(back to index)

PPIPMI Reporting

Proposal Sponsor: 
Martyn Peggie

Overview

The University needs to be able to accurately report on staff data from Oracle through the PPIPMI universe. The current universe is based on snapshots and daily extracts rather than transactional (real time) data which affects the accuracy of the data users are able to report on.

Other contributors: 
Susan McLaren, Gillian Henderson, Anne Finnan, Dawn Nicholls, Pam Baillie, Mike McMonagle, Susan McKeown
What would happen if the project did not take place?: 

Currently, due to the limitations of snapshots, data on starters and leavers can be missing from extracts all together. Additionally, late changes (e.g. grade, salary, hours etc.) to staff data do not show in the month the change is effective from. The current PPIMI set up does not appropriately handle costing splits for headcount & FTE measures – This is more critical now we use this in RAM and TAG which are key planning processes in the University. We  work hard to avoid these but the risk of error due to manual manipulation of data exists

The current approach affects benchmarking data as well as the confidence of Schools/Departments in the data held in our universe and their ability to accurately report on historical data.

Fulfilling the University’s management information requirements whilst operating within the current constraints of the PPIPMI Universe requires significant levels of time from the HR systems team.  Whilst many reports can be accurately produced by other systems users, a significant proportion of requests need to be completed by HR Systems teams. At peak times this introduces delays in the provision of data and also presents a significant single-point-of-failure risk.

The current challenges faced with PPIPMI based reports mean there is risk of inaccurate or incomplete data being provided.  This understandably impacts on the University’s confidence in HR data. There is currently a risk of inaccurate or incomplete data being provided which may result in reputational damage and poorly informed decision making. The provision of inaccurate data may also impact on our ability to achieve Athena Swan awards

These concerns have been raised directly with UHRS via the BI/MI project and Maxxim review

Additional information: 

Consideration should be given to the requirements for the organisational hierarchy set out in the proposed Organisational Hierarchy Redesign project .

 

Project Proposal (Word)

Who does it affect?: 
  • HR Business Systems team
  • UHRS
  • IS Applications
  • All devolved HR teams
  • All internal users of the management information from PPIPMI
Why is it needed/What are the benefits?: 

The Benefits of this project are:

  • Informed University decision making from improved MI
  • Reduced administrative overhead in devolved HR teams and HR Business Systems team
  • Reduction of bottlenecks in HR reporting process through reducing the reliance on HR Systems team in preparing reports. This is expected to increase the speed of reporting processes.
  • Reduction of single-point-of-failure risk by reducing the reliance on HR Systems team in preparing reports.
  • The need for improved PPIPMI universe was identified by the University’s BI/MI project. The need for improved PPIPMI universe was identified by the University’s BI/MI project.

The HR systems team currently spend 4 days a month (48 days a year) on PPIPMI based reports which would be expected to significantly reduce if the proposed improvements to PPIPMI Universe were implemented. This time figure above does not include any estimation of time for users of the PPIPMI Universe outside of UHRS – implementation of this proposal is expected to introduce significant time savings for these users.

The issues with the data structures results in higher numbers of requests to UHRS due to anxiety over accuracy of reports. Alternatively, reports may be inaccurately being produced by user who are not aware of this risk/issue

BI/MI requirement?: 

This project is intended to fulfill the Business need for better staff information as highlighted by the University’s BI/MI project

Fit with University strategy: 

The University’s HR Information Systems are central to the delivery of the University Strategy and the People Strategy – providing systems to help us to attract, reward and retain the best people from around the world.

This is reflected in our directional statement “We will continue to enhance and maintain our systems to support effective recruitment, retention, development and reward of our academic, research and professional services staff.”

Enablers - People

  • The People Strategy also states that we will “Ensure that our services are always delivered in a timely, responsive, flexible and solutions focused way. “
  • Improved MI will support the University in attracting and recruiting the most talented staff.

Enablers - Finance

  • Deliver best value in all our activities.

Enablers – Infrastructure

  • Ensure that we have the information we need to support learning, teaching, research and effective decision-making.

Themes- Equality & widening participation

  • The University has a target of achieving the institutional Athena SWAN silver award. The provision of accurate equality related HR data supports the University in achieving this award.
Score for portfolio comparison: 

Programme Priority (per separate guidance)

4

Overall Priority

(per separate guidance)

2

Programme Scoring (per separate guidance)

1.Alignment with University Strategic Plan/Business Objectives

2 x 3 = 6

2.Risk of not doing the project

2 x 2 = 4

3.Benefits relative to cost

2 x 2 = 4

4.Time to deliver tangible benefit

2 x 1 = 2

TOTAL SCORE

16

Planning Status: 
Proposal
Programme Priority: 
2
Overall Priority: 
2
Portfolio: 
USG
Portfolio Priority: 
2
Planned Start: 
15/16
Multi-Year: 
Yes
Project Owner: 
USG
Funding Source: 
Core Grant
IS Admin Tab
Estimation Reference: 

Estimation References

Assumes period of analysis at the start of the project to agree requirements for change

3pt estimate Nov15

 

Estimation Type: 
Software Development (in-house)
Estimation Confidence: 
Reasonably Confident (similar to previous work)
Estimated IS Apps Days: 
Large
Estimated Business Partner Days: 
Large
Estimated Service Management Days: 
Small

(back to index)