Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
25/06/2026 1:10 am
TL;DR: HR teams are prioritising cost reduction and efficiency, but the article shows that manual document handling, slow onboarding, human error, and weak auditability still constrain digital transformation, according to OneSpan and SHRM. The real governance issue is that workflow automation does not by itself solve identity, signature assurance, or lifecycle control.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by OneSpan: Quatre leaders du secteur sur la réussite de la transformation numérique des RH
By the numbers:
- 68% of organisations are focusing on reducing costs and improving efficiency this year.
- Only 31% of HR professionals said their organisation was very effective at achieving those goals last year.
- The company reduced contract signing time from 20 minutes to 1 minute.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should organisations govern digital HR signatures across onboarding and offboarding?
A: Treat digital signatures as governed identity events, not just document actions.
Q: Why do HR automation projects still fail audit and compliance checks?
A: They often automate speed without automating assurance.
Q: What breaks when signing authority is not tied to employee lifecycle state?
A: Former approvers can retain workflow rights, stale approvals can remain valid in practice, and documents can continue routing through outdated chains.
Practitioner guidance
- Map every HR signature step to an identity and control owner Document who initiates the workflow, who approves it, which assurance level applies, and where the audit evidence is stored.
- Tie signing authority to HR lifecycle state Remove approver rights when employment status changes and ensure routing rules reflect role, geography, and document type.
- Set authentication strength by document risk Require stronger proof for regulated or cross-border signatures than for low-risk internal acknowledgements.
What's in the full article
OneSpan's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Specific customer workflow examples for HR onboarding, offer letters, and termination agreements
- Integration patterns with Workday and SAP HCM for routing and signature automation
- Examples of authentication options used for different HR signing scenarios
- Customer-reported operational impacts across signature speed, cost reduction, and employee experience
👉 Read OneSpan's case study on digital HR signature workflows and automation →
Digital HR signatures: what IAM teams are missing?
Explore further
25/06/2026 10:24 am
Digital HR is an identity governance problem disguised as workflow optimisation. The article is about faster document movement, but the control question is who is allowed to initiate, authenticate, approve, and retain employment actions. That is classic identity governance, not simple process automation. Practitioners should treat HR digitalisation as a governed identity flow, not a productivity project.
A few things that frame the scale:
- The average estimated time to remediate a leaked secret is 27 days, despite 75% of organisations expressing strong confidence in their secrets management capabilities, according to The State of Secrets in AppSec.
- Only 44% of developers are reported to follow security best practices for secrets management, exposing a persistent behaviour gap that also shows up in workflow governance.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How can security teams tell whether HR signature automation is actually controlled?
A: Check whether every signed document has a complete evidence trail, a named approver, the correct authentication level, and a lifecycle-linked access record. If any of those elements are missing, the process may be efficient but it is not well governed. Strong control is visible in evidence quality, not in workflow speed.
👉 Read our full editorial: Digital HR transformation exposes identity and auditability gaps
