In this advisor, I want to review the public business process methodologies. Lots of people talk about methodologies, but finding a practical methodology you can use in your own organization is too easy.
First, some ground rules: When I refer to a methodology, I mean a comprehensive and specific set of instructions for accomplishing a task—in this case redesigning or improving a business process. The complexities are such that no methodology can ever be an algorithm—it can’t specify exactly what to do in every case. At best a methodology can provide a generic approach and a collection of heuristics. A good methodology, however, can provide a large collection of heuristics, a precise vocabulary, checklists and worksheets, and well defined procedures for accomplishing particular tasks. A good methodology can guarantee that trained teams will approach projects in a reasonably consistent manner and usually achieve the same results.
I define a public methodology as a methodology that is described in a book, taught in available courses, and used by at least one company. This excludes the methodologies offered by some consulting companies that you can only learn about by hiring the consultancy. Similarly, it excludes the various methodologies that people write about in articles that never get beyond a general description, and it excludes the various vendor methodologies that are sold in conjunction with a software product. All of the methodologies described below can be used without using a specific software tool. Thus, these are methodologies that any organization can study and discuss with others. I’ve tried to include all the public methodologies being actively marketed today.
Second, a qualification: I have worked with Roger Burlton and others to develop two Business Process Trends Associates methodologies, which I include in this discussion. In fact, I’ll begin by describing them and then use them as a reference point for the subsequent discussion. Thus, I can hardly be described as an objective source of information on this topic, although I am trying to be as objective as I can.
The Business Process Trends Associates methodology is, in fact, two methodologies: one for enterprise work and one for process redesign. BPTrends Associates describes the two methodologies and the major steps associated with each, as shown in Figure 1. We discriminate between enterprise activities that create tools for executives and BPM centers of excellence to use and the projects companies undertake to redesign a specific process. As a generalization, less sophisticated companies focus on process redesign and improvement, while more sophisticated companies tend to focus on creating a business process architecture that can be used to help manage and prioritize the entire enterprise’s process efforts. It’s nice to have an enterprise process architecture in place to help select processes for redesign, but most organizations don’t have an enterprise architecture in place, so we treat the two situations more or less independently.
Figure 1. The BPTrends Associates Enterprise and Redesign Methodologies
BPTA Enterprise Methodology. BPTrends Associates refers to its methodology as a “best practices” methodology. It doesn’t seek to create a unique, proprietary approach, but, instead, seeks to synthesize the best of various previous approaches into a well coordinated whole. At the enterprise level the goal is to create or organize the tools and resources that senior managers and a business process center of excellence will need to manage and coordinate process work throughout the entire organization. Thus, phases in the enterprise effort include organizing strategy and processes, creating a business process architecture, organizing a process measurement system, establishing a process governance system, and aligning processes with other resources from IT, HR, etc. These tools and resources, in turn, are used by executives or by a BPM group to identify and prioritize process change efforts, to train and evaluate process managers and to support specific process redesign or improvement projects. The sequence of activities isn’t too important at the enterprise level; companies approach enterprise development in different ways. Some focus on process modeling first, while others are much more concerned with performance measurement. They key is establishing tools that managers can use consistently.
BPTA Process Redesign Methodology. The BPTrends Associates redesign methodology focuses on projects that involve major changes in business processes. We look, in a systematic way, at the business model underlying the process, at inputs, outputs, activities and flows, the management of processes, the control of processes and the support of processes. At this level, sequence is very important. We focus on a step-by-step approach to analyzing the As-Is process and creating a new To-Be process. We use the core notation of BPMN and rely on best practices whenever possible.
BPTA offers public courses in conjunction with Boston University. For more information check: (www.butrain.com/Business-management-training-courses/business-process-management-training.asp The book to read for an introduction to this approach is Paul Harmon’s Business Process Change, 2nd Ed. (Morgan Kaufmann, 2007).
With this framework in mind, Figure 2 suggests how I would describe the other public business process methodologies I know about. I’ve subdivided them in two ways. First I discriminate, very broadly, between those methodologies aimed primarily at enterprise level change and those aimed at process level or implementation level change. This isn’t always a very precise distinction, as we will see. Second, I have discriminated between more or less comprehensive process methodologies and those that are more specialized and only used for specific types of projects.
Figure 2. An overview of the public business process change methodologies
Enterprise Adoption of Six Sigma. Doing justice to Six Sigma, as a methodology, is hard. First there is definitive description of the Six Sigma approach. It originated at Motorola in the mid-Eighties, but there are no books that everyone agrees define what Six Sigma is. In fact there are dozens of books on Six Sigma, each slightly different. There are six leading Six Sigma training-consulting companies each with extensive programs of courses. Broadly, Six Sigma can be divided into four areas: Management, Six Sigma for Design, process redesign, and process improvement. Process Improvement, with its DMAIC methodology is what most people associate with Six Sigma—and we consider DMAIC below. Six Sigma Management refers to a whole bag of things, but I use it here principally to refer to the fact that Six Sigma is often brought into an organization by a CEO or COO to transform an organization. Organizational transformation is hard to do and Six Sigma has a better record than any other process approach. By involving the CEO and focusing on saving the company large amounts of money, it rallies the executives. That, followed by an extensive training program, results in getting large numbers of employees to be more aware of the importance of process. One of the best books to read to understand how this is done is The Six Sigma Fieldbook: How DuPont Successfully Implemented the Six Sigma Breakthrough Management Strategy by Mikel Harry and Don R. Linsenmann (Doubleday, 2006). A more generic book is Rowland Hayler and Michael Nichols’ book, What is Six Sigma Process Management? (McGraw-Hill, 2005).
The other Six Sigma enterprise level initiative is Design for Six Sigma, which is a rather technical niche methodology aimed at designing new products so they can be more easily. A good book on this niche methodology is Design for Six Sigma in Technology and Product Development by C.M. Creveling, J.L. Slutsky and D. Antis Jr. (Prentice Hall, 2003).
Rummler-Brache-PDL Methodology. The font of all modern process methodologies is the methodology defined by Geary Rummler and Alan Brache in their book: Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart. (Jossey-Bass, 2nd Ed. 1995). Geary Rummler started teaching process analysis and redesign at the end of the Sixties and refined his methodology in the Seventies. In the early Eighties he taught courses at Motorola University that laid the process foundation for what became Six Sigma. He and Alan published their book, Improving Performance, in 1990. In 1993, when process reengineering became an overnight sensation, folks looked around for a systematic way to apply Davenport and Hammer’s ideas and many settled on Process Improvement and the courses offered by Rummler-Brache. (This is where process diagrams with swimlanes came from.) In spite of his seminal role in process change, Rummler has always insisted on a “performance” view of an organization. He focuses equally on organization architecture and management and on processes and people. Thus, it would be easy to classify the Rummler-Brache methodology as either an enterprise level organization change methodology or as a process redesign methodology, and, in fact, Rummler-Brache always offered courses in both areas.
Geary Rummler currently manages the Performance Development Lab (PDL) and still teaches the latest version of his comprehensive approach to organization and process improvement. The best book to read is Geary Rummler’s Serious Performance Consulting: According to Rummler (ISPI or ASTD, 2004).
xBML Methodology (Business Genetics) This is another methodology that’s a bit hard to classify. The fact that it is termed the eXtended Business Management Language (xBML) methodology suggests its roots in IT. On the surface it feels like a limited implementation of the Zachman approach to enterprise architecture. One begins by creating hierarchies or networks (models) for: 1- activities (What), 2-information flows (Which), 3-managers and employees (Who), 4-geographical locations (Where), and 5-flows between activities (When). If a company can do this, then it has created a repository of all its processes and the possible links between them and it also knows what information is required, who works on each, and where the work takes place. Using this information one can construct a flow diagram. When one first hears of this approach—it sounds simple: identify all your processes or activities in a hierarchy diagram. Identify all your employees and indicate what roles they perform in any possible activity. The reality, of course, is that these are huge undertakings in large companies, and often involve circularity. You have to know the names of the processes and activities before you can say which activities a given employee helps implement. On the other hand, if you don’t complete a comprehensive analysis of your firm before you proceed to a project, how do you scope the specific project and determine which subprocesses you will need to focus on? Business Genetics is presented as a combination enterprise methodology and a process redesign methodology. In fact, it seems more like an enterprise repository methodology to us, but, in any case, it is hard to classify in our schema.
Business Genetics, the company that sells the methodology and training, is closely allied with a software vendor, xBML Innovations, that provides a modeling tool tailored for xBML. The methodology was offered before the software tool, however, and was developed and is more or less independent of the tool, so we are treating this as an independent methodology and not a software vendor methodology. The book to read to learn more about this approach is Business Genetics by Cedric Tyler and Stephen Baker (John Wiley, 2007).
Some Specialized Enterprise Methodologies
Some people would deny that some or all of the following
approaches to process change constitute a process change methodology. In fact, however, I encounter these
approaches when I visit companies working on process change and that many find
them very useful. These are not comprehensive
process change methodologies, but constitute specialized or niche approaches to
process change.
Balanced Scorecard. A good example of a specialized methodology is the Balanced Scorecard approach created by Robert Kaplan and David Norton. The initial Balanced Scorecard was a conceptual device to get organizations to be more flexible and comprehensive in evaluating company goals and measures. It evolved into a structured methodology for evaluating organization and managerial performance that is now widely used by leading organizations throughout the world. Recently, Kaplan and Norton have suggested how Balanced Scorecard could be extended to tie strategy to performance goals and measures. The best general book on Balanced Scorecard is The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action by Kaplan and Norton (Harvard Business School Press, 1996). A recent book that suggests how it can be aligned with Six Sigma is Praveen Gupta’s Six Sigma Balanced Scorecard (McGraw-Hill, 2004). We use a variation on the Balanced Scorecard approach in the BPTA Enterprise Methodology to organize metrics and process manager evaluations.
CMMI. Another specialized methodology is offered by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie-Mellon University. Working for the US Department of Defense, SCI created CMM—the Capability Maturity Model. It was originally designed to evaluate the maturity of software development organizations. It has been extended to CMMI, which can be used with any business process. If you study CMMI, you will find that they believe that the most effective way to evaluate the process maturity of organizations is to study the skills possessed by managers. Similarly, if you develop a change program based on CMMI, you are, in effect, defining skills and capabilities that your process managers will need to master. Thus, CMMI, as a methodology or prescription for change, defines a training program for your organization’s managers. It doesn’t provide any direct help with specific process improvement, but, assumes that if you improve your manager’s skills in managing processes that will eventually result in improved processes and better performance. Thus, CMMI, as a process change methodology, is both a long-term and a niche-focused approach. There are many books on CMMI and on various specialized versions of CMM. The best general introduction is CMMI, 2nd Ed., Guidelines for Process Integration and Improvement, by Mary Beth Chrissis, Mike Konrad and Sandy Shrum (Addison-Wesley, 2007).
SCOR. SCOR is the Supply Chain Council’s supply chain framework. It is also the name of a notation and a methodology defined by the SCC. Obviously the SCOR methodology is a niche methodology that is focused on redesigning or improving an organization’s supply chain. If the SCC’s methodology were all there was, we wouldn’t include it, since the SCOR methodology isn’t much more than a very general approach. Peter Bolstorff and Robert Rosenbaum, however, have extended the SCOR methodology into a very systematic, seventeen week program that helps a company examine and improve its supply chain. They term their methodology Supply Chain Excellence, and they document their step-by-step approach in a book of the same name. They have just released the second edition of Supply Chain Excellence (AMACOM, 2007).
Proteus. Proteus is a business rules methodology created by Ron Ross and Gladys Lam, both of Business Rule Solutions. Rules are used in processes to guide decisions, and hence, there is a close relationship between analyzing activities and defining the rules the employees or systems use to make the decisions that are made when the activity is performed. In some cases, simply changing a set of business rules can solve a process performance problem. That said, however, those who focus on business rules use a somewhat different approach than process analysts. They tend to start with company policies and put quite a bit of effort into defining the organization’s vocabulary and work, top-down, to define a traceable hierarchy of business rules. Most process analysis methodologies, on the other hand, either ignore rules, or only focus on them when they attempt fine-grained task analysis. The use of rules in simulation systems, ERP systems, and in the development of BPMS applications, however, guarantees that the analysis of rules and processes will become increasingly intertwined. Meanwhile, Proteus is a systematic approach to business rules analysis and improvement. A good book read on this approach is Ron Ross’s Principles of the Business Rule Approach (Addison-Wesley, 2003).
Lean Six Sigma (DMAIC) We have already discussed the problem of classifying Six Sigma. There is no single source book. Instead, Six Sigma has evolved from practices initially taught at Motorola University. Today, the most respected source of Six Sigma certification is probably the American Society for Quality (ASQ) but there are other Six Sigma professional groups (e.g. ISSSP), dozens of books, and workshops on every aspect of Six Sigma. Most Six Sigma practitioners focus on process improvement. They begin with an established process and seek to improve the quality of the process outputs while simultaneously reducing the variability of the output. Most Six Sigma practitioners put a major emphasis on measuring processes and on the use of statistical techniques to analyze process problems. The best known methodology associated with Six Sigma is DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control). Over the years many observers have objected that Six Sigma teams have focused too narrowly on low-level processes, often seeming to insist on improving the way deck chair are placed even as the ship sanks. In fact, most Six Sigma training companies and most Six Sigma authors warn of this and urge practitioners to not only consider process improvement projects but to also consider larger process redesign efforts and company process management issues. Most Six Sigma companies have courses in all these areas.
Recently, most Six Sigma practitioners have begun to incorporate Lean in their practice. Lean derives from the Toyota Production System and is focused on improving the flow of activities within an organization. At the enterprise level, Lean practitioners map entire value streams and seek to make the flow more efficient by introducing ideas like Just-In-Time and flows that are pulled by demand rather than pushed. At the process level, Lean folks tend to focus on the elimination of waste (muda). To a process redesign practitioner, like myself, Lean seems like a rather limited approach to improving flow, ignoring, for example, business rules and process management practices, but it fits well with Six Sigma improvement efforts. Unfortunately it tends to pull Lean Six Sigma discussions back toward a focus on manufacturing, but presumably Lean will be extended to other domains just as Six Sigma has been.
I won’t bother to recommend a book for Lean Six Sigma. There are dozens of them that all cover nearly the same ground. If you are interested in this area, you will probably want to get the book of someone working with whatever Lean Six Sigma training company you decide to go to for training.
BPM Methodology. John Jeston and Johan Nelis have written a popular book, Business Process management: Practical Guidelines to Successful Implementations (Elsevier, 2006), that defines a business process redesign methodology. Like most business process methodologies they combine enterprise architecture work and process redesign work into a single process, but they could easily divide them and have an enterprise methodology and a separate process redesign methodology if they choose. I would describe their methodology as a best practices methodology. They provide a general structure for a wide variety of popular techniques. In addition, the book describes how to move from a redesign effort to a BPMS effort, making this the methodology that is probably most aligned with the current interest in developing BPMS systems.
RIVA and Human Interaction Management. Here are two specialized methodologies from the UK. RIVA is a methodology by Martyn Ould that puts a lot of emphasis on processes that involve human communication and collaboration. The methodology introduces a unique notation, the Role Activity Diagram, that is specialized to describe collaborations. Keith Harrison-Broninski uses the Role Activity Diagram and extends RIVA to describe an approach to analyzing human-driven processes. Harrison-Broninski doesn’t provide a phased methodology and it would be easy to see his HIM approach as simply a set of heuristics. Together with RIVA, however it defines a method for attacking human-driven process problems. Neither of these approaches constitutes a general approach to dealing with business process problems. RIVA has the feel of a software methodology. Both authors, however, are forcing people to think about processes that involve collaboration and the dynamic development of solutions to tasks and techniques from each will probably be incorporated into the more popular redesign methodologies. The two books for these methodologies are: Martyn A Ould’s Business Process Management: A Rigorous Approach (The British Computer Society, 2005) and Human Interactions by Keith Harrison-Broninski (Meghan-Kiffer, 2005).
Implementation Level Methodologies
The implementation level is concerned with providing support
and infrastructure for business processes. Thus, an HR methodology to generate training or an IT
methodology to generate software applications constitute implementation level
methodologies. In general, process
analysts ignore the more technical implementation level methodologies. In many
organizations, however, IT is responsible for process change and some IT groups
use extended software methodologies for process work. In effect, “requirements capture” becomes a process
analysis phase. Thus, it is
appropriate to comment on a few of the implementation methodologies with strong
process modules.
IDEFO Methodology. IDEF is a methodology initially developed for the Air Force in the Seventies. It is, in essence, a structured software methodology. It has a front-end module, IDEF0, which is focused on analyzing business functions and the processes within them. The methodology as gone through several iterations and there are those with backgrounds in military work, who like IDEF0 for process analysis work. A good book that explains IDEF0 is Clarence G. Feldmann’s The Practical Guide to Business Process Reengineereing Using IDEF0 (Dorset House, 1998).
IBM’s LOVEM Methodology. In the mid-Nineties IBM promoted a methodology called LOVEM (Line of Vision Enterprise Modeling). In essence, LOVEM was a variation on the Rummler-Brache methodology with extra swimlanes added to make it easier to see where IT resources supported business processes. The name, Line of Vision, derived from the fact that Rummler-Brache always placed a swimlane for the customer at the top and one could glance across the top line and see all the places that the process touched the customer. LOVEM’s way of representing IT systems were quickly incorporated into Rummler-Brache practice, just as other methodologies quickly incorporated swimlanes and LOVEM, as an independent process or IT methodology has largely disappeared.
Unified Software Development Process. Finally, a word on IBM/Rational’s Unified Software Development methodology. In the mid-Nineties, Rational hired three of the popular object-oriented software development methodologists and set out to create a unified approach to OO software development. At the same time the Object Management Group (OMG) decided to try to standardize the notation for OO diagrams. In response, Rational decided to split their notation from their procedural methodology and submitted their notation to the OMG. It was adopted, with some changes and has become the OMG’s Unified Modeling Language (UML). The initial version of UML included a number of different modeling techniques including one for activity diagrams/state diagrams. By combining state and activity diagrams the initial UML diagrams, the OMG guaranteed that no one involved in process workflow analysis would use their approach. In the recent major UML update (Version 2.0) this problem was corrected and UML 2.0 has an Activity diagram specification that could be used by business people. Meantime, however, the process modeling vendors have settled on the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) which is also an OMG specification and work is now underway to align UML activity diagrams and BPMN diagrams.
The key thing, however, is that Rational and the OMG split notation from methodology. Rational, on its own, proceeded to create the Unified Software Development Process. IBM then bought Rational. The IBM/Rational Unified Software Development Process is probably the most widely used software development methodology today, and many companies have standardized on it. USDP uses UML and business analysts and software developers working with USDP are necessarily using UML. Thus they use Use Cases and Activity Diagrams for requirements analysis. As noted earlier, few business people are interested in UML or USDP, but when IT leads the process work at a company, business people often find themselves looking at requirements documents defined by means of UML models. The authoritative books on UML and USDP are all coauthored by the three software methodologists who created this approach: Grady Booch, James Rumbach and Ivar Jacobson.
ARIS. Finally, there is ARIS, the methodology of IDS Scheer. It would be easy to dismiss this as a vendor methodology, designed to support IDS Scheer’s ARIS software modeling product were it not for two things. First, Dr. Scheer has written a number of books on the ARIS methodology, some of them focused on enterprise and process level analysis. And, second, the use of ARIS as a modeling technique by SAP, Oracle and Microsoft, guarantees that ARIS is extensively used by those engaged in ERP implementation efforts at leading companies throughout the world. Overall, ARIS is heavily focused on software development, but it is also widely used by business process analysts, especially when they are working on company ERP projects. For more information on the ARIS methodology, read one or more of the books written on ARIS by August-Wilhelm Scheer.
This overview of process methodologies suggests the diversity of the field. If I were to include vendor, consultant, and academic methodologies we would see there is even more variety than we have sketched out here. I’ve undoubtedly missed a public methodology or two and would appreciate information from readers on other methodologies I might have included. I’ve mostly avoided methodologies at the implementation level and haven’t even begun to consider training or human performance methodologies one might use in conjunction with a process improvement effort.
Of the methodologies I have considered, Six Sigma DMAIC is undoubtedly the best known and most widely used, but it is, as we have suggested generally used to achieve rather limited goals. Similarly, the second and third largest groups of users would be business analysts and software developers who use ARIS or UML for IT related problems.
Put a different way, the methodologies that are truly BPM methodologies, in the broadest sense, are neither well established nor broadly used. Business process change initiatives have been popular for the last twenty years, but we have yet to arrive at a consensus about the best way to conceptualize or approach systematic process change. The good news, however, is that companies now have some interesting process change methodologies available that are designed to be used by business managers and process change practitioners and we will undoubtedly see one or more of them become more widely known in the years ahead.
Paul Harmon is the Executive Editor of Business Process Trends, a website devoted to providing information on business process change, the author of Business Process Change, a popular book on business process redesign, and he is the Chief Process Methodologist at BPTrends Associates, a process training and consulting company. He can be reached at pharmon@bptrends.com.
return to top
Would you like to advertise in this space? Contact marketing@ispi.org |
|||
Performance Marketplace is a convenient way to exchange information of interest to the performance improvement community. Take a few moments each month to scan the listings for important new events, publications, services, and employment opportunities. To post information for our readers, contact ISPI Director of Marketing, Keith Pew at keithp@ispi.org or 301.587.8570.
Books Career Resources Conferences,
Seminars, and Workshops Learn the Principles & Practices of Performance Improvement, September 22-24, in Albuquerque, NM. Take your organization to the next level. Register today! |
Join us for the Fall Conference, September 24-27, in Albuquerque, NM. Achieve Business Results through Performance Improvement. Register today! Magazines,
Newsletters, and Journals Performance Improvement Quarterly is a peer-reviewed journal created to stimulate professional discussion in the field and to advance the discipline of HPT through literature reviews, experimental studies with a scholarly base, and case studies. Discounted to ISPI members.
|
Are you working to improve workplace performance?
Then ISPI membership is your key to professional development through
education, certification, networking, and professional affinity programs.
If you are already a member, we thank you for your support. If you have
been considering membership or are about to renew, there is no better
time to join ISPI. To apply for membership or renew, simply click here.
ISPI is looking for Human Performance Technology (HPT) articles (approximately 500 words and not previously published) for PerformanceXpress that bridge the gap from research to practice (please, no product or service promotion is permitted). Below are a few examples of the article formats that can be used:
In addition to the article, please include a short bio (2–3 lines) and a contact email address. All submissions should be sent to johnc@ispi.org. Each article will be reviewed by one of ISPI’s on-staff HPT experts, and the author will be contacted if it is accepted for publication. If you have any further questions, please contact johnc@ispi.org.
Feel free to forward ISPI’s PerformanceXpress newsletter to your colleagues or anyone you think may benefit from the information. If you are reading someone else’s PerformanceXpress, send your complete contact information to johnc@ispi.org, and you will be added to the PerformanceXpress emailing list.
PerformanceXpress is an ISPI member benefit designed to build community, stimulate discussion, and keep you informed of the Society’s activities and events. This newsletter is published monthly and will be emailed to you at the beginning of each month.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Chen at johnc@ispi.org.
ISPI
