How to Identify Your Real HR Problems Before Selecting HCM Technology

Problem-first HCM selection means completing a structured diagnostic (mapping business signals to HR scenarios to validated problems) before evaluating platforms, so the resulting requirements document is built around evidenced organisational need rather than a generic template or vendor demo.

HCM technology represents a significant, multi-year investment; selecting it based on an unvalidated or generic requirements list increases the risk of buying capability the organisation does not need while missing capability it does.

• The HCM requirements document was drafted from a generic template rather than the organisation's own validated problems.
• Different stakeholders each requested features based on personal frustration rather than an agreed problem list.
• Vendor demonstrations shaped the requirements list more than internal diagnostic work did.
• No one can explain, in outcome terms, why a specific feature was included as a 'must-have' requirement.

• Structured problem diagnosis takes time that procurement timelines often do not allow for.
• Stakeholders may already have informal vendor preferences that bias the requirements process.
• Distinguishing a genuine organisational problem from an individual's personal frustration requires validation effort.
• Cross-functional alignment on the problem list can be politically difficult to achieve before procurement begins.

• Procurement processes triggered by contract renewal timing rather than a validated business need.
• Absence of a pre-procurement diagnostic phase in the standard HCM buying process.
• Requirements gathering delegated to whichever team is available rather than grounded in a cross-functional problem review.
• Reliance on generic industry requirement templates instead of organisation-specific evidence.

• HCM platforms selected that do not resolve the organisation's actual priority problems.
• Expensive contract terms locked in for capability the organisation does not need.
• Extended implementation timelines as gaps between requirements and actual need are discovered mid-project.
• Reduced confidence in future technology decisions if the selected platform underdelivers against expectations.

• An HCM requirements document explicitly traceable to validated organisational problems.
• A cross-functional agreement on priority problems before procurement begins.
• Vendor evaluation criteria weighted toward evidenced problem resolution rather than feature count.
• A shorter, more focused requirements list that is easier for vendors to respond to meaningfully.

• Running a structured problem-validation exercise (mapping business signals to HR scenarios to problems) before drafting HCM requirements.
• Building the RFP requirements list directly from the validated problem list, with each requirement traceable to a specific problem.
• Weighting vendor evaluation criteria toward evidenced problem resolution rather than feature volume.

Technology is considered last, after the problem and target outcome are agreed. These are capability areas to evaluate, not product recommendations.

• Structured diagnostic frameworks for translating business signals into validated HR problems ahead of procurement.
• Requirements-traceability tooling that links each RFP requirement back to a specific validated problem.
• Vendor evaluation scorecards weighted by problem-resolution fit.

1. 01Can every requirement in our current HCM RFP be traced back to a specific, validated organisational problem?
2. 02Was our requirements list built from internal diagnostic work, or from a generic industry template?
3. 03Did any vendor's product capability shape our requirements list before we had defined our own problems?

Illustrative examples — not claims about any named organisation

MBT's methodology places Validated Problems and Target Outcomes explicitly ahead of Technology in the diagnostic sequence for exactly this reason: an HCM platform selected without that upstream work inherits the biases of whichever internal voice or vendor demonstration was loudest, rather than reflecting the organisation's actual, evidenced needs.

How long should problem validation take before an HCM RFP is issued?

It depends on organisational complexity, but MBT recommends treating it as a distinct phase with its own timeline, rather than compressing it into the RFP drafting process itself.

Can vendor input be used at all during problem validation?

Vendor input is more useful for testing feasibility once problems are defined; using it to define the problems themselves risks introducing vendor bias too early.

• Employment Outlook

  OECD

  Cross-country labour-market and employment policy analysis.

• World Development Report

  World Bank

  Background analysis on labour markets and the future of work.