Fixing BPM – In the transition to Customer-Centricity – why have processes at all?

It’s time to make the distinction that unless you have a process that is fully automated,
sample_Processyour customers, suppliers or other stakeholders may want/need to receive information or provide input at virtually ANY step along an organization’s processes.

Clearly, you cannot take each of your existing structured processes and provide a provisional customer in-reach/out-reach link and a supplier in-reach/out-reach link at each step along any process.

In respect of structured processes there has been a longstanding but often inadequately unaddressed need to re-visit completed steps, skip over certain steps, start work on steps that are not yet current along a process instance and add steps that are not in the process. If we are take on the task of upgrading BPM capabilities, we might as well fix this problem as well.

There is no reason not to expect a need for collaboration with customers, suppliers and stakeholders at any of these supplementary interventions so we need in-reach and out-reach at ANY intervention (i.e. structured steps or ad hoc steps).

Now, limiting the discussion to a single instance of a process template plus supplementary related interventions fails to take into account that chances are there will be multiple contemporaneous instances of any process template with no guarantee of consistency across these instances as a result of recognizing that.  Some instances will basically follow the logic of the template, others will include multiple ad hoc interventions.

If you subscribe to the notion of “continuous process improvement” you could, on top of this, have several versions of a “best practice” running, each having multiple instances.

The final straw is that whereas there is nothing better than a best practice (at least until you improve it), some staff members will consistently follow a best practice, others will follow the best practice to an extent and yet others, given the option, will not want to follow the best practice, based on the notion that what they do is “special” and cannot be done by following the best practice.

Stay tuned for reasons why fixing BPM means we need process fragments, not processes.

Update: 2016-06-10 – The conclusion seems to be “we need in-reach and out-reach at ANY intervention (i.e. structured steps or ad hoc steps)”, meaning, no point trying to map out “the customer journey”.

Within the organization, however, in any quest to become “customer-centric”, it’s business as usual – we need structured sequences of steps or “best practices” and we need the run-time ability to process ad hoc interventions at Cases.

I think it’s a good idea to go easy on in-reach at first, especially in the area of healthcare where you are likely to get a deluge of patient inquiries re their assessments, diagnoses, tx plans, meds. Having to respond to all of these can greatly reduce office/clinic productivity.


Management consultant and process control engineer (MSc EE) with a focus on bridging the gap between operations and strategy in the areas of critical infrastructure protection, major crimes case management, healthcare services delivery, and b2b/b2c/b2d transactions. (C) 2010-2019 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 Business Process Management, Customer Centricity and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s