International Process and Performance Institute

NOTE - LAST OF A 3-PART SERIES

PART 3

Why – Why does the process exist?

Identifying who the process serves does not require significant work on our part – it is the passive part of the process reference model. Understanding why the process exists is not a passive activity.

Why does the process exist? What wants and needs does it fulfill for the consumer of its output? Do we know that? If so, do we have measures and goals?

Understanding the need or want a process fulfills – or is intended to fulfill – is absolutely critical to achieving business success from process management. This is an area where process management often runs into trouble as the measures and goals of the process – if they exist – most often exist as indirect KPI’s.

What is needed is some work around the goal of the process in respect to its customer. What does the customer want? What would cause them to think of the outcome of the process as successful versus what is not successful?

The degree in which we identify the measures and goals of the process in explicit alignment with what will make the customer’s life simpler, easier and more successful the more value we create.

That’s right, the better we are at identifying what the customer of the process really wants and needs the better the process will be. There are multiple levels to this and simply “asking” the customer is at the very bottom. Really great process management is able to articulate both the measures and the goals of a process that reflect what the customer of the that process really wants and needs better than the customer can ever do for us.

What – What shape should the process take to best fulfill that need?

The process shape is the set of high level assumptions that we make about a process – what activities are in the process and what must be done to produce the desired outcome.

The design of the high level process shape heavily influences how well a process fulfills the needs of its customers. For example, while there may be many ways to get to the grocery store there is probably one way that is better than the others.

The process shape is our expression of what we feel we must do to produce an outcome. The high level process shape should always be as simple as possible and it should be carefully designed against the Why and the Who.

If we have a very good Why we are likely to get a very good What. Knowing why a process exists is required if we are going to craft a process shape that actually delivers on the promise.

This is where we challenge activities and rules that may still exist in our processes even though the original need they addressed has either changed or no longer exists. The reason why a process has a certain shape is not important. Identifying the appropriate shape of the process to support the goals of the customer of the process is very important.

This is where we look hard at the process (in its entirety) to make sure the overall shape of the process is an appropriate one for producing the outcome we intend for it to produce.

How – How do we support the process in the fulfillment of the need?

Once we now who the process serves, why it exists (wants and needs), and what its shape should be to deliver on those wants and needs we must now support the work of that process to help deliver on the promise.

This is where BPM (and other) software comes into play. The how is the part of the process management challenge that BPM software is designed to address.

Supporting the process can involve automation and workflow. It can involve document management and document creation. It can bring into place contextual information the helps people do their jobs better. It can include simple business rules that help avert or catch human err. It can include more complex business rules to help people (and work) navigate to the desired outcome.

Efficiency and quality can often be enhanced when processes are properly supported. Well configured supporting technology will make it easier for people to successfully complete the right tasks at the right time.

Supporting how work gets it done is the final piece of the process reference model.

Why BPM Fell Short of the Mark

The reason why BPM software fell short of the mark is that it does not address all four quadrants of the process reference model. The reason why consultants fell short of the mark is that they too failed to address all four process quadrants. Same with methods. The fact is; we all fell short of the mark in addressing all of the quadrants in the process reference model.

That is the problem just as it is the opportunity. As BPM moves forward it will evolve. Already the main BPM vendors have moved into severe stagnation in regards to any form of thought leadership. The BPM market in many ways has become the “me too” crowd with the caveat that “I’m better because.”

There are also beginning to emerge some new twists on the BPM angle in software vendors that are small, mean, lean and inventive. They are a symptom of market pressure that comes from a problem that has not been adequately solved.

The next evolution of BPM will come much closer to solving that problem. The chances that the next round of BPM software will successfully cross the chasm are actually quite high. The value proposition is far more compelling and the lessons learned carry a powerful message in respect to our understanding of how process management must really work.

In doing so, the market will be a flurry of innovative and creative output of compelling approaches to bringing our process management activity into the holistic state of addressing the entire process reference model.

Until then it is up to each one of us to understand and implement process management in the right way. If we don’t do it, who will?