Go For the Little Picture


More, again, on why BPM initiatives fail.

Many BPM initiatives fail because they take on too big a scope, this extends the initial implementation timeframe, results are slow to materialize, people lose enthusiasm, progress slows, the timeframe then increases way beyond the original timeframe, funding runs out, and management eventually puts the initiative out of its misery.

The future is not going to be like the present so any “big project” that cannot get off the ground in weeks is doomed because the playing field WILL be different.

So, go for incremental deployment (this department, this process), but make sure of four things (and perhaps others) . . .

1) Adopt a total enterprise approach – “we are going to encourage best practices, people can follow these as-is if that is appropriate but they can optionally deviate from best practices to the point where a best practice comprising a linked sequence of steps actually gets implemented in isolated situations as a seemingly unrelated series of ad hoc steps”.

The approach must allow incremental roll-out of processes over an extended timeframe.

And, it must be able on a ongoing basis to “rein in” serious  deviations from best practices.

2) There is a central common resource allocation, leveling and balancing run time environment for the performance of work so that scarce pooled resources can be properly allocated across the organization to process instances and to ad hoc interventions.

3) The User Interface must be such so that the care and feeding of the BPM mapping environment and the run-time environment do not detract from staff productivity.

A not-so-bad solution is ONE screen where each worker sees their fixed time commitments on one side and their floating time to-do tasks on the other side. This covers 100% of all work done by all workers each day.

4) From the time the first process is mapped and implemented, it should be able, via the run-time environment to carry out bi-directional dynamic linking to/from other current and legacy systems.

This requires the use of an arms-length data exchanger as opposed to trying to hay-wire disparate systems together.

About kwkeirstead@civerex.com

Management consultant and process control engineer (MSc EE) with a focus on bridging the gap between operations and strategy in critical infrastructure protection, healthcare, connect-the-dots law enforcement investigations, job shop manufacturing and b2b organizations. (C) 2010-2017 Karl Walter Keirstead, P. Eng. All rights reserved. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, and are not connected with Jay-Kell Technologies Inc, Civerex Systems Inc. (Canada), Civerex Systems Inc. (USA) or CvX Productions.
This entry was posted in Adaptive Case Management, Automated Resource Allocation, Business Process Management, Operational Planning, Process auditing, Process Mapping, Productivity Improvement, Project Planning. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s