Feb 2014 Nยบ 0 A quarterly eMagazine about Business Process Management
In the Peruvian financial system by making use of the PEMM model
The new Information Management Paradigm Built on Processes
As a support to self-sustaining process optimization-automation in our organizations
A model for Business Process Execution Measurement
BPMteca.com starts a journey of no return, providing a magazine that begins on a quarterly basis, without discarding an evolution to a lower frequency if the reader demands in the future. This project is not episodic, but the result of my passion for promoting Business Process Management by reading, which makes today's digital world viability. Although BPMteca has born thinking only for Spanish language readers, we did not want to miss the opportunity of internationalization disseminating the articles in English, with which we can reach the whole world. Two separate issues will be provided in order to facilitate the reading and include only advertising segmented by keeping the target language audience. Our interest is to provide relevant and quality content while maintaining a rigorous scientific journal but writing with simplicity, with the desire to ever become a useful resource for the public interested in Business Process Management. So what are you waiting for. Jump in. Enjoy these and many more pages, and do not forget to let us know what you think by tweeting to @worldBPMmagazine
Pedro Robledo Editor and Director
Page 2
@pedrorobledoBPM
Contents Issue 0 Director Pedro Robledo pedrorobledo@bpmteca.com Editorial redaccion@bpmteca.com
Mantra 2014: BPM of Things 4
Advertising publicidad@bpmteca.com Contributors Michael McClellan George Barlow Josep Mª Cos i Riera Andrea Delgado Francisco Ruiz Ignacio García Ernesto Calderón Alcalde
In the Peruvian financial system by making use of the PEMM model 8
The new Information Management Paradigm Built on Processes 22
Edit
BPMTeca.com is an independent editorial project with the mission to provide quality books and magazines about Business Process Management (BPM - Business Process Management). This editorial focuses on publications that discuss the full scope of BPM from modeling, design, automation and monitoring of business processes.
As a support to self-sustaining process optimization-automation in our organizations 28
A model for Business Process Execution Measurement 35 Page 3
Pedro Robledo Editor and Director of World BPM Magazine
In 2014, it's time to talk about "Internet of Things ( IoTInternet of Things ) and what it means for the future of BPM. Using the definition of Wikipedia, "Internet of Things refers to uniquely identifiable objects and their virtual representations in an Internet-like structure", that in the business world will mean that by 2020 there will be billions of regularly connected devices (sensors) to the Internet. These things or devices will be intelligent, which means a great opportunity of innovation of models and business processes of enterprises and the public sector. IoT could increase global private sector earnings by 21 % between 2014 and 2022, improving productivity and efficiency, improving decision-making in real-time to solve crucial problems and obtaining a increased customer satisfaction. Companies need to be prepared to interact with "these things" to get new business challenges. And, according to the study presented by Cisco, IoT will reach 4.6 billion for the Public Sector in ten years, generating savings, increasing the efficiency of government and improving services for citizens over the next decade. If the organizations want to take advantage of the new opportunities offered by the Internet of Things, they must understand the processes that occur when systems of intelligent devices are connected to a network or between them.
Page 4
During 2013 everyone has spoken about the 4 disruptive technology trends encompassed by the term SMAC: Social, Mobility, Analytics and Cloud. SMAC impacts on processes and process management truly offer competitive advantages through new business opportunities unprecedented innovation. Now, in my point of view the new mantra of 2014 focuses on BPM of Things, where efforts combine to communicate people, processes, data, events and things, to take advantage of the new opportunities offered by the Internet of Things applied to Business Process Management. If we combine SMAC concept with IoT, we will have a new disruptive technology trend of innovation, that we will call SMACT (SMAC + T of intelligent Things). The term "Intelligent Thing" refers to physical objects capable of collecting and transmitting information, to interact in three possible ways human-to-machine (h2m - human with machine), machine-to-machine (m2m - machine to machine), and machine-to-human (m2h - human machine). This connection may create a single or complex event or process. It is essential to relate IoT with BPM in order to manage the automation of processes caused by smart digital things, with great potential to change the business in terms of productivity, opportunity and competitiveness. So we can call this trend as BPMoT (BPM of Things). human-to-machine (h2m - human with machine), machine-to-machine (m2m - machine to machine), and machine-to-human (m2h - human machine). This connection may create a single or complex event or process. It is essential to relate IoT with BPM in order to manage the automation of processes caused by smart digital things, with great potential to change the business in terms of productivity, opportunity and competitiveness. So we can call this trend as BPMoT (BPM of Things).
BPMoT or BPM of Things, can be defined as the application of the business process management discipline (including methods, tools and technology) oriented to continuous improvement of the business processes of an organization, with the traditional participants (people, systems, applications and data) and the new one: the smart digital objects which are connected via internet to exchange information to be processed in a reactive or proactive manner, taking decisions in real time automatically according to business rules for compliance with business objectives. Page 5
With BPM can coordinate and execute events and the vast information generated by the connected devices in real time, triggering the execution of specific tasks that involve people and connected devices. By combining people, processes, data, and things, BPMoT helps companies to create solutions to the challenges ahead to achieve greater competitiveness, greater automation, implementing decisions quickly and get an effective, efficient, transparent and agile performance. According to Gartner, the Industrial Digital Economy will be conducted quickly by machine-to-person, person-to-machine and machine-to-machine , through the Internet of Things (IoT) communication. A market that Gartner predicts will eclipse $ 304,000 million in 2020, with over 30 billion "things" (essentially interconnected sensors). IDC considers that the installed base of IoT in late 2020 is 212 billion "things" globally, including 30.1 billion things connected independently. These forecasts generate some interesting expectations for business if you have the ability to process in real time all available information from the devices to process (Device-To-Process) and from processes to send instructions (Process-To-Device). The application of BPMoT in the organizations offers intelligent and innovative solutions creating new possibilities in all business industries, for example, it provides: • Intelligent Control and Machine Monitoring based on real-time data • Time reduction of malfunctioning equipment • Equipment predictive maintenance to reduce risks, incidents, breakdowns, malfunctions… • Start Equipment Maintenance Processes. • Special Promotions in stores for passengers who have lost a flight. • Provide immediate assistance in an emergency, for example by measuring a portable blood pressure so in the case which should be high dangerous, it creates an alert that automatically assign tasks to medical personnel • Patient Telemonitoring. • Using a device in a medicament box, you can provide a reminder to the patient when he has to take his medicine, and when the box is going to be empty automatically the sensor generates a purchase requisition to the pharmacy. • Contact lenses that measure glucose levels. • Specific diets automation for each piece of cattle. • Analysis of the best time to take milk of a cow. • Integrating sensors in the streets of cities to offer the best people services (available parking on the streets, light controls to be turn on due to poor visibility, failure of traffic lights ... ) and to help the situation of the environment (pollution control, noise...; full garbage collectors...). • Launch of procurement orders automatically. • Traceability of whole lifecycle of plants to make and implement management decisions and optimizing agricultural production. • Request maintenance or repair automatically ( eg. sensors in a vehicle)
Page 6
The value of Internet of Things for Business Process Management, will help private companies and the public sector to become more productive and competitive. Hans Vestberg , CEO of Ericsson, in the MWC (Mobile World Congress) said, "If a person connects to the network, life-changing. But if all things and objects are connected, the world changes." And I would add " If business processes are connected to people, things and objects, business change." We can innovate by taking advantage of the potential of the internet. The business world has to use IoT to implement innovation processes whose results have real application. Legislation has to be agile in order to define the necessary rules to not hinder the progress but keep the balance between personalization, privacy and security.
Page 7
by Calderón Alcalde, Ernesto. MSc in Systems Engineering UNMSM
“In the transformation process, as in life, knowing where you are and have a roadmap is better than to stumble in the dark" Page 8
MichaelHammer
Abstract— Under the acronym BPM (Business Process Management) at the present time we understand it as a discipline of business process management strongly supported by information technologies. In the current approach to BPM, the challenge is to develop agility in business organizations. That is, the ability that has an organization to respond quickly to changes in its environment and the demands of its customers, making changes to their business processes integrated across the entire value-added chain for the customer. There are also proposals that define maturity models in stages as an organization is oriented to an integrated and process management. The number of models proposed for measuring the maturity of business processes have increased, the basis of most of these maturity models has been the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) developed by the Software Engineering Institute of Carnegie Mellon University (Rosemann, 2005). This model was originally developed to assess the maturity of software development processes and is based on the concept of immature and mature processes in software organizations. Dr. Michael Hammer created a maturity model to help executives understand, plan and direct efforts for a process-based transformation. Thus, he identified two major groups of features belonging to the enterprise that are necessary to obtain a good performance: the processes enablers and the capabilities of the company. From both concepts, Hammer designed the Process Model and Enterprise Maturity Model (PEMM). BPM is emerging in the world, however, at present, there was found a lack of case studies about BPM in Peru and a plenty of confusion about what is and what is not BPM even in countries that are more developed and mature BPM, as shown by studies in Spain (Robledo and Laurentiis, 2009) and Chile (Sepulveda and others, 2009)
I. INTRODUCTION Companies need to be sure that their business processes are “mature”, in other words, they need to deliver a high performance but sustainable in time. In order to achieve this goal, they have to develop two types of elements: process facilitators, that operate in the individual processes, and company capabilities, that are applied to complete organizations (Michael Hammer, 2007. Messurement has a large tradition and is a fundamental aspect in any kind of engineering. Organizations can use resulting information to learn from their past with the aim to improve their performance, and get being more predictable. On the other side, to improve the efficiency in an organization, it’s usually necessary to improve its processes. Business processes affect the product quality, and the customer’s satisfaction, which has a fundamental importance in the market. In that sense, many organizations around the world are adopting business management as a way to increase their productivity and achieve more efficient results in a shorten time of answer responding so to their competitors offer. Between the services suppliers, its identified, due to their complex procurement rules, the financial sector, that stands up in the market, besides, the one with the biggest growing in the last years in the Peruvian market. Likewise, with the purpose of measuring the impact of the business process management execution in the organizations and identify their level of maturity, besides the impact and its benefits, it was defined additional constructs to the PEMM model to validate and analyze its dependency, as shown in the next graphic N°1:
Page 9
The Investigation Model included an instrument: a questionnaire divided in four sections, the first one oriented to collect basic data of identification of the sample entities, the second section tried to discover the intention of use, if not done yet, the third section allowed to measure of the processes enablers and the capacities of the company, also it was planned a fourth section to discover the impact of this discipline in the entities that adopted it or the perception of what they expect from the impact in the company. This article is dedicated to the perception and maturity of BPM, where it’s shown in a very exhaustive way the perception and the elements, how the processes enablers and the companies capacities can help as a guide to clarify the definitions, benefits and realities of this management discipline in companies like the peruvian financial entities. In fact, this article shows how is perceived processes management in the financial entities, and also, analyzes the current status and the more specific challenges that have to face Peruvian executives. 1.1. Problem Situation: In the last years, business process improvement is considered essential to achieve a competitive organization. To improve these processes it is necessary to measure them and use the outcoming information to evaluate and subsequently detect the weak points. There is a great initiative diversity of measure in the text books, but most of them have not been applied in a real peruvian corporative environment, this is a relevant point considered to outline the objectives of the present study, this characteristic was obtained with interviews to different experts in the matter in Peru and South America. The isolated use of measuring in an organization doesn’t produce all the desired effect, since; in addition, this must be aligned with the company strategies. For that reason, in this paper the purpose is to frame measures inside an organizational maturity model, HAMMER’s model proposal, Process and Enterprise Maturity Model (PEMM), but, besides “maturity” it’s considered necessary to study the adoption level, since it was supposed that peruvian companies are in a stage prior to initiating a formal maturity path, and this is the intention of the level of use or BPM adoption, the one that determines if this discipline is used or not, which is mainly defined by the CEOs. Therefore, the final objective of the present study, was that the measures of the investigation guide the organizations improving their processes,
Page 10
helping to achieve higher maturity levels, through organized proposals of a BPM Project Strategic Planning and/or a methodological guide to implant BPM Projects.
PEMM Model 1.2. Problem Formultaion: “An organization is as good as its processes are” (Rummbler and Brache), besides its known that with the appearance of internet in the 90’s, the demands of the companies have change dramatically: flexibility and speed are nowadays features necessary for survival. Actually, a client can buy directly for a good price, and just in time, trough internet, besides this, market trends change in a few days and are not restricted to a specific geographic region, if not they take place all around the world, for that reason, BPM is emerging worldwide, as an option to shorten costs, improve quality and production, however, actually in Peru it was found a lack of study of cases in BPM, and also a great confusion about what is and not BPM, as happened years before in other countries, the ones that now have a good grade of development and maturity in BPM, as is demonstrated by the studies in Spain (Robledo and Laurentiis, 2009) and Chile (Sepúlveda and others, 2009). Perhaps the term “Operative Excellence”, is one of the BPM objetives that may create confusión because the BPM market is in a state of maturity respect to technology, but quite immature when it comes to implanting. We can asure that BPM is the right vehicle to achieve that companies go forward in the path to excellence, since excellence is not something achievable in a specific period of time, in fact, there are different maturity levels to overcome (Laurentiis, 2010). Therefore reaserching was planned with the following formulation of the principal problem: “It is unknown the BPM grade of maturity, the adoption of this discipline and in what meassure it impacts the operative excellence of the Peruvian Financial System (SFP)”. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation article was developed through a mixed methodology (quantitative and qualitative) to determine the BPM Grade of Maturity in the Entities of the Peruvian Financial System, and that in the investigation course it was found necessary to evaluate the BPM adoption level, finally it was proposed a practical design of a BPM Projects Strategic Planning, as well as the adoption of a guide to implement this kind of projects, with the purpose of outline a path to follow in the path to maturity. This it how the following objectives were planned: Page 11
The general objective that was intended to achieve with the development of this research study was:
Have knowledge of the BPM maturity level, its adoption and the measure of its impact in the operative excellence in the entities of the Peruvian Financial System (SFP). Likewise, it was planned the following specific objectives: 1.- Determine the maturity level of the Corporative Capabilities, as well as its impact in the operative excellence and in the BPM maturity in the entities of the Peruvian Financial System. 2.- Determine the maturity level in the process enablers, as well as its impact in the operative excellence and in the BPM maturity in the entities of the Peruvian Financial System. 3.- Determine the BPM adoption level and its impact in the BPM maturity in the entities of the Peruvian Financial System. 4.- Define a tool to plan and implement BPM projects. It’s important to outline that this investigation refers a matter associated to the organizations current reality and its outcomes are useful as a base to others with the aim to positioning properly with relation to their present and future strategies. Therefore, this article abstract of the investigation, has the aim of being original, since the use of Business Process Management by the Entities of the Peruvian Financial System is a topic that remains unexplored, despite of its contribution to the operational excellence in the mentioned entities.
1.3. Importance of the Investigation: In Porter’s words, a company only can beat its rivals by keeping a sustainable difference. Therefore, the company must deliver more value to its customers than the other market competitors, or create a unique value that the others don’t have and at a lower cost. One way to achieve this difference is the “operational effectiveness” (Porter, 2007). This term is also identified in the Arnoldo Delta Model, “Delta Project” (Hax, 2003), where it describes the identification, in addition to the preponderance of the role of technologies for implementing the strategies, there are 3 essential processes required in the execution of a strategy: “Operational Efficacy”, “Customer Orientation”, and “Innovation”. In the same way Richard A. D’Aveni, reveals us that we are living in the “hypercompetition” era, where he describes that: meanwhile cost and quality, choosing the right time and the knowledge, the strengths and financial resources have played always a role in the competition; actually the difference resides in the speed and aggressivity to interact in those fields (D’aveni 1994). Therefore quick and direct actions to reduce costs, implanting shared services centers, or procurements of outsourcing use to be quick and effective solutions according to Laurentiis. But if we want to generate a structural solid base, it is important to keep the point of view of our processes and Enterprise resources, which ones must be simplify, automatize from end-to-end, and manage properly, creating a process management and continue improving in our organizations culture (Laurentiis, 2009).
Page 12
1.4. Investigaci坦n Questions The methodology can be seen as a general knowledge and set of skills, which researchers need to orient the researching process, take opportune decisions, select concepts, hypothesis, technics and appropriate data. So, we have that according to Dankhe and his classification model, the current investigation primarily would be descriptive, it was oriented to measure and evaluate dimensions or components of the process management in the financial system, as the author of this paper indicates from a scientific point of view, describing is measuring and besides its concerning is explaining why this BPM discipline is not being adopted, in a mayor scale or with a structured proposal to assure minimizing the risk of failure. There are some criteria to plan properly a problem, in that sense we defined one main problem and 3 specific ones. 1.4.1. General Problem The current paper looked to respond the following general questioning: Which is the BPM grade of maturity, the BPM adoption and how much they impact in the operative excellence in Peruvian financial system entities (SFP)? 1.4.2. Specific Problems To achieve such result it was intended to define the following specific problems: 多What is the Corporative Capacities maturity level, and how much they impact in the operative excellence, as well as in the Peruvian Financial System Entities? 多Which is the maturity level of the process enablers, and to what extend they impact in the operative excellence and in the BPM maturity level in the Peruvian financial system entities? 多Which is the BPM adoption level and to what extend they impact in the BPM maturity level in the Peruvian financial system entities? 1.5. Instrumentation The sample we took was: not a probabilistic one, the probability sampling was too expensive so we resorted to non-probabilistic methods, even being aware that they do not provide certainty to make generalizations, because there is no assurance that the extracted sample is representative, since that not all the population subjects has the same probability of being elected, however the number was important to cover the different entities level in the SFP, therefore when it comes of a very dynamic and complex sector it provides a fertile land for gathering and data exploitation geared to achieve the final objective of this researching paper. So same the study has being done through the data analysis obtained from a survey. The survey used is the exploratory type, done with the purpose of obtaining mayor knowledge about the subject of study (Forza, 2002). The survey was designed based in the criteria of cost, time and error minimizing associated to sampling. In that sense the survey design was planned so: 0. Perspective of the Questionary. (2) 1. Generals. (7) 2. Adoption. (10) Maturity.
Page 13
3. Processes enablers (53) 4. Capacities of the Enterprise (54) 5. Impact (7)
II. RESULTS
2.1. Basics Results:
Charge in the Company The 54.5% of the surveyed had a middle range executive charge, in a minor percentage its seen managers, and heads of area.
Perspective of the answers
Coverage of Selected Institutions
Page 14
Is there a BPM area in you company? On knowledge of BPM and its adoption, it was identified that 100% of the surveyed said to have BPM knowledge, however 45.5% have not adopted this discipline, besides there is a 27.3 % with no intention of adopt BPM, if not until the short term.
BPM Objectives in your company? So same there was gathered the objectives that the surveyed wanted to satisfy, this is viewed in the graphic, where, since it’s a multiple option question, 81.8% of the surveyed indicated that would use BPM to improve management. 2.2. Descriptive statistics:
Research was developed in a group of entities from the public and private sectors, since both determine the Peruvian financial sector.
Page 15
In the first component of the research model the BPM adoption was analyzed, it was constructed from two (2) variables, perceived utility and the perceived easiness of usage. As we see, it can be concluded that more than 60% of the surveyed indicated that they find it useful, at same point, the idea of adopting BPM in their institutions, as shown in the following graphic:
Regarding to the perception of easiness of usage, it can be concluded, almost equal to the perception of utility, that over 70% of the surveyed agrees that BPM would be easy to use in their institution, as shown in the following graphic:
As we can see mostly, at least 90% of the people surveyed showed a positive attitude towards the adoption of BPM in their institution.
Page 16
2.3. Maturity-Entrepreneurial Capacities: Companies can use their capacities to plan and evaluate the progress in process based transformations, so from there, it can be designed a improvement path, in that sense the current research correlated the individual perception of the responsible person versus the reality captured trough a questionnaire, this results are shown as follows:
• • • • • • •
Five (5) from eleven (11) companies have not adopted BPM. Nine (9) companies don’t have a BPM Area. The perspective to the use of BPM is mostly positive. The perspective to the impact of BPM is mostly positive. Companies consider being in the maturity level 1 and 2 (Initial Mature and Some Mature) relating to their capacities. Five companies (5) considered themselves being in level 1, and so other five considered being in level 2 relating to their capacities. None of the eleven (11) entities agreed have completely reach some maturity level relating to their capacities.
Page 17
2.9. Maturity-Process Enabler: Basically those are the characteristics that determine the capacity of correct functioning of a process for a period of time (life cycle), the Hammer model considers of main importance to develop them as much as the entrepreneurial capacities, that is why its important to measure its maturity, in that sense this research correlated the perception versus reality, capturing it through a questionnaire, the following chart shows the abstract of the questionnaire:
• Five companies (5) considered themselves really being in level 1, and so same other five (5) considered being in level 2, but besides those, a company considered being in level 3 in relation to its process enablers. • None of the eleven (11) entities got to be completely at same point of maturity level in relation to its enablers. • Companies consider being in maturity level 1, 2 and 3 (Initial Mature, Some Mature and Mature) in relation to its processes enablers. CONCLUSIONS They are as follows: The field research was limited to entities of the Peruvian financial system. Page 18
The survey done in the selected companies, allowed us to have a complete vision of their BPM maturity situation and so its correlation with the impact in the operative excellence, as it was raised initially in this paper hypothesis, as well as it let us appreciate the attitude towards the adoption of this discipline. In that sense the planted hypothesis were accepted or rejected: Empiric evidence supports 2 of 3 of the research hypothesis. Therefore, the proposed hypothesis is approved: “Financial organizations with no adequate entrepreneurial capacities have a basic maturity level and therefore its operative excellence has a negative impact”. Besides, the other hypothesis was approved: ““Financial organizations with no adequate process enablers have a basic maturity level and therefore its operative excellence has a negative impact”. On the other side, the third hypothesis was rejected: “Financial organizations that show a positive intention of use, adopt, as a minority, BPM as management discipline of their processes, therefore BPM has a positive impact”. Finally to prove the present general hypothesis it was used: Entrepreneurial capacities analysis (PEMM), descriptive analysis, analysis of correspondence of multi-capacities and analysis of correspondence of multi-capacities entrepreneurial-impact, process enablers analysis (PEMM), analysis of correspondence of multi-process enablers and analysis of correspondence of multi-process enablersimpact and analysis of correspondence of multi-adoption impact. Inferential analysis proved that none of the analyzed financial entities achieved to be at some level in relation to their entrepreneurial capacities and processes enablers, therefore they would have a default basic maturity level which has a negative impact in their operative excellence. In conclusion, empirical evidence supports the research general hypothesis; therefore the referred hypothesis is approved. “The BPM maturity level in the peruvian financial system is in an initial degree or not even adopted, this fact has a negative impact in their processes’ operative excellence”. Therefore we can conclude: The maturity level in the analyzed financial entities is basic: If it is true that there is an intention of use, in the praxis this is not reflected, since just a single financial entity has adopted it, this fact generates a negative impact in the operative excellence of the others that postpone its adoption. So same: 1. The capacities maturity level is basic and has a negative impact in the operative excellence and entities maturity of the SFP. 2. The process enablers’ maturity level is basic and has a negative impact in the operative excellence and entities maturity of the SFP. 3. Financial entities of the SFP show a BPM positive intention of use, but the majority of them has not adopted it as management discipline, therefore the minority that adopted it, had a positive impact.
Page 19
Management, REFERENCES
DE MELLO, PAULO IVAN: “Impactos da Adopcao da estao por procesos em empresas seguradoras brasileiras” PEREZ FERNANDEZ , JOSE ANTONIO: “Gestión por procesos”, España, 2010 BANDARA Y OTROS: “Factores que dificultan los proyectos BPM”, Australia, 2007. BRAVO, JUAN: “Gestión de Procesos”, Ed. evolución, Santiago de Chile, 2010 of
Business
Process
Management
Professionals (ABPMP): “Guide to the Business Process
Management
Common
Body
of
Knowledge”, Chicago, 2009 CLUB-BPM: “Apuntes BPM Conceptos. BPM Business Process Management - Gestión de Procesos de Negocio”, España, 2009.
Edition:
Practical
Guidelines to Successful Implementations”. Ed.
HAMMER MICHAEL: “The Process Audit”.
Association
Second
Butterworth-Heinemann, 2008 NOY VIAMNTES Y PEREZ: “La actualidad de la Gestión de Procesos de Negocio: Business Process Management
(BPM)”,2010
en
http://
renia.cujae.edu.cu/index.php/revistacientifica/ article/view/66 PORTER, MICHAEL.: Estrategia y ventaja competitiva, Barcelona, Deusto, 2006. ROBLEDO Y LAURENTIIS: “El estado del BPM y las tendencias en España”, España, 2009. http://www.club-bpm.com/Noticias/not00017.htm ROBLEDO Y LAURENTIIS: “Estudio Nacional de Business Process Management”, España, 2010. En http://www.club-bpm.com/Noticias/art00110.htm SEGUEL, RICARDO: "Predicciones para BPM 2010 y más".
BPM
Chile
Group
en
http://
www.bpmchile.org/ D' AVENI, RICHARD: Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering, New York, SIGIFREDO, LAENGLE: “Business Process ManageFree Press, 1994. ment (BPM), desafíos de los procesos de negocio DIAZ PIRAQUIVE: “Gestión de procesos de negocio y de las tecnologías de la información”, Chile, BPM (Business Process Management), TICs y creci2007 en http://sigifredo.laengle.googlepages.com/ miento empresarial ¿Qué es BPM y cómo se articula home con el crecimiento empresarial?”,2008 en http:// SEPULVEDA Y OTROS:”Investigación Nacional sobre www.urosario.edu.co/urosario_files/72/723d0023Gestión de Procesos de Negocio”, Santiago de 7cb6-446d-8474-d4f2c91ca10f.pdf Chile, 2009 en:http://www.cetiuc.cl/ BANDARA Y OTROS: “Factores que dificultan los proestudios_cetiuc/ yectos BPM”, Australia, 2007. SEPULVEDA Y OTROS:” Estudio Nacional sobre BuGARIMELLA Y OTROS: “Introducción a BPM para siness Process Management”, Santiago de Chile, Dummies” Ed. Wiley Publishing, Inc., Estados 2010, en http://www.cetiuc.cl/estudios_cetiuc/ Unidos, 2008. SENGE, PETER. : La quinta disciplina, Buenos Aires, HAX, ARNOLDO: El Modelo Delta – Un Nuevo Marco Granica y Vergara, 1992. Estratégico, Estados Unidos, 2003. SEPULVEDA, HERMES (Marketing & Sales Manager HOWARD, SMITH Y FINGAR, PETER: “Business en CIO, Colombia): "BPM se está posicionando en Process Management: The Third Wave”. Ed: el mundo como el modelo de gestión organizacioMeghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa, 2003. nal por excelencia", Colombia, 2010, en http:// JESTON, JOHN Y NELIS JOHAN: “Business Process www.club-bpm.com/Noticias/art00112.htm Page 20
Page 21
Michael McClellan Principal at Collaboration Synergies Inc
George Barlow Vice President of BPM and Cloud Solutions for AgilePoint
Page 22
It is time to re-evaluate how we look at our information management toolset and examine our business from a process perspective. Information silos cannot be accepted and information can no longer be departmentally owned. We need to orchestrate information into strategic and sustainable competitive advantage processes that support the extended enterprise and include a wide range of stakeholders across the value chain. Production Process Management (PPM) describes a concept of applying business process management design and tools to the areas of manufacturing plant and supply chain activity management within and across the extended enterprise. The primary idea behind PPM is to center thinking on business functions and activities versus what software package or combination of software packages might be applied. Processes are designed to follow chronological steps of how you want to run the business by connecting and supporting predefined, sequenced events with the correct information in a role-based form for the intended user. A process may be fully electronic, fully or partially manual, or a combination of either. One key thought is that the process is specific to, and alterable to fit, the given business requirement. These illustrations provide an overview of the typical application hierarchy in most manufacturing companies today. Illustration 1 shows the usual enterprise level applications, including Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), Product Lifecycle Management (PLM), Supply Chain Management (SCM), etc. Beneath that is the integration layer made up of mostly custom software intended to bridge the gap between the plant application activities and the needs of the enterprise systems. The next lower level is a symbolic display of plant applications used in manufacturing. These are typically stand-alone, departmental data-centric systems. Beneath that are the machine level programmable controllers, other control systems and sensors. The bottom layer suggests the specific operational requirements of the local plant, which could be based on things like product, tradition or labor agreement.
Illustration 1. Typical applications at the business level Page 23
Illustration 2. Process Software Layer
Illustration 2 shows the same hierarchy except the custom software integration layer has been replaced with a process software layer. Instead of using traditional software programming development tools to create and deploy new functions, process development m od elin g t ool s are u sed to collaboratively develop the process using standard modeling language BPMN 2.0. The modeled processes will be supported by data retrieved from the existing applications as part of the process execution functions.
Production Process Management (PPM) describes a concept of applying business process management design and tools to the areas of manufacturing plant and supply chain activity management within and across the extended enterprise.
Page 24
Illustration 3 shows an example of a simple production process where the task is to retrieve the amount of scrap produced from each plant at the end of each shift and calculate the scrap percentage of the finished product produced on that shift. The plant is required to weigh each item of scrap and collect the shift total in a scalemounted PLC. The PPM platform will initiate this process automatically at shift end by collecting the scrap and finished goods data and making the calculation. The information is then sent to the ERP system as part of the financial and metrics measurement administrative processes. A major aircraft manufacturer is planning to link its enterprise level applications such as PLM and ERP, and suppliers’ enterprise information systems, to the plant floor using process technology. The most obvious advantages include enterprisewide incremental process deployment and process revision with minimum disruption to the user; the Gartner described build-to-change strategy rather than a build-to-last approach.
Illustration 3. Example of a simple manufacturing process Page 25
PPM Justification In multi-plant, multi-product companies, there is a strong need to blend managerial responsibilities and information management techniques into a systems network as a set of dynamic but consistent processes. PPM answers these needs with effective results. 1.
System
management through a process layer environment is less
disruptive for system users. floor
or
supply
chain
No more rip and replace to upgrade plant
applications
as
processes
can
be
deployed
incrementally and at the enterprise level or plant level. 2.
Applied business processes are enterprise global standards with granular changes at the business unit and/or plant level.
3.
Processes provide an individualized user interface that is capable of compliance and validation confirmation.
4.
A less costly method to accomplish information exchange without direct systems integration, providing optimization of business processes within and between entities and easy couple/decouple information sharing.
5.
The production process layer is proprietary to the user company, providing the basis for building a sustainable competitive advantage through production process design and execution.
6.
The time it takes to create an application using traditional programming methods is frequently 5 – 10 times longer than making one with process technology and modifying existing process applications as enterprise requirements change is typically magnitudes faster.
Illustration 4. Simplified Architectural Elements Page 26
Applying PPM A major food products company has recently launched a PPM initiative to connect the enterprise ERP system to 80-plus manufacturing facilities. Each facility has the usual complement of application silos (OEE, scheduling, MES, maintenance, etc.) but the PPM objective is to build value through processes that can be deployed to a number of plants rather than developing integration code and one-off information tools for each facility. In another food company PPM is planned to build a recipe package by retrieving data from four enterprise system sources. The ERP system begins the process by assigning a production order to a plant. Based on the product and the plant location, the PPM is to retrieve the correct production information specific to that instance of production from four enterprise systems, and download the recipe package to the plant. Later PPM versions will see production parameters (i.e. oven temperature, conveyor speed) directly loaded to devices and production manager’s devices. A major household battery manufacturer has been pursuing a process approach based on a less complicated three level architecture seen in Illustration 4. This is easier, simpler and less costly than traditional point-to-point integration methods.
Page 27
by Josep Mª Cos i Riera Managing Director Proceedit “The BPaaS Company”
Page 28
Abstract Potential productivity gains that can exceed a factor of 3, suppose a huge driving force that guides organizations to consider the massive optimization and automation of their business processes through new procedural methodologies and technologies that have just recently reached sufficient maturity. However, in the way we are now beginning to go, and that will be the task of a full generation, there are brakes and barriers that abort not a few of the initiatives which are beginning to be undertaken. The recent emergence of new collaborative business models and forms of service of the automated business processes from the cloud at low monthly costs and on demand, without minimums or permanencies, open a threshold of hope to overcome difficulties and achieve the goal for all types of organizations, not just corporations and large companies but also small and medium size ones. A collaborative BPaaS model as a support optimization-automation in our organizations
to
self-sustaining
process
Organizations of any type, although sometimes they are not aware of it, work through processes, whether they are explicit, standardized and formal or, in many cases, especially in small and medium organizations, operated on a non- explicitly, nor standardized nor formal way but performed according to the particular form of work of each employee, and to the control and managing style each supervisor and manager is applying. In most cases, these processes are carried on transactional and registration applications, forming isolated silos of content (data, documents, emails and other content) with little interaction between them, unless it is performed manually by the users, again on their own, without applying clear, formal, homogenous, reliably reported, transparent and auditable rules. As we can see in the attached figure, we can say in short that, essentially, employees are the ones driving the organization business processes, and to control and direct them to align their actions with corporate policies and standards represents an arduous, methodic and continued effort of its supervisors and managers, consuming them on it a large percentage of its valuable time and energy.
Page 29
OPEX and BPM as methodologies and BPMS-SOA as mature support technologies, have provided the ability to reveal, standardize, formalize, optimize and automate business processes in organizations in such a way that they can be conducted aligned, transparently, efficiently and with little supervision effort (only by exception) and in accordance with the necessary requirements to adapt our organizations to major change that involves moving from a traditional pyramidal and imperative organization type, towards a new kind of modern extended or collaborative organization type, whose major differentials characteristics are shown in the following table:
In this new scenario, as shown in the following figure, users are no longer governing the business processes of organizations, but it is the newly created procedural-transactional system itself does, behaving according to the business rules determined at any time by the management of the organization and which are broadcast in real time to the operational level. It might therefore be thought that those organizations that do not work excellently with optimized and automated business processes, it is because either they don’t have adequate information about the opportunities offered by the state of the art of the technology or because, for whatever reason, they have decided not use them or postpone its implementation.
Page 30
As usual, nothing is as simple as it first appears. Indeed, reveal, standardize, formalize, optimize and automate a particular business process in an organization, applying the traditional customer-provider relation model of the IT industry, it can represent being on the lowest range, adding the costs of business consulting, technology consulting, licensing of support applications, servers and other communications and security infrastructures required, an investment of around SDRs 100,000 per business process (about â‚Ź 120,000 or US$ 150,000), and generate a sustained annual impact on the exploitation account as per the operational, support and maintenance costs, of around SDRs 20,000 per year (about â‚Ź 24,000 or US$ 30,000). This should not be an insurmountable obstacle, since each business process automized generates big savings which fully justify the investment (IRRs > 50 %), except for the fact that a medium-size organization should optimize, automate, deploy and maintain about 200 different business processes in order to achieve an acceptable operational efficiency. According to the above figures we see that, in the current scenario of IT Industry, the total investment for this effort would reach, in average, around 20 million SDRs per organization (200 business processes multiplied per 100,000 SDRs per business process), and the related operating costs would raise to about 4 million SDRs per year, evidently, fortunes accessible only to large companies and corporations. And so, the evidence tells us that only large companies and corporations are able to deploy automated business processes on a massive way, because for them: 1) investment is not a barrier by having access to sources of almost unlimited and low cost funding; and 2) they have an extremely important advantage: being for them the business processes automation costs of the same order as those of a medium or small business, the number of rotations of the processes (instances per month) is much higher, then the savings they get are much more elevated and, therefore, the Page 31
amortization of the investments to be made and the compensation of the induced operating cost are achieved much faster, and then, massive BPM deployment is affordable and sustainable, even with the high investments and operating costs involved when applying the traditional IT Industry business model. Is everything lost for SMBs and thus they must resign themselves to stay at the queue of the level of excellence and therefore suffering every day with growing impotence a rapid drop of competitiveness in relation to large companies and corporations, and then be inevitably expelled or relegated to small local or ultra-specialized market niches or, in order to survive, they must be forced to subject their employees and managers to neo-medieval working conditions? Fortunately, the answer is emphatically no! Indeed, a collaborative model for the development and distribution of automated business processes, applying methods of standardization and therefore allowing their reuse and licensing at low, variable and proportional costs according to the resources consumed, combining it with the service of the solutions in a BPaaS (Business Process as a Service) modality from the cloud, without barriers, minimums or permanencies, enables small and medium sized organizations to access to the same level of efficiency that large organizations and corporations are able to, and therefore they can compete on equal terms with them. Let's put it in numbers, with the model described above, a personal or automated task, as part of a business process served on BPaaS mode, can cost, on average, about 0.03 SDRs per BPM task. According to our experience, and as we have reflected in the attached calculation table, you can count with an average saving of around 2.1 manminutes per BPM process task (including personal and automated tasks), and assuming with an average total hourly cost of staff of let’s say SDRs 15, the average monetary saving by BPM task become around SDRs 0.52 which leads to an average net savings of about SDRs 0.49 per BPM task performed, equivalent to around 0.59 ₏ or 0.74 US$.
Page 32
In other words, if the organization hires the service of an automated business process on the BPaaS modality described before, and pays for it at the end of the month according to the actually consumed resources, before finishing the first operating week, it has already amortized (much before to have paid it) the monthly service of the process and still has more than three long weeks to accumulate net savings, therefore, applying this model, there is no CAPEX nor OPEX to be considered, only net savings to be obtained. We see how, with collaborative models based on co-development, standardization, reuse, co-distribution and resource sharing in the cloud, the deployment of BPM business processes in an organization, however small it may be, can be massive, affordable and self-sustainable, requiring no investment nor operational costs but obtaining a high stream of saved net cash flow.
In our opinion, there are no excuses or barriers anymore to initiate the journey of optimize and automate our business processes in order to achieve excellence in the efficiency of our operations and to obtain and maintain the consequent self-sustaining competitive advantage that will allow SMBs to fight on equal footing with larger companies and corporations.
Reference Documents: “proceedit – Value Proposal for our Customers”. “proceedit - The BBaaS Company”. “proceedit – An Innovative Model for the Massive, Affordable and Self-Sustainable BPM Deployment”. “proceedit - OPEX-BPM-SOA-µBPO Integrated Services”. “proceedit – IT Paradigm Change”. “proceedit - Analysis and Prospective of the BPM Market at 5 Years”. All above documents are available by request to josep.cos@proceedit.com
Page 33
Glossary: BPaaS: Applies for “Business Process as a Service”, which is a modality of using automating business process applications on the cloud paying the customer user a variable monthly fee depending on the consumed resources (named users, tasks performed, documents treated, images scanned, volume of data and documents occupied …). BPM: Applies for “Business Process Management” or management-through-processes method which helps to improve the company's performance in a more and more complex and ever-changing environment.
television and telephones. OPEX: Applies for “OPerating EXpenditures “, which is an ongoing cost for running a product, business, or system including the cost of workers and facility expenses such as rent and utilities. This term can also apply for “OPerational EXcellence”, which is an element of organizational leadership that stresses the application of a variety of principles, systems, and tools toward the sustainable improvement of key performance metrics. Much of this management philosophy is based on earlier continuous improvement methodologies, such as Lean Manufacturing, Six Sigma, and Scientific Management.
BPMS: Applies for “Business Process Management System” or “Business Process Management Suite”, which are informatics tools or applications on which they are automated, operated and monitored the SDR: Applies for “Special Drawing Rights”, which are supplementary foreign exchange reserve assets business processes of the organizations. defined and maintained by the International Monetary CAPEX: Applies for “CAPital EXpenditures “, Fund (IMF). Not a currency, but a basket of currencies which are expenditures creating future benefits. A composed by euros, Japanese yen, pounds sterling, capital expenditure is incurred when a business spends and US dollars, can act as very stable reference money either to buy fixed assets or to add to the value currency for international trade operations. The of an existing fixed asset with a useful life extending exchange against € and US$ use to be around 1.2 €/ SDR and 1.5 US$/SDR. The daily exchange rates can beyond the taxable year. be obtained at: http://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/ Cash Flow: Is the balance of movement data/rms_five.aspx of money into and out of a business, project, or financial product. It is usually measured during a SOA: Applies for “Service-Oriented Architecture” or “Service-Oriented Applications”, which is a software specified, limited period of time. design and a software architecture design pattern based on discrete pieces of software providing Cloud: Or Cloud computing refers to network-based application interoperability functionality as services to services, which appear to be provided by real server other applications. This is known as Servicehardware, and are in fact served up by virtual orientation. It is independent of any vendor, product or hardware, simulated by software running on one or technology. more real machines. Such virtual servers do not physically exist and can therefore be moved around and scaled up (or down) on the fly without affecting SMB: Applies for “Small and Medium Business” also the end user - arguably, rather like a cloud. call SME or “Small and Medium Enterprises”, which IRR: Applies for “Internal Rate of Return”, which is are companies whose personnel numbers fall below a rate of return used in capital budgeting to measure certain limits. Small enterprises outnumber large and compare the profitability of investments. The term companies by a wide margin and also employ many internal refers to the fact that its calculation does not more people. incorporate environmental factors (e.g., the interest rate or inflation). IT: Applies for “Information Technology”, which is the industry sector covering the application of computers and telecommunications equipment to store, retrieve, transmit and manipulate data, often in the context of a business or other enterprise. The term is commonly used as a synonym for computers and computer networks, but it also encompasses other information distribution technologies such as
Page 34
By Andrea Delgado (Universidad de La República, Uruguay), Francisco Ruiz (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, España) y Ignacio García (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, España)
Abstract: “You can’t manage (to improve) what you can’t measure” is an old business principie defining the importance of measurement for improvement. In this article we present a materialization of this principle: a model to guide the measurement of business process execution in the context of a continuous improvement cycle. It is only an intellectual tool but we think it can be very useful to face the complexity of this challenge. Main elements of the model are: a list of measurable concepts and goals related with BP execution; a set of predefined measures obtained applying the GQM method from these goals; and a novel way to classify visually the measures using a 3D space (granularity level of data recorded in log files, execution views or focus, aspects of the Devil’s quadrant).
Page 35
Introduction According to (Gartner, 2011) “organizations carry out BPM projects in order to improve one or more business processes”. Execution measurement becomes the enabler towards understanding and controlling the real occurrences of BPs in the organization to establish a continuous BP improvement culture (OMG, 2008). Measurement of BPs execution provides the basis for analyzing the real behaviour in the organization, helping detect deviations from the planned behaviour, which will lead to finding improvement opportunities for the BPs. However, there is a general lack of an integrated view containing the complete information needed to analyze BPs execution including information about systems execution, to provide the business area with the needed operational support. With this goal in mind we have developed MINERVA [1], a framework integrating (Delgado et al., 2013):
i. ii. iii.
the realization of BPs by means of services with a model-driven approach— using SoaML - and a methodology, providing support for their traceability and the agilely introduction of improvements; the definition, implementation, collection and calculation of execution measures, for both BPs and services execution, that are presented in an integrated view which allows business people to find improvement opportunities in BPs; and a guide and improvement activities to carry out the integration of improvements, both in BPs and services, to help achieve the business goals defined in the organization as well as the specific ones for each BP.
In this article we focus the second issue, always in the context of a continuous BP improvement cycle which we have extended with specific measurement and improvement activities (see figure 1).
Business Process Execution Measurement Model (BPEMM) A key part of MINERVA is BPEMM, a help to support the improvement effort in the organization, providing a set of execution measures for measuring BPs execution that aim to relate it with the business and BP goals defined by the organization. In the context of continuous improvement of BPs the use of BPEMM is when carrying out new execution measurement activities included into each stage of the BP lifecycle (figure 1): ‘select execution measures’ activity during the ‘design & analysis’ stage, ‘implement execution measures collection’ activity during t he ‘configuration’ stage, ‘collect execution measures’ activity during the ‘enactment stage’, and ‘analyze execution measurement results’ activity during the ‘evaluation’ stage.
[1] http://alarcos.esi.uclm.es/minerva/
Page 36
Figure 1. MINERVA BP improvement life cycle, based on (Weske, 2007)
BPEMM is defined to be used by (figure 2): a. business people to select the execution measures they want to obtain from each BP execution based on the predefined set of goals it provides; b. developers to implement the selected measures into the BPs and services implementation, and also to collect the needed data from their execution; and another time c. business people to analyze the measurement results that are provided based on the data collected.
Figure 2. BPEMM use Turing the BP improvement cycle Page 37
To provide traceability from the execution measurement results to the defined goals in the organization BPEMM has been defined applying the GQM paradigm (Basili, 1992), which allows business Goals for the organization to be defined, Questions to define how each goal will be evaluated to be formulated, and Metrics/measures to answer the questions to be established. Execution measures in BPEMM are specified differentiating into base measures, derived measures and indicators applying the following standardized definitions (García et al., 2006): • Base measure (or direct measure): a measure of an attribute with no dependence upon any other measure, and whose value can be obtained directly. • Derived measure: a measure derived from other base and/or derived measures whose value is calculated by means of a function. • Indicator: a measure whose value is qualitative and which is obtained applying an analysis model. For instance. Indicators are defined to support decision making. In BP execution, base measures correspond to data that can be obtained directly from the execution event log, for instance, ‘duration of an activity instance’. Derived measures are valuated using mathematical functions, for instance, ‘duration of a BP case’ is equal to the sum of ‘duration of an activity instance’ for all activities inside the BP. The analysis model defining an indicator is formed by one or more decision criteria, defining ranks using threshold values. For instance, ‘speed of a BP case’ will be ‘fast’ whether ‘duration of a BP case’ is less than 1 minute, ‘middle’ whether it is between 1 and 3 minutes, or ‘slow’ in any other case. In BPEMM we use the ProM [2] metaphor of semaphores to assign colours to three ranks with the following meaning: “Green” for OK, “Yellow” for Warning and “Red” for Stop (problems). BPEMM have been extended specifically to measure the execution of BPs implemented by services, so execution measures in BPEMM are grouped into three views: Generic BP execution, Lean BP execution and Services execution, where the first groups together measures that can be applied to any kind of BP, the second includes measures to detect ‘waste elements’ such as rework loops, and the third includes specific measures for services execution when supporting BPs. Other elements have been integrated in BPEMM such as the “devil’s quadrant” aspects (Reijers, 2003) of time, cost, flexibility and quality, as a way to facilitate the organization of measures. The use of these dimensions help analyze the trade-offs that have to be taken into account when designing or redesigning a BP, since changes in one dimension can negatively impact another, i.e. removing an activity can improve the duration of the BP but can negatively affect its quality. A three level hierarchy for measures has been also defined regarding the granularity of BPs execution: activity instance, each BP case, and BP model (all BP cases for the same BP model) (see figure 3). At the bottom level measures for each activity instance are registered; in the middle level these measures are combined to calculate measures for each corresponding BP case, and finally in the top level the BP case measures are combined to calculate the measures for the BP, such as averages or percentages, among others. Each level then, corresponds to the differentiated elements that are registered in BPs execution log files.
[2] http://www.promtools.org/ Page 38
Figure 3. Hierarchy of granularity levels.
In order to facilitate the use, all the set of measures is organized in a three dimensional space (<granularity level>, <execution view>,<Devil’s Quadrant aspect>) named ‘The BPEMM Cube’. In this way a concrete measure is viewed as a point of the space. For instance, measure m1 in figure 4 corresponds to the point (BP case, Generic BP, Time).
Figure 4. The BPEMM Cube (a visual three-dimensional taxonomy of measures)
Page 39
In current version of BPEMM we have identified 26 goals related with 19 ‘measurable concepts’ of interest in the context of BP execution, which are shown in table 1. For each one of these goals GQM method is applied in order to identify relevant questions and the associated measures with whose values we can respond the questions. The current set of execution measures of BPEMM is based on existing definitions we have found in the relevant literature - (Laguna and Marklund, 2005) and others - adding some new ones. Also BPEMM is fully extensible and practitioners can add new measures. Business staff is an integral part of the whole improvement effort, which must be also supported by the IT people to provide the technical support needed for the measurement activities and the implementation, collection and calculation of the execution measures. To carry out this work it is very advisable to use tools (BAM, process mining, …), specially when calculating values of complex derived measures and of indicators. For this objective we have developed a specific plugin of ProM (figure 5).
Figure 5. ProM BPEMM plug-in example showing ‘for each BP case’ option.
Page 40
Execution View
Generic
Measurable Concept
Definition
Goals
Throughput Time (TT)
Total time from the moment in which a BP case is initiated to its completion
Min TT, ciency
Max effi-
Capacity
Number of BP cases per unit of time that the BP can handle, for resources (bottlenecks)
Max capacity, tlenecks
Min bot-
Resources
Tangible assets necessary to perform activities within a BP
Min quantity, zation
Max utili-
Cost
Of human resources to produce a good or deliver a service (labour cost)
Min cost
Path execution
Successful path execution (i.e. charging credit card) vs. unsuccessful path (i.e. charged rejected)
Max successful, Min unsuccessful
Final state
State of BP ending, apart from successful or unsuccessful (i.e. normally, aborted, cancelled)
Max normal, abnormal
Quality
External: user satisfaction with the product or process, internal: condition of working in BP
Max external and internal quality
Flexibility
Ability to react to changes, i.e. resources executing tasks, process handling cases, change workloads, change structure
Max flexibility, Min time for introducing changes
Rework
Loop in the BP with control specifying criteria to allow a job to continue processing
Min execution of rework loops
Value-adding activities
Activities essential for the BP to meet customer's expectations
Max value-adding activities
Non value-adding activities
Activities that does not add value to the customer
Min non value-adding activities
Defects / errors
Defects/errors in process/products causes repair, rework and waste
Min defects/ errors
Response Time
Guaranteed time interval for the execution of the response of an event
Guarantee a defined response time
Throughput
Number of event responses completed over a given observation interval
Guarantee a defined throughput
Capacity
Maximum achievable throughput without violating specified responses time
Guarantee a defined capacity
Availability
Service readiness for usage
Guarantee a defined availability
Reliability
Service ability to keep operating over time
Guarantee defined reliability
Confidentiality
Property that data be inaccessible to unauthorized users
Guarantee defined confidentiality
Integrity
Property that the data be resistant to unauthorized modification
Guarantee defined integrity
Min
Lean
Services
Table 1. Measurable concepts and Goals in BPEMM Page 41
Measures Next we present the set of execution measures included in BPEMM, classified in the three execution views we have defined: Generic BP, Lean focus and Services. In the ‘Generic BP view’ we have included generic and domain specific execution measures for domains such as healthcare, software or production. These measures are related to generic BP characteristics that are not themselves related to the type of BP, such as duration of activities and of the complete BP, costs, roles involved, quality as perceived by the user. Domain specific measures refer to measures that have to be instantiated, in turn, for each domain, for example to measure “successful path” execution through the BP, specific activities included in the path have to be identified for each BP. This kind of measures is defined by the business area, as Key Performance Indicators (KPI), taking into account specific expected results such as quantity of received or delivered orders, products, or successful payments. As a sample we show in figure 6 the goal, questions and measures with <execution view>=’Generic BP’ and <Devil’s Quadrant aspect>=’Cost’. In the ‘BPEMM Cube’ showed in figure 4 this set of measures would be represented as a vertical line.
Figure 6. Measures for Generic BP execution view & Cost aspect of the Devil’s quadrant.
Page 42
En la ‘vista Deshecho’ (Lean) hemos incluido medidas de ejecución que dan información para detectar ‘basura’ en la ejecución de PNs. Con ello se busca encontrar actividades, caminos o partes en de un PN que, si se cambian, pueden llevar a una optimización y mejora del PN completo. El pensamiento ‘Lean’ fue ideado por primera vez en Toyota y está bsado en la identificación y eliminación de basura, entendiendo por tal siete tipos de situaciones: sobreproducción, esperas inútiles, transporte, procesamiento extra, inventario, movimiento y defectos. Los principios ‘Lean’ y estos tipos de basura se han adaptado a otras áreas distintas de la fabricación industrial, entre las que se encuentra el desarrollo de software (Poppendieck, 2002). En la ejecución de PNs las actividades sin valor añadido están habitualmente relacionadas con transferencias, retrasos, retrabajo y actividades de control en bucles. Las medidas en esta vista están estrechamente relacionadas entre sí ya que, por ejemplo, cuando se define un bucle en el flujo de un PN es habitual añadir una actividad de control para determinar si la ejecución puede seguir adelante o debe volver hacia atrás. Como muestra en la figura 7 se ncluyen la meta, pregunta y medidas relacionadas con el retrabajo en bucles.
Figura 7. Medidas para la vista ‘Deshecho’ y el aspecto Tiempo (retrabajo en bucles) del cuadrante del diablo. In the ‘Lean view’ we have included execution measures to collect information for detecting waste in the BP execution. It aims to find activities, paths or parts in the BP that if changed can lead to an optimization and improvement of the complete BP. Lean thinking was first introduced in Toyota and is based on the identification and elimination of waste, which is categorized in seven types: overproduction, waiting, transport, extra processing, inventory, motion and defects. Lean principles and waste types have been adapted to areas other than the manufacturing one, such as software development (Poppendieck, 2002). In BP execution non value-adding activities are usually related to handoffs, delays, rework, and control activities in loops. Measures in this view are closely related to each other, because when a loop is defined in the flow of the BP, a control activity is usually added to determine if execution can continue or must go back, with respect to the control definitions. As a sample in figure 7 the goal, question and measures regarding the rework in loops are shown. Page 43
Figure 8. Measures for Service execution view & Time dimension (service throughput) of the Devil’s quadrant. Conclusions In this article we have presented the main characteristics of BPEMM, a model to guide the measurement of BP execution, a fully indispensable effort for its improvement. BPEMM integrates a set of existing execution measures and new ones that have been defined, which covers many of the measures that organizations usually define to gather information about the real execution of their BPs. By applying GQM, it is defined in such a way that each measure is related to a specific goal of the organization. It can be extended by adding new goals and associated questions and measures, if an organization needs to do so. The model integrates different ideas, which makes it easier use it as a guide for the execution effort in organizations, as all concepts, information and definitions are together in one single place. This way, BPEMM establish three dimensions to consider when measuring execution of BPs: a) granularity level of process elements that are being measuring (activity instances, BP cases, or full BP); b) view when now we are focusing (BP in general, lean, or IT services with which the process is automated); and c) the aspects to balance when a process is changed, well-known as the ‘Devil’s quadrant’ (cost, quality, time, and flexibility). These three dimensions (defining the ‘BPEMM cube’) are a systematic classification of execution measures which is itself an added value because it facilitates the use of BPEMM against the alternative of a simple flat list of measures. Readers can enlarge information in the aforementioned web or contacting with authors.
Page 44
References (Basili, 1992): V. Basili. Software modeling and measurement: The QGM paradigm. University of Maryland, CS-TR-2956, 1992. (Delgado et al., 2013): A. Delgado, B. Weber, F. Ruiz, I. García and M. Piattini. An integrated approach based on execution measures for the continuous improvement of business processes realized by services. Information and Software Technology. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2013.08.003 (García et al., 2006): F. García, M. Bertoa, C. Calero, A. Vallecillo, F. Ruiz, M. Piattini, and M. Genero. Towards a consistent terminology for software measurement. Information and Software Technology, vol. 48 (8), pp. 631644, 2006. (Gartner, 2011): Gartner. Survey analysis: BPM spending to grow significantly in 2011. http://www.gartner.com, February 2011. (Laguna and Marklund, 2005): M. Laguna and J. Marklund. Business Process Modeling, Simulation and Design. Prentice Hall, 2005. (OMG, 2008): OMG. Business Process Maturity Model (BPMM). http://www.omg.org/spec/ SoaML/. (Poppendieck, 2002): M. Poppendieck. Principles of lean thinking. In OOPSLA (Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages & Applications), 2002. (Reijers, 2003): H. Reijers. Design and Control of Workflow Processes: BPM for Service Industry. Springer, 2003. (Weske, 2007): M. Weske. BPM Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer, 2007.
Page 45
Page 46