Information Technology: A Key for Business

Process Reengineering

Authors:

Dr. RAJESH VERMA

Assistant Professor
Lovely Professional University
Phagwara
Mob: 98729-74457
e-mail: dr.rajeshverma@rediffmail.com

ASHU GUPTA
Senior Lecturer in Computer Applications
Apeejay Institute of Management
Rama Mandi-Hoshiarpur Road
Jalandhar-144023
Mob: 98158-91562
e-mail: guptashu1@rediffmail.com

Dr. KAWALJEET SINGH

Director
University Computer Centre
Punjabi University
Patiala
 Information Technology: A Key for Business Process
Reengineering
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the paper is to take a comprehensive look at Business Process

Reengineering (BPR), which is a popular term for the reoptimization of organizational

processes and structures after the implementation of new information technologies into

an organization. There is some evidence that changes in the use of information

technology (IT) in an organization may require major restructuring of the organization to

take full advantage of the technologies. This paper will attempt to demystify the myths of

BPR. It will examine the advantages and disadvantages of BPR in organizations. The

paper will also explore the various phases of the BPR process and the relationship

between BPR and Information Technology (IT). Information Technology should be

viewed as more than an automating tool but rather a fundamental way to reshape the way

business is done. The examination of IT will reveal the use of IT tools within the BPR

process which typically results in faster, better and cheaper solutions at each phase of the

BPR process. The primary methodology of the research will be through literature.

Keywords: Business Process Reengineering, Competency, Information Technology,

IT Tools, Transformation
1. Introduction

Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is known by many names, such as ‘core

process redesign’, ‘new industrial engineering’ or ‘working smarter’. All of them imply

the same concept that focuses on integrating both business process redesign and

deployment of information technologies (IT) to support the reengineering work. This

paper will attempt to introduce some of the more important aspects of BPR and the

significance and role of information technology in BPR. In addition, the paper will

explore two questions: where does BPR comes from and what is involved in BPR in

terms of principals and assumptions.

2. What is BPR?

Business process reengineering ideas are based on the premise that every

organization needs a sense of direction. Without that direction in the form of strategic

plans and business plans, the organization has no foundation upon which to build process

improvements. BPR is a method of improving the operation and therefore the outputs of

organizations. Generally the topic of BPR involves discovering how business processes

currently operate, how to redesign these processes to eliminate the wasted or redundant

effort, improve efficiency, and how to implement the process changes in order to gain

competitiveness. The purpose of BPR is to find new ways to organize tasks, organize

people and use information technology so that the processes support the organization’s

goals. It means analyzing and altering the business processes of the organization as a

whole. For a thorough and effective reengineering project, organizations should first meet
certain conditions before starting such a project. Initially, the management should

abandon all the rules and procedures that have been used upto that time. In addition they

should abandon other inadequate organizational and production principles. At this point,

the design of a renovated and redesigned organization should begin.

According to Hammer and Champy (1993), “Reengineering is the fundamental

rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements

in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service and

speed”.

Vidgen (1994) defines the central key points of BPR as:

• radical change and assumption challenge

• process and goal orientation

• organizational restructuring

• the exploitation of enabling technologies, particularly information technology

which means that by focusing on business objectives, processes are analyzed in

the organization, non-essential or redundant procedures are eliminated, and then

IT is used to redesign and streamline organizational processes.

2.1 BPR as Radical Change

BPR is a radical change rather than an incremental change. Davenport (1993)

advocates radical change as:

Objectives of 5% or 10% improvement in all business processes each year must give way

to efforts to achieve 50%, 100%, or even higher improvement levels in a few key

processes. Radical change is the only means of obtaining the order of magnitude

improvements necessary in today’s global marketplace. Existing approaches to meeting

customer needs are so functionally based that incremental change will never yield the

requisite interdependence.

3. Process-Orientation: From Structure to Process

Many current business processes with their functional structures were designed to

enable efficient management by separating processes into small tasks that could be

performed by less skilled workers with little responsibility. Under this structure, the

higher skilled and more trusted managers made the important decisions. Traditional

structural approaches to a business reengineering generally follow this sequential order.

First, a business strategy is proposed, then the business structures and processes are

planned, and finally they are implemented with IT. In comparison, BPR is regarded as

process-oriented which is trying to overcome some problems raised by hierarchical

structures. That means, BPR as process-orientation changes the structural relationships

between management and employers into the interactive processes between them. BPR

attempts to radically break the existing process structures and replace them with

innovative solutions.

4. BPR Process and Approach

Process redesign, often called BPR, takes a ‘clean sheet’ approach to the process,

which is usually either broken, or so slow that it is no longer competitive in delivering the

company’s value to its customer. Inputs and outputs are defined, and checked to ensure

they align with customers’ present, and future, requirements. New technology, methods

and data flows are considered in relation to the process. A new process is designed from

scratch using the above. The change is planned and implemented to achieve minimum
disruption. Where a fundamental redesign of the entire process is not required, process

improvement can take different forms like analysis and improvement, continuous

improvement or simply attempts to gain more control.

The most common approach to process improvement is to take an underperforming

process, which is key to achieving the business objectives, and create a systematic

analysis to determine the most important areas for improvement. These are then

addressed on a project-by-project basis. A temporary process improvement team that

primarily consists of people within the process controls the analysis and improvement.

Continuous improvement is the ongoing management of the process after it has been

redesigned and streamlined. This is part of an overall culture change that needs to be

clearly thought through and well directed from the top of the organization.

Davenport & Short (1990) define business process as "a set of logically related tasks

performed to achieve a defined business outcome." A process is "a structured, measured

set of activities designed to produce a specified output for a particular customer or

market. It implies a strong emphasis on how work is done within an organization”

(Davenport 1993). In their view processes have two important characteristics:

a) They have customers (internal or external)

b) They cross-organizational boundaries

Processes are generally identified in terms of beginning and end points, interfaces, and

organization units involved, with special emphasis on customers. Examples of processes

include developing a new product, ordering goods from a supplier, creating a marketing

plan or processing and paying an insurance claim. According to Davenport & Short

(1990), processes may be defined based on three dimensions:

a) Entities: Processes take place between organizational entities. They could be

interorganizational, interfunctional or interpersonal.

b) Objects: Processes result in manipulation of objects. These objects could be physical

or informational.

c) Activities: Processes could involve two types of activities: managerial and operational.

5. Myths about BPR

The concept of BPR is widely misunderstood and has been equated to downsizing,

client/server computing and several other management techniques of the past several

years. Davenport & Stoddard (1994) identify several reengineering myths:

The Myth of Reengineering Novelty: Reengineering, although based on familiar

concepts, introduces new concepts that are combined in a new format. These key

components have never been together before.

The Myth of the Clean Slate: Regardless of Hammer's (1990) sentiment: "Don't

automate, obliterate!" clean slate change is rarely found in practice. Or, as Davenport and

Stoddard (1994) state: A "blank sheet of paper" used in design usually requires a "blank

check" for implementation. Therefore, a more affordable approach for most companies is

to use Clean Slate Design, which involves a detailed vision for a process without concern

for the existing environment. However, the implementation is done over several phased

projects. Some opponents of BPR say that despite the delivery of radical design, it does

not guarantee a revolutionary approach to change. Moreover, a revolutionary change

process might not be feasible given the risk and cost of revolutionary tactics.

The Myth of Information Systems Leadership: Information Systems (IS) is generally

viewed as a partner within a cross-functional team that is generally headed by a non-IS

project leader and a non-IS business person who has better control over the processes that

are being redesigned. The distinction between IT and IS begins with the idea that IT

offers strategic relevance. Moreover, IT has an impact on BPR projects that can improve

the quality of an organization’s information systems management.

The Myth of Reengineering vs. Quality: Most companies have approaches to

organizational change including reengineering, continuous improvement, incremental

approaches, and restructuring techniques.

The Myth of Reengineering vs. Transformation: BPR is a process that contributes to

organizational transformation; however it is not the same as transformation.

Organizational transformation is defined as, "Profound, fundamental changes in thought

and actions, which create an irreversible discontinuity in the experience of a system"

(Adams 1984). Organizational transformation is generally about the emergence of a new

belief system and necessarily involves reframing, which is a discontinuous change in the

organizations or group's shared meaning or culture. It also involves broad changes in

other organizational dimensions besides the work processes.

6. BPR Success/Failure Factors

There are both soft and hard factors that cause success and failure of BPR efforts. The

factors listed below are based on various articles and empirical research on BPR

implementation. These dimensions are:

• change management
• management competency and support
• organizational structure

• project planning and management

 B
U
• IT Infrastructure
1. Motivations & Reward S 1. Problems in
System
• IT infrastructure Success Factors I Failure Factors Communication
2. People Involvement 2. Organizational
3. Empowerment
N Resistance
4. Training & Education E Change of Mgt. 3. Lack of Training &
Change of Mgt.
5. Stimulation of
Culture S Culture Factors Education
Receptivity of 4. Problems related to
Organization to S creating a culture for
Change change
6. Effective
Communication P
R
1. Committed & Strong O 1. Problems related to
Leadership C commitment, support &
2. Management of Risk leadership
3. Sponsorship Mgt. Competence E Mgt. Support 2. Problems related to
Factors Factors
S sponsorship
S

1. Adequate job
R 1. Ineffective BPR Teams
integration Approach E 2. Problems related to
2. Effective BPR Teams E Organizational
integration mechanism,
3. Appropriate Jobs, Organizational job definition and
Definitions & Structure Factors N Structure Factors responsibility allocation
Responsibilities G
Allocation
I
N
E
1. Problems related to
1. Alignment of BPR E planning & project mgt.
Strategy with R 2. Problems related to
Corporate Strategy
2. Effective Planning &
I goals & measure
3. Inadequate focus &
use of Project Mgt. N Objectives
Techniques. G 4. Ineffective process
3. Adequate Resources BPR Project redesign
4. External Orientation & BPR Project Mgt. Mgt. Factors 5. Problems related to
Learning Factors Factors
5. Effective use of
I BPR resources
6. Ineffective use of
Consultants M consultants
6. Adequate P 7. Unrealistic expectations
identification of BPR
values L
EM
E
N 1. Problems related to IT
investment
1. Proper IS Integration
T 2. Improper IS integration
2. Efective A 3. Inadequate IS
Reengineering of
IT infrastructure T IT infrastructure
development
Legacy IS 4. Ineffective
3. Effective use of Factors I Factors reengineering of Legacy
Software Tools O IS
N
Figure 1: Summary of Key Success/ Failure Factors in BPR (Al-Mashari &Zairi,

1999)

6.1 Factors relating to Change Management Systems and Culture

Factors relating to change management systems and culture are important to the

success of BPR initiatives. Change management, which involves all human- and social

related changes needed by management to facilitate the acceptance of newly designed

processes and structures into working practice and to deal effectively with resistance, is

considered by many researchers to be a crucial component of any BPR effort. Effective

communication is considered a major key to successful BPR-related change efforts.

Communication is needed throughout the change process at all levels and for all

audiences, even with those not involved directly in the reengineering project. Effective

communication between stakeholders inside and outside the organization is necessary to

market a BPR program and to ensure patience and understanding of the structural and

cultural changes needed as well as the organization's competitive position.

Communication should be open, honest, and clear, especially when discussing sensitive

issues related to change such as personnel reductions. As BPR results in decisions being

pushed down to lower levels, empowerment of both individuals and teams becomes a

critical factor for successful BPR efforts. Since it establishes a culture in which staff at all

levels feel more responsible and accountable and it promotes self-management and a

collaborative teamwork culture. Empowerment means that staff is given the chance to

participate in redesign processes. When empowered, employees are able set their goals
and monitor their own performance as well as identify and solve problems that affect

their work thereby supporting the BPR efforts.

6.2Factors for Management Competency

Sound management processes ensure that BPR efforts will be implemented in the

most effective manner. The most noticeable managerial practices that directly influence

the success of BPR implementation are top management support and commitment,

championship and sponsorship, and effective management of risks. Commitment and

leadership in the upper echelons of management are often cited as the most important

factors of a successful BPR project. Leadership has to be effective and creative in

thinking and understanding (Hammer and Champy, 1993) in order to provide a clear

vision of the future. This vision must be clearly communicated to a wide range of

employees who then become involved and motivated rather than directly guided.

Commitment to and support for the change must constantly be reinforced from senior

management throughout a BPR project. Sufficient authority and knowledge, and proper

communication with all parts in the change process, are important in dealing with

organizational resistance during BPR implementation (Hammer and Champy, 1993).

Barriers such as political, economic, and organizational risks are all associated with BPR-

related change. And champions of the change play a major role in overcoming these

barriers and increasing the chance of successful BPR implementation. The champions

must be able to persuade top management of the need to change and to continually push

the change efforts throughout the organization. BPR implementation involves radical

change to several systems in the organization. Risks associated with acceptance of

changes in the organizational structure, deploying emerging technologies with little

familiarity, large investment in new resources needed for the new processes, loss of

personnel, and loss of earnings (Towers, 1994; Clemons, 1995) are some examples of the

many risks that an organization may take when implementing BPR. Therefore,

continuous risk assessment is needed throughout the implementation process to deal with

any risk at its initial stage and to ensure the success of the reengineering efforts.

Anticipating and planning for risk handling is important for dealing effectively with any

risk when it first occurs.

6.3 Factors relating to Organizational Structure

As BPR creates new processes that define jobs and responsibilities across the

existing organizational functions (Davenport and Short, 1990), there is a clear need to

create a new organizational structure which determines how BPR teams are going to

look, how human resources are integrated, and how the new jobs and responsibilities are

going to be formulated. An adequate job integration of organizational human resources

infrastructure is important to a BPR project's success. When individuals within a process

perform a series of tasks efficiently, product quality, processing time, and cost are all

going to improve. However, the move to integrate human resources necessitates a careful

consideration of all related organizational changes. Effective BPR cross-functional teams

are a critical component of successful BPR implementation. Team members should be

experienced in variety of techniques. Teams should be made up of people from both

inside and outside the organization (Hammer and Champy, 1993). The determinants of an

effective BPR team are as follows: competency of team members, their credibility within

the organization and their creativity, team empowerment, motivation, effective team

leadership, proper organization of the team, complementary skills among team members
and adequate size. As BPR results in a major structural change in the form of new jobs

and responsibilities, it becomes necessary for successful implementation to have formal

and clear descriptions of all jobs and responsibilities that the new designed processes

bring along with them.

6.4 Factors related to BPR Project Management

Successful BPR implementation is highly dependent on an effective BPR

Program management, which includes strategic alignment, effective planning and project

management techniques, identification of performance, adequate resources, effective use

of consultants, building a process vision integrating BPR with other improvement

techniques. Proper planning for the BPR project with an adequate time frame are key

factors in delivering a successful BPR project on time. Effective use of project

management techniques and managing people-related issues have also a crucial role in

smoothing the flow of the process redesign stages. Measurement of project progress

should also be maintained continually throughout a BPR project.

6.5 Factors related to IT infrastructure

Building an effective IT infrastructure is a vital factor in successful BPR

implementation. An adequate understanding of technologies for redesigning business

processes is necessary for proper selection of IT platforms. Effective overall system

architecture, flexible IT infrastructure and proper installation of IT components all

contribute to building an effective IT infrastructure for business processes. The IT

infrastructure and BPR are interdependent in the sense that deciding the information

requirements for the new business processes determines the IT infrastructure. In addition,

recognition of IT capabilities provides alternatives for BPR. Building a responsive IT

infrastructure is highly dependent on an appropriate determination of business process

information needs . This, in turn, is determined by the types of activities within a business

process, and the sequencing and reliance on other organizational processes. An effective

IT infrastructure follows a top-down approach, beginning with business strategy and IS

strategy and passing through designs of data, systems and computer architecture.

Linkages between the IT infrastructure components are important for ensuring integrity

and consistency among the IT infrastructure components. IT standards also have a major

role in reconciling various infrastructure components to provide shared IT services that

are of a certain degree of effectiveness to support business process applications. The IT

infrastructure shared services and the human IT infrastructure components, in terms of

their responsibilities and their expertise, are both vital to the process of the IT

infrastructure composition.

7. Selecting an IT Application
One main objective of BPR is to use IT to support radical change. Some authors

view IT as the central implementation vehicle of BPR. However BPR has not really

worked as its proponents expected. Davenport and Short (1990) attribute this problem to

a lack of understanding of the deeper issues of IT. They claim that IT has traditionally

been used to increase the speed of work but not to transform it and BPR is about using IT

to do things differently. Therefore, IT plays an important role in BPR. Properly

implementing IT can improve the competitive position of organizations. But

inappropriately implementing IT may create barriers to responding to the rapidly

changing business environment. Further, simply picking IT packages cannot achieve

successful BPR if it is simply used to speed up the process rather than reengineer it. As

Davenport (1993) contends:

 ... information and IT are rarely sufficient to bring about the process change; most

process innovations are enabled by a combination of IT, information and

organizational/human resource changes.

Vendor User

Driven Driven
Vendor Developed Application Customized

Application Solution Adaptation Application

Functional Localized Functional semi- Functional

vendor constrained customized customized

Intrafunctional
Narrow Focus work-flow BPR localized work- localized work-

flow BPR flow BPR

Cross functional Cross functional Cross

vendor constrained semi customized functional

Interfunctional
BPR BPR customized

BPR
Strategic Business Strategic Business Strategic

Network vendor Network semi Business

constrained BPR customized BPR Network

Interorganizational
redefinition

customized

BPR
Broad Focus
Figure 2: BPR Strategies (Light, 2000)

IT can continuously reflect and reinforce bureaucratic and functional structures or IT can

help to create a leaner, flatter and more responsive organization. For example, IT tools
that are designed for functional hierarchies are primarily designed to support incremental

improvements and cannot achieve the radical change in BPR projects.

While information systems provide fast processing and response, they often fail to

provide the flexibility for human communication, which can lead to serious

consequences. This means IT may sometimes have a negative impact by merely

automating the existing processes. However, it could also have a positive impact if it is

deployed correctly in conjunction with the organization’s goals. IT is the enabler to

reengineer processes and is an important driving force for business transformation.

8. BPR and Information Technology

There is a relationship between BPR and information technology (IT). Hammer

(1990) considers it to be the key implementation of BPR. He says the use of IT is to

challenge the assumptions inherent in the work processes that have existed since before

the advent of modern computer and communications technology. He argues that at the

heart of reengineering is the idea of discontinuous thinking. Discontinuous thinking is a

way to recognize and break away from the outdated rules and fundamental assumptions

that underlie operations. Usually, these rules are based on assumptions about technology,

people, and organizational goals that no longer exist. Hammer (1990) suggests the

following principles of reengineering:

• Organize around outcomes, not tasks

• Have those who use the output of the process perform the process

• Interleave information processing work into the real work that produces the

information
 • Treat geographically dispersed resources as though they were centralized

• Link parallel activities instead of integrating their results

• Put the decision point where the work is performed, and build control into the

process

• Capture information once and at the source

Davenport & Short (1990) argue that BPR requires taking a broader view of both IT and

business activity, and of the relationships between them. IT should be viewed as more

than an automating or mechanizing force but rather as a way to fundamentally reshape

the way business is done. Many researchers and practitioners have increasingly

considered factors related to IT infrastructure as a vital component of successful BPR

efforts. Effective alignment of IT infrastructure and BPR strategy, building an effective

IT infrastructure, adequate IT infrastructure investment decision, adequate measurement

of IT infrastructure effectiveness, proper IS integration, effective reengineering of legacy

IS, increasing IT function competency, and effective use of software tools are a few of

the most important factors that contribute to the success of BPR projects. This alignment

of IT infrastructure and BPR strategy are needed to ensure the success of the BPR

initiative.

IT can best enhance an organization’s position by supporting a business-thrust strategy

(McDonald, 1993). The business strategy should be clear and detailed. Top management

should act as a strategy formulator who provides commitment for the whole process of

redesign, while the IS manager should be responsible for designing and implementing the

IS strategy. The strategy describes the role of IT in leveraging changes to business

processes and infrastructures. IT strategic alignment is approached through the process of

integration between business strategy and IT strategy, as well as between IT

infrastructure and organizational infrastructure. The degree of alignment between the

BPR strategy and the IT infrastructure strategy is indicated by including the identification

of information resource needs in the BPR strategy, deriving the IT infrastructure strategy

from the business strategy, examining the IT infrastructure strategy against the BPR

strategy, the active involvement of management in the process of IT infrastructure

planning and IT managers in business planning, and by the degree of synchronization in

formulating the two strategies. The following figure shows the multidimensional nature

of BPR.

Business Legacy
IT Legacy Strategic Vision

BPR Strategy:
-Unit of Analysis
Strategic Choice -Scope
-Scale
-Pace

Business pressures
IT Strategy

Figure 3: Multidimensional View of BPR (Light, 2000)

Business activities should be viewed as more than a collection of individual or even

functional tasks. They should be viewed as a way to achieve maximum effectiveness. IT

and BPR have recursive relationships. IT capabilities should support business processes
and business processes should be implemented in terms of the capabilities IT can provide.

Davenport & Short (1990) refer to this broadened, recursive view of IT and BPR as the

new industrial engineering. Business processes represent a new approach to coordination

across an organization. IT's promise is to be the most powerful tool for reducing the costs

of coordination (Davenport & Short 1990). The way related functions participate in a

process can be differentiated along two dimensions: degree of mediation and degree of

collaboration. They define the Degree of Mediation of the process as the extent of

sequential flow of input and output among participating functions. They define the

Degree of Collaboration of the process is the extent of information exchange and mutual

adjustment among functions when participating in the same process. In this framework,

information technology is critical in reducing the Degree of Mediation and enhancing the

Degree of Collaboration. Also, innovative uses of IT would inevitably lead many firms to

develop new structures, enabling them to coordinate their activities in ways that were not

possible before. Such structures may raise the organization's capabilities and

responsiveness, leading to potential strategic advantages.

Although, BPR has its roots in IT management, it is primarily a business initiative that

has broad consequences in terms of satisfying the needs of customers and the firm's other

constituents (Davenport & Stoddard 1994). The IS group may need to play a behind-the-

scenes advocacy role, convincing senior management of the power offered by IT and

process redesign. It would also need to incorporate the skills of process measurement,

analysis, and redesign.

9. Davenport and Short (1990) prescribe a five-step approach to BPR:

Develop the Business Vision and Process Objectives: BPR is driven by a business

vision, which implies specific business objectives such as Cost Reduction, Time

Reduction or Output Quality improvement.

Identify the Processes to be Redesigned: Most firms use an approach, which focuses on

the most important processes, or those that conflict most with the business vision. A

fewer number of firms use the exhaustive approach that attempts to identify all the

processes within an organization and then prioritize them in order of redesign urgency.

Understand and Measure the Existing Processes: Important to avoid the repetition of

old mistakes and for providing a baseline for future improvements.

Identify IT Levers: Awareness of IT capabilities can and should influence process

design.

Design and Build a Prototype of the New Process: The actual design should not be

viewed as the end of the BPR process. In contrast, it should be viewed as a prototype,

with successive iterations. The metaphor of prototype aligns the BPR approach with

quick delivery of results, and the involvement and satisfaction of customers.

According to Malhotra (1998), 70% of the BPR projects fail. He states the biggest

obstacles that reengineering faces are:

• Lack of sustained management commitment and leadership.

• Unrealistic scope and expectations.
• Resistance to change.
Based on the BPR consultants' interviews, Bashein et al. (1994) outline the positive

preconditions for BPR success as: Senior Management Commitment and Sponsorship;

Realistic Expectations; Empowered and Collaborative Workers; Strategic Context of

Growth and Expansion; Shared Vision; Sound Management Practices; Appropriate

People Participating Full-Time and Sufficient Budget. They also identify negative

preconditions related to BPR as: The Wrong Sponsor; A "Do It to Me" Attitude; Cost-

Cutting Focus; and Narrow Technical Focus. The negative preconditions relating to the

Organization include: Unsound Financial Condition; Too Many Projects Under Way;

Fear and Lack of Optimism; and, Animosity Toward and By IS and HR Specialists. To

turn around negative conditions, organizations should: Do Something Smaller First (pilot

project); Conduct Personal Transformation (change of mindset); and Get IS and HR

Involved.

King (1994) views the primary reason for BPR failure as overemphasis on the tactical

aspects and the strategic dimensions being compromised. He notes that most failures of

reengineering are attributable to the process being viewed and applied at a tactical, rather

than strategic, levels. He discusses that there are important strategic dimensions to BPR,

notably, Developing and Prioritizing Objectives; Defining the Process Structure and

Assumptions; Identifying Trade-Offs Between Processes; Identifying New Product and

Market Opportunities; Coordinating the Reengineering Effort; and, Developing a Human

Resources Strategy. He concludes that the ultimate success of BPR depends on the people

who do it and on how well they can be motivated to be creative and to apply their

detailed knowledge to the redesign of business processes (Davenport & Stoddard 1994,

Markus et al. 1994).

Kettinger & Grover (1995) outline some propositions to guide future questions into the

phenomenon of BPR. Their propositions center around the concepts of knowledge

management, employee empowerment, adoption of new IT's, and a shared vision. Earl et

al. (1995) have proposed a "process alignment model" that consists of four emphases:

process, strategy, IS, and change management and control and used it to develop more

BPR strategies. Malhotra (1998) has developed the key emphasis on these issues based

primarily on an integrated view of recent literature from organization theory, organization

control, strategy, and IS. King (1994) believes that although the current interest in BPR

may end, process reengineering, in some form or another would endure.

Conclusion
Dramatic changes in the business environment throughout the nineteen eighties forced

organizations to examine outdated modes of work and develop new focused strategies

based on new business models. Many business management concepts emerged but BPR

has probably been the most influential. BPR emerged as a concept geared towards a clean

slate, radial approach. However, the original ideas did not take into account the situations

in organizations where factors such as the evolution of the ways of work, organizational

cultures and IT infrastructures had become significantly linked with organizations. A

variety of methodologies, tools and techniques for BPR projects have developed out of

implementation failures. As a result, the concept of BPR has survived and has been

broadened to become more commonly associated with multidimensional process change

efforts. Reengineering is not just a matter of fundamental and radical improvements in

performance, but is also an approach to analyzing and transforming the nature of

businesses and industries.

References
Al-Mashari, Majed., & Zairi, Mohamed. 1999. BPR implementation process: An analysis
of key success factors and failure factors. Business Process Management Journal,
Vol. 5, No. 1, pp 87-112.
Bashein, B.J., Markus, M.L., & Riley, P. 1994. Preconditions for BPR Success: And How
to Prevent Failures. Information Systems Management, Vol. 11, pp. 7-13.
Caron, M., Jarvenpaa, S.L. & Stoddard, D.B. 1994. Business Reengineering at CIGNA
Corporation: Experience and Lessons Learned From the First Five Years. MIS
Quarterly, pp. 233-250.
Clemons, E. 1995. Using scenario analysis to manage the strategic risks of
Reengineering. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 61-71.
Cook, M. 1996. Building Enterprise Information Architecture: Reengineering
Information Systems. Prentice Hall PTR.
Davenport, T.H. & Short, J.E. 1990. The New Industrial Engineering: Information
Technology and Business Process Redesign. Sloan Management Review, pp.11-27.
Davenport, T.H. 1994. Reengineering: Business Change of Mythic Proportions? MIS
Quarterly, pp. 121-127.
Davenport, T.H. & Beers, M.C. 1995. Managing Information about Processes. Journal of
Management Information Systems, Vol.12, pp. 57-80.
Earl, M.J., Sampler, J.L. & Short, J.E. 1995. Strategies for Business Process
Reengineering: Evidence from Field Studies. Journal of Management Information
Systems,Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 31-56.
Hammer, M. 1990. Reengineering work: don't automate, obliterate. Harvard Business
Review,Vol. 68, No. 4, pp. 104-12.
Hammer, M. and Champy, J. 1993. Reengineering the corporation: a manifesto for
business revolution. Harper Business, New York, NY.
Harrington, H.J. 1991. Business Process Improvement: The Breakthrough Strategy for
Total Quality, Productivity, and Competitiveness. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Harrington, H.J., Esseling, E. & Van Nimwegen, H. 1997. Business Process
Improvement Workbook: Documentation, Analysis, Design, and Management of
Business Process Improvement. McGraw-Hill.
Johnson, L. & Stergiou, M. 1997. Integrating BPR and Systems Development using
Meta-Models. In Technology Transfer Institute, Proceedings - BPR Year 97
Europe.
Johnson, L. & Stergiou, M. 1997. The Link between BPR, Evolutionary Delivery and
Evolutionary Development. SCI'97 Proceedings - World Multiconference on
Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Vol. 2, pp. 61-67.
Light, B. 2000. The Evolution of Business Process Reengineering. In Hackney, R. and
Dunn, D. (Ed.), Business Information Technology: Alternative and Adaptive
Futures, pp. 291-306, London, MacMillan Press Ltd.
Malhotra, Y. 1998. Business Process Redesign: An Overview. IEEE Engineering
Management Review, Vol. 26, No. 2.
McDonald, H. 1993. Business strategy development, alignment, and redesign. In Scott-
Morton, M. (Ed.), The Corporation of the 1990s: Information Technology and
Organizational Transformation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Sabherwal, R. and King, W. 1991. Towards a theory of the strategic use of information
resources: an inductive approach', Information and Management, Vol. 20, No. 3,
pp.191-212.
Saunders, C. and Jones, W. 1992. Measuring performance of the information systems
function. Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 8, No. 4,pp. 63-82.
Schnitt, D. 1993. Reengineering the organization using information technology. Journal
of Systems Management, pp. 14-20.
Towers, S. 1996. Re-engineering: middle managers are the key asset. Management
Services, pp. 17-18.
Venkatraman, N. 1994. IT-enabled business transformation: from automation to business
scope redefinition. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 73-87.
Walker, G. and Weber, D. 1984. A transaction cost approach to make-or-buy Decisions.
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, pp. 373-91.
Zairi, M. and Sinclair, D. 1995. Business process re-engineering and process
management: a survey of current practice and future trends in integrated
management. Management Decision, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 3-16.