the organization’s size as the size can

define the needs of the HR function (Bader, 2012). Though it is found that, so far only

large companies have tried to implement HRISs of all three types, naming operational

HRIS, relational HRIS and transformational HRIS. On the other hand, smaller and mid-

sized company only tried to implement operational and relational HRIS as these two

HRISs do not perform HR activities with a strategic character thus are less costly (Randi

and Steve, 2013).

Many innovation and IT studies have also pointed to organization size as an important

factor of adoption (Abeer, Mashael and Abdullah, 2011). Consistent with previous results

by (Alireza, and Payvand, 2012), organization size should constitute a central adoption

11

factor. Thong and Yap point out in their 1995 study that business size is the most

important discriminator between adopters and non-adopters of IT within Singaporean

small businesses. Additionally, the results of Ball’s 2001 survey of 115 companies in the

United Kingdom on HRIS usage indicated that organizational size was the clear

determinate of whether an organization has any HRIS, as well as whether it adopts certain

applications. Firm size is considered one of the most commonly studied determinants of

IT adoption and diffusion. In a recent study, Dennis, (2015) analyzed, through meta-

analysis, the association between firm size and IT innovation adoption, concluding that

although a positive relationship generally existed, the relationship was moderated by five

variables: type of IT innovation, type of firm, stage of adoption, scope of size, and type of

size measurement.

2.2.2 Organization IT Planning

IT planning means that organizations should determine why and how IT can enhance

their business processes and profitability, and then develop a strategy and objectives to

obtain the anticipated results (Virginia et al., 2007). Organization’s owners/managers

should assign the resources and dedicate significant time and attention to manage the

adoption process. They must understand that IT, requiring long term commitment and

sizeable investment, as well as having high strategic importance, can have a significant

influence over organizational capacity, validity and survival. Planning of IT is perceived

to be even more essential with regard to the speed at which technological innovations take

place, along with the continuous efforts required by the Organization’s’ internal

environments to absorb them. Therefore, organizations’ can fully benefit from adoption

of IT through IT planning to evaluate the threats and opportunities created by IT (Ahmer,

2013).

In addition, IS planning in organizations, requiring integration with business strategy, has

become more crucial as IS becomes more central to the future success and growth of

organization’s and business strategy and IS strategy become intertwined . When IT

adoption is not planned strategically, for example when organizations invest in IS with

the aim of only improving production processing without integrating other systems, IT-

based competitive advantages are typically accidental rather than planned .According to

the literature, IS planning includes five phases; financial resources planning, human

12

resources planning, information requirements analysis, implementation (software

development, installation, and conversion) and post implementation (operation,

maintenance, future needs). In addition, a review of IT adoption literature by Ayman et al,

places emphasis on IT projects management and argues that highly regarded IT projects

can be badly delivered if they are not properly managed (Randi and Steve, 2013).

Although it is generally believed that barriers to IT adoption arise mostly out of

inaccessibility to funds and technology, the major barrier to IT adoption among US small

business is the lack of an information system plan. Larger organizations are more

adaptive to innovation adoption as compared to smaller organizations. But the research

also reveals that smaller organizations were found to be more agile as compared to larger

organizations due to adaptability factors and flexibility (Salwa and Ziad, 2006).

2.2.3 Organizational Culture

Organization culture is referred to as the behaviors that contribute to unique social and

psychological environment of an organization. It includes the organization’s expectations,

experiences, philosophy, and values that holds it together. It is expressed in its inner

workings, its self-image, interaction with the outside world, and future expectations. It is

based on shared attitudes, custom and norms, beliefs and values (Salwa and AZiad,

2006). It also assists in maintaining the identity group, cohesion of members and the

survival of the respective group. It defines how things are going to be done in different

situations in a whole organization through a set of rules and regulations. According to

Abeer et al., (2011), organizational culture plays an important role in the application and

spreading of electronic management in an organization (Catherine, Elegwa and Kabare,

2015).

Randi &Steve, (2013) stress that organizational culture has been used by various

researchers in the area of IT adoption. This three dimensional view explains that

organizational culture consists of three concepts: assumptions, values, and artifacts.

Alireza and Payvand (2012) defines culture as “an organization’s values, beliefs,

practices, rituals, and customs” .Based the definition of Hisham, Sattam and Eman,

(2013) “culture in organizations can be thought of as the beliefs, values, and meanings

13

shared by members of an organization”. Abeer, et al. (2011) suggests that organizational

culture is necessary since culture is key to success of IT projects.

Several writers have identified the need to view organizational, cultural, and behavioral

issues as key areas that need to be addressed for the successful implementation of

information systems (Niisha and Mona, 2012). AsAbeer, et al. (2011), pointed out the

field has been driven by changes in technology, rather than by issues of management,

information and systems that are independent of specific technologies. It may be

necessary to broaden out the scope of system development and involve other groups of

staff within the process. Naser (2014) argues that information systems management

should be an inseparable element of every manager’s daily work. Technology should not

be the overriding focus within the organization. It is important that a balance is achieved

to take account of the issues that need to be incorporated in the development process, i.e.

strategy, technology, education and training. HR is often see as the guardian of the

organizations culture and could help in the alignment of IS development and culture

management.

Organizations with open and flexible corporate cultures adapt easily to new technology

and the changes that come with it, as their employees at all levels tend to view changes

positively and are more willing to adapt to the changes. This is especially true if a

philosophy of empowering and motivating employees prevails in the organization.

Another study by Dennis (2015) found that organizations with cultures are seen as being

flexible or open and having a long-term orientation, had a greater propensity in adopting

advanced manufacturing technology. Muhhamad et al., (2014) states that organizational

culture continues to be cited as an important factor in the success or failure of information

systems (IS) adoption. This is evidenced by the growing trend in the number of studies

that address cultural issues in IS literature over the last several decades (Ahmer, 2013).

2.2.4 Organizational Change

Organizational change is another significant influencing factor of IT adoption. Business

growth forces SMEs to adopt novel and more effective technological solutions. The use

of ICTs in small firms is the result of many internal factors such as business expansion,

downsizing or relocation, and finding and capturing new markets which bring about

change in organizations.

14

Owner/managers may regard IT or ICTs as an essential tool to help managing changes.

This view is supported by Drew, suggesting that industry changes and trends and

opportunities for growth are some of the major driving forces pushing SMEs toward the

adoption of IT. Since in SMEs the concept of business growth requires and is associated

with deployment of a total quality system and professionalization processes as well, IT

adoption might be regarded as a rational response to these alterations from managers

(Syeda, Sajid and Syed, 2012).

Another important factor is resistance to change, as employees may feel safer with the old

paper system (Bader, 2012).Most organizations greatly underestimate the cultural impact

of technology on their employees. HR should give the same priority to addressing these

changes with employees as they do the training and implementation of software,

assessing the level of employee skill and acceptance of technology and arranging training

and mentoring programs within staff groups to help stressed employees. Ideally,

employees should play a role in the development of the HR system (Vincent, 2007).

2.3 Human Resource Involvement and HRIS Adaptation

The existence of a formal HR-department appears to increase the likelihood of a firm

adopting HRIS, acting as an internal promoter (Niisha and Mona, 2012).This is because,

although the advantages of adoption are beneficial for the whole organization, gains such

as alleviation of administrative burdens via automation are most beneficial for the HR

department. Motivation, capacity, and ability to adopt HRIS are considerably higher when

there is an institutionalized HR department. Additionally, the recognition of HR as a

“change agent” or “strategic partner” is more likely to influence the adoption and

implementation of HRIS applications and practices (Murat and Nihat, 2014). The

important factors of HR involvement include HRM IT collaboration, HRM as change

agent and HRM expertise (Kamel and Abdullah, 2014, Ahmer, 2013, Murat and Nihat,

2014).

2.3.1 HRM IT Collaboration

Collaboration of HRM and IT has also been identified as a crucial success factor in HRIS

adoption. This collaboration can ensure successful integration of technology into HRM

processes, responding to the need for quality HRM services (Kamel and Abdullah,

15

2014).Dennis (2015) acknowledged four roles for HR staff along two axes

strategic/operational focus and processes/people orientated), administrative expert,

change agent, employee champion and strategic partner. There exist some criticism on the

work of Dennis (2015) which advocates that e.g., the typology is prescriptive, not

empirically proven, based exclusively on U.S.A. experience of HR staff, and that the

framework does not address the role conflict of the HR roles (Ahmer, 2013).

Management information systems (MIS) can further help decision makers to make and

implement strategic decisions. However, IT is only a tool and can only complement, not

substitute, the people who drive it. Often, organizations mistake IT as a message and not

the messenger and divert time, effort, and money away from long-term investment in

people to developing and deploying information technologies (Salwa and Ziad, 2006). In

fact, the critical success factors in information systems project implementation are

nontechnical and are due to social and managerial issues (Bader, 2012). With the

increasing use of information technologies in HR planning and delivery, the way people

in organizations look at the nature and role of HR itself may change (Asafo-Adjei,

2007).In many organizations, IS and Human Resources Management (HRM) have

become full strategic partners at the governance level. The strategic potential of HRM is

well recognized as effective HRM practices support business goals and objectives. Jack

Welch, former CFO and retired CEO of General Electric, said that CEOs should value

their HR managers as much as their chief financial officers (Kamini, 2014).

Crucially, e-HRM implementations should be termed an HR rather than an IT project,

given that HR staff holds knowledge of HR processes. In this context, Naser (2014)

argued that close collaboration between departments is critical. In a study closely related

to this emphasis upon developing a shared vision between HR and IT managers (Kamel

AND Abdullah, 2014). Using cross-functional project teams with representatives from

HR and IS, mapping of HR processes and identification of HR needs are seen as

impacting on implementation success (Bader, 2012).

2.3.2 HRM Change Agent

This study will focus on reviewing the framework of Salwa and Ziad (2006). Hence

indicating and recognizing the HR department as adapters of new ways for HRM. Randi

16

and Steve (2013) framework does not incorporate the possible HR role of change

manager. Since e-HRM is assumed to be complex in the “basic” and “advanced” direction

i.e., dealing with both information technologies and HR practices, change management is

assumed to be a necessity in order to convince, encourage and entrust the employees and

managers with e-HRM. Essentially HR managers are assumed to have the potential to

develop the capabilities for change of HR staff, employees and managers in order to

adopt and deploy e-HRM (Ahmer, 2013).

Hence it is argued that the recognition for the role of change management is important to

the HR manager, therefore the framework of Alireza and Payvand (2012) is preferred.

The HR roles identified could be related to the e-HRM adoption and deployment

outcomes. The recognition of HR as “change agent” and/or “strategic partner” is more

likely to indicate the adoption and deployment of an “advanced” e-HRM direction i.e., the

long-term planning and forecasting of HR practices.

As e-HR technology and applications expand and practice continues to change, so must

the skill sets required for career success in HR (Harman et al., 2011). According to a

recent report by the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM), this technological

evolution is driving several key trends in HR delivery and practice, such as the increased

use of social media, a shift from “on-premise” software solutions to cloud-based

solutions, the growth in compliance, and the use of business intelligence tools. To these

trends, we would add the increasing adoption of HRIS by smaller organizations. More

employees, HR professionals, and organizations are now affected by HRIS than ever

before. In response to these changes, additional roles are emerging for HR professionals

(Randi and Steve, 2013).

2.3.3 HRM Expertise

Expertise is a crucial factor in innovation adoption. HR expertise could be explained as

knowledge of employees in HRIS. HRIS staff should be knowledge of more than one

functional area; at least IS and HR functions. Availability of skilled HRIS professionals

was essential in ensuring success. HR expertise could be achieved through user training.

Training enhances technology competency which could affect the speed and coverage of

adoption of innovation (Murat and Nihat, 2014).

17

Vincent (2007)., in evaluating capacity project’s HRIS in the health sectors of three

African countries that is Rwanda, Swaziland and Uganda, the project staff observed the

following in Swaziland: that, trainers perceived a general lack of basic computer literacy

among many (especially senior staff). Most of them felt that the statistics unit data base

fell outside their usual administrative responsibilities and were reluctant to engage the

new system. To resolve the issue and emphasize the systems relevance and benefits, the

local statistics development team introduced the system to the HR team in the form of a

general HR workshop, identifying objectives, and then later illustrating the utility of the

HRIS in providing responses. This approach of the training as a HR strategy as opposed

to more technical HRIS training helped align relatively computer- illiterate personnel to

HRIS. Therefore management participation is paramount in giving continuous learning

and training for a successful implementation of HRIS in an organization.

HRIS capabilities in shaping the integration between HRM and IT (Bader, 2012) are

application to HRM tasks. This means that HR professionals would be able to cope with

their new roles without panicking because the new role is supported by HRIS. Users of

HRIS need to identify their strategic HR tasks and organization type before embarking on

HRIS implementation in order to enjoy the full benefit of using HRIS both to HR

professionals and to the organization as a whole.HR is primarily concerned with the

management of people within organizations, focusing on policies and systems. HR

departments and units in organizations typically undertake a number of activities,

including employee recruitment, training and development, performance appraisal, and

rewarding for example. HR is also concerned with industrial relations, that is, the

balancing of organizational practices with requirements arising from collective bargaining

and from governmental laws (Rifat and Yazzan, 2004).

HR departments and units in organizations typically undertake a number of activit ies,

including employee recruitment, training and development, performance appraisal, and

rewarding (for example., managing pay and benefit systems), HR is also concerned with

industrial relations, that is, the balancing of organizational practices with requirements

arising from collective bargaining and from governmental laws (Asafo-Adjei , 2007).In

startup companies, HR duties may be performed by trained professionals. In larger

companies, an entire functional group is typically dedicated to the discipline, with staff

18

specializing in various HR tasks and functional leadership engaging in strategic decision-

making across the business. To train practitioners for the profession, institutions of higher

education, professional associations, and companies themselves have created programs of

study dedicated explicitly to the duties of the function. Academic and practitioner

organizations likewise seek to engage and further the field of HR, as evidenced by several

field-specific publications (Vincent, 2007).

HR is also a field of research study that is popular within the fields of management and

industrial/organizational psychology, with research articles appearing in a number of

academic journals, including those mentioned later in this article. In the current global

work environment, most companies focus on lowering employee turnover and on

retaining the talent and knowledge held by their workforce. New hiring not only entails a

high cost but also increases the risk of a newcomer not being able to replace the person

who was working in that position before. HR departments also strive to offer benefits that

will appeal to workers, thus reducing the risk of losing corporate knowledge (Salwa and

Ziad, 2006).

Within companies, HR positions generally fall into one of two categories: generalist and

specialist. Generalists support employees directly with their questions, grievances, and

work on a range of projects within the organization. They "may handle all aspects of

human resources work, and thus require an extensive range of knowledge. The

responsibilities of human resources generalists can vary widely, depending on their

employer's needs. Specialists, conversely, work in a specific HR function. Some

practitioners will spend an entire career as either a generalist or a specialist while others

will obtain experiences from each and choose a path later. Being an HR manager

consistently ranks as one of the best jobs (Virginia et al., 2007).

Human resource consulting is a related career path where individuals may work as

advisers to companies and complete tasks outsourced from companies. In 2007, there

were 950 HR consultancies globally, constituting a USD $18.4 billion market (Harman et

al., 2011). The top five revenue generating firms were Mercer, Ernst & Young, Deloitte,

Watson Wyatt (now part of Towers Watson), Aon(now merged with Hewitt), and PwC

consulting. For 2010, some individuals with PhDs in HR and related fields, such as

industrial and organizational psychology and management, are professors who teach HR

19

principles at colleges and universities. They are most often found in Colleges of Business

in departments of HR or Management. Many professors conduct research on topics that

fall within the HR domain, such as financial compensation, recruitment, and training

(Sharna et al., 2010).

2.4 Top Management Involvement and Adoption of HRIS

It is the top managers who make the final decision to adopt IT based on the internal needs

of the organization or environmental changes (Niisha and Mona, 2012). The CEO also

takes the responsibility of managing and use of technological innovations in

organizations. An organizations strategic decision to adopt or reject an innovation often

reflects the personal characteristics of its top managers. The CEO’s attitude and

perception of new innovation plays an important role in the adoption of IT. A CEO’s

innovativeness and favorable attitude of new technology affects in a positive way the

adoption of IT. The creation of an attitude towards an innovation happens before a

decision to adopt has been made. Top managers’ favorable attitude assists in all stages of

adoption (Murat and Nihat, 2014). The important factors for top management

involvement include perception and attitude, CEO’s support and commitment, desire for

growth, IT knowledge and expertise, innovativeness and leadership traits (Niisha and

Mona, 2014, Murat and Nihat, 2014, Dennis 2015, Riffat and Yazzan, 2014, Kristine,

2007, Kamal and Abudallah, 2014).

2.4.1 Perception of and Attitude towards IT Adoption

Small businesses that have adopted IT are more likely to have CEOs who possess better

positive attitudes in IT adoption. This view is reinforced by Niisha and Mona (2012) who

found that the positive attitude of top management has resulted in relative success of IT

adoption in SMEs, especially in manufacturing industry. In addition, it is argued that a

greater intention to adopt IT solutions is directly attributable to the more positive attitude

of small and minority business owners in IT adoption. Consequently, if the CEO

perceives that benefits of IT adoption outweigh its risks, then the business is more likely

to adopt IT.

Likewise, when management has been highly willing to implement IT application, SMEs

do not perceive management priority on IT as a major barrier in adopting IS applications.

20

In this regard, a positive attitude by top management in using IT (as the users of IT in

SMEs) will result in IT acceptance and subsequently success in SMEs. Top management

support shows influencing action on adoption of HRIS. Findings from Yang et al. (2007)

show that CEO’s attitude and interest towards information communication technology

(ICT) are important to promote ICT adoption (Muhhamad et al., 2014).

2.4.2 CEO’s (Chief Executive Officer) Support and Commitment

According to Murat and Nihat (2014) beside top management support to adopt a system

in the organizations, employee engagement is also needed which is also greatly

influenced by the management commitment. Most studies showed that management

commitment has a positive influence on HRIS or IT adoption. Gaining the support of top

management in taking an assessment of the organization’ s human resource needs and

requirements is important for adoption of the HRIS. Many researchers confirm that if the

needs assessment is not done properly or is not well justified, the entire project will fail

(Naser, 2014).

Researchers argue that top management support involvement and participation of the

executive or top-level management innovation involvement plays a large role in adoption

or early adoption of that innovation. The strong commitment of top management,

especially of a particular ‘innovation champion’, leads to early adoption, while a lack of

top management commitment inhibits adoption. Given the important role of top-level

managers in organizations, it is not surprising that top management support has been one

of the most widely discussed organizational factors in several HRIS adoption studies

(Kamel and Abdullah, 2014).

In addition to verbal support, top management can demonstrate their confidence in HRIS

by personally utilizing the system. Their frequent personal HRIS usage may result in

sufficient delegation of resources and an increased pressure for HRIS success. Alireza

and Payvand (2012) examined 47 Malaysian public sector agencies on IT usage to

support total quality management (TQM). Among the organizational factors explored, the

researchers found top management support for IT applications as the highest predictor of

IT usage. Randi and Steve (2013) also mentioned that user skill level might be strongly

related to the variance in attitudes toward the value of an HRIS.

21

2.4.3 CEOs Desire for Growth

Desire for growth is another characteristic of CEOs that is considered as an important

influencing factor over adoption of IT. Dennis (2015) discusses that firm’s size is

positively related to the decision to accumulate additional information, and growth of a

firm is coupled with the gathering of additional information. Moreover, they argued that

familiarity with administration is other important CEO-related determinant which

influences the use of information and IS within organizations. Dennis (2015) study

showed that comparing to CEOs not possessing knowledge of administration, CEOs with

high familiarity with administration will use more information and subsequently IT.

2.4.4 CEO IT Knowledge and Experiences

CEO’s IT knowledge and experience of IT is another aspect that affects IT adoption in

organizations. A study by Rifat and Yazzan (2004) demonstrated that small businesses

with CEOs who are more knowledgeable about IT are more probable to adopt IT. They

discussed that greater knowledge of CEOs will reduce the degree of uncertainty entangled

with IT which will result in lower risk of IT adoption. Moreover, Ananya and Nur (2013)

found that in Organization’s, CEOs with higher levels of computing skills are more

satisfied with the implemented IS rather than those having inferior skills while based on

the literature, satisfaction with IS/IT is one of the most applied measures of IT success in

organizations (Vincent, 2007). These views are consistent with the findings of other

studies which found that sufficient knowledge of IT and its consequent influences over

organization could be provocative and supportive for IT adoption in Organization’s

(Bader, 2012).

2.4.5 CEO Innovativeness

Another influencing factor attributable to the top management characteristics is CEO

innovativeness, both in general and IT-specific terms. Personal Innovativeness in IT

(PIIT) has been revealed to be a reliable predictor of user’s attitude about the simplicity

of use and effectiveness of new technologies (Hayel and Fayiz, 2014).Innovative CEOs

would prefer to apply distinctive and risky solutions such as IT that change the structure

in which the problems are generated. Thus CEOs desire of being more innovative will

expedite the process of IT adoption. Based on the upper echelon theory, prior literature

22

suggests that CEO’s demographic characteristics and personality traits of openness and

extraversion are the significant determinants of IT usage behavior and performance

within businesses (Kristine et al., 2007).

2.4.6 Leadership Traits

Leadership culture is key to the success of IS adoption and effective leadership is the

means by which the culture is created and managed (Kamel and Abdullah, 2014).

Management attitudes and values concerning control, management, and communication

can hinder successful implementation. According to Salwa and Ziad (2006) it was very

common in China that there was a lack of strategic expectancy for ERP adoption and

management did not see the strategic benefits. Cross-functional teamwork was lacking as

many managers put the needs of their department above the needs of the enterprise

because the project was considered IT-related and did not have a strategic focus or

sponsor in top management, the IT staff took the lead roles on the project teams.

According to Virginia et al., (2007) based on a case study in Turkey, found out that in a

culture where everybody wants to be a leader though they do not have adequate

knowledge and experience, sometimes may create a barrier for the successful technology

implementation projects. Since technology projects are one of the important investment

projects for an enterprise, project manager may behave emotionally instead of being

logical. Visionary, supporting and encouraging leaders (That is transformational leader)

who advocate HRIS implementations were found to contribute to the acceptance of new

systems (Naser, 2014).

2.5 Chapter Summary

The chapter presented a review on previous research studies and findings on organization

characteristics and HRIS adoption, HR involvement and HRIS adoption and top

management involvement and HRIS adoption. The next chapter provides the research

methodology on the study.

23

CHAPTER THREE

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the research methodology. The chapter covers research design,

population and sampling design, data collection methods, research procedures, data

analysis methods and chapter summary.

3.2 Research Design

According to Zikmund (2010), a research design is the "blue print" of the study. The

design of a study defines the study type (descriptive, correlational, semi-experimental,

experimental, review, meta-analytic) and sub-type (for example descriptive-longitudinal

case study), research question, hypotheses, independent (organizational characteristics,

HR involvement and support, top management support and dependent variables (HRIS

adoption), experimental design, and, if applicable, data collection methods and a

statistical analysis plan. The research adopted a descriptive survey design that ensured

collections and descriptive analysis of data from the population of study.

Descriptive survey design is defined by Peil, (2005) as a research design that determines

and reports the way things are and attempts to describe such things as possible behavior,

attitudes, values and characteristics. A descriptive case study was adopted for this

research. Zikmund (2010) defines a case study as an intensive study of a single unit with

an aim to generalize across larger sets of units. The dependent variable in the study was

the adoption of Human Resource Information System (HRIS). The independent variables

in the study were organizational characteristics, HR involvement and top management

involvement.

3.3 Population and Sampling Design

3.3.1 Population

According to Peil, (2005), a research population is generally a large collection of

individuals or objects that is the main focus of a scientific query. Target population

includes all the members real or hypothetical set of people, events or objects to which

24

researchers wish to generalize the results of their research (Singleton and Strait 2010).

The population of the study was Human Resource management staff in the five selected

IT firms in Kenya which are, Mode, Techno Brain, Symphony, Ashwoth Technologies

and Isolutions Associates. The reason for using the 5 firms is because they were within

easy reach based on the researcher’s geographical location.

Table 3.1: Target Population

Population Percentage (%)

Mode 24 18

Techno Brain 26 20

Symphony 30; 23

Ashwoth Technologies 28 22

Isolutions Associates 22 17

Total 128 100

3.3.2 Sampling Design

3.3.2.1 Sampling Frame

A sampling frame is a list of population units or elements from which to select units or

elements to be sampled (McDaniel & Gates, 2001).The sampling frame was human

resource departments of the IT companies from where the population was drawn, the

sampling frame is appropriate since it gives each and every respondent an equal chance of

participating in the study. Human resource departments are appropriate since they have

the required information on Human Resource Information System. The sample frame

ensured that respondents give accurate information which helped in achieving the

objective of the study. The list of the population was obtained from Human Resource

Managers.

3.3.2.2 Sampling Technique

According to Zikmund (2010) sampling design is concerned with the selection of a subset

of individuals from within a statistical population to estimate characteristics of the whole

population. Stratified random sampling was used to select the 5 IT companies from a

25

large number of IT companies. The sampling technique was appropriate since the

population was homogeneous. Stratified random sampling is defined as a method of

sampling where the population is divided into subgroups or strata and a random sample is

selected from each group (Latham, 2007). Stratified random sampling was used to

generate the sample for HR staff. In this study, only people dealing with directed involved

with the HRIS were included as study elements.

3.3.2.3 Sample Size

Wisker (2001) defines a sample as a selected and chosen group upon which you carry out

your research. A sample is a subset of the population. It comprises of some members

selected from it. By studying the sample, the researcher should be able to draw

conclusions that would be generalized to the population of interest (Sekaran 2003).

Mugenda & Mugenda, (2003) suggests that for descriptive studies at least 20% - 50% of

the total population is enough, the sample size for the study was 64 respondents.

Table 3.2: Sample Size Distribution

Population Percentage (%) Sample (50%)

Mode 24 50 12

Techno Brain 26 50 13

Symphony 30 50 15

Ashwoth Technologies 28 50 14

Isolutions Associates 22 50 11

Total 128 100 64

3.4 Data Collection Methods

Questionnaires were useful in gathering information from the employees regarding

human resource information systems. Structured and unstructured questionnaires were

used for the study. Structured questionnaires list close-end questions. These included

multiple choice questions which offer respondents the ability to strongly disagree,

disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree. The type of questions asked were 5 point

likert scale: questions that gave the respondent complete freedom to response.

26

Unstructured questionnaires have open ended questions where respondents can answer in

their own words. Questionnaires were self-administered questionnaire where respondents

were asked to complete the questionnaire and researcher-administered where the

researcher used the questionnaire to interviewed the respondents. The questionnaire was

broken down into sections. The first section referred to as “section A” contained the

demographic questions and the second section referred to as ‘section B” contained a set of

questions which were further divided based on the research questions.

3.5 Research Procedures

The research procedure involved preparation of the structured employee, and

management questionnaires. The questionnaire was pilot tested to refine the questions

before it could be administered in the actual study. A pilot test was conducted to detect

weakness in design and instrumentation and to provide proxy data for selection of a

probability sample. According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003), the accuracy of data to

be collected largely depends on the data collection instruments in terms of validity and

reliability. Feedback from piloting of questionnaire was used to refine the questionnaire

before final administration.

This was followed by a sign up copy sheet of those respondents who participated in the

research. The sign in forms as well as the research consent forms were handed out to

assure the respondents of information confidentiality and of their rights. Once this had

been filled out, the questionnaires were distributed to the respondents who filled them by

answering the questions in each section. Thereafter, the respondents returned the

questionnaire to the researcher.

3.6 Data Analysis Methods

The completed questionnaires were cleaned, coded then analyzed using the IBM SPSS

Version 20.0 data analysis system. Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics were

used to analyze data. Descriptive statistics included frequency, percentages, mode, mean

and standard deviation to profile sample characteristics and major patterns emerging from

the data. Inferential statistics makes inferences about populations using data drawn from

the population. Inferential statistics was concerned with making predictions or inferences

about the population from observations and analysis of the sample.

27

A multiple regression model was applied to analyze the relationship between the various

variables. The model treated HRIS adoption as the dependent variable while the

independent variables were organization characteristics, HR involvement and support and

top management involvement. The responses on the HRIS adoption were measured by

computing the mean percentage score based on the responses derived from the Likert

scale questions.

The relationship equation was as shown below-

Y=α +β1X1+β2X2+β3X3+ε

where Y = HRIS adoption

α = Constant term

β1=Beta co-efficient

X1= Organization Characteristics

X2= HR involvement and support

X3= Top management Involvement

ε= Error term

The model helped to better understand which among the independent variables are related

to the dependent variable and to explore the form of their relationship. The analysis was

then visually displayed using frequency tables.

3.7 Chapter Summary

This chapter presents the research methodology that was used in the study. The chapter

covers the research design used. It also discusses on population and sampling design.

Under sampling design the researcher discusses on the sampling frame used, the sampling

technique and the sample size from which data was collected. Data collection methods

and an overview of the questionnaire are covered, research procedures on how the

research will be conducted and finally data analysis methods applied on the collected

data. The next chapter presents the results and findings of the study.

28

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents results and findings. The study sought to determine the challenges

faced in of adoption of Human Resource Information systems, a case study of selected IT

firms in Kenya. The presentation of the results was based on the research questions.

4.2 General Information

A total of 64 questionnaires were administered to the sample of 64 HR staff. All the

completed questionnaires were included in data analysis. The research achieved a 100%

response rate.

4.2.1 Response Rate

To determine the number of the respondents who filled and submitted the questionnaires,

an analysis of the response rate was done. Table 4.1 shows that the response rate was 64

respondents which is 100% of the total sample size. The response rate of 100% was

considered appropriate since according to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) a response rate

of over 50% of the total sample size; provides enough data that can be used to generalize

the characteristics of a study problem as expressed by the opinions of few respondents in

the target population. The study hence considered the 100% response suitable on

challenges faced in of adoption of Human Resource Information systems.

Table 4.1: Response Rate

Responses Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Response 64 100

Non response 0 0

4.2.2 Age of Respondents

Table 4.2 shows that majority (55%) of the respondents were between 18-30 years, 30%

between ages 31-40 years, 11% between 41-50 years and 4% of the respondents were

within the age bracket of 51 years and over. This showed that majority of the respondents

29

in the IT companies were young people and had stayed in the organization for a long time

hence they understood the challenges faced in of adoption of Human Resource

Information systems.

Table 4.2: Age of Respondents

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

18-30 years 35 55

31-40 years 19 30

41-50 years;2 7 11

Above 51 years 3 4

Total 64 100

4.2.3 Highest Education Level

Table 4.3 shows that majority (53%) of the respondents had university education level,

42% had college education level and 5% had secondary education level. This indicates

that most of the respondents were academically qualified in their respective job

undertakings and hence they clearly understood challenges faced in of adoption of Human

Resource Information systems.

Table 4.3: Highest Education Level

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Secondary Level 3 5

College Level 27 42

University Level 34 53

Any other (specify) 0 0

Total 64 100

4.2.4 Working Experience

Table 4.4 shows that majority (42%) of the respondents had a working experience of 1-5

years, 31% had 6-10 years, 16% had 11-20 years , 6% had 21 years and above and 5%

had less than 1 year. Most of the respondents had worked in the firms over long period

and thus understood the challenges faced in adoption of Human Resource Information

Systems.

30

Table 4.4: Working Experience

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Below 1 year 3 5

1-5 years 27 42

6-10 years 20 31

11-20 years 10 16

21 years and above 4 6

Total 64 100

4.2.5 Adoption of Human Resource Information System

The study aimed to establish the respondent’s opinion on adoption of human resource

information system. Table 4.5 shows 47% of the respondents strongly agreed that lack of

management support was indicated as a barrier to adoption of HRIS, 34% agreed, 14%

were neutral, 3% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed which showed that top

management hindered adoption of human resource information system.

Table 4.5: Lack of Management Support

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 2 3

Neutral 8 13

Agree 22 34

Strongly Agree 30 47

Total 64 100

4.2.6 HRIS Cost

The study aimed to establish the respondent’s opinion whether HRIS is costly to

implement and sustain. Table 4.6 shows that 31% of the respondents strongly agreed,

30% agreed, 16% were neutral, 5% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed which showed

that cost was a factor in implementation of human resource information system.

31

Table 4.6: HRIS Cost

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 3 5

Neutral 10 16

Agree 19 30

Strongly Agree 20 31

Total 64 100

4.2.7 Lack of Reliable Vendor

Table 4.7 indicates the respondent’s opinion on whether lack of reliable vendor frustrate

adoption of HRIS. Majority of respondents who were 42% strongly agreed, 33% agreed,

15% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed which shows that IT firms

lacked reliable vendor which frustrated adoption of HRIS.

Table 4.7: Lack of Reliable Vendor

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 10 15

Agree 21 33

Strongly Agree 27 42

Total 64 100

4.2.8 Resistance from Employees

Table 4.8 indicates the respondent’s opinion on whether HRIS adoption faces resistance

from employees. Majority of respondents who were 45% strongly agreed, 36% agreed,

7% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 5% strongly disagreed which shows that IT firms

faced resistance from employees for the adoption of HRIS due to employees lack of

training.

32

Table 4.8: Resistance from Employees

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 5 7

Agree 23 36

Strongly Agree 29 45

Total 64 100

4.2.9 Lack of Technical Expertise

The study aimed to establish the respondent’s opinion on whether IT firms lacked

technical expertise to adopt HRIS. Table 4.9 shows that 40% of the respondents strongly

agreed, 31% agreed, 16% were neutral, 9% disagreed and 5% strongly disagreed which

shows that most IT firms lacked the required technical skills to successfully adopt HRIS.

Table 4.9: Lack of Technical Expertise

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 6 9

Neutral 10 16

Agree 20 31

Strongly Agree 25 40

Total 64 100

4.2.10 HRIS Improves Efficiency

The study aimed to establish the respondent’s opinion on whether adoption of human

resource information system helps improve efficiency. Table 4.10 shows that 45% of the

respondents agreed, 33% strongly agreed, 11% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 5%

strongly disagreed, which shows that efficiency was a key factor in the adoption of

human resource information system

33

Table 4.10: HRIS Improves Efficiency

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 7 11

Agree 29 45

Strongly Agree 21 33

Total 64 100

4.2.11 HRIS and Strategic HRM

The study aimed to establish the respondent’s opinion on whether adoption of human

resource information system helps in strategic human resource management, Table 4.11

shows that 45% of the respondents agreed, 33% strongly agreed, 11% were neutral, 6%

disagreed and 5% strongly disagreed which shows that HRIS adoption was key in

adoption of strategic human resource management among IT firms.

Table 4.11: HRIS and Strategic HRM

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 7 11

Agree 29 45

Strongly Agree 21 33

Total 64 100

4.3 Organization Characteristics and HRIS Adoption

4.3.1 Organization Resources

The study sought to determine on whether organization’s resources, transaction volumes,

or total workforce affect adoption of HRIS. Table 4.12 shows that 48% of the respondents

strongly agreed, 31% agreed, 10% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed

which shows that organization’s resources, transaction volumes, or total workforce

34

greatly determined whether the organization was to adopt human resource information

system.

Table 4.12: Organization Resources

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 7 10

Agree 20 31

Strongly Agree 31 48

Total 64 100

4.3.2 Organization IT Planning

Table 4.13 shows the respondents opinion on whether organization IT planning has

implication in adoption of HRIS, 44% of the respondents strongly agreed, 34% agreed,

9% were neutral 6% disagreed and 6% strongly disagreed which showed that most IT

firms lacked planning on IT which slowed down adoption of HRIS.

Table 4.13: Organization IT Planning

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 4 6

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 6 9

Agree 22 34

Strongly Agree 28 44

Total 64 100

4.3.3 IT Planning Benefit

Table 4.14 shows the respondents opinion on whether organization’s can fully benefit

from adoption of HRIS through IT planning, 43% of the respondents agreed, 39%

strongly agreed, 8% were neutral, 8% disagreed and 2% strongly disagreed which shows

that IT planning among IT forms was critical in successful adoption of human resource

information system.

35

Table 4.14: IT Planning Benefit

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 1 2

Disagree 5 8

Neutral 5 8

Agree 28 43

Strongly Agree 25 39

Total 64 100

4.3.4 Organization Culture

Table 4.14 shows the respondents opinion on whether organization culture influences

adoption of HRIS, 41% of the respondents strongly agreed, 41% agreed 6% were neutral,

6% disagreed and 6% strongly disagreed which shows that organization culture played a

major role on to whether the organization should adopt human resource information

system or not.

Table 4.15: Organization Culture

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 4 6

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 4 6

Agree 26 41

Strongly Agree 26 41

Total 64 100

4.3.5 Organization Flexibility

Respondent’s opinion on whether organizations with open and flexible corporate cultures

adapt easily to new technology as indicated in Table 4.16. 42% of the respondents agreed,

38% strongly agreed, 14% were neutral, 3% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed, which

shows that open and flexible corporate cultures were important factors in adoption of

HRIS.

36

Table 4.16: Organization Flexibility

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 2 3

Neutral 9 14

Agree 27 42

Strongly Agree 24 38

Total 64 100

4.3.6 Organization Size

Respondents expressed their opinion on whether organization size, supporting

organization settings including a skilled workforce are important factors in successful

innovation adoption. Table 4.17 shows that 35% of the respondents agreed, 34% strongly

disagreed, 23% were neutral, 5% disagreed and 2% strongly disagreed which shows that

organization size, skilled work force were important factors in successful adoption of

HRIS in IT firms.

Table 4.17: Organization Size

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 1 2

Disagree 3 5

Neutral 15 23

Agree 23 35

Strongly Agree 22 34

Total 64 100

4.3.7Business Size Turnover

Table 4.18 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether business size definable by

turnover and/or number of employees is one of the most important determinants of IT

adoption. 48% of the respondents strongly agreed, 30% agreed, 13% were neutral, 6%

disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed which shows that business size was a major

consideration on whether or not the organization should adopt human resource

information system.

37

Table 4.18: Business Size Turnover

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 8 13

Agree 19 30

Strongly Agree 31 48

Total 64 100

4.3.8 Organizational Change

Table 4.19 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether organizational change is a

significant influencing factor over IT adoption. 38% of the respondents strongly agreed,

31% agreed, 25% were neutral, 5% strongly agreed and 2% disagreed, which shows that

change management is important if the organization is to successfully adopt human

resource information system.

Table 4.19: Organizational Change

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 1 2

Neutral 16 25

Agree 20 31

Strongly Agree 24 38

Total 64 100

4.4 Human Resource Involvement and HRIS Adaptation

4.4.1 Human Resource Existence

Table 4.20 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether the existence of a formal HR-

department, appears to increase the likelihood of a firm adopting HRIS. 41% agreed, 36%

strongly agreed, 17% were neutral and 6% disagreed which shows that HR department

plays a major role in providing IT department with the required HR information

necessary for HRIS adoption.

38

Table 4.20: Human Resource Existence

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 0 0

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 11 17

Agree 26 41

Strongly Agree 23 36

Total 64 100

4.4.2 HR Roles

Table 4.21 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether the HR roles identified could be

related to the e-HRM adoption. 33% of the respondents agreed, 30% strongly agreed,

27% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 5% strongly disagreed, which shows that there was a

strong relationship between HR and e-HRM adoption since all HR functions are all

conducted electronically.

Table 4.21: HR Roles

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 17 27

Agree 21 33

Strongly Agree 19 30

Total 64 100

4.4.3 Collaboration of HRM and IT

Table 4.22 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether collaboration of HRM and IT has

also been identified as a crucial success factor in HRIS use. 42% of the respondents

strongly agreed, 42% agreed, 9% neutral, 3% disagree and 3% strongly disagreed which

shows that collaboration of HRM and IT is key in adoption of human resource

information system.

39

Table 4.22: Collaboration of HRM and IT

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 2 3

Neutral 6 9

Agree 27 42

Strongly Agree 27 42

Total 64 100

4.4.4 HR Roles Related to HRIS Outcome

Table 4.23 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether the HR roles identified could be

related to the e-HRM adoption deployment outcomes. 42% of the respondents agreed,

38% strongly agreed, 13% neutral, 3% disagreed and 5% strongly disagreed, which

shows that there was a strong relationship between HR and e-HRM adoption since all HR

functions are all conducted electronically.

Table 4.23: HR Roles Related to HRIS Outcome

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 2 3

Neutral 8 13

Agree 27 42

Strongly Agree 24 38

Total 64 100

4.4.5 HR Expertise

Table 4.24 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether expertise is a crucial factor in

innovation adoption of HRIS. 38% of the respondents agreed, 36% strongly agreed, 20%

were neutral, 3% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed which shows that expertise is a

crucial factor in innovation adoption of HRIS.

40

Table 4.24: HR Expertise

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 2 3

Neutral 13 20

Agree 24 38

Strongly Agree 23 36

Total 64 100

4.4.6 HR New Role

Table 4.25 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether HR professionals are comfortable

with new roles of HRIS. 52% of the respondents strongly agreed, 34% agreed, 9% were

neutral, 3% disagreed and 2% strongly disagreed which shows that HR professionals

were ready to accommodate change.

Table 4.25: HR New Role

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 1 2

Disagree 2 3

Neutral 6 9

Agree 22 34

Strongly Agree 33 52

Total 64 100

4.5 Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adaptation

4.5.1 Top Management as Final Decision Makers

Table 4.26 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether it is the top managers who make

the final decision to adopt HRIS. 47% of the respondents strongly agreed, 27% agreed,

17% were neutral, 6% strongly agreed and 5% disagreed which shows that the financial

position of IT firms determined whether HRIS will be implemented, top managers made

the final decision on whether HRIS will be implemented or not.

41

Table 4.26: Top Management as Final Decision Makers

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 4 6

Disagree 3 5

Neutral 10 17

Agree 17 27

Strongly Agree 30 47

Total 64 100

4.5.2 Positive Attitude of Top Management

Table 4.27 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether positive attitude of top

management has resulted in relative success of HRIS adoption. Majority of respondents

who were 31% were neutral, 29% agreed, 25% strongly agreed, 5% disagreed and 3%

strongly disagreed, which shows that there lacked positive attitude to enable adoption of

human resource information system.

Table 4.27 Positive Attitude of Top Management

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 3 5

Neutral 20 31

Agree 19 29

Strongly Agree 16 25

Total 64 100

4.5.3 Top Management Commitment

Table 4.28 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether top management commitment has

a positive influence on HRIS adoption. Majority of respondents who were 45% agreed,

33% strongly agreed, 11% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 4% strongly disagreed, which

shows that positive attitude was necessary to ensure that IT firms successfully adopt

human resource management.

42

Table 4.28: Top Management Commitment

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 4

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 7 11

Agree 29 45

Strongly Agree 21 33

Total 64 100

4.5.4 Top Management Innovativeness

Table 4.29 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether the strong commitment of top

management, especially of a particular ‘innovation champion’, leads to early adoption of

HRIS. Majority of respondents who were 31% strongly agreed, 31% agreed, 30% neutral,

5% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed which shows that innovation by the top

management is key in adoption of HRIS.

Table 4.29: Top Management Innovativeness

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 2 3

Disagree 3 5

Neutral 19 30

Agree 20 31

Strongly Agree 20 31

Total 64 100

4.5.5 CEO’s Innovative Desire

Table 4.30 indicates the respondent’s opinion on whether CEO’s desire of being more

innovative will expedite the process of HRIS adoption. Majority of respondents who were

27% strongly agreed, 27% agreed, 23% were neutral, 16% disagreed and 8% strongly

disagreed, which shows that CEO innovation and interest is critical on successful

adoption of human resource information system among IT firms.

43

Table 4.30: CEO’s Innovative Desire

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 5 8

Disagree 10 16

Neutral 15 23

Agree 17 27

Strongly Agree 17 27

Total 64 100

4.5.6 CEO’s IT Knowledge

Table 4.31 indicates the respondent’s opinion on whether CEO’s IT knowledge affect

adoption of HRIS. Majority of respondents who were 38% agreed, 36% strongly agreed,

17% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 5% strongly disagreed, which shows that the level of

knowledge by the CEO was an important factor in adoption of HRIS.

Table 4.31: CEO’s IT Knowledge

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 3 5

Disagree 4 6

Neutral 10 17

Agree 24 38

Strongly Agree 23 36

Total 64 100

4.5.7 CEO’s IT Experience

Table 4.32 indicates the respondent’s opinion on whether CEO’s IT experience of IT

affect adoption of HRIS. Majority of respondents who were 31% strongly agreed, 31%

agreed, 15% were neutral, 7% disagreed and 7% strongly disagreed, which shows that

CEO IT experience was important in adoption of human resource e information system.

44

Table 4.32: CEO’s IT Experience

Response Distribution

Frequency Percentage

Strongly Disagree 7 7

Disagree 7 7

Neutral 10 15

Agree 20 31

Strongly Agree 20 31

Total 64 100

4.5.8 Leadership Culture

Table 4.33 shows the respondent’s opinion on whether leadership culture is a key to the

success of HRIS adoption. Majority of respondents who were 30% strongly agreed, 29%

agreed, 19% were neutral, 17% disagreed and 6% strongly disagreed, which shows that

leadership culture way key in adoption of human resource information system.

Table 4.33: Leadership Culture

Response Distribution

Frequency

Percentage

Strongly Disagree 4 6

Disagree 11 17

Neutral 12 19

Agree 18 29

Strongly Agree 19 30

Total 64 100

4.6 Inferential Analysis

4.6.1 Correlation of Variables

The study conducted correlation analysis on challenges faced in of adoption of Human

Resource Information systems. Table 4.34 shows that there was a positive correlation

between organizational characteristics and HRIS adoption and no significant relationship

between organization characteristics and HRIS because (r =0.104, p> 0.05).

45

Table 4.34 shows that there was positive correlation between HR involvement and HRIS

adoption and no significant relationship between HR involvement and HRIS adoption

because (r = 0.245, p> 0.05).

Table 4.34 shows that there was a positive correlation between top management and

HRIS and no significant relationship between top management and HRIS adoption

because (r =0.058, p> 0.05).

Table 4.34: Pearson Correlation between Organization Characteristics, HR

Involvement, Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption

Adoption of Human Resource Information System

Adoption of Human

Resource Information System

Pearson

Correlation

1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

N 64

Organization Characteristics

Pearson Correlation

.104

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.414

N 64

Human Resource Involvement

Pearson Correlation

.245

Sig. (2-tailed)

.051

N 64

Top Management Involvement

Pearson Correlation

.058

Sig. (2-tailed)

.650

N 64

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

4.6.2 Regressions Analysis

According to Kothari (2006), regression analysis is a statistical process for estimating the

relationships among variables. Table 4.35 shows the results of multiple regressions. The

value of R2 is 0.066, revealing 6.6% variability in organization characteristics, human

46

resource involvement and top management involvement accounted for adoption of human

resource information system variables in the model developed.

The adjusted R2 is an improved estimation of R2 in the population. The value of adjusted

R2 is 0.019. This adjusted measure provides a revised estimate of 1.9% variability,

revealing 1.9% variability in organization characteristics, human resource involvement

and top management involvement accounted for adoption of human resource information

system due to the fitted model.

Table 4.35: Model Summary for Organization Characteristics, HR Involvement,

Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption

Model R R Square

Adjusted R

Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .257a .066 .019 .74838

a. Predictors: (Constant), Top management Involvement, Organization Characteristics,

Human Resource Involvement

4.6.3 Coefficients

The estimates of the regression coefficients, t-statistics, standard errors of the estimates

and p values are shown in Table 4.36.

Y=3.956+0.026 X1+0.170 X2 -0.059 X3

Organization characteristics, human resource involvement and top management

involvement were used in multiple regression analysis to predict the adoption of HRIS.

The analysis shows that organization characteristic did not significantly predict the

adoption of HRIS. The coefficient for organization characteristics is (1=.026, t=.236,

p>0.794) so for every unit increase in organization characteristics, a 2.6% unit increase in

HRIS adoption is predicted, holding all other variables constant.

HR involvement also did not significantly predict the adoption of HRIS. The coefficient

for HR involvement is(1=.170, t=1.882, p>0.065) so for every unit increase in HR

involvement, a 1.7% unit increase in HRIS adoption is depicted, holding all other

variables constant.

47

Top management involvement had a negative coefficient and did not significantly predict

the adoption of HRIS. The coefficient for top management involvement is ((1= -.059, t=

-.631, p>0.531) so for every unit decrease in top management involvement, a 5.9% unit

decrease in HRIS adoption is depicted, holding all other variables constant.

Table 4.36: Coefficients on Organization Characteristics, HR Involvement, Top

Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption

Model

Un-standardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 3.956 .406 9.742 .000

Organization

Characteristics

.026 .100 .037 .263 .794

Human Resource

Involvement .170 .090 .277 1.882 .065

Top Management

Involvement

-.059 .093 -.095 -.631 .531

a. Dependent Variable: Adoption of Human Resource Information System

4.7 Chapter Summary

This chapter presents the results and findings of the study. Findings are presented in

frequency tables. Inferential analysis is also presented using correlation, regression

analysis and coefficients on organization characteristics, HR involvement and top

management involvement and HRIS adoption. The next chapter presents discussion on

findings, conclusion and recommendations.

48

CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the discussion of research findings, conclusion, and

recommendations of the study. The chapter sections are aligned with the research

questions.

5.2 Summary

The purpose of the study was to determine the challenges faced in the adoption of HRIS.

The research questions that guided the study were: To what extent do organizational

characteristics affect HRIS adoption among IT companies? To what extent does HR

involvement affect HRIS adoption among IT companies? To what extent does top

management involvement affect HRIS adoption among IT companies?

The study used a descriptive research design approach. The population size was 128.

Stratified random sampling was used to select the sample for the study. The sample size

of the study was 64. Data was collected using a self-administered questionnaire. All the

completed questionnaires were entered into IBM SPSS 20.0 statistical software.

Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis and multiple regressions were conducted to

analyze the data. Results were presented in tables showing frequencies and percentages.

From the findings, organizational characteristics were indicated by majority of

respondents to affect the adoption of human resource information system. Most

respondents strongly agreed that organization resources, transaction volumes or total

workforce affected the adoption of HRIS. Most respondents were of the opinion that

organization IT planning had implications in adoption of HRIS. IT planning was

indicated to be critical in the implementation of HRIS. Organization culture greatly

affected the adoption of adoption of HRIS when open and flexible culture enabled easy

adoption of HRIS. Most respondents indicated that organization size, supporting

organization settings to be important factors in successful adoption of HRIS. Most

respondents indicated that organization change was significant in successful adoption as

some members of staff and the management was not willing to accommodate change.

49

Staff involvement was found to be key in the adoption of human resource information

system.

Findings on HR involvement indicated that the existence of a formal HR department

increased adoption of HRIS since HR and IT department’s collaboration was key for

HRIS adoption. Most respondents indicated that HR and HRIS roles influenced easier

adoption of HRIS. Most respondents were of the opinion that HR professional were

comfortable with new roles of HRIS. Majority of respondents indicated that expertise of

HR professionals was crucial in HRIS adoption since HR department provided the

necessary human resource information necessary for HRIS adoption. Most respondents

were of the opinion that HR staff should be fully involved in the adoption of HRIS since

they provide the necessary human resource information to be integrated with information

technology.

The study findings on top management involvement showed that majority of respondents

indicated that top managers had the final say whether to implement HRIS or not. Most

respondents were of the opinion that positive attitude and commitment among the

managers was key in implementation of HRIS. Majority of the respondents indicated that

CEOs level of knowledge, desire, experience on HRIS and leadership culture are

important in implementation of HRIS. Most respondents were of the opinion that the top

management was an integral part of human resource information system adoption since

they were the final decision makers in implementation of HRIS. The top management

were indicated to approve finances which were key to adoption of human resource

information system.

5.3 Discussion

5.3.1 Organization Characteristics and HRIS Adoption

The findings indicated that those organization characteristics based on organization size,

IT planning, culture and change had a great impact on adoption of HRIS in an

organization. Organization size which includes the number of employees, the level of

skills among staff determined how fast the organization adopted HRIS. From the findings,

availability of resources, transaction volumes and the number of the workforce has been

indicated to be a key factor to adoption of human resource information system which

50

collaborates with the study by Kamel and Abdullah (2014) who argued that organization

size, supporting organization settings including a skilled workforce are important factors

in successful innovation adoption. This also supports a study carried out by Dennis,

(2015) who analyzed through meta-analysis and found that there is an association

between firm size and IT innovation adoption.

According to the findings, effective information technology planning made the

organization fully benefit from adoption of HRIS which was indicated to greatly affect

the adoption of human resource information system which collaborates with the study by

Ahmer (2013) who argued that planning of IT is perceived to be more essential when it

comes to speed at which technological innovations take place and that organizations can

fully benefit from adoption of IT through IT planning to evaluate the threats and

opportunities created by IT. The findings also support the study by (Randi and Steve,

2013) who argue that highly regarded IT projects can be badly delivered if they are not

properly managed and planned for.

From the findings, changing organization culture to be more open and flexible determined

how effectively the organization adopted HRIS. This collaborates with the study by

Dennis (2015) who argued that open and flexible organization culture necessitates fast

adoption. This is also supported the study by (Niisha and Mona, 2012) who argued that

organization, cultural and behavioral issues were key areas that needed to be addressed

for successful implementation of HRIS. Muhhamad, (2014) also argued that

organizational culture is to be considered as an important factor when it comes to success

or failure of information systems adoption. From the findings, organizational change was

key in the adoption of human resource information system since there is need for the

management to change the way staff did their work which collaborates with the study by

Syeda, Sajid and Syed (2012) who argued that organizational change has a significant

influencing factor over IT adoption. This is also supported by Drew who suggested that

industry changes and trends are a major driving force towards adoption of HRIS in

organizations. The findings indicate that staff involvement is key for the adoption of

HRIS. This is supported by a study from Vincent, (2007) who argued that employees

should play an active role in the development of HRIS systems.

51

5.3.2 HR Involvement and HRIS Adoption

According to the findings, the human resource department was an interregnal part of

adoption of human resource information system since human resource department

provided human resource information which was critical in human resource information

system adoption which collaborates with the study by Niisha and Mona (2012) who

argued that the existence of a formal HR-department, appears to increase the likelihood of

a firm adopting HRIS as they act as an internal promoters.

Based on the findings, collaboration of HR and IT were identified to be a crucial success

factor when for the adoption of HRIS. This collaborates with the study by Kamel and

Abdullah (2014) who argued that collaboration can ensure successful integration of

technology into HRM processes, thus responding to the need for quality HRM services.

This is also supported by the study by Naser, (2014) who argued that close collaborations

between departments is critical for successful adoption of HRIS. Kamel and Abdullah

(2014) also argued that developing a shared vision between HR and IT managers was also

important when it came to successful implementation of HRIS.

Findings also indicated that HR professionals were comfortable with their new roles in

HRIS which had an influence on successful implementation of HRIS. This collaborates

with the study by (Bader, 2012) who argued that HRIS capabilities are applications to

HRM tasks which means that HR professionals were able to cope with their new roles

without panicking. The findings also indicated that HR expertise was very crucial in

HRIS adoption since HR department provide human resource information that is

necessary for HRIS adoption. This collaborates with the study by Murat and Nihat (2014)

who argued that HR expertise could be achieved through user training and that training

enhanced competency which could affect the speed and coverage of adoption of systems.

Findings indicated that HR staff should be fully involved in adoption of HRIS since they

provide the necessary human resource information to be integrated into the system. This

collaborates with the study by Murat and Nihat (2014) who argued that the recognition of

HR as a change agent and a strategic partner is likely to influence the adoption and

implementation of HRIS applications and practices. According to Salwa and Ziad (2006)

52

their study indicated that there was importance in recognizing HR department as adapters

of new ways of operating human resource management.

5.3.3 Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption

From the findings, top managers had the final say on whether to implement HRIS or not.

This collaborates with the study carried out by Niisha and Mona (2012) who argued that

it was the top managers who made the final decision to adopt IT, based on the internal

needs of the organization or environmental needs. According to Niisha and Mona (2012),

they argue that the positive attitude of top management results in relative success of

adoption of HRIS. They go ahead to comment that a positive attitude by top management

in using HRIS would result in its acceptance and subsequently in the success of the

organization. Muhammad et al. (2014) also argues that CEO’s attitude and interest

towards information technology was important in order to promote HRIS adoption. These

studies collaborate with the findings which showed that most respondents were of the

opinion that positive attitude from top management was key when it came to

implementation of HRIS.

Top managers needed to be more supportive and committed in implementation of human

resource information systems which collaborates with the study by Murat and Nihat

(2014) who argued that management commitment greatly influenced employee

engagement when it came to implementation of HRIS adoption. Gaining the support of

top management was key when it came to adoption of HRIS. These findings are

supported by Alireza and Payvand (2012) whose study showed that top management

support for IT applications was the highest predicator of IT usage in organizations.

According to the findings, the CEO level of IT knowledge was key in the adoption of

human resource information system which collaborates with Rifat and Yazzan (2004)

who argued that CEO’s IT knowledge and experience of IT affects IT adoption in

organizations. They go ahead to discuss further by mentioning that CEOs who are more

knowledgeable about IT are more probable to adopt HRIS. They also mention that CEOs

with greater knowledge of IT will reduce the uncertainty entangled with IT which then

reduces the lower risk of HRIS adoption. The findings also indicated that top

management innovativeness was key when it came to adoption of HRIS. This finding is

53

supported with the study by Kristine et al. (2007) who argued that a CEOs demographic

characteristics and openness and extraversion are key determinants when it came to IT

usage and behavior.

From the findings, leadership culture is a key determinant when it comes to acceptance on

adoption of HRIS by employees. This finding collaborates with Kamel and Abdullah

(2014) who argued that leadership culture is a key to the success of IS adoption and

effective leadership is the means by which the culture is created and managed. Naser

(2014) also supports these findings from his study which showed that visionary,

supporting and encouraging leaders (transformational leader) who advocated HRIS

implementations were found to contribute to the acceptance of new systems. According to

Virginia et al. (2007), a culture where everyone wants to be a leader and do not have

adequate knowledge and experiences sometimes creates a barrier for successful

implementation of technological projects. This study concurs with the finding that

leadership is key when it comes to successful implementation of HRIS in organizations.

5.4 Conclusions

5.4.1 Organization Characteristics and HRIS Adoption

The study concludes that organizational characteristics greatly affect the adoption of

human resource information system in information technology in Kenya. Scarce

resources, large number of transaction volumes and unskilled workforce was found to

slow down the adoption of human resource information system. Lack of proper planning

within an organization also slows the adoption of human resource information system.

Additionally, resistance to change among employees has been indicated to slow down

HRIS implementation.

The study also concludes that active involvement of staff in the process of implementing

HRIS is key for the adoption of human resource information systems. Organizational

culture greatly affects adoption of HRIS. Findings indicated that an open and flexible

culture enabled easy adoption of HRIS in an organization. Organization IT planning is a

critical factor for HRIS implementation. The business size of the organization also plays a

key role in the adoption HRIS.

54

5.4.2 HR Involvement and HRIS Adoption

The study concludes that low level of collaboration between human resource staff and

information technology departments slows the adoption of human resource information

system. This is because HR staff are afraid to lose their relevance and their resistance to

take new roles slows the human resource information systems adoption process.

Management’s failure to involve human resource professionals in the implementation of

human resource information system has led to slow adoption of HRIS. Lack of expertise

and understanding by the HR professionals on the importance of HRIS to the organization

can also lead to slow adoption of HRIS within an organization.

The study also concluded that the existence of a formal HR department increases the

likelihood of HRIS adoption in an organization. HR had a great influence on how quickly

and effectively HRIS adoption can occur within an organization. The study also

concludes that HR staff should be involved in the adoption of HRIS since they provide

the necessary human resource information to be integrated with information technology.

5.4.3 Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption

Top managers are the final decision makers in the adoption of human resource

information system. The study therefore concludes that negative attitude and lack of

commitment among top managers has hindered the adoption of HRIS. Low level of

knowledge among Top management also impacts on the adoption of HRIS.

Lack of desire to accept a new HRIS system and lack of experience by the top

management slows down the adoption of HRIS in organizations. Leadership culture

determines how fast the organization adopts HRIS. Since top management approves

finances of resources in organizations, they are key to adoption of HRIS in organizations.

Their positive attitude and high level of commitment is therefore crucial for successful

implementation of HRIS. The study therefore concludes that it is important for top

management to be actively and genuinely involved when it comes to successful

implementation of HRIS as they are seen as the driving force behind a new system.

55

5.5 Recommendations

5.5.1 Recommendations for Improvement

5.5.1.1 Organization Characteristics and HRIS Adoption

This study recommends that firms should allocate adequate resources for adoption of

human resource information system. A firm’s resources may include both tangible and

intangible assets including capabilities. Therefore organizational processes, people, time,

information and knowledge are all types of resources that the study recommends should

be properly managed and controlled by the organization to enable the organization to

conceive and implement a system that will improve its efficiency and effectiveness.

Proper organizing of human resource records enables efficient adoption of human

resource information system.

The study noted that training of staff is key during the adoption of human resource

information system, because it also helps in providing user information satisfaction. The

study therefore recommends that organizations should invest heavily in training so that

HRIS meets the user’s satisfaction, as this will increase the likely adoption of the system.

Staff can also be trained on change management in order to be well equipped and

prepared for change when a new system is put in place.

The study also recommends that IT planning should be of key importance to an

organization. This is because when, more effort is spent on IT planning, it can lead to a

better fit of the organization’s requirements with that of the final system. Also user

information satisfaction is expected to be high when the level of IT planning is high.

5.5.1.2 HR Involvement and HRIS Adoption

The study noted that human resource staff were not well trained on human resource

information system which made it difficult to get accurate information for its adoption.

The study therefore recommends that organizations in the information technology

industry should prepare human resource departments for the adoption of human resource

information system through regular training on the intended purpose of the integration.

The management in the IT industry should ensure that the new roles of human resource

56

staff are within their human resource areas of expertise which should reduce resistance to

change.

5.5.1.3 Top Management Involvement and HRIS Adoption

The study revealed that top management has a great influence on HRIS adoption. Thus it

will be very important for top management be the forefront endorsers of new systems in

the organization like HRIS as this will show the employees that the leadership of the

organization supports new practices. This study recommends that management practices

in organizations in the information technology industry should facilitate adoption of

information system among employees in information technology industry. The study also

recommends that top management should ensure there is coordination of all factions so as

to allow a seamless and smooth process in the adoption of human resource information

system.

5.5.2 Recommendation for Further Studies

The study identified the challenges faced in the adoption of human resource information

systems. There are other challenges faced in the adoption of Human Resource

Information systems that have not been identified in the study. Some of these factors

include: IT infrastructure, competitive pressure, vendor support, government policies and

support and many more others. Suggestion for further studies into these factors is

therefore advisable to contribute towards ways of handling challenges faced in the

adoption of Human Resource Information systems.

57

REFERENCES

Abeer, I., Mashael, S. & Abdullah, S. (2011). The Critical Success Factors of ERP

implementation in Higher Education in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Information

Technology and Economic Development, 2(2), 1-16.

Ahmer, Z. (2013). Adoption of Human Resource Information System in Pakistan. Journal

of Quality and Technology Management, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 25–50.

Alireza, P.E. & Payvand, F.N. (2012). Exploring the Type of Relationship between

Information Security Management and Organizational Culture. International

Journal of Information, Security and Systems Management, Vol 1, No 1, pp. 21-

28.

Ananya, R. & Nur, N.A. (2013). Adoption of Human Resource Information System: A

Theoretical Analysis.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, pp. 473 – 478.

Asafo-Adjei, A. B. (2007). The Role of Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) in

Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM). Swedish School Of Economics

and Business Administration.

Bader, Y.O. (2012). The Relationship between Human Resource Information System

(HRIS) Functions and Human Resource Management (HRM) Functionalities.

Journal of Management Research, ISSN 1941-899X Vol. 4, No. 4.

Catherine, W., Elegwa, M. & Kabare, K. (2015). The Influence of Management

Participation on Adoption of HRIS IN Teachers Service Commission (TSC)

Operations in Kenya, International Journal of Academic Research in Business

and Social Sciences,Vol 5, No 2, ISSN 2222-6990.

Dennis, K. (2015). Drivers and challenges of ICT adoption by SMES in Accra

metropolis. Journal of Technology Research, Volume 6.

Harman, P.S., Sunita, J. & Sekh, A.S. (2011). Role of Human Resource Information

System in Banking Industry of Developing Countries. University of Delhi, Delhi,

India.

58

Hayel, T.A. & Fayiz, D.S. (2014). Human Capital Information Systems. International

Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 9, No. 9, ISSN 1833-3850 E-ISSN

1833-8119.

Hisham, A., Sattam, A. & Eman, B. (2013). Factors Influencing the Successful Adoption

of Human Resource Information System. Intelligent Information Management,

Vol 5, 1-9.

Kamel, K. & Abdullah, B. (2014). The Impact of Implementing SAP System on Human

Resource. International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 9, No 12,

2014 ISSN 1833-3850 E-ISSN 1833-8119.

Kamini, T. (2014). Roles of HRIS in Performance Evaluation and decision making.

International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol.2, Issue 4, ISSN 2231

5780.

Kristine, D., David, G. & Sharna, W. (2006). Replacing or Enhancing HRM. The

University of Sydney.

Light, Z., Idisemi, A., Craig, C. & Hanifa, S. (2013). The Impact of Culture in Enterprise

Resource Planning System Implementation. Proceedings of the World Congress

on Engineering, Vol 1, ISBN 978-988-19251-0-7.

Morteza, G., Mohammad, S.S., Tang, S.H. & Norizma, H. (2011). Information

Technology Adoption in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. Interdisciplinary

Journal of Research in Business, Vol. 1, Issue. 7, pp.53-80.

Muhhamad, I., Shao, Y. & Khawaja, T. (2014). Explore the Adoption of HRIS in

Telecom Sector in Pakistan. International Journal of Economics and Management

Sciences, Volume 3, Issue 1,162, ISSN 2162-6359.

Murat, E. & Nihat, E. (2014). Effects of Technology Readiness on technology acceptance

in E-HRM. The Journal of Knowledge Economy & Knowledge Management ,

Volume. 9.

Naser, A. (2014). The Impact of Organizational Culture on the Adoption of E-

Management. International Journal of Business and Management , Vol. 9, No. 9,

ISSN 1833-3850 E-ISSN 1833-8119.

59

Niisha, A. & Mona, K. (2012). Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) Its role and

importance in Business Competitiveness. GianJyoti E-Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2,

ISSN 2250-348X.

Nikhal, A. & Sanjana, B. (2013). Managerial Perceptions of the Impact of HRIS on

Organizational Efficiency. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, Vol. 5,

No. 12, pp. 861-875, ISSN: 2220-6140.

Rand, H. & Zu’bi M. F. (2014). Factors Motivating and Inhibiting the Practice of HRIS in

Business Organizations. International Business Research, Vol. 7, No. 7, ISSN

1913-9004 E-ISSN 1913-9012.

Randi, H. & Steve, L. (2013). Factors Influencing the Adoption of HRIS Applications .

International Journal of management and Business studies, Vol 3, Issue 4, ISSN

2230-9519.

Rifat, O. & Yazzan, N. (2004). The Effect of the Adopted Computerized Human

Resources Information System on Job Satisfaction in the Jordanian Private

Hospitals. University of Jordan.

Salwa, A. & Ziad, M.S. (2006). The Organizational Factors Affecting Enterprise

Resource Planning Systems (ERPs) Implementation Success.

Sharna, W. & David, G., Kristine, D. (2010). Transitioning to a new HRIS. The reshaping

of human resources and information technology talent. Journal of Electronic

Commerce Research, Vol. 11, No. 4.

Syeda, Q., Sajid, M.A. & Syed, H.R. (2012). Benefits and Barriers of Human Resource

Information System in Accounts Office &Azad Jammu &Kashmir Community

Development Program. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science,

Vol. 2, No. 3.

Vincent, C. (2007). A Study of the Impact of Organizational Learning on Information

System Effectiveness. Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

Virginia, B., Maria, P. & Ana, I.J. (2007). Drivers, Benefits and Challenges of ICT

Adoption by Small and Medium Sized Enterprises. Problems and Perspectives

in Management, Volume 5, Issue 1.

60

APPENDIX II: LETTER

June Seif

P.O.BOX 11695

00100- NBO, Kenya

Tel: +254736462445

REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO CONDUCT RESEARCH

Dear Madam/Sir

My name is June Seif, and I am an EMOD (Executive Masters in Organizational

Development) student at USIU. The research I wish to conduct for my Masters

dissertation involves challenges faced in adoption of HRIS in organizations.

I am hereby seeking your consent to carry out the research in your organization.

I have provided you with a copy of my proposal which includes copies of the measure

and consent and assent forms to be used in the research process.

Upon completion of the study, I undertake to provide the Department of HR with a bound

copy of the full research report. If you require any further information, please do not

hesitate to contact me on my email: [email protected] or you can reach me on

my cell phone: +254736462445. Thank you for your time and consideration in this

matter.

Yours sincerely,

June Seif

United States International University Africa.

61

APPENDIX III: QUESTIONNIARE

This questionnaire seeks information on the challenges faced in of adoption of Human

Resource Information systems. All the information you give will be treated with

confidentially and used for academic purposes only and nothing else what so ever. Please

take a few minutes to complete this questionnaire.

SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Please tick appropriately

Tick as appropriate

1. Indicate age bracket:

18-30 yrs.

31-40 yrs.

41-50 yrs.

Above 51 yrs.

2. Highest Education Level

Secondary level

College level

University level

Any other please specify.......................................................................

3. Working experience

Below 1 year

1-5years

6-10 years

11-20 years

21 and above

62

SECTION B: ADOPTION OF HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION SYSTEM

Please state the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements

regarding Adoption of Human Resource Information System. (1 Strongly Disagree, 2

Disagree, 3 Neutral, 4 Agree and 5 Strongly Agree)

1 2 3 4 5

Lack of management support acts as a Barrier to adoption

of HRIS

HRIS is costly to implement and sustain

Lack of reliable vendor frustrate adoption of HRIS

HRIS adoption face resistance from employees

IT firms lack technical expertise to adopt HRIS

Adoption of human resource information system helps

improve efficiency

Adoption of human resource information system helps in

strategic human resource management

From your opinion, how can the organization effectively adopt human resource

information system

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

63

SECTION C: ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND HRIS

ADOPTION

Please state the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements

regarding organizational characteristics and HRIS adoption of human resource

information system. (1 strongly Disagree, 2 Disagree, 3 Neutral, 4 Agree and 5

strongly Agree)

1 2 3 4 5

Organization’s resources, transaction volumes, or total

workforce affect adoption of HRIS

Organization IT planning has implication in adoption of

HRIS

Organizations can fully benefit from adoption of HRIS

through IT planning

Organization Culture influence adoption of HRIS

Organizations with open and flexible corporate cultures

adapt easily to new technology

Organizational change is A significant influencing factor

over IT adoption

From your opinion, how do organization characteristics affect adoption of human

resource information system

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

64

SECTION D: HUMAN RESOURCE INVOLVEMENT AND HRIS ADAPTATION

Please state the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements

regarding Human Resource Involvement and HRIS Adaptation (1 is strongly Disagree, 2

is Disagree, 3 is Neutral, 4 is Agree and 5 is Strongly Agree)

1 2 3 4 5

The existence of a formal HR-department, appears to increase

the likelihood of a firm adopting HRIS

Collaboration of HRM and IT has also been identified as a

crucial success factor in HRIS adoption and use

The HR roles identified could be related to the e-HRM

adoption and deployment outcomes

Expertise is a crucial factor in innovation adoption of HRIS

HR professionals are comfortable with new roles of HRIS

From your opinion, how does Human Resource Involvement affect adoption of human

resource information system

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

65

SECTION E: TOP MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT AND HRIS ADOPTION

Please state the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements

regarding top management involvement on HRIS Adoption. (1 is Strongly Disagree, 2 is

Disagree, 3 is Neutral, 4 is Agree and 5 is Strongly Agree)

1 2 3 4 5

It is the top managers who make the final decision to adopt

HRIS

Positive attitude of top management has resulted in relative

success of HRIS adoption

management commitment has a positive influence on HRIS

adoption

The strong commitment of top management, especially of a

particular ‘innovation champion’, leads to early adoption of

HRIS

CEOs desire of being more innovative will expedite the process

of HRIS adoption

CEO’s IT knowledge and experience of IT affect adoption of

HRIS

Leadership culture is a key to the success of HRIS adoption

From your opinion, how does top management involvement affect adoption of human

resource information system

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME