The firm that helps you choose an HRIS should not be the firm that implements it. The firm that oversees the implementation should not be paid if a particular vendor wins. Those are structural rules, not preferences. A public employer can test them in writing, in an afternoon, before it signs a consulting agreement.
This applies to cities, counties, and utility organizations. Payroll is a poor place to discover that your advisor’s incentive and your employees’ paycheck were never the same thing.
Who works for whom
On a full-suite HRIS replacement there are at least three commercial roles.
The software vendor works for the software vendor. Their job is to sell and renew a subscription. A good vendor still wants a successful go-live. The contract they prefer is the one they wrote.
The implementer (the system integrator, or the vendor’s own services arm) works for the implementer. Their job is to deliver the scope they sold, on the hours they sold. When a requirement and the product disagree, the pressure inside that firm runs toward changing the requirement.
The advisor should work for the agency. Needs assessment, requirements, the RFP, vendor evaluation, the selection recommendation, contract negotiation, implementation oversight, data conversion oversight, testing, organizational change management, go-live readiness, and post-go-live stabilization are all buyer’s-side work. Project management in that list is the agency’s project management, not the integrator’s.
If one firm occupies two of those roles, it works for both. When they conflict, you will not be the one who chooses which role wins. The contract already did.
What the conflict looks like
You do not need a scandal. Ordinary incentives are enough.
Reseller agreements. A firm that resells the software is paid when you buy it, and often paid more when you buy more of it. The recommendation to replace, and the recommendation of that product, are no longer independent of the firm’s revenue.
Implementation partnerships. A firm that is an implementation partner for one or more products in the field will implement the winner, or hopes to. Requirements drift toward what that firm knows how to configure. Risks that would embarrass the implementation are softer in the status report. Oversight of your own project’s delivery is not oversight.
Referral fees and other vendor compensation. A fee paid by the vendor when you sign, a “finder” arrangement, a marketing development fund, a discount on the firm’s own licenses. If any of those exist, the advisor is paid by someone who is not you. The amount does not have to be large. The direction of the payment is the conflict.
The same firm, sequenced. “We will help you select, and if you want we can also implement” is the same conflict with a pause in the middle. The selection will remember that the implementation revenue is waiting. So will the contract negotiation, which is where a weak statement of work becomes next year’s change orders.
None of this means implementers are careless or vendors are dishonest. It means they are the wrong party to tell you what to buy, and the wrong party to judge whether their own project is on track.
How to test a consultant’s independence
Ask in writing. A conversation is not a record you can show a board or a procurement officer. Send the questions, and keep the answers with the procurement file.
- Does your firm hold a reseller agreement with any vendor that might bid this HRIS, or with any vendor you have recommended to a public agency in the past three years?
- Does your firm hold an implementation partnership, a services authorization, or any delivery role for those vendors?
- Does your firm accept referral fees, commissions, marketing funds, or any other compensation from a software vendor or from an implementer?
- If we select Vendor A, Vendor B, or neither, does any payment to your firm change?
- Will your firm, or a parent, affiliate, or subcontractor you control, bid the implementation or the software?
- Who is prohibited, by your contract with us, from paying you for this engagement besides us?
Ask for the answer on the firm’s letterhead or in the proposal, signed. “We are vendor-neutral” is a slogan. The six answers are a test.
Read them narrowly. “We do not resell” can sit next to an implementation practice that uses another company’s paper. “We are independent” can sit next to an affiliate that implements. The questions name reseller agreements, implementation partnerships, and referral fees because those are the relationships that change who the firm works for. If the answer introduces a fourth arrangement, ask again until you understand who pays.
Then put the accepted answers into the consulting contract. A proposal promise that is not in the contract is a brochure. The contract should say the firm is paid only by the agency, that it will not bid the software or the implementation, and that it will disclose any relationship that appears later, including through a subcontractor.
What the test does not prove
A clean written answer does not prove the firm is good at payroll, utilities, or change management. It proves the incentive points at you. You still have to check references, insist on named people, and read the statement of work.
It also does not prove the implementer is unnecessary. You need an implementer. You need them on their side of the table, with a scope you negotiated while someone who does not share their revenue was in the room with you.
Risk management during the project depends on the same split. The person who reports that testing is not ready for parallel payroll cannot be the person whose milestone payment depends on declaring it ready.
How Avèro is set up
Avèro holds no reseller agreements, no implementation partnerships, and no referral fees. We do not take vendor compensation. We do not implement software. The only revenue on an engagement is the agency’s fee, so a recommendation to keep the current HRIS pays us the same as a recommendation to replace it, and the logo in a selection does not change the invoice.
That is the claim. Apply the six questions to us anyway. We will answer them in writing. If we cannot, do not hire us.
The same structure is why a selection we support can be explained in public. Named HCM work, and the limits on what we will claim, is on the HRIS and HCM advisory page. Utility context is on the utilities page. Organizational change, contract review, and buyer-side project management sit with the rest of the eight practices. None of those practices include implementing the system.
If you are hiring an HRIS consultant and you want the questions in a form you can send, write to us. Ask us first.