Epicor HCM - Preferred HR System for the Database Guru
Updated July 24, 2016
Epicor HCM - Preferred HR System for the Database Guru
Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Overall Satisfaction with Epicor HCM
The performance, employment history, benefits, and module integrations with payroll and benefit provider exports were used. In addition, candidate self-service was used for the hiring process. This was used across our whole organization. Candidates had access to our candidate self service portal to apply for open positions and review their applications. All employees, primarily manufacturing floor employees, had access to view and interact with all of their HR-related information through the employee self-service interface. HR representatives had location-based security access, such that they could manage employees based on the current location (region, division, or other data) of the employee. HR users had access to enter personnel actions to modify most data in the system, which was routed through an approval process that is dynamic and allows for multiple approval steps with some intelligent routing potential. Along with properly trained users, the system drastically improves the time and organization necessary to manage personnel information and actions that paper processes cannot provide. It also serves to centrally locate and share a single system of record for personnel and pay records that can dictate external payouts.
- The database relational structure and schema. Spending several years as a database engineer, I appreciate the normalized design of the underlying database structure. I feel that when compared with many other information systems, Epicor HCM is a model that I frequently reference to other people as an example of a "properly built" database schema.
- The out of the box customization tools. Although they do not always work as well as intended, HCM is a product that understands that every business runs a little differently. The ability to rename fields and manipulate variables using tasks in the front-end interface does allow for some easier tailoring of the out of the box processes to terms that our business users were familiar with (resource editor, global variable editor). The task editor also provides good promise to be a tool to customize the interface to see what you want to see on the form. However, this is somewhat limited in potential and is subject to frequent bugs as of 5.8. Customization of menu items and menu tabs on the main menu is possible, which is a perk, but can be a bit confusing when compared to other systems. Some bugs required manipulation through the database in order to get them to fall into place properly.
- The ease of use. Once properly oriented with the product, adept computer users should have no problem navigating through the main page and flowing through the steps to complete maintenance on records or enter personnel actions, etc.
- Configurability. Because of the database structure, code tables and data tables allowed us to enter data that matches our business model and properly maintain the personnel information in the way we found suited us best.
- Limitations of ad hoc query potential. The visual builder should have an option to "go advanced" and allow more complex queries to be written. The SQL-entry does not allow more than basic subqueries and joins. Compound queries, which are used by salary grade information, are not supported through this interface. All reports are run through SSRS, which is fine to be embedded on the screen, but I felt that the transition from query information from user's superview to some viewable information has some room for improvement.
- End-user experience with record manipulation user interface flow / structure. I understand what developers were going from with the one screen record selection on the left navigation panel with record data on the right side. This sounds good in theory and works well with technically-savvy users. However, I found that with less technically oriented users, the visual flow of this was not as intuitive and accepted by the users (including candidates of the company), frequently making mistakes and being unable to complete required tasks. Because this interface is prevalent throughout the system, I would recommend focus-group testing redesigned versions of the interface with general information to see which redesign potential, or even just visual styling to the existing interface, could be cascaded through the software.
- Out of the box reporting and configuration. This is something that is difficult to nail down in a software because every customer is different and will use the system a bit differently. However, I felt that the standard product comes with tons of reports enabled on the menu, but most are of little value if not first edited. This needs to be done by exporting, manipulating using report developer tools, and re-imported. This is not unexpected, but I think that it would add value for HCM to provide a tool which assists in the configuration of the reports.
- Security flaws or limitations of functionality. In an organization where some HR users should have access to see some or most users' information, there is not this security also embedded on important features like "routing history" or "audit" tasks. For example, if the enterprise president receives a bonus, an HR manager who must field weekly audits in a branch location will have access to see that bonus if they are granted access to the routing history or audit tasks.
- Epicor HCM overall has had a strong positive affect on the speed at which HR actions are completed and improves the quality of the data being maintained. Routing actions for approvals and electronic notifications, which are new features above our previous electronic system are harder to lose than paper.
- Epicor HCM professional services experience has been hit and miss, but all in all, mostly negative. Throughout our implementation, Epicor has had a few personnel assigned and reassigned to our project. Our problems frequently needed to be escalated, and disturbing periods were communication was not available by key Epicor project members led to a disheartening experience. A lot of configuration by professional services experts and consultants of Epicor needed to be completely redone, leading to incorrect payouts for benefit deductions and costing the company significant loses that could not be refunded without legal action. These were not pursued, but the diligence and expertise with which these services were carried out were very disappointing.
- Open4 and ADP EEASE
After a failed implementation with Open4, we needed a solution that was more usable with our end-users. The outdated system provided by one of ADP's products needed to be replaced. We chose Epicor HCM because we were enticed by the functionality it provided and ease of use, as well as its ability to be integrated with Epicor ERP, a product which we had owned and used for several years.