Linkedin: Why Process Approach?

<discussion ref="http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=61365&discussionID=13160866&sik=1265359418661&trk=ug_qa_q&goback=.ana_61365_1265359418661_3_1" />

I am with Scott – processes can be a company’s most valuable asset. To realize potentials of this asset I used the following “techniques” in implementing enterprise business process management (BPM) systems (see the difference between BPM discipline, BPM system and BPM suite - http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/2009/04/should-we-consider-third-forgotten-bpm.html):

1.We have observed that improving a BPM system requires a lot of communication with practically everyone within the enterprise, and everyone should be treated as a stakeholder of the BPM system. Each group of stakeholders has different views, different concerns and a different understanding of the BPM system. The different groups of stakeholders are generally the following: top managers, enterprise architects, business line managers, process owners, super-users, normal users, project managers, business analysts, IT managers, IT solutions architects, IT developers, IT operators.

It is necessary to explain to each group of stakeholders how their concerns will be addressed and how their current working practices will be changed for the better. (This is a typical duty of the chief architect of the BPM system.) Coherent and clear explanations in the business language are vital for the success of a BPM project.

2. It is not enough to capture processes – they have to work or “be actionable”. The aim is to have a single description of business processes which is used by different people in different parts of an enterprise:
• model in design
• input for project planning and implementation
• executable program for coordination of work
• documentation for all staff members
• base for taking management decisions

Sure that a good architecture which combines BPM, SOA, EA and other technologies and methods is very desirable to realize potentials of processes.


No comments: