Business process reengineering

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Business process re-engineering is a business management strategy, originally pioneered in the early 1990s, focusing on the analysis and design of workflows and processes within an organization. BPR aimed to help organizations fundamentally rethink how they do their work in order to dramatically improve customer service, cut operational costs, and become world-class competitors.[1] In the mid-1990s, as many as 60% of the Fortune 500 companies claimed to either have initiated reengineering efforts, or to have plans to do so.[2] BPR seeks to help companies radically restructure their organizations by focusing on the ground-up design of their business processes. According to Davenport (1990) a business process is a set of logically related tasks performed to achieve a defined business outcome. Re-engineering emphasized a holistic focus on business objectives and how processes related to them, encouraging full-scale recreation of processes rather than iterative optimization of subprocesses.[1]

Business Process Reengineering Cycle

Business process re-engineering is also known as business process redesign, business transformation, or business process change management.

1 Overview 2 History 2.1 Reengineering Work: Don't Automate, Obliterate, 1990 2.2 Development after 1995 3 Business process reengineering topics 3.1 The role of information technology 3.2 Research and methodology 4 BPR success & failure factors 4.1 Organization wide commitment 4.2 BPR team composition 4.3 Business needs analysis 4.4 Adequate IT infrastructure 4.5 Effective change management 4.6 Ongoing Continuous Improvement 5 Critique 6 See also 7 References 8 Further reading

and speed. but cannot yield dramatic improvements if the process itself is fundamentally inefficient and outmoded. it is an approach for redesigning the way work is done to better support the organization's mission and reduce costs. however. and re-designs an organization's core business processes with the aim of achieving dramatic improvements in critical performance measures. re-engineering focuses on the organization's business processes—the Reengineering guidance and relationship steps and procedures that govern how resources are used to create of Mission and Work Processes to products and services that meet the needs of particular customers or Information Technology. quality.[1] Within the framework of this basic assessment of mission and goals. It can also be completely redesigned or eliminated altogether. rather than refining current ways of doing work. and improved. modeled. Re-engineering identifies. and become world-class competitors. 1990 . is more than just business improvising. no one is responsible for the overall performance of the entire process. Reengineering starts with a high-level assessment of the organization's mission. A key stimulus for re-engineering has been the continuing development and deployment of sophisticated information systems and networks. BPR. such as cost. markets. a business process can be decomposed into specific activities.8 Further reading 9 External links Overview Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) is basically rethinking and radically redesigning an organization's existing resources. For that reason. measured. re-engineering focuses on re-designing the process as a whole in order to achieve the greatest possible benefits to the organization and their customers. As a structured ordering of work steps across time and place. Often. This drive for realizing dramatic improvements by fundamentally re-thinking how the organization's work should be done distinguishes re-engineering from process improvement efforts that focus on functional or incremental improvement. strategic goals. Basic questions are asked. particularly in terms of the wants and needs of its customers. such as "Does our mission need to be redefined? Are our strategic goals aligned with our mission? Who are our customers?" An organization may find that it is operating on questionable assumptions. analyzes. does it go on to decide how best to do it.[1] Reengineering Work: Don't Automate. Leading organizations are becoming bolder in using this technology to support innovative business processes. service. Only after the organization rethinks what it should be doing. Re-engineering maintains that optimizing the performance of subprocesses can result in some benefits. cut operational costs. Obliterate.[1] Re-engineering recognizes that an organization's business processes are usually fragmented into subprocesses and tasks that are carried out by several specialized functional areas within the organization.[1] History Business process re-engineering (BPR) began as a private sector technique to help organizations fundamentally rethink how they do their work in order to dramatically improve customer service. and customer needs.

Reengineering Work: Don't Automate. as many as 60% of the Fortune 500 companies claimed to either have initiated reengineering efforts. i. Obliterate. companies should reconsiditors. More recently. Obliterate" in the Harvard Business Review.[5] and a rebirth of Taylorism under a different label. Development after 1995 With the publication of critiques in 1995 and 1996 by some of the early BPR proponents[citation needed ]. Equivalently to the critique brought forward against BPR. Despite this critique. considering business processes as a starting point for business analysis and redesign has become a widely accepted approach and is a standard part of the change methodology portfolio. coupled with abuses and misuses of the concept by others. their inability to satisfy customer needs..e. time-to-market and productivity."[7] "encompasses the envisioning of new work strategies. major reductions of the work force.[6] conducted by MIT. a fast growing number of publications. as it is evenly driven by a striving for process efficiency supported by information technology. such as cost. the critics were fast to claim that BPR was a way to dehumanize the work place."[8] .[4] During the following years. and organizational dimensions. namely that technology in general. rather than using technology for automating it. Even well established management thinkers. published the article "Reengineering Work: Don't Automate. in which he claimed that the major challenge for managers is to obliterate forms of work that do not add value. has been used primarily for automating existing processes rather than using it as an enabler for making non-value adding work obsolete. were dedicated to BPR. but also by the study Made in America. were accepting and advocating BPR as a new tool for (re)achieving success in a dynamic world. books as well as journal articles.S. the actual process design activity. such as Peter Drucker and Tom Peters. increase managerial control. reengineering was adopted at an accelerating pace and by 1993. the concept of Business Process Management (BPM) has gained major attention in the corporate world and can be considered as a successor to the BPR wave of the 1990s. quality. and the implementation of the change in all its complex technological. BPM is now accused[citation needed] of focusing on technology and disregarding the people aspects of change. and more specifically information technology.[3] This statement implicitly accused managers of having focused on the wrong issues.. service. began to wane. the reengineering fervor in the U.[2] This trend was fueled by the fast adoption of BPR by the consulting industry. and many consulting firms embarked on this trend and developed BPR methods. and this work should be removed. and speed. Hammer's claim was simple: Most of the work being done does not add any value for customers. but is typically performed in a less radical way as originally proposed. human. and their insufficient cost structure[citation needed ]. However. or to have plans to do so. 1990 In 1990. Instead. and to justify downsizing. Michael Hammer. Business process reengineering topics The most notable definitions of reengineering are: ". a former professor of computer science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). that showed how companies in many US industries had lagged behind their foreign counterparts in terms of competitiveness. not accelerated through automation. Since then. the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical contemporary modern measures of performance.

motivation and reward systems.BPR is different from other approaches to organization development (OD). to get in immediate contact with potential buyers Automatic identification and tracking. allowing organizations to be centralized and decentralized at the same time Decision-support tools. and other ways of managing and performing work is often considered as being insufficient. BPR literature [11] identified several so called disruptive technologies that were supposed to challenge traditional wisdom about how work should be performed. and patterns of collaboration within and between organizations[citation needed ].e. strategy. rather than supporting existing business functions. instead of requiring to be found High performance computing. it was used for increasing organizational efficiency. allowing field personnel to work office independent Interactive videodisk. the change of structural organizational variables. The concept of business processes . the composition of organizational units. especially workflow management systems were considered as a significant contributor to improved process efficiency. customer focus. information technology is generally considered as playing a role as enabler of new forms of organizing and collaborating. and cross-functionality. The organization dimension reflects the structural elements of the company. and the distribution of work between them[citation needed]. such as hierarchical levels. While IT traditionally has been used for supporting the existing business functions. value adding. such as SAP. Research and methodology . JD Edwards. by virtue of its aim for fundamental and radical change rather than iterative improvement. The people / human resources dimension deals with aspects such as education. BPR derives its existence from different disciplines.where a process view is used as common framework for considering these dimensions. and four major areas can be identified as being subjected to change in BPR . In BPR. PeopleSoft. the use of information technology (IT) is conceived as a major contributing factor.organization. positioned their solutions as vehicles for business process redesign and improvement. making information available at many places Expert the basic underlying idea of BPR.[9] In order to achieve the major improvements BPR is seeking for. technology. Also ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) vendors. Business strategy is the primary driver of BPR initiatives and the other dimensions are governed by strategy's encompassing role. allowing generalists to perform specialist tasks Telecommunication networks. For being able to reap the achievable benefits fully. These processes are characterized by a number of attributes: Process ownership. Technology is concerned with the use of computer systems and other forms of communication technology in the business. The role of information technology Information technology (IT) has historically played an important role in the reengineering concept. training. allowing things to tell where they are. Shared databases.[10] It is considered by some as a major enabler for new forms of working and collaborating within an organization and across organizational borders[citation needed].interrelated activities aiming at creating a value added output to a customer . especially the continuous improvement or TQM movement. allowing on-the-fly planning and revisioning In the mid-1990s. Oracle.and school. and people . allowing decision-making to be a part of everybody's job Wireless data communication and portable computers. it now plays a role as enabler of new organizational forms. i.

5. 3. BPR does not only mean change. Some items to use on a process analysis checklist are: Reduce handoffs. Centralize data. One such methodology. as opposed to an IT-centric. BPR team composition.[12] Simplified schematic outline of using a business process approach. based on the PRLC (Process Reengineering Life Cycle) approach developed by Guha. Some important BPR success factors. Free resources faster. and the use of IT. Effective change management. The constituents of this drastic change include the overhaul of organizational structures.[14] BPR success & failure factors Over the past years. was described by Lon Roberts (1994). a significant number of methodological approaches have been developed. Structural organization with functional units 2. Business needs analysis. skills development. management systems.Although the labels and steps differ slightly. a recent survey showed that some 88 percent of CIOs were satisfied with the end result of BPR efforts. methodology. include. Some BPR researchers have focused on key factors in the BPR process that enabled a successful outcome. BPR can potentially impact every aspect of how business is conducted today. employee responsibilities and performance measurements. Re-structuring and streamlining activities. that also incorporated a Risk and Impact Assessment to account for the impact that BPR can have on jobs and operations.[15] Successful BPR can result in enormous reductions in cost or cycle time. Ongoing continuous improvement Generally. The following outline is one such model. Reduce delays. 4. some BPR Model based on PRLC approach practitioners advocated a change in emphasis to a customer-centric. 6. It can also potentially create substantial improvements in quality. BPR projects and efforts have revealed some interesting findings for both academics and practitioners. 2. Combine similar activities. Introduction of New Product Development as cross-functional process 3. Organization wide commitment. but rather dramatic change. which will be discussed in further details later. Also within the management consulting industry. but are not limited to the following: 1. Change on this scale can cause results ranging from enviable success to complete failure. customer service.[13] Roberts also stressed the use of change management tools to proactively address resistance to change—a factor linked to the demise of many reengineering initiatives that looked good on the drawing board. Many lessons were learned and many elements were identified as essential to the success of a BPR activity. incentive systems. the early methodologies that were rooted in IT-centric BPR solutions share many of the same basic principles and elements. In spite of the depth of change involved in undertaking BPR efforts. . exemplified for pharmaceutical R&D 1. removal of non-value adding tasks Benefiting from lessons learned from the early adopters. Adequate IT infrastructure.

bottom-up buy-in from process users. Even so. and by linking strategy to the budgeting process. money. practical experience.or other business objectives. and continuous involvement of all . Organizations were well aware that changes needed to be made. These failures indicate that reengineering involves a great deal of risk. companies must be willing to examine how strategy and reengineering complement each other by learning to quantify strategy in terms of cost. by assessing the organization’s current capabilities and process realistically. milestones. Since BPR can involve multiple areas within the organization. and workplace culture. but did not know which areas to change or how to change them.[15] Leadership has to be effective. it was reported that only 30 percent of reengineering projects were regarded as successful. by accepting ownership of the strategy throughout the organization. In 1998. BPR is only a short-term efficiency exercise. By informing all affected groups at every stage. implementing reengineering requires the talents and energies of a broad spectrum of experts. and how it should be performed. and timetables. job roles. and budget allocation for the total solution with measures to demonstrate value. Reengineering can help an aggressive company to stay on top. Before any BPR project can be implemented successfully. and strong leadership must be provided. and major reengineering efforts are now being conducted around the world. develop a complete understanding of what is BPR. many companies are willing to take that risk because the rewards can be astounding. BPR projects can fail to meet the inherently high expectations of reengineering.[21] Top management must recognize the need for change. and creative in thinking and understanding in order to provide a clear vision to the future. benefits. or transform an organization on the verge of bankruptcy into an effective competitor. and emphasizing the positive end results of the reengineering process. knowledge of what caused the successes or failures is becoming apparent. The successes have spawned international interest. However. process reengineering is a management concept that has been formed by trial and error or. Changing them simultaneously is an extraordinary task. it is possible to minimize resistance to change and increase the odds for success. and leadership. in other words.[16] To reap lasting benefits.[22] Convincing every affected group within the organization of the need for BPR is a key step in successfully implementing a process. Otherwise. the organization can gain valuable input before a process is implemented.[16] Like any large and complex undertaking. dedicated BPR team.[16] On the other hand. visible. Through the involvement of selected department members. or even negligible. a step which promotes both the cooperation and the vital acceptance of the reengineered process by all segments of the organization.[18] Organization wide commitment There is no doubt that major changes to business processes have a direct impact on processes. technology. top management sponsorship is imperative for success.[17] The earlier promise of BPR has not been fulfilled as some organizations have put forth extensive BPR efforts only to achieve marginal. As a result. consistent.[16] Many unsuccessful BPR attempts may have been due to the confusion surrounding BPR.[19] Reengineering efforts can by no means be exercised without a company-wide commitment to the goals to be achieved. there must be a commitment to the project by the management of the organization. The ultimate success of BPR depends on the strong. it can actually produce revolutionary improvements for business operations. and plan how to achieve it. The promise of BPR is not empty. Other organizations have succeeded only in destroying the morale and momentum built up over their lifetime.[20] Commitment and leadership in the upper echelons of management are often cited as the most important factors of a successful BPR project. Significant changes to even one of those areas require resources. As more and more businesses reengineer their processes. Getting enterprise wide commitment involves the following: top management sponsorship. strong. it is extremely important to get support from all affected departments.

and specificity of goals. and committed technology experts.[26] effective team leadership.[27] proper organization of the team. This team will form the nucleus of the BPR effort.[24] their credibility within the organization and their creativity. and members of all ultimate process users’ groups.[28] complementary skills among team members. Too often. regarding the need and strategy for BPR. passionate. make key decisions and recommendations. It also depends on the people who do it and how well they can be motivated to be creative and to apply their detailed knowledge to the redesign of business processes. In this analysis phase. These sessions build a consensus as to the vision of the ideal business process. brightest. it must be kept under ten players. adequate size. and help communicate the details and benefits of the BPR program to the entire organization. For example. They help identify essential goals for BPR within each department and then collectively define objectives for how the project will impact each work group or department on individual basis and the business organization as a whole. finance. Members representing impacted departments.departmental levels within the organization. the entire process will be much more difficult to execute efficiently and effectively. it may include members with the following characteristics: Members who do not know the process at all. business area responsible for the process being addressed. interchangeable accountability. clarity of work approach. if possible.[23] BPR team composition Once organization wide commitment has been secured from all departments involved in the reengineering effort and at different levels. The efforts of the team must be focused on identifying breakthrough opportunities and designing new work steps or processes that will create quantum gains and competitive advantage. Covert (1997) recommends that in order to have an effective BPR team. Members from outside of the organization [20] Moreover. BPR teams jump directly into the technology without first assessing the current processes of the organization and determining what exactly needs reengineering.[25] team empowerment. If the organization fails to keep the team at a manageable size. the critical step of selecting a BPR team must be taken. One or two members of the best. a series of sessions should be held with process owners and stakeholders. Team members who are selected from each work group within the organization will have an impact on the outcome of the reengineered process according to their desired requirements. training of members in process mapping and brainstorming techniques. technology groups. The determinants of an effective BPR team may be summarized as follows: competency of the members of the team. their motivation. Members who know the process inside-out.[15] Business needs analysis Another important factor in the success of any BPR effort is performing a thorough business needs analysis. Customers. The idea of these sessions is to conceptualize the ideal business process .[29] The most effective BPR teams include active representatives from the following work groups: top management. The BPR team should be mixed in depth and knowledge.

This alignment must be demonstrated from the perspective of financial performance. effective reengineering of legacy IS. adequate measurement of IT infrastructure effectiveness. adequate IT infrastructure investment decision. The business needs analysis contributes tremendously to the reengineering effort by helping the BPR team to prioritize and determine where it should focus its improvements efforts.[22] Hammer (1990) prescribes the use of IT to challenge the assumptions inherent in the work process that have existed since long before the advent of modern computer and communications technology. on the one hand.[16] Adequate IT infrastructure Researchers consider adequate IT infrastructure reassessment and composition as a vital factor in successful BPR implementation. building an effective IT infrastructure.and the business organization as a whole. This linkage should show the thread from the top to the bottom of the organization.[16] Developing a business vision and process objectives relies. and on the other. Such reengineering initiatives are wasteful and steal resources from other strategic projects. so each person can easily connect the overall business direction with the reengineering effort. The idea of these sessions is to conceptualize the ideal business process for the organization and build a business process model. weaknesses.[20] The business needs analysis also helps in relating the BPR project goals back to key business objectives and the overall strategic direction for the organization. especially if there are other more critical projects to the future of the business. It is important to acknowledge and evaluate all ideas in order to make all participants feel that they are a part of this important and crucial process. and are more aligned with the strategic direction. Moreover.[30] BPR projects that are not in alignment with the organization’s strategic direction can be counterproductive. Results of these meetings will help formulate the basic plan for the project. increasing IT function competency. solidifying particular goals.[32] Effective alignment of IT infrastructure and BPR strategy.[31] Factors related to IT infrastructure have been increasingly considered by many researchers and practitioners as a vital component of successful BPR efforts. on awareness and knowledge about innovative activities undertaken by competitors and other organizations. and defining business objectives. associate value. There is always a possibility that an organization may make significant investments in an area that is not a core competency for the company and later outsource this capability. and the vision for the organization. Those items that seem unnecessary or unrealistic may be eliminated or modified later on in the diagnosing stage of the BPR project. and effective use of software tools are the most important factors that contribute to the success of BPR projects. the organization’s key stakeholders and sponsors may find themselves unable to provide the level of support the organization needs in terms of resources. proper information systems (IS) integration. without strategic alignment. and market structure. . customer service. on a clear understanding of organizational strengths. This plan includes the following: identifying specific problem areas.

systems. IT strategic alignment is approached through the process of integration between business and IT strategies. and a recognition of IT capabilities provides alternatives for BPR. and utilizing IT assets. in terms of their responsibilities and their needed expertise. the less painful the transition is.These are vital factors that contribute to building an effective IT infrastructure for business processes.[35] The IT infrastructure shared services and the human IT infrastructure components.[22] Most analysts view BPR and IT as irrevocably linked. the better change is managed. do not achieve the full potential of their change effort. An effective IT infrastructure composition process follows a top-down approach. as well as between IT and organizational infrastructures. is determined by the types of activities embedded in a business process.[34] and their linkages. but rather a management technique.[33] An IT infrastructure is made up of physical assets. not programmable machines. . beginning with business strategy and IS strategy and passing through designs of data.[37] Effective change management Al-Mashari and Zairi (2000) suggest that BPR involves changes in people behavior and culture. and their sequencing and reliance on other organizational processes. Ford was able to decrease its headcount in the procurement department by 75 percent by using IT in conjunction with BPR. Organizational culture is a determining factor in successful BPR implementation.[26] is considered by many researchers to be a crucial component of any BPR effort.[38] One of the most overlooked obstacles to successful BPR project implementation is resistance from those whom implementers believe will benefit the most. managing. as well as to guide the process of acquiring. Many people fail to understand that change is not an event. Most projects underestimate the cultural impact of major process and structural change and as a result. An important step towards any successful reengineering effort is to convey an understanding of the necessity for change. shared services. Change management is the discipline of managing change as a process. which involves all human and social related changes and cultural adjustment techniques needed by management to facilitate the insertion of newly designed processes and structures into working practice and to deal effectively with resistance. Culture in an organization is a self-reinforcing set of beliefs. as well as descriptions of their contexts of interaction.[20] It is a well-known fact that organizations do not change unless people change.[22] BPR must be accompanied by strategic planning which addresses leveraging IT as a competitive tool.[33] The IT infrastructure and BPR are interdependent in the sense that deciding the information requirements for the new business processes determines the IT infrastructure constituents. in another well-known example. processes. and technology. with due consideration that employees are people.[36] Linkages between the IT infrastructure components. Change management.[32] Furthermore. attitudes. there are many factors that prevent the effective implementation of BPR and hence restrict innovation and continuous improvement. This.[32] Building a responsive IT infrastructure is highly dependent on an appropriate determination of business process information needs.[35] The way in which the IT infrastructure components are composed and their linkages determines the extent to which information resources can be delivered. As a result. are important for ensuring integrity and consistency among the IT infrastructure components. intellectual assets. Walmart. for example.[39] Organizational culture influences the organization’s ability to adapt to change. IT standards 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. are both vital to the process of the IT infrastructure composition.[16] Change is implicitly driven by motivation which is fueled by the recognition of the need for change. and computer architecture. in turn. would not have been able to reengineer the processes used to procure and distribute mass-market retail goods without IT.

To ensure that the process generates the desired benefits. Change is implicitly driven by motivation which is fueled by the recognition of the need for change. The first step towards any successful transformation effort is to convey an understanding of the necessity for change. more time should be taken to modify the process until it does. Understanding the people in organizations. If it does not perform satisfactorily. It is essential that the automation infrastructure of the BPR activity provides for performance measurements in order to support continuous improvements. and past performance is essential to recognize. many BPR projects have failed because they did not recognize the importance of the human element in implementing BPR. A fundamental concept for quality practitioners is the use of feedback loops at every step of the process and an environment that encourages constant evaluation of results and individual efforts to improve. BPR is not a recipe for successful business transformation if it focuses on only computer technology and process redesign. Hammer and Champy (1993) use the IBM Credit Corporation as well as Ford and Kodak. Culture is one of the most resistant elements of organizational behavior and is extremely difficult to change. attitudes.[40] At the end user’s level. It will need to efficiently capture appropriate data and allow access to appropriate individuals. motivation.[41] It is interesting that many of the successful applications of reengineering described by its proponents are in organizations practicing continuous improvement programs. People should be the focus for any successful business change. leadership. it must be tested before it is deployed to the end users. Implementing BPR successfully is dependent on how thoroughly management conveys the new cultural messages to the organization. attitudes. and integrate into the vision and implementation of BPR. and services. and company icons constantly enforce the message of the current culture. In fact. physical symbols. understand. Culture in an organization is a self-reinforcing set of beliefs. If the human element is given equal or greater emphasis in BPR. the current company culture. BPR must consider current culture in order to change these beliefs. This will also contribute to a continuous risk assessment and evaluation which are needed throughout the implementation process to deal with any risks at their initial state and to ensure the success of the reengineering efforts.the organization’s ability to adapt to change. products. as examples of companies that carried out BPR successfully due to the fact that they had long-running continuous . there must be a proactive feedback mechanism that provides for and facilitates resolutions of problems and issues.[20] The incremental change is governed by the knowledge gained from each previous change cycle. and behavior. Messages conveyed from management in an organization continually enforce current culture. Anticipating and planning for risk handling is important for dealing effectively with any risk when it first occurs and as early as possible in the BPR process. and behaviors effectively.[20] Management rewards system.[19] Ongoing Continuous Improvement Many organizational change theorists hold a common view of organizations adjusting gradually and incrementally and responding locally to individual crises as they arise [20] Common elements are: BPR is a successive and ongoing process and should be regarded as an improvement strategy that enables an organization to make the move from traditional functional orientation to one that aligns with strategic business processes. stories of company origin and early successes of founders. the odds of successful business transformation increase substantially.[30] Continuous improvement is defined as the propensity of the organization to pursue incremental and innovative improvements in its processes.[19] These messages provide people in the organization with a guideline to predict the outcome of acceptable behavior patterns.

the reengineering genie quickly turned ugly. reengineering has not always lived up to its expectations.improvement programs. in order to achieve that.[42] In many circumstances.e." [43] Hammer similarly admitted that: "I wasn't smart enough about that. Others have claimed that reengineering was a recycled buzzword for commonly-held ideas. Organizations planning to undertake BPR must take into consideration the success factors of BPR in order to ensure that their reengineering related change efforts are comprehensive. have insisted all along that layoffs shouldn't be the point. However. I was reflecting my engineering background and was insufficient appreciative of the human dimension. But the fact is. the ultimate success of BPR depends on the people who do it and on how well they can be committed and motivated to be creative and to apply their detailed knowledge to the reengineering initiative. there are some key success factors that must be taken into consideration when performing BPR. successful BPR can potentially create substantial improvements in the way organizations do business and can actually produce fundamental improvements for business operations. Critique Many companies used reengineering as an pretext to downsize their companies dramatically. the label BPR was used for major workforce reductions. radically changing the way of thinking in an organization). stated that: "When I wrote about "business process redesign" in 1990. the two names most closely associated with reengineering. In addition. Very often. I explicitly said that using it for cost reduction alone was not a sensible goal.[40] In conclusion. and have minimum chance of failure. Abrahamson (1996) argued that fashionable management terms tend to follow a lifecycle. an early BPR proponent. BPR success factors are a collection of lessons learned from reengineering projects and from these lessons common themes have emerged. Goldratt (and his Theory of Constraints) reengineering does not provide an effective way to focus improvement efforts on the organization's constraint[citation needed ]. According to Eliyahu M. Thomas Davenport. I've learned that's critical." i. totally disregard the status quo. They argue that Reengineering was in fact nothing new (as e. reengineering earned a reputation for being synonymous with downsizing and layoffs. The most frequent critique against BPR concerns the strict focus on efficiency and technology and the disregard of people in the organization that is subjected to a reengineering initiative.g. And consultants Michael Hammer and James Champy. Some prominent reasons include: Reengineering assumes that the factor that limits an organization's performance is the ineffectiveness of its processes (which may or may not be true) and offers no means of validating that assumption. which for Reengineering peaked between 1993 and 1996 (Ponzi and Koenig 2002). once out of the bottle. he was in fact reengineering. well-implemented. when Henry Ford implemented the assembly line in 1908. consequently." [44] . though this was not the intent of reengineering's proponents. Reengineering assumes the need to start the process of performance improvement with a "clean slate.

Hammer & Champy (1993). ^ a b c d e f Business Process Re-engineering Assessment Guide (http://www. ^ Thomas H.instant-science. Robert M. ^ e. 1997) 16. Financial 1994 3. Lynne Munns and Andy Cross ( seeks radical rather than merely continuous improvement.instant-science.pdf). August 23.ft.instant-science. ^ (Motwani. and uses the specific techniques within the JIT and TQM ”toolboxes” as enablers. outlining and comparing some of them can be found here. MIT press. 1993 5. ^ Michael ^ Johansson et al. May 1997. Industry Week 1994) 6. while broadening the process vision. AI Magazine Voume 15 Number 2. United States General Accounting Office.instant-science.cnn. ^ Lon Roberts (1994) Process reengineering: the key to achieving breakthrough success.pdf) Bain & Co. May 1997" (http://www.See also Business Process Management Business Process Improvement Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) Kaizen Process improvement Workflow References This article incorporates public domain material from the United States General Accounting Office document "Business Process Re-engineering Assessment Guide.pdf) McKinsey & 1994) . et al. ^ Guha et al.htm). 12.pdf) Andersen Consulting (now Accenture) (http://www. 1998) 18. 14. (http://www. (http://www.pdf) Boston Consulting Group (http://www. Solow and Richard K.instant-science. ^ (Greenbaum 1995. ^ Business efficiency: IT can help paint a bigger picture.html#axzz1VySiR5f7) 11. ^ Hammer and Champy (1993) 1. featuring Ian Manocha. ^ (Berman. ^ Forbes: Reengineering. ^ A set of short papers.pdf).instant-science.g. followed by some guidelines for companies considering to contract a consultancy for a BPR initiative: Overview (http://www. ^ ( Comparison (http://www.pdf) Guidelines for BPR consulting clients (http://www. (1993) 13. 1998) a b c d e f g (Covert. Lester (1989) Made In America: Regaining the Productive Edge".net/pub/comparison. ^ (Hammer 1990) 4. The Hot New Managing Tool (http://money. ^ 17. It escalates the efforts of JIT and TQM to make process orientation a strategic tool and a core competence of the organization. Davenport (1993) 9.gao.gao. although a close relative.php/aimagazine/article/download/1113/1031). BPR concentrates on core business processes. ^ a b Hamscher.pdf) a b c 15. Walter: "AI in Business-Process Reengineering" (http://aaaipress. (1993): "Business Process Reengineering..instant-science."

30. 41. in: W. 24. 1995) ^ [1] (http://www. Davenport. 1996) ^ (Zairi & Sinclair. 47–57. 29.19. Business Process Reengineering: Building a Comprehensive Methodology.utoronto. 1991) ^ (Towers.. J. et al. Thomas (1995). Reengineering Management. Quality Management in Health Care. "The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign". 1999) ^ (Clemons. 2001) ^ (Jackson. 1998) ^ a b (Weicher. (1995).C. 1997) ^ a b c d (Al-Mashari & Zairi. 1994) ^ (Barrett. ^ a b c (Campbell & Kleiner. 1993) ^ a b (Vakola & Rezgui. 34. 28.The Fad That Forgot People (http://www.00019514-20021002000009. 20. 31. Harper Business Books. 40. 1998) ^ a b c (Ross. 10(2): pp. 35. 25. 2000) ^ (Malhotra. Summer 1993 . "PDF" (http://www.livemint.jsessionid=FBLJvhQdtm2LjZ9gVv9nkLtcG2ptdJVgPn8pxtJWmRWc6Gw1Vkxk!42534952!-949856144!8091!-1) Greenbaum. Information Systems Management. 27. 1997) ^ a b c d e f g (Dooley & Johnson. 42. 1995) ^ (White. Boston Davenport. 1996) ^ (Sabherwal & King. 1999) ^ (King.qmhcjournal. 1996) Further reading Abrahamson. Joan (1995). Reengineering .. "Work and Tools". 37. Thomas & Short. et al. et al. 36. 254-285. New York. Academy of Management Review. New York Dubois. E. 33. 1997) ^ (Malhotra. (1996). Technology and Culture. 44. Fast Company.html) ^ (Davenport. Management fashion. 32. 39. in: Sloan Management Review. Thomas (1993). 43..rotman. J. H. T. W. Davenport (eds). 1995) ^ a b (Gore. Harvard Business School Press. (2002). 1995) ^ (Guha. Windows on the 21. 1995) ^ (Broadbent & Weill. Champy.J. & Teng. 23. November 1995. Summer 1990. (1990). 21. 22. 1997) ^ a b (Kayworth. 1993) ^ (Berrington & Oblich. 1994) ^ (Rastogi. Peter (1972).H. W.htm. 1993) ^ (Katzenbach & Smith. Kranzberg and W... 1994) ^ a b (Carr. Cornerstone Guha. Kettinger. 38. Drucker.htm). pp 11–27 Davenport. "Harmonization of the European vaccination policy and the role TQM and reengineering could play". Process Innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. S.

Tom (1994). New York] Thompson. JB (1996). MacGraw-Hill. no.brint. Lon (1994). IEEE Engineering Management Review External links BPR Articles (http://www. ISBN 0-06-662112-7.). Hansen. pg. A. Process Reengineering: The Key To Achieving Breakthrough Success. L.1 Business Process Redesign: An Overview (http://www. The Economist . you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. James D. "Knowledge management: another management fad?". Information Research. By using this site. pp 66. "Reengineering Work: Don't Automate.html). Bassam (2008). in: James March (ed.: Nov 26. (1994).. Financial Times. M.appspot. Alan P. a non-profit organization. Summer 1993 Hammer.htm)". Taylor (1911). H. Prentice Hall. Fall 1998. N. Organizations in Action. New York Industry Week (1994). 8(1).wikipedia. Harper Business Books. p 8 Malhotra. 26.: (1993) Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. (1995). Inc. Quality Press. and Brache. Milwaukee. Chicago Loyd. PRISM: Process Re-engineering Integrated Spiral Model.institut.J. Harper Collins. Dec 5 1994. Henry J. Hammer. . Geary A. Rummler. 4/18/94 Johansson. S.. (1993).Y. The principles of scientific management (http://www. Hammer. Obliterate". "De-engineering the corporation". Harvard Business Review. "Giants with Feet of Clay". Ponzi. "Business Process Redesign: An Overview (http://www. Rand McNally. Information Systems Management. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation. Frederick. London. Hussein. "Reengineering Reviewed".com/Management_Science/Business_Process_Reengineering/) [3] (http://infchg.htm) Retrieved from " 2 July J. and Stanton. et al. IEEE Engineering Management Review. pp. and Champy. Roberts. ISBN 0-7879-0090-7. A. and Koenig. M. Yogesh (1998).com/b/BPR) Reengineering relationship of Mission and Work Processes to Information Gregory (1993) "Automating Business Process Reengineering". (1969). New York. VDM Verlag [2] (http://www. John Wiley & Sons Leavitt. 1996. Industry Week article. July/August. Technological and Humanistic Approaches". (2002). (1990). (1965).kmbook. New York. vol.bpubs. Handbook of Organizations. Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space in the Organization Chart . Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. "Applied Organizational Change in Industry: Structural. Harper & Row.htm).com/bpr. Wall Street Journal. additional terms may apply. "The Reengineering Revolution".Methodology.php?title=Business_process_reengineering&oldid=577301695" Categories: Business terms Business process Process management This page was last modified on 15 October 2013 at 16:25. Business Process Reengineering: BreakPoint Strategies for Market Dominance. 1993. 104–112. M. BPR : Decision engineering in a strained industrial and business environment (http://iegd.

Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation. .. a non-profit organization. Inc.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful