Successfully reported this slideshow.

BPR meets ST

499 views

Published on

Business Process Reengineering meets Socio Technical Systems. An insight in the backgrounds of BPR and providing STS as an alternative. Or a best of both worlds perspective?

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

BPR meets ST

  1. 1. BUSINESS PROCESSREDESIGNBPR meets ST
  2. 2. Part IBusiness Proces Reengineering (BPR)
  3. 3. Roadmap (part 1) Definition and background What is and isn‟t BPR? Implementing BPR How about BPR and IT? Succes and Failure factors
  4. 4. Definition The fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service and speed (Hammer and Champy, 1993). Reengineering Fundamental rethink of Radical redesign of business processes business processes Dramatic & sustainable improvements in performance
  5. 5. Changing demands from environment Stage 1: 1776 Demand Adam Smith driven Stage 2: Customer 1820s friendlinesCustomer driven Railroad s bureaucracie s Supply driven Stage 3: Early 1900s Henry Ford Stage 4: 1945-1960 Mass production
  6. 6. BPR is… (fundamentals) Focus on fundamentals Radical redesign element Potential for dramatic results Business process orientation Think Big„„If I were re-creating this company today, given what I know and the current level of technology, what would it look like?‟‟„
  7. 7. BPR is… (implications) Several jobs combined in one Decentralization of decision making Natural and logical process steps Less standardization Reduced or eliminated checks and control
  8. 8. Typical BPR output…
  9. 9. BPR isn‟t… Reorganizing Downsizing Once-in-a-life-time operation A departemental or managerial toy
  10. 10. Implementing BPR Several models, different number of stepsDiscover Construct Process Innovate Test and and a redesign Evaluate analyses and build implementidentify team
  11. 11. How about BPR and IT? BPR isn‟t strictly IT Since 1990 IT gained influence Powerful enabler and provides breakthrough Examples : - Workflow management - Sharing/ Collecting information - Connecting (re)sources
  12. 12. Success and failure factors Radical redesign Team Composition Horizon Committment Role of IT Managerial competences
  13. 13. Part IISociotechnical Systems (STS) perspectiveas an alternative?
  14. 14. Roadmap (part 2) STS approach Implementing STS Comparing BPR  STS Comparing STS  BPR Concluding remarks
  15. 15. Sociotechnical systems (STS)approach Roots in 1950s/60s at the Tavistock institute: research relation technology and unemployment, deskilling and alienation At the core is “joint optimization”  Operational excellence  Quality of work-life Classic „design principles‟ Also claims relevance with regards to the modern demands from the environment
  16. 16. Implementing STS Define Design the systems:Define scope Define Define organisation: of the mission and design - Production - Productionorganisation strategy principles - Control - Control - Information
  17. 17. Comparing BPR  STSBPR STS ∆Process focus Organise in streams Radical change Incremental change Dramatic improvement Meet external  functional requirementsUse of IT IT as enabler 
  18. 18. Comparing STS  BPR Mumford (1994): “the main difference between socio-technical design and [BPR] seems to be one of emphasis and values. The socio- technical approach has always been as much on quality of working life […] as on efficiency.” Kuipers, et al (2010): “…specifically from the viewpoint of quality of work, BPR is lacking the ability of defining the required the regulatory potential [for working spaces] Quality of work as a starting point to be a required outcome
  19. 19. Concluding remarksA future for BPR? Towards an integralperspective
  20. 20. Towards integration BPR and STS have major similarities in Demands from backgrounds, intentions and objectives the environment Bureaucracy BPR history has shown that the lacking does not fit of design principles can have anymore catastrophic consequences for the quality of work Change needed STS could acknowledge a more firm Quality of work focus on efficiency and IT leverage at risk Why not use a „best of both worlds‟ Integrate BPR principle? and STS
  21. 21. DiscussionIs integrating BPR and STS really a “best of both worlds” situation or does it just make STS better? …Or is it the other way around?

×