Beyond the pitfalls: Addressing the 4 major reasons technology-enabled HR projects fail

Without well-defined objectives and stakeholder alignment, projects drift or deliver solutions nobody needs. According to our 2025 survey, A new value case for HR technology | Deloitte Insights, more than four in 10 organisations (42% to be exact) we surveyed cited unrealistic business cases or a lack of data to evaluate them properly as key reasons tech investments have fallen short. The importance of aligning the key outcomes to be achieved to the organisation’s broader strategy and vision should not be downplayed. These technology enablers should enhance the organisation’s mission and not deter from it. 

So often, leaders set out an agenda of transforming their function and how people work, but then fail to establish a programme to deliver on that agenda. Often we see the ‘change programme’ quickly become an ‘IT project’. Vendors and System Integrators are asked to bid for technology implementations and subsequently present optimistic timelines and budgets, ignoring the real effort in process redesign, behavioural change, data transformation, integration and adoption. Maintaining a clear focus on the key outcomes throughout the journey helps ensure that the programme prioritises meaningful milestones and lasting business value.

Without visible leadership (with cross-functional alignment), and strong decision-making, projects stall or lose credibility. Programmes can drift off course as they encounter resistance (as they always do!). Too often, weak decisions are made, further watering-down the original objective. Strong leadership keeps the project moving forward, and robust governance assumes a multi-stakeholder approach that balances interests, ensures transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct across all these groups. 

Technology will change how workers engage with work; however, the benefits are rarely realised overnight. Leaders often fail to consider what the programamme promises to deliver, and when, and how they message this to workers. Expectations will need to be managed. Good change is more frequently incremental, and leaders should pace change appropriately for their organisation.