A step-by-step walkthrough for solving each of the 3 practice case studies
🧭 The universal method — use this for EVERY case
1️⃣ READ for the ROLE
Who are you? A consultant designing a system. The company is always "you must design…". You are an engineer, not HR.
2️⃣ FIND THE NUMBER
Highlight the big number: 200 engineers in 3 weeks, 15 countries, 2,800 shift workers. That number dictates the scale of your answer.
3️⃣ SPLIT INTO DELIVERABLES
Each case asks 4 deliverables. Answer each as its OWN mini-answer (pipeline, map, table, rules, etc.). Never combine them.
4️⃣ ADD OWNERS + GATES
Whatever you draw — every step has a who (owner) and a when/what (gate/condition). That's what "done" means.
Engineer's mindset: Hiring = a pipeline · Compliance = a risk register · Onboarding = IAM provisioning · Audit trail = an immutable log · Time→Payroll = a validated data pipeline. If you can say the engineering analogy, you understand it.
Case Study 1 · Sessions 3 focus
🏥 MedCorp's Talent Sprint — hire 140 field engineers in 9 weeks
MedCorp must recruit 140 engineers + support staff fast, cut time-to-hire from 38 → 21 days, and use AI screening fairly. Fix email + spreadsheets hiring.
The 4 deliverables: ① Hiring Pipeline · ② Integration Web · ③ Candidate→Employee Data Map + Compliance · ④ AI Screening & Fairness policy
1
Deliverable ① — The Hiring Pipeline
Draw the stages in order: Requisition → Job Posted → Applications → Screening → Interview → Offer → Accepted → Employee Created. For EVERY stage write its OWNER and its GATE.
Map the approval chain FIRST — hiring manager → HR → finance. This is where teams most often get stuck.
Write a one-line caption: "a stage doesn't advance until its gate passes."
Examiner checks: every stage has both an owner AND a gate · approval chain drawn before the stages
2
Deliverable ② — The Integration Web
The ATS is the hub. Draw 3 things: what goes OUT (job postings → LinkedIn via API/webhook), what comes IN (applications + background-check results), and the ONE handoff to Core HR (where the candidate BECOMES an employee).
Examiner checks: ATS at the centre · outbound/inbound arrows labelled · the candidate→Core-HR handoff drawn · a fallback if a vendor API is down (requeue & retry, never drop)
3
Deliverable ③ — Candidate→Employee Field Map + Compliance
Build the table: Candidate field (ATS) → Employee field (HRIS) → What happens. Mark each as COPY / CLEAN-SPLIT / NEW. Then a 5–7 item compliance checklist.
Never re-type compensation — carry it from the approved offer.
Employee ID is system-generated (NEW), not taken from anywhere.
Compliance checklist: consent · bg check only after a written offer · no protected data collected · retention period · access control · AI-bias audit · audit log
4
Deliverable ④ — AI Screening & Fairness Statement
5–8 line policy covering: what candidates must be told (AI is used + right to human review), how you audit for bias (track pass-rate by demographic), and GDPR retention for unsuccessful candidates (6–12 months, purge on request).
Recall: Amazon scrapped its AI recruiter (gender bias) · NYC Local Law 144 requires an annual bias audit
Done = "I know who does what at every stage, and nothing is re-typed."
Case Study 2 · Sessions 3–4 focus
🌍 Polaris Expands to 12 Countries — onboard right & prove it
Fintech hires remote staff across 12 countries with different rules on documents, breaks, consultation and where data must live. Must onboard correctly and be provable.
The 4 deliverables: ① Welcome Checklist · ② Compliance Matrix · ③ Data Residency Map · ④ Audit Trail Design
1
Deliverable ① — The Welcome Checklist (Onboarding Workflow)
One-page "first 90 days" checklist: Before Day 1 → Day 1 → Day 7–30 → Day 60–90. Each step has exactly ONE owner (HR/IT/Manager/Employee). Add country branches as IF country == … THEN run case.
Fill it in for ONE country of your choice (e.g. India: PAN/Aadhaar + POSH; Germany: works council + break after 6h; USA: I-9 + E-Verify).
4-phase model to reference: Preboarding → Orientation → Role Integration → Acculturation
2
Deliverable ② — The Compliance Matrix
Table: Country | Regulation | What you must do | Risk if missed. Cover ≥6 countries, one line per rule, mark each High/Med/Low risk.
USA → I-9 Sec 1 by Day 1, Sec 2 within 3 business days
Germany → works council (Betriebsrat) consultation
India → PAN/Aadhaar, POSH, Factories Act
UK → right-to-work Share Code; Brazil → 13th salary, CLT
Risk column = prioritisation: high-risk = system BLOCKS if missed; low-risk = warns but allows
3
Deliverable ③ — The Data Residency Map
Where must each country's employee data be stored? ID which regions need EU servers (GDPR: Germany, France) vs. those that allow flexible hosting, and how you prove compliance.
Key fact: Germany/GDPR requires EU-server residency — a regulator fined a competitor over this
4
Deliverable ④ — The Audit Trail Design
Show 5+ audit log rows with the full recipe: who · what · when · old→new. Explain immutability (append-only; corrections add a NEW row, never overwrite) and how you handle a GDPR erasure request where the audit log itself can't be deleted.
Examiner checks: every row has who/what/when/before-after · logs even SYSTEM actions · immutable · document hashes
Done = "A busy HR person can follow it in 60 seconds, and I can prove each step."
Case Study 3 · Sessions 4–5 focus
🚚 Atlas Logistics — time that pays correctly
2,800 shift workers (warehouse + drivers + office) across US, Germany, India. Budget punching, underreported overtime, late payroll. Must capture time accurately & follow the law.
The 4 deliverables: ① Time Collection Architecture · ② Business Rules Engine · ③ Time-to-Payroll Flow · ④ Exception & Fairness Plan
1
Deliverable ① — Time Collection Architecture
Draw the 4 ways to clock in (phone app for drivers/remote, computer for office, badge for site, fingerprint for the warehouse) all feeding ONE time engine. Every clock-in is a real timestamp. Engine dedupes + catches gaps/overlaps.
Which fixes buddy punching at the warehouse? Biometric (fingerprint) — not shared badge cards.
Buddy punching risk is highest with badge/RFID swipe cards, lowest with biometric/facial
2
Deliverable ② — The Business Rules Engine
A table of 10+ rules, each a condition → action, tagged with its country.
USA: FLSA overtime 1.5× over 40h/wk
Germany: 30-min break after 6h; min 20 working days annual leave
EU: 48h weekly cap (incl. overtime)
Annual leave accrues 1.25 days/mo · sick leave granted upfront · carry-over capped at 5 days
Unapproved-at-cutoff → hold payment + alert; night work → shift differential
Use the 3-rule starter kit (annual accrues monthly · sick upfront · carry-over capped) then extend
3
Deliverable ③ — Time-to-Payroll Flow
Draw the 6–8 step integration pipeline: collection → timecard → rules → manager approval → validation → payroll feed → exception handling → posting. Show what happens to a BAD row (unapproved, missing project code, hours over cap) → goes to an exception queue, never silently dropped.
Each step gates the next; the pipeline REFUSES bad data. Integration to payroll = scheduled batch export at period close.
4
Deliverable ④ — The Exception & Fairness Plan
5–8 lines covering: how exception management surfaces underreporting for manager review; how you fix the underreporting culture (AUTOMATE capture, remove manual entry — don't discipline); and how segregation of duties stops the person submitting a timesheet from being its sole approver.
Segregation of duties: submitter ≠ approver · better to hold a row than pay it wrong
Done = "I know who worked what, and the system caught the errors."
⚠️ Common mistakes that lose marks
1 · Combining the deliverables. Each case asks 4 distinct things. Answer each one separately with its own diagram/table. An examiner won't hunt for your 3rd deliverable buried inside your 1st.
2 · No owners or gates. A pipeline/steps with no "who" and no "what lets it move" is just a list. Adding owner + gate is what makes it a designed system.
3 · Re-typing data. The instant you suggest manually re-entering a number (pay, hours, employee data) between systems, you've missed the point. Integrations + source-of-truth prevent this.
4 · Forgetting the country dimension. Every case is multi-country. If your answer only handles one country's rules, it's incomplete. Cover the variety (US/DE/IN/UK/BR/EU).
5 · No error handling. Systems fail. Show what happens to a bad row / downed vendor / missed deadline — an exception queue or dead-letter queue, not a silent drop.
6 · Not saying WHY. The marking guidance loves justification. After drawing anything, add one line starting "Because…".
💡 30-second rule: after each deliverable, you should be able to explain it to a busy colleague in one breath. If you can't, it needs simplifying.
MG3003 · Silicon University, Bhubaneswar · Built by TechSambad