FireRadical22 / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

SudoHR allows Employees with same name but different ids #2

Open FireRadical22 opened 1 year ago

FireRadical22 commented 1 year ago

While there may be multiple people called Irfan, for example, it would not be the case when the employee's full name is given. In the screenshot, if Irfan Ibrahim were to be the full name of an employee, then he shouldn't be having more than one employee id

Allows existing name in list of employees.PNG

nus-pe-script commented 1 year ago

Team's Response

Hi, thanks for raising this but a key part of our design consideration for Employee (explicitly mentioned in DG 4.1.1) is to have SudoHR support employees with the same name fields. We feel the argument of having distinguishing employees by full name is rather invalid for the following reasons:

  1. You seem to assume it is impossible or highly improbable that 2 person can share the same full name. There is no guarantee for this. To substantiate, there is someone else in NUS (this is not made-up..) with the exact same name, family name, as well as chinese name as myself. The only small difference is that there is an additional white space in his chinese name (hui kai vs huikai) .

  2. Suppose we argue that whitespaces matter. This is problematic on its own because now we can have Irfan Ibrahim and Irfan _ Ibrahim (note excess whitespaces is auto being trimmed even in this render, once again suggesting it shouldn't be use by a distinguishing factor). This goes against our nature as a data consolidation app as well - are the above 2 really 2 different employees? Might there have been a human mistake while adding employees/loading data? All these are part of design consideration to help spot and minimize human errors for HR personnel.

  3. Some people may not have submitted their legal full name to be registered to the company (though this is arguably rare and you may argue a company should strictly stick to an employee's full name, but we wouldn't really know their practices right), opting instead for a part of their name

So, we conclude that name isn't sufficient to qualify a unique identifier. Still, we need some form (and it is part of our value proposition too) of identifier to unambiguously refer to an employee. It should not be too far-fetched to imagine that every company has its own form of unique identifier to keep track of employees that are joining and hence, we have decided on incorporating this field as part of our app under eid

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]