Supporting the Distributed Process Mapping Approach
By Triaster Limited

Institute of Management
A Question of Quality? A survey or performance improvement initiatives. Karen Charlesworth

In July 2000 the Institute of Management reported its findings on a survey of performance improvement initiatives. In this report it is noted that:

“Only 19% of managers felt that defined responsibility [for continuous improvement] lay with quality assurance
specialists …”

Further:

“45% took the view that everyone in the organisation has a role to play if the programme is to succeed.”

And, in the same report it was stated that

“… this is entirely consistent with much of the literature which emphasises that quality and continuous improvement should not be left to a specialist department. Instead, it should be the concern of all employees with the onus on those at the top to establish a commitment throughout the organisation. Over half of middle managers felt continuous improvement was the responsibility of everyone.”

Peter Dorfman, President of KnowledgeFarm
Bottom-Up Knowledge Capture

Peter states:

“Top-down knowledge management has had limited success. KM will begin to show significant ROIs when the process is inverted.”

This explicitly supports the bottom-up approach to knowledge management.

Randy Barrett
Making a Go of It Alone. Egad! Some Companies Reengineer Without Consultants

Note especially the quote of Elna Blass, director of process innovation at Harley Davidson

“Blass’ basic approach is to offer her services, get people understanding the process, and then get out of the way. She consults closely with the business unit in question but makes its staff do the work of process mapping … Harley recently redesigned its invoicing system to a deafening silence and no resistance”.

Also see
Chasing the BPR Tool Market. User Demands Driving Better, Cheaper Software

“Software for modelling and simulation will become embedded in business program suites – regular tools for
everyday use”.

Dr. Yogesh Malhotra
Business Process Redesign: An Overview

This article is full of insights into how successful change requires workforce involvement. Specifically, Malhotra
explores:

“The Myth of Top-Down Design”

Paul A. Strassmann
The Hocus-Pocus of Reengineering

Strassmann’s article The Hocus-Pocus of Reengineering (June 1994) compares Business Process Reengineering
(revolutionary) with Business Process Improvement (evolutionary).

“Evolutionary change stimulates morale and imagination, creating conditions for rewarding organizational learning and for inspiring employees to discover innovative ways to deal with adversity and competitive challenges.”

“The first step-one that reengineering proponents generally skip-is gaining widespread support for change; after all, lasting improvements in business processes can be made only with the support of those who know the
business.”

“BPI depends primarily on mobilizing employee commitment and imaginative cooperation, relying heavily on in-house know-how to find conditions that will support the creation of new jobs – even if that means that many existing positions will disappear.”

“In BPI everybody with an understanding of the business will be asked to participate.”

“Every day should be Process Improvement Day – that is how organizational learning takes place and how you gain employee commitment. At each incremental stage of process improvement, your people can keep
pace with their leaders, developing the same understanding of the business. They are allowed the opportunity to think about what they are doing. They are not intimidated by precipitous layoffs that inhibit their sharing of ideas on how to use their own time and talent more effectively.”

“It is never wise to disregard your people, relationships with customers, assets, accumulated knowledge, or reputation.”

Jim Clemmer
Process Reengineering and Improvement: Not an Either/Or Choice

Clemmer’s article, Process Reengineering and Improvement: Not an Either/Or Choice, discusses the benefits of Business Process Improvement (bottom-up) versus Business Process Reengineering (top-down).

“When a large percentage of an organization’s people are trained and belong to improvement teams, the
relentless pursuit of continuous improvement can really add up . . . an ethic of constantly looking for ways to do things better also carries over to individuals’ daily work habits.”

“The bottom-up nature of process management usually means that the improvement effort is outside of the
managerial mainstream.”

ProSci’s 1998-1999 Reengineering Best Practices study
Reengineering Success Factors

“Unfortunately the ability of external consultants to implement significant change in an organization is small. The chances are only slightly better for staff groups. Ultimately the solution and results come back to those accountable for day-to-day execution. That does not mean that consultants or staff are not valuable. What it does mean, though, is that the terms of engagement and accountability must be clear. The ownership must ultimately rest with line operation, whether it be manufacturing, customer service, logistics, sales, etc.”

“. . . they [line operation] know today’s processes, they know the gaps and issues, they have front-line, in-your-face experience. They are real. The customers work with them, not your consultants and staff personnel.”

“You need the line organization to have the awareness that they need help, to contribute their knowledge, and to own the solution and implementation.”

Philip M. Johnson
Leap: A “Personal Information Environment” for Software Engineers

“. . .traditional top-down process improvement initiatives remain an important and valuable component of a
high quality software development organization. However, it is also possible to pursue a “bottom up”,
developer-centered approach that addresses many of these concerns. In a bottom-up approach, the focus is on
providing individual developers with the insights necessary to acquire and improve their technical skills.
Management buy-in and support becomes secondary to the developers’ self-interest in their own professional
development.”

Michael Hammer and James Champy
Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution - buy book

“Managers have to switch from supervisory roles to acting as facilitators, as enablers, and as people whose jobs are the development of people and their skills so that those people will be able to perform value-adding processes themselves.” (Pg 77)

“Companies don’t reengineer processes; people do.” (Pg 102)

“A process map also creates a vocabulary to help people discuss reengineering.” (Pg 118)

Dorine C. Andrews and Susan K. Stalick
Business Reengineering: The Survival Guide

“When people have access to information and can communicate cross functionally
and cross-organizationally, then work can be performed simultaneously instead of linearly.” (Pg 25)

“[Employee] involvement alleviates much of the pain associated with change, allowing us to move more quickly from denial to acceptance. When people are involved in designing and planning new business operations, it is difficult to deny what is happening.” (Pg 30)

“Continuous Process Improvement Principles: 1) Improvement is everyone’s responsibility, 2) Create an ongoing Exchange and Sharing of information, 3) Quality is driven by individuals, not organizations. 4) Improvement is always desirable 5) Pay attention to detail 6) Quality requires systemic work” (Pg 35)

“People tend to focus on the tasks they perform rather than on what they produce and who they service. Their
performance traditionally is measured in the same way. When they let go of the task orientation, they can think in terms of customers and products and services” (Pg 117)

“If you want people to feel that they’re part of the solution, they must become involved in its design. If it’s important to value workers’ opinions and ideas, then start by including them in the reengineering project.” (Pg 172)

“Process ownership is critical, and because processes integrate so many different functional pieces, process
ownership belongs to the teams who run the process. Employees have the capability for continual growth and
performance mastery if provided with the right support and developmental environment. What is good for them is also good for the business. People are most productive when they enjoy their work and relish doing it.” (Pg 220)

Susan M. Grotevant
Business Engineering and Process Redesign in Higher Education: Art or Science?

“In order to be successful organizations will increasingly need to develop the potential of their employees, increase their knowledge and provide a work environment that facilitates learning and experimentation at every level in the organization. It is important not to lose sight of the fact that the potential of an
organization represents the sum of the potential of its people.”

“The least invasive type of change strategy available to organizations is one of continuous process improvement, which operates under the principle that excellence can be achieved by making a large number of small or incremental improvements continuously over time. The goal is to please both internal and external customers by improving the quality of both processes and outcomes.

Work teams and individuals are encouraged and empowered to suggest and implement improvements using a
structured set of tools and techniques to correctly identify and define both
problems and solutions.”

Masaaki Imai
An Interview With Masaaki Imai

Massaki Imai established the Kaizen Institute to help Western companies introduce kaizen concepts.

“Kaizen means ongoing improvement involving everybody, without spending much
money.”

Imai states:

“Everybody in the company should be seeking a better way of doing their job all the time by constantly eliminating muda (non-value-adding activities) and streamlining the work processes, and managers should be establishing a challenging target to motivate employees."

Howard Smith
Howard Smith is the chief technology officer of Computer Sciences Corp in Europe, and co-chairman of the Business Process Management Initiative (BPMI.org)

Excerpt from Abstract Thinking article in InformationAge, December 2001.

“The process repositories in place today are allowing all parts of the business to visualise, understand and collaborate to improve its processes. Finally, it seems, business processes are moving outside of software.”

Allan Baktoft Jakobsen
Over My Dead Body!

“Working with software improvements for some years now, I recommend changing inside-out and bottom-up [Bottom-up Process Improvement Tricks]. Inside-out because I respect and value people’s own judgement, and bottom-up because people’s commitment is a much better basis for dealing with all the risks.”

“Start with establishing a common understanding of the problems as an input to the risk analysis. Inform about possible solutions, and let then the people do the mapping between the problems and solutions proposing the changes themselves.”

Ahmed A. Shabana
The effect of Outside Consultants Involvement over the Success of BPR Projects

This paper was presented to the 1995 Americas Conference on Information Systems. The conclusions he presented in that paper remain highly significant today, and extend beyond BPR. He concluded that

"Contrary to expectations, the level of consultant's interventions had little influence over the success of the BPR projects in both the outcomes and the implementation decisions".

He found no evidence to support the hypothesis that

"the level of outside consultants involvement has an effect over the outcomes of BPR projects".

Tao Te Ching written by Lao-tzu

“With the best of leaders
When the work is done
The project completed
The people will say
‘We did it ourselves’"

Cited from Runge-Balliol leadership
training course at The Industrial Society.

top of page