• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
 

A Case Study on Business Process Management

on

  • 1,044 views

Navigating Business Process Management nowadays with the real implementation as its case study, delivered for Universitas Indonesia Computer Science Master Program students.

Navigating Business Process Management nowadays with the real implementation as its case study, delivered for Universitas Indonesia Computer Science Master Program students.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,044
Views on SlideShare
1,040
Embed Views
4

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 4

https://twitter.com 4

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • The slide is developed for guest lecturer on ‘Business Process Management and Business Process Reengineering’ subject as an elective course in Universitas Indonesia Faculty of Computer Science Master Program held at their Depok Campus on May 23rd, 2013.
  • Source: Accenture
  • Credit to TechCrunch: http://techcrunch.com/2013/05/16/bpm/
  • Credit to Gartner Group http://www.bpminstitute.org/resources/webcasts/bpm-outlook-gartner-outlines-2013-trends
  • Credit to Gartner Group http://www.bpminstitute.org/resources/webcasts/bpm-outlook-gartner-outlines-2013-trends
  • Credit to www.abpmp.org
  • Source: Accenture
  • Credit to BPM Institute http://www.bpminstitute.org/resources/articles/importance-being-earnest-about-enterprise-governance

A Case Study on Business Process Management A Case Study on Business Process Management Presentation Transcript

  • Presented by Goutama BachtiarFaculty of Computer Science Master Program, UniversitasIndonesia23 May 2013
  • Introduction
  •  14 years of professional working experiences thatincludes 12 years of IT Training and EducationManagement, 9 years’ Technology Consulting andProject Management and 8 years in IT Audit field. Today he is wearing numerous hats: Advisor atCorporate Angel Investor ‘Global Innovations andTechnology Platform’, ISACA Subject Matter Expert,Head of Information Technology at Roligio Group, PMIProgram Evaluator, Content Producer for numerouscompanies, as well as Contributor and Columnist inseveral media: Asia Tech Site e27.co, Forbes Indonesia,The Jakarta Post, DetikINET and InfoKomputer amongothers.
  •  Strategic management approach toalign organization business processesaligned with customer needs Bringing in business effectiveness andefficiency while striving for innovation,flexibility and integration withtechnology Continuous process optimizationprocess
  •  Efficient, effective and more capable ofchange Influenced by Total Quality Management(TQM) or Continuous ImprovementProcess methodologies Key drivers: People and (supported by)Technology
  •  Managing end-to-end, customer-facing processes Consolidating data and increasing visibility into andaccess to associated data and information Increasing the flexibility and functionality of currentinfrastructure and data Integrating with existing systems and leveragingemerging SOA Establishing a common language for Business-ITalignment
  •  Focusing on objective to optimize a domain identified asan area for improvement In the financial sector, BPM is critical to make sure thesystem delivers a quality service while maintainingregulatory compliance International standards limited to IT sector: ISO/IEC15944 covering operational aspects of the business Other standards: BPMN, Enterprise Architecture, andBusiness Motivation Model
  •  Open source getting dominant: BonitaSoft,Pegasystems, Appian and LongJump Automating business processes, particularly wherethese operate at the intersection of machines andpeople Insurance companies employ it to automate claimsprocess when customer involved in car accident Or to streamline and make accountable any businessprocess where without systems in place things wouldfall through cracks, especially at scale.
  •  A design studio to model business processes An engine that adapts to various informationsystems architectures An end-user interface formanaging and interacting with processes Support for internal and external systems via alibrary of ‘Connectors’ and a strong developercommunity contributing for connectors,business processes and other extensions
  •  It serves more than 600 companies andgovernments worldwide (Accenture, DirectTV,Old Dominion University, Trane, Teach ForAmerica and Michelin) More than 2 million downloads and has 60,000community members
  •  Moving beyond efficiency to effectiveness and innovation Developing intelligent business operations Leveraging Social BPM Advancing BPM maturity to drive higher outcomes Adopting Cloud business process services Addressing organizational change in order to changebehavior Developing and mastering BPM skills
  •  Streamline and Automate IT Compliance for the Enterprise Companies forced to address regulations such as Sarbanes-Oxley, Basel I, Basel II, and HIPAA for mounting stakeholderand public demands for stronger internal controls and greateraccountability• Implementing a proactive and risk-based informationtechnology (IT) governance, risk management, and regulatorycompliance (GRC)• Enables companies to better manage compliance costs• Streamline compliance and business processes throughincreased automation
  •  Gartner predicts nearly US$3billion in 2013 and othersays it will hit US$5billion by 2017 No shortage of BPM maturity models, several based onCapability Maturity Model (CMM) framework by SEI Process Enterprise Maturity Model (PEMM) by Hammerand Co. with performance improvement and financialresults as its dimensions Focusing more on improved performance – more amatter of competence than maturity
  •  Chief Business Process Officer or Director level Association of Business Process ManagementProfessional (ABPMP) Business Process Management Common Bodyof Knowledge (BPM CBOK) Certified Business Process Professional(CBPP)
  •  Hewlett-Packard iGSO Finance SAP deployment to the large and complexparts business of Hewlett-Packard (iGSO) in the APJregion A complex and multi year program that involved over100 finance professionals and implemented SAP to amultibillion dollar business Successfully migrated all finance processes frommultiple legacy environments to a global standard SAPFI/CO environment
  •  Hewlett-Packard iGSO We are looking for an individual who is capable ofmanaging global complex finance projects. Whilst thisrole is not specific to any one program, the successfulcandidate will initially be assigned to the iGSO program(The Parts division of HP Services) as a test manager,helping to deliver a consolidated, reengineered, internetbased solution for the supply of spare parts globally.The program scope is both broad and complex from anHP Finance perspective, providing both challenge andinterest through the program lifecycle.
  •  Hewlett-Packard iGSO The test manager will manage all finance needs relatedto finance regression and user acceptance testingacross all finance processes. When any change occursto our business environments due to execution ofprojects, new business implementations, new mergersand acquisitions etc; there is a critical need to completeuser acceptance testing of financial processes andsystems to guarantee the integrity of HPs financialstatements. This role is for an individual to plan,manage and coordinate these testing phases acrossHP, across business and financial platforms.
  •  Hewlett-Packard iGSO Test Lead/Manager for EMEA Managed a team of over 5 business testers for the EMEA Region for the SAP implementation Aligned complex business processes (supply chain) and IT requirements at country level to produce a coherent implementation strategy across the business units Was responsible for the System, System Integration and UAT testing of 27 European countries which I delivered on time and budget both remotely from Erskine and at the clients’ sites Daily preparation of Executive reports to support senior management based in the States Owned Defect Management Lifecycle and escalation processes to the Project Board for EMEA Coordinated business deployment and User Acceptance Testing sessions Dealt and provided stakeholder analysis to ensure all relevant requirements were met during the implementation at country level and corporate Provided business consultancy to HP Global IT during the collocation exercise in Houston, Texas representing EMEA Award for the successful takeover of the IGSO portfolio while maintaining accountability for the old portfolio, Hewlett Packard
  • (After 1 week of deployment) Overview of Issues faced by Japan till-date:1. Manual Orders during Cutover2. Orders rejected by UPS due to addressvalidation3. Some parts not orderable4. SBD, NBD TLT set as ‘0’ for initial 2 days5. UPS Change Mgmt6. Operational Issues GSC UPS7. Application Issue (fewer than HK/NZ till date)
  • Learning Country Mitigation Mitigated?Parts Not Orderable caused by-Allocation logic system SyncIssue-Master Data not fully loadedSync Issue- Include 3 validation during cutover weekend which was onlyonce in the pastMaster Data Fall Out– All Master Data has been vigorously worked with minimalfall out identifiedYesDelivery Order (DO) creationtiming is not setup correctlyTiming for China has been set as 48 hrs to ensure DO iscreated promptlyYesUser Familiarization- Parts Ordering process-End to End validation was done will all affected funciton (callagents, delivery team, GPSC and 3PL)-Training to partner and hands-on familiarization beingconductedYesAddress Truncation issue fromWFM-iGSOiGSO – 3PLIncorporate address adjustment workaround in training toGSC and SUBK partnerIt was tested and confirmed that 3PL system (DHL) does nothave address truncation issueYesWarehouse Change Mgmt Select/SAPIM Warehouses – Hands-on training conductedleading to exam certification. Supported with detailed WorkInstructions signed off by HP Logistics teamCutover period: DHL assign a trained resource at eachlocation to provide 1st level support.Yes
  • Learning Country Mitigation Mitigated?Global Trade Screen-Partial name match resulting in SOhold-Plant code not mapped in GTS- Partial name matchValidated – China will not run into name match hold-Plant code not mapped in GTSValidated for all countries/plant: all mappedYesBCP Plan Use EXPO. Dry run will be conducted week of 4th May. Urgentdeliveries during cutover will be using EXPO to ensurefamiliarity and proper recoveryYesLearning from Past Deployment (cont’d)
  •  Hong Kong/New Zealand go-live Success Factors Key factors/actions/plans/preparations that haveproven to help success Learning Key issues/learning that countries need to avoid thathas been seen in the deployments Next Step
  •  Cut Over activities completed on scheduleover 6 Dec weekend Go live on schedule IT Warranty Exit at end of 2 weeks 89 issues raised in first two weeks Closed: 53 Resolved/Pend CR: 16 Open: 20 No critical issues open (8 high, 8 medium, 4low)
  •  Resources Flexibility of team members Country Operations team involvement as part of thepreparation, communication and deployment includingthe cut-over weekend and subsequent week Dedicated Country TSDO lead to support the iGSODeployment in facing the Country Operations Region and Country iPMO played a key role to ensureteams are communicatingSuccess Factors
  •  Communications Ensuring all parties has constant communications ondeployment tasks as part of the core team (eg:Finance, GSAO, GBS) Weekly meetings between HP and 3PL IT to ensurealignment with Data Migration Tasks leading up to thecut-over weekend Setting up of Combined Command Centers meetingsand numerous joint preparations meetings prior todeployment Weekly to increased daily meetings with Master Datateams to ensure Master Data readinessSuccess Factors
  •  Support/Process Strong Country Management support for deployment HP 3PL lead with DHL during cutover weekend and fora week afterwards to liason between HP and 3PL atWarehouse Having a Transaction Mock Session prior todeployment helps to understand weekend datamigration tasks and expectations between IT andBusiness Issue Tracker approach managed by iPMO assisted indriving issues to completion whilst allowing projectmanagers to manager their respective areasSuccess Factors
  •  Documentations GPSC detailed project plan of all tasks required to be performedprior to deployment Integrated Golden Transaction plan with prioritization andagreement across all parties (with further improvement actions tosync up expectations) Integrated Hour by Hour (HBH) plan for the Cutover weekendtasks Consolidation of all communication materials at a centralsharepoint site Consolidation of all issues in a Sharepoint list allows respectiveowners to provide the latest updates for all to viewSuccess Factors
  • Learning• Training− NZ training to GSCB direct dispatch team performedbut there are groups missed within country and globalGSC− Channel partners has a lot of ‘how to’ questions raisedto Country Channel Ops team after go-live− Too much training information to absorb in shorttimeframe without sufficient hands-on experience
  • • Data/System Readiness− Data needs to be clean up prior to migration− Master Data:• Master Data not 100% setup in GCSN prior deployment in all 4master data systems (SRS, CRS, PRM and Sap 4.7)• Partner renewal in NZ very near to GCSN deployment (newpartners needs to be setup urgently)• HK partner re-org requires partner name to be discussed/agreedacross various team in HK before setup− Parts Master:• Incorrect fields setup• Insufficient validation• No formal sign-off carried out which leave gaps on readinesbetween event systems− Numerous SELECT B2B issues.• Lack of pro-active monitoring for countriesLearning
  • • Process/Engagement− No proper post Go Live process to resolve parts issuesbetween GCSN & iGSO− No agreed measurements and means of obtaining dataon business activity during/after Go Live− Lack of engagement between the IT teams andcommitment of resources− Lack of clarity on roles & responsibilities on engagementwith 3PL IT within countries− Combined Command Center’s (CCC) process are notfollowed. Issues are not brought into CCC hotline fordiscussion and prioritization.Learning
  •  Develop Action Plan (owner/timeline) before the nextcountry deployment WIP