|
RE-REENGINEERING
Fine-tuning with the aid of BPM software
could eliminate major technology revamps.
By John Verity
Two years ago, LexisNexis realized
that its ability to serve new web-based customers was severely
strained. Thousands of small and midsize law firms represented
a huge business opportunity for the company's legal information
services, but they often had to wait 48 hours to have their
web accounts activated after signing up. For smaller firms
seeking to buy documents in small quantities, often to apply
to pending cases, such a delay was intolerable.
Clearly, LexisNexis needed to revamp its
customer sign-up and order-fulfillment processes, which were
designed for large law firms and the ordering of hardcover
legal tomes. But instead of spending millions on a massive
new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, LexisNexis
chose a somewhat unorthodox and unproven route: by reworking
some key workflows to require fewer manual tasks and installing
a new kind of software (from Intalio) that choreographs the
activities of several existing back-office systems, it was
able to get new web accounts running in a matter of minutes.
Equally important, though, is that the
so-called business process management (BPM) software that
made this speed-up possible is spurring changes within Lexis-Nexis
that any company would welcome. Thanks to powerful new modeling
tools that can fully describe even the most complex business
processes, the IT department is working more closely than
ever with business-unit managers. Contention and misunderstanding
are giving way to avid collaboration. Indeed, business managers
themselves are fine-tuning important processes almost on the
fly, with only minimal involvement by the IT department.
"In my view, if there's a business process,"
says Allan McLaughlin, senior vice president and CIO of LexisNexis,
"it's the business department that owns it, and IT's role
in it should be transparent."
That's a goal, of course, for which many
executives have been aiming ever since consultants Michael
Hammer and James Champy began urging Corporate America more
than a decade ago to start identifying and reengineering its
most critical business processes. But reengineering called
for a slash-and-burn approach, using automation to eliminate
massive amounts of manual work. BPM, in contrast, emphasizes
the monitoring and fine-tuning of business processes, as such
becoming a critical business process in itself.
Malleable Apps
Howard Smith, CTO (Europe) at Computer
Sciences and co-author of Business Process Management: The
Third Wave, sees BPM (which should not be confused with business
performance management, an emerging approach to financial
analytics) as the very basis for most future enterprise software.
Today's ERP and customer-management systems, Smith says, are
splendid at manipulating data, but they tend to embody a single
business process. By focusing on BPM techniques, however,
it will be possible to create highly malleable applications
that can be quickly and safely altered to handle a broad range
of processes.
For example, the process of managing a
sales campaign necessarily varies depending on industry, product,
type of customer, and at what step in the campaign each customer
happens to be. That calls for a level and kind of flexibility
that packaged software often lacks. Today's BPM software can
modify existing applications to make them more flexible; down
the road, it may be built into many different types of software,
providing new flexibility as a matter of course.
Slick technology alone won't guarantee
success for the two dozen start-up companies that have made
BPM a hot area, or for IBM, Microsoft, and other established
companies currently touting BPM tools. Top executives must
lead an important cultural change, too (see "Hammer Time Again?"
this page). But having come up during the era of reengineering,
today's managers are nothing if not process-aware. They've
seen how success in supply-chain management and e-commerce
depends on a strong understanding of key processes. And increasingly,
executives recognize that agility is essential to profitability,
even in seemingly stodgy markets.
"We're always trying to improve our short-term
planning," says John Wheeler, senior vice president and CIO
of Nova Chemicals, which produces raw materials used to make
plastics and other products. But "demand forecasts are never
true." So, using BPM tools from IDS Scheer of Germany, Nova
Chemicals is seeking to "be able to react faster" to unanticipated
fluctuations in demand.
Essential Ingredients
From a technology point of view, there
are five essential BPM ingredients, says Hollis Bischoff,
vice president of technology research services at consulting
firm META Group:
1. Tools for modeling or diagramming processes
in detail, including every person, system, and task; the business
rules that determine the sequence of activities; and the timing
of those activities.
2. Business process execution tools (also
known as business process orchestration engines) that oversee
the movement and routing of data and documents between individual
desks and computers.
3. Integration server tools that help
disparate computers exchange data and cooperate in executing
complex transactions.
4. Monitoring and measurement tools, used
to observe processes in action and identify bottlenecks.
5. Simulation optimization tools, for
simulating processes in detail and evaluating proposed changes.
Although the idea of continuously improving
business processes has been discussed in academic and business
circles for years, recent progress in several areas of technology
may finally put full-blown BPM within practical reach. One
key driver: web services, a standards-based scheme that enables
disparate systems and pieces of software to exchange data
and work together easily without a substantial integration
effort. Meanwhile, tools for measuring, analyzing, and simulating
the performance of complex processes have also improved. Together,
analysts say, they help create a vital feedback cycle: measure,
analyze, optimize, measure again, and so on.
Simulating a process in depth can yield
surprising results: how should a bank address the increased
volume of loan applications it expects to receive toward the
end of each fiscal quarter, for example? It might simply add
more people, assigning them to manually underwrite loans of
more than US$10,000, as bank policy dictates. But a simulation
may show that it would be more profitable to raise that to
US$15,000, thereby routing a greater number of loans through
the speedier automatic underwriting process. That might increase
the bank's risk, but the extra business it would close might
more than compensate.
Another important development is
business process modeling language, or BPML, which provides
a mathematically rigorous scheme for describing every aspect
of a business process. Much as modern computer programming
languages hide all the binary codes that used to boggle programmers'
minds, BPML may provide a standard way to hide the technical
plumbing and mind-numbing intricacies that make business processes
tick. And that's just the beginning. New software, called
a process engine, is designed to keep track of every document
and transaction involved and make sure different computers
exchange the right data. The great benefit of this approach
is that simply changing the high-level process model can automatically
reprogram the process itself, perhaps expanding its capacity
or rejiggering a few of its underlying business rules. In
this way, BPM could make the enterprise itself a programmable
entity. In theory, anyway. But for now, companies may be satisfied
with a tweak. 
|
Hammer Time Again
It was exactly ten years ago that
Michael Hammer, with his best-selling book Reengineering the
Corporation, put Corporate America on notice about the vital
importance of business processes. Until then, processes within
corporations were more a subject for business-school theorizing
than boardroom strategizing. But with Reengineering, Hammer
not only contributed new words to business jargon (while raising
the bar for the sale of business books), he and co-author
James Champy also managed to persuade thousands of managers
to recognize and rethink complex, cross-functional processes
like order-to-cash, for example.
Hammer, still writing about and
preaching the benefits of process-centric management, is mostly
enthused by all the talk these days about business process
management (BPM). Much of it builds on his original thinking.
"Technology is now available that enables companies to
do things with their processes that they really couldn't do
five or ten years ago," he says. "Technology is
an important enabler of real BPM."
Hammer worries, however, that new
technology is dominating the BPM discussion and distracting
managers from the deep cultural changes that are needed. "I
think of BPM as a way to run a business that focuses on end-to-end
business processes," he says. BPM is not, he states,
simply the installation of a process-modeling tool or new
software that watches the flow of documents around an organization.
He is particularly dismissive of
claims, heard mainly from certain providers of advanced BPM
technology, that software is now at hand that can automatically
translate a high-level description of some business process
into executable code. He grants that modeling tools are better
than ever and that "they can't hurt", but they cannot
capture, much less overcome, the most important obstacles
to process efficiency - the boundaries between departments
of a company, "where managers typically try to hold on
to their authority," he says.
"There is a burgeoning [BPM]
software arena," concedes Hammer, "and I think it
does give more impetus to real process work." But new
technology as the sole source of processes that are more measurable,
manageable, or malleable? "I'm not holding my breath,"
he says. "BPM initiatives need to be elevated above the
nether reaches of IT and made more strategic and backed with
upper management's commitment to true process thinking."
JV |