!Process Cafe Process Cafe

PROMIS and the BPTG agree on cooperation


The following press release was sent out yesterday:
PROMIS Solutions AG (PROMIS) announces today an agreement on cooperation with Business Process Transformations Group (BPTG).

PROMIS and the BPTG have signed today a memorandum of understanding about future joint operations to create a higher demand for their services and products around the world. Through this alliance PROMIS will become with their Enterprise Value Architect (EVA) Netmodeler an official Custodian of the 8 Omega Framework.

The intention of the cooperation is to establish a strategic alliance leveraging PROMIS strong expertise in this area with the right suite of products and BPTG skills in the area of methodology and implementation. BPTG’s existing Network of experienced Consultants coupled with a large Customer portfolio and PROMIS EVA product suite will generate a successful mix for both parties.


To read the full release click here

What does this mean?

Well PROMIS are currently developing a tool that is set to become the market leader in Enterprise Architecture - EVA Netmodeler (which I am currently evaluating). With the incorporation of the BPTG 8 Omega framework into that tool it will increase the footprint of organisations into which the tool can go. The BPTG will benefit from having their framework supported in an industry leading tool. One item of note is that all BPTG members will get instant access to this through the EVA Netmodeler server which will be hosted by BPTG. This will increase collaboration and, presumably, decrease timelines

From a process point of view this now gives a 'Software as a Service' implementation of a change model applicable across all industries using an acknowledged industry-wide standard.

That has to be good, right?

Building the Business Case for Process Management

It's a sad fact that in today's business environment, 'The ROI' is generally king.

Unless you can provide a compelling business case for business process management you are unlikely to be able to gain any credence or acceptance for that. And when I say a compelling business case this refers to a quantifiable positive impact on the company's bottom line.

Unfortunately, like 'quality' as a concept, business process management (not Business Process Management) is something that everyone can agree to in principle, but which tends to fall down when actual figures are produced.

The problem is the nebulous nature of the topic. It is much easier in a business to look at something concrete - such as a manufacturing site building being created, or a new CRM application being added - than it is to look at 'a process capability', and justify it on a dollar (or Pound Sterling/Euro/Yen) basis.

Don't get me wrong, it's very easy to quantify the cost of doing something. This is created from adding up training costs, software installation and maintenance costs, consultancy costs etc. and arriving at a bottom line figure. What's more difficult is arriving at a figure for savings.

Although that's not always the case.

Take, for example a manufacturing line that is experiencing issues with rework. Each piece of rework is costing the company an amount of money. By recognising the process issue behind this and resolving it with process improvement it is easy to arrive at a cost saving. But not all businesses are like that.

I'm working with an organisation at the moment who have just received venture capital to allow them to expand. Their VC's have mandated a tripling of turnover within 3 years as a result of the cash injection. Obviously that can't be achieved purely by increasing business, costs have to be decreased too. This is a case where managing and understanding the processes has to play a part.

But I can't build the business case.

The reason I can't build the business case is that I can't know what I need to know about the company until I've been in and seen it ,and I can't go in and see it until the business case has been created to allow me in there. It's Catch-22.

So how can we solve the problem? How can we build a business case for process management that focuses on tangible items a CEO can understand?

Let me propose a couple of suggestions:

1) Identify a recognised need for understanding and managing your processes. Let's say, for example, that you were looking to outsource a section of your organisation. Understanding the processes that are supported by that part of the business would enable you to be better prepared to handle outsourcing discussions. Understanding exactly where the responsibility is passed to the outsourcing company and exactly where it comes back to your organisation has to give you a financial advantage.

Assign a notional value to each 'transaction' (i.e. if the outsourcing company is managing your Accounts Receivables, divide the cost of outsourcing your AR department by the number of transactions dealt with in a year and this will give you a notional value per transaction. If you don't know how much the outsourcing is going to cost you, use the cost of your AR function from last year). Divide that figure by the number of 'steps' or 'handoffs' each transaction goes through. This will give you a notional cost per process step. Now realise that each time a transaction has to go through one of these steps it is costing your company $x. Now look at the amount of rework that is being performed at the moment. Multiply that by the notional dollar cost and this will give you the amount that bad process is costing. It is generally all bad process that causes things like that to happen.

2) Identify a target saving. Assume that at present you are in an organisation that has an overhead of $xM. Target a particular saving against that which you would like to come as a result of process improvement (say $0.25M) This will give you the top line of the business case. You can then start to understand the bottom line of the business case by identifying the factors mentioned earlier (training costs, software installation and maintenance costs, consultancy costs etc). Subtract the two and that's your business case. The downside of this is that it is not always feasible to assume that the target saving can be achieved through process improvement. Sometimes the figures are just outlandish!

The benefit of this type of proposal is that once the initial costs have been saved, the capability that has been implemented to identify and improve processes can be applied to other parts of the business at a very small incremental costs. This is a key differentiator between process improvement projects and other types of projects: Once the capability has been created, it can be applied to other parts of the organisation with minimal incremental cost.

Summary

I answered a similar question recently on Linked-in which was asking how to convince a CEO to subscribe to Enterprise Architecture. My reply to that was quite simple: "Take your nearest competitor and analyse what advantage they would have over you if they could make strategic decisions and implement them in half the time you do. Then ask your board why you wouldn't put in something that would enable you to do that. EA can enable you to do that" Maybe the business case for process management is along the similar lines "Take your nearest competitor and analyse what advantage they would have over you if their processes were slick, streamlined and manged efficiently Then ask your board why you wouldn't put in something that would enable you to do the same with your processes"

Sometimes it just needs someone to show the leap of faith in starting the ball rolling.


Reminder: 'Doing Business Process Work in your organisation - A white paper' is still available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you.

Click this link and follow the instructions to get this free download.



For more about me check out my "About Me' page

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford

The Process Cafe goes mobile

In an attempt to get as many people access to the Process Cafe as possible, I have now enabled mobile access to this blog.

That means you can now read the Process Cafe on your iPhone, Treo or other mobile device in a special 'mobile friendly' manner.

In order to do this just point your mobile at the Process Cafe Mobile site. That link is http://processcafe.mofuse.mobi/

You will still get everything you would on the full Process Cafe website but in a format more suited to mobile devices.

This service is provided by mofuse who are one of the leaders in mobile blogging

Enjoy your mobile reading!


Reminder: 'Doing Business Process Work in your organisation - A white paper' is still available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you.

Click this link and follow the instructions to get this free download.



For more about me check out my "About Me' page

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford

Testing the Testimonials

I'll be posting some information about 'EVA Netmodeler' - a new EA tool that I saw today - in a couple of days, when I've had a chance to play with it for a bit longer, but in the meantime let's talk customer testimonials

Metastorm have just released a set of customer testimonials in a big push to get people bought into their software. This isn't a new feature (after all if you look at this page you'll see someone mentioned there who hasn't worked for that company for getting on for two years (me!), so it's not revolutionary), but what is different is the use of custom created video testimonials.

These cover a whole range of customers and topics.

The thing I particularly like about this is the way the questions are edited together to give a complete story about why Metastorm was chosen, what the problems were that lead them there etc., but at no point is there a blatant plug for the Metastorm software itself. It's been very cleverly done.

It got me thinking about the whole area of customer testimonials and their value. For example we've all been to web sites that have faceless individuals telling you how they were 'so glad they bought product xyz' and how it 'changed my life' - as if this is in itself enough to persuade you to buy the product. What very few testimonials actually do is to engage the satisfied purchaser in a dialogue about what they were hoping to achieve with the product, what their problems were and what led them to chose that product.

Consider the following web-site: PXMethod Speed Reading (Incidentally this is a completely bogus web site designed as a means of testing uptake on a similar product. As it says on the payment page if you click through "Note: This page is a mock-up. It is NOT secure. Please do not use real credit card information. Use a few numbers in that field and hit "Order Now" to see the final screen."). Note the heavy use of testimonials down the side and in the body of the text itself. These are all meant to increase your level of confidence with the product and persuade you to purchase. But consider the content of the testimonials. There is no context in which to view them, there is no identification of people other than a partial name and location "Amy K., Princeton Day School", and there is no way of knowing how genuine these testimonials are.

Compare those to the Metastorm video testimonials. You will see that all the participants are named (as are the companies they work for). The testimonial is placed in context with a set of questions that allows you to gain confidence that the speakers are genuine. It also answers some of the questions you will be asking yourself when deciding to purchase an EA/BPM tool of your own. "How did you build your business case for this tool?"

It is undoubtedly a very expensive way of gathering testimonials, but I believe it is extremely persuasive.

What do you think?



Reminder: 'Doing Business Process Work in your organisation - A white paper' is still available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you.

Click this link and follow the instructions to get this free download.



For more about me check out my "About Me' page

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford

"The Way It's Always Been Done" (or how an aversion to change can hurt your business)

If you search this blog thoroughly you'll find reference to the following story, but I wanted to repeat it because I think it highlights a fundamental point when looking at processes: The need to ask yourself "Why?"

A well known UK insurance company was trying to compete with the new on-line insurance companies that could issue a policy document in three days. The current standard for this company was 33 days. A project was launched to understand why. Analysis indicated that after the policy is reviewed and approved (1 day) it was sent to a warehouse in Cardiff, Wales for storage. The state of the art warehouse was temperature and humidity controlled by computer, and stored the policies for 30 days prior to sending the final documents out to the end customers.

Further analysis at the warehouse indicated that the reason this step was taken (and had been brought in from the previous manual system when the computerised warehouse had been implemented) was not entirely clear. Everyone who was interviewed was very positive about the investment in the computer controlled warehouse and was anxious to tell stories about the speed and efficiencies that were gained by not needing men in fork-lift trucks searching for documents from the vast stores. Nobody seemed to know why the documents were stored for 30 days, though. Tracking down the longest serving employee in the company it was determined that was how it had always been done because this step was necessary to allow the policy to dry.


"Allow the policy to dry....?!?!?!"


Apparently back in the mists of time when policies were printed in ink on parchment they were stored for 30 days to allow the ink to thoroughly dry. In todays modern world this step was no longer needed. It was removed and suddenly the insurance company was able to mix it up with the new boys.

The story was told to me by Steve Towers from the BPMG at a BPM conference a number of years ago. Now I have no idea if this story as apocryphal or not and - frankly - I don't care. The reason I like it (and the reason I have retold it dozens of times in the intervening few years) is that it does identify a key problem that occurs when people look at streamlining processes and making them more efficient.
'That's the way it's always been done'
This is the curse of modern society (ironically enough). People are hesitant to change things that have traditionally been done because they think that this will - in some way - cause bigger issues.

I come from a background of heavily regulated industry. This is the sort of place where you need to have 24 people review a document before it can be officially approved. When electronic signatures were introduced into the process it was still felt that all 24 people needed to review each document despite the fact that research showed that, in fact, only about 5 people in each case had input into the review, the others either didn't review it or too so long to review it that the whole approval cycle took forever to complete. Reviewers were added so that they couldn't later come back and say 'Well I didn't know anything about this'.

When we looked at the problem through a different lens we were able to say 'Suppose this document was stored in a central place and you were informed when it was updated, would you be happy to take that as proof that you were informed, given 3 working days to come back with issues and - if nothing is heard - we take it that you are aware and up-to-date?' By adding in this 'Implicit review' step we were able to do several things.

1) We were able to minimise the number of folks reviewing the actual document.
2) We were able to substantially reduce the approval cycle time for a document.

The key was to ignore the way things had been done previously and concentrate on why we need to do things a certain way now.

So take a look around your own organisation and ask yourself the question 'Why are we doing these things? Is it because this is the way things have always been done?"

You might be surprised.


Just a reminder the free download 'Doing Business Process Work in your organisation - A White paper' is still available. Click this link and follow the instructions. Your White paper will be sent as soon as possible. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you!



For more about me check out my "About Me' page

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford


Technorati Tags: , , , ,

BPM in the Pharmaceutical Industry

Being an ex-pharma employee myself (no names here, but the company invented Prozac...), I was interested to read the CIO.com article about the use of BPM products in the pharmaceutical industry.

The article itself (by David Carr) applies to Wyeth Pharamaceuticals, but I know from experience that the concepts and issues identified would be applicable to any and all pharma companies.

The thing that makes this interesting is that the driver for the BPM work actually came from the R&D function. In my experience the R&D function is very freewheeling and one of the last parts of a Pharma company to promote adherence to standards. This is particularly true of technology, for example, where non-standard applications and systems are rife. However as the Wyeth CIO Jeffrey E. Keisling mentions, they were looking at results rather than technology adherence. The key result of this initial phase of work is that they were able to streamline the process for label creation (This is an extremely time consuming and fiddly process where data from diverse parts of the organisation has to be collated, analysed and presented in a manner which is acceptable to regulator authorities).


What is less surprising is the way in which BPM has ben embraced within the IT part of the orgaisation. One senior IT person is quoted as saying that with the use of the Metastorm BPM tool they have been able to reduce the cycle time for program development to a point where they are doing twice as many projects in a year as they had planned. Now don't misinterpet this to mean that they software helps them code programs twice as fast, my reading of the situation is that it doesn't completely eliminates the need for a software development effort on the projects. What happens is that a business analyst can do more of the up-front work of defining a business process, but there is still additional effort needed to integrate the systems that must work with the BPM software. However, overall the cycle time is lower.

As I mentioned above Wheth have done this using the Metastorm BPM tool. On of the problems they have found with this tool, though is that it is very IT-centric. To combat that they have started to implement the Provision modelling tool. This is a more user-focused tool that allows processes to be modelled intuitively then permitting them to be dropped into the BPM tool for coding up.

Feel free to read the complete article as it has some excellent points, but if you don't wish to wade through 5 screens worth of text I have extracted the following 'gems' from the article, which I think apply to process management in general

1) Do whatever is needed to get buy-in for this. Wyeth had stonrg push-back for purchasing the BPM tool as folks thought it replicated functionality they had in other existing tools. They were able to convince them of the business benefit of doing this

2) When you have the buy-in, build the competence. Wyeth are building a Centre of Excellence which is something they only do for strategic parts of the business. This has the dual benefit of creating a single organisation responsible for standards and metrics as well as providing resource to help build and improve the process management capability

3) Start small, go viral. Wyeth took the same approach I did with BPM in Pharma - they started small. Instead of rolling out a large project encompassing all areas of the business they identified a smaller, key project that would benefit, succesfully rolled this out and stood back. Other parts of the organisation saw the succes, decided they wanted that as well, and it went viral. This is, by far, the easiest way of implementing major change in an organisation.

4) Bust the silo's. For Wyeth, the decision to focus on BPM emerged from an analysis of where the research systems group was putting its energy. The tendency was to create systems from scratch each time and build them in-house. On top of that the focus on transactional systems was shifted more towards integration of systems rather than improving transactional systems. This meant identifying individual processes within a system and then tying these processes together across systems. This, effectively, meant busting the traditional silo mentality which resides in many large , well established companies.

Summary
This article corresponds very closely with my own experience implementing processes within the Pharma industry. The very tight governance and regulatory aspect makes every job more difficult and time consuming than with many other industries. This causes a great deal of inertia in companies in embracing change. But by following some of the tips here and emulating both Wyeth and my last company, it shows that this inertia can be overcome to great benefit.

Photo courtesy of Rodrigo Senna
Technorati Tags: , ,

For more about me check out my "About Me' page

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford


Get the Process Cafe by Email!

I have just enabled e-mail subscriptions to the Process Cafe.

Those of you who wish to read this blog and don't want to use RSS (which is approximately 80% of the population, apparently) can now subscribe to an e-mail version which will be sent to you whenever the site is updated.

Just click on the link below to subscribe or fill in the form at the right hand side of the page and click 'Subscribe!'

It couldn't be easier.

Click here to subscribe

(I promise that all e-mail information is safe, will only be used for the Process Cafe and will not be given, sold or lent to any other person/company or entity)



For more about me check out my "About Me' page


All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford