Of all the leadership literature I've read, I always come away with an impression that it's always all about the big picture. The details of implementation are given footnotes most times, if at all. My experience in working with the HR/IT areas of companies that past 20 years or so tells me that the details surely do count. Getting them right and making sure someone is responsible for them on an ongoing basis will lead to lower costs and greater flexibility – which are two terrific enablers for leaders who like to get things done well.
For example, one thing I see time and again is that HR and HRIS processes were not put together to minimize errors. Those errors still need to be resolved – after all, who wants to tell employees that their benefits, payroll, or stock options are incorrect? We got 99% of them right, but sorry you're in that 1% that just fell over. I haven't come across HR and HRIS folks who would say that – they do what it takes to get everything corrected to take care of their coworkers. The problem is that when you have enough processes that perform poorly because of bad or incomplete design, you end up spending a lot of resources (that's money, folks... that could be going to profit instead) fixing stuff. Good leadership will make sure there are sufficient resources (time, people, $) up front to get a good process in place that minimizes errors. The less we spend on fixing stuff, the more we have for profit and investment – and I think leaders of all kinds care about that.
Another leadership detail that is often overlooked is setting examples and expectations to execute HR business processes on time, avoiding the dreaded retroactive HR data changes. Why is this a big deal? Because retroactive changes incur significantly more costs than the ones done on time, and they tend to adversely impact the employee. Even if your HR system supports retroactive changes – and SAP HR does a great job at this – there are often things that need to be cleared up by a person. If a company's leaders set an example, and set expectations, of getting their HR transaction done on time then it will have a ripple effect on the rest of the organization. Still, there will be some people who just don't get that message; in those cases the HR and HRIS teams need their leaders' support in enforcing timely process requirements.
Finally, the details of HRIS technology matter, in fact they matter a lot. The technical details can make one's head spin, and they change and evolve all the time. Here is where the CIO can really provide some value in helping HR develop a good strategy for how software technology will be used. The details count – interoperability, software features and customization, and standards – because a mess of systems leads to a support mess, which results in an inflexible HRIS landscape and higher maintenance costs (which could go to profits instead!).
In organizations I've worked with, there are always significant costs incurred in cleaning up after bad processes. Anywhere from 25% to 50% of the staff's time could be freed if processes and the technical landscape were corrected. And that takes some detailed attention, but what leader wouldn't want to gain those benefits?