This page answers questions about our audit on the Human Resource Information System. This page sums up key parts of the report in Plain English. Please note: this page is not the whole report. The whole report is here
We use short names. We refer to:
- the Department of Health as ‘Health’
- the Department of Premier and Cabinet as ‘DPAC’
- the Human Resource Information System as ‘HRIS’
- the Human Resource Information System Program as ‘the HRIS Program’
- the Human Resource Transformation Program as ‘the HRTP’.
Background information
This section tells you some background information so you can understand what the HRIS is and why we did the audit.
What is the HRIS program?
An HRIS is an IT system. It stores staff information in one place. It is used for pay, leave and staff records. It is also used for things like recruiting staff.
The HRIS Program and the HRTP are two names for a project that began in Health and transitioned to DPAC after 4 years. The HRIS Program was managed by Health and the HRTP is being managed by DPAC. The project was designed to deliver a system (HRIS) to underpin changes to Tasmanian State Service HR operations. The HRIS program and the HRTP were supposed to replace old systems. They were supposed to replace lots of systems with one system. They were meant to support every day human resource work.
Why did you do this audit?
The Tasmanian State Service has needed to make changes to its HRIS framework for a long time. The first attempt was in 2013. In 2020, Health started work on the HRIS program as a standalone solution for the agency and later as a foundation system for a whole of government solution. In 2024, the program moved to DPAC. After the move, the program was renamed HRTP.
There are many examples nationally and globally, of failed delivery of HRIS programs.
Here are some examples:
- In Canada, a payroll system cost about $3.5 billion and continued to cause many payroll mistakes that are still taking years to fix.
- In Queensland Health, a $1.2 billion payroll system failed and caused serious problems for staff.
- Western Australia ran a shared services program from 2003 to 2011 that did not succeed. A new HR program is now underway.
- The Australian Government stopped a $340 million finance and HR system when it did not meet its goals.
- In the ACT, a $78 million program only delivered one small part.
Parliament felt it was not informed as to how this project was progressing or how much had been spent to date, so it asked us to do an audit.
What we found
This section tells you some of what we found.
Does the government need a new HRIS?
Yes. The program was established because current HR systems and practices have lots of problems.
Here are some examples:
- data is hard to see and hard to use
- reports are slow and sometimes wrong
- planning the workforce is difficult
- tracking bad behaviour of staff is hard
- many payroll and HR tasks are done manually
- processes are old and slow
- lots of staff are needed to pay people
- there is a higher risk of pay errors
- the systems are aging and unreliable
- payroll outages have already occurred.
These problems cost lots of money. They make things slower and make things riskier. They make other things the Tasmanian State Service wants to do, such as make savings, much harder.
How much has this cost and how much more will cost?
The government has spent about $64 million since 2020. Health spent $47 million. DPAC has spent an additional $19.7 million so far. This amount is based on information up to May 2026.
DPAC thinks it will take about $53.1m more. This means a total forecast of $119.8m. We do not know if this will be enough.
Why did you split the report into the two agencies?
We did this to match the report’s main focus. The report assesses management by two separate departments. HRIS and HRTP are fundamentally different programs. They differ in agency, people accountable, governance, objectives, scope and timelines. Importantly, HRIS started as Health only, while HRTP applies across the entire government.
How did Health do?
We found that:
- Health spent about $47 million over 4 years on the HRIS program.
- None of the planned pieces were delivered. These included:
– pay staff correctly and on time
– agree to a common interpretation of each of the awards (which set pay and other conditions for different groups of staff) and set them up in the new system
– handle multiple and concurrent employment
– manage rostering in a consistent and equitable manner using digital tools
– lower the number of overpayments and one-off payments
– manage a large number of employees easily
– use data to make better management decisions
– make the employee’s work experience better – from hiring to retiring
– increase the ease and opportunity for employee’s self-service
– lower the risk of system outages. - The program was run mainly as an IT project rather than business practice change. Health needed to change how they did things before they built an IT system.
- Some problems were raised many times, but they were never properly fixed.
- Some problems were hidden and long-standing, and the program lead did not have the power or capability to solve them.
- Health did not do well on communicating to public or parliament about how they were going.
Did any benefits come out of the first 4 years? What did the first $47 million actually purchase?
It is hard to assess. The program did not deliver the planned modules. An external report commissioned by Health in late 2023 found little value achieved from what had been built. This was accepted by the heads of the two agencies at that time. The program was then stopped, restructured and transitioned to DPAC over the course of 2024-25. DPAC advised that some of Health’s work was able to be reused in the new HRTP. The learnings from HRIS could also inform the work of HRTP.
How did DPAC do?
We found that:
- The program is not yet fully funded.
- All stakeholders are not agreed on the intended outcomes.
- Some stakeholders were not fully involved. But DPAC is fixing this.
- DPAC haven’t resolved some key problems.
DPAC has no plan yet for sharing information outside the agency, such as to the end users. Why does this matter?
Because:
- a large amount of public money was spent with no visible results
- problems grew because they were not fixed when identified.
Should they continue to spend more public money to finish the project?
This is not for us to determine. The audit looked at planning and early implementation and covered the period from outset in 2019-20 to December 2025. But we do recommend that some fundamental issues are resolved before proceeding.
When will government get a new HRIS?
DPAC says it will put the system in place a piece at a time. They advise:
- the People and Positions function will happen by the end of June 2026
- the Pay and Rostering function will happen by the end of June 2028
- the Recruitment, Onboarding, Offboarding, and Talent functions will happen by the end of December 2028.
These dates are based on current estimates. The timeline might change because the system is complex. Lots of problems have to be fixed before they can release each piece.
Will the program succeed?
We don’t know. Our report outlines the improvements that have been made to the governance and supporting resources for the program. But we cannot provide any assurance that risks will not be realised. It could fail, if:
- remaining key problems DPAC knows about are not solved. Some of these will be hard problems to solve
- the program does not have enough resourcing to finish its work.