BPM 2010
Business Process Governance:
A platform to progress BPM
Hoboken, September 2010
Introduction
Gaby Doebeli, Business Architect
Practice Leader of BPM Centre of Excellence (CoE)
BPM CoE Value Proposition:
Build BPM capability across the business on all
levels of management
Enable the business to improve process
performance by delivering: practice leadership (incl.
governance, strategy, advise, coaching, mentoring
and training)
2
Presentation Overview
CONTEXT
Organisational Environment
BPM Environment
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Literature Review
Research Strategy & Method
Findings
OPERATIONALISATION & CONCLUSION
BPM Governance & Design Model
Operationalisation of the Model
Conclusion
3
Context - Organisational Environment
QR 1865 - 2010
A government owned organisation (GOC)
The largest player in the contestable bulk freight market in Australia
with a 60% market share.
It’s Intermodal services operate across the continent from Cairns to
Perth.
Has moved 59million tonnes of freight (bulk, non bulk) in 2008/09.
Has hauled 185million tonnes of coal in 2008/09.
It owns 10,000 kilometre of network.
Runs 1,000 Train Services per day.
Owns 353 Train Sets
Moves approx. 66 million passengers a year.
15,000 staff serve customers across the country
4
The QR Business Model 2008
Competitors QR
Rolling Stock Rolling Stock QR Corporate Units
Provide services to the business
(Road & Rail)
Above Rail
QR QR QR QR
Passengers Freight Coal Intermodal
CEO’s Office
PN Train
Enterprise Risk Services
(Pacific Nat’l)
Corporate Affairs
Marketing & Strategy
QR Network (QLD) Corporate HR
The Asset Owner
Responsible for engineering and constructing new rail infrastructure and maintaining the existing rail QR Finance
systems. Controlling train movements across the network. Negotiating track access arrangements with
customers and the industry regulator. Managing the network to deliver a safe, reliable and efficient Shared Services Group:
Below Rail
service to customers
– Information Services Division
– HR Operations
– Property Division
– Supply Division
QR Services – Financial Services Division
Designs, constructs, maintains and manages the Network.
QR Services provides the rail industry with a one stop shop for safe, innovative, and cost competitive asset
solutions. Comprehensive services are delivered by more than 5,000 people across four major businesses.
5
BPM Environment
CoE
Freight
CoE
Freight Capability
CoE
CoE
Intermodal
Coal
CoE
QRPassengers
Assessment
Advise & Coaching
CoE
Network
CoE
Capability QR Services
improvement
strategies
6
BPM Capability Development 1990-2010
Major Events / Projects
Company Redesign & Sale 2010 BPM Governance Design
Lines of Business Design/Architectures
Company Change Formation Program
BPR, BPMN,& Six Sigma Training
Governance Review
2009 BPM Practice Leadership BPM Centre of Excellence
Company Strategy & Repositioning Company Wide Process Redesign Alignment of Capability Frameworks
Set up Multi Businesses
New Board & Senior Mgt
2008 Assessment of BPM Governance Winner of BPM Award 2008
SAP Implementation approach review
Rule-based to Principle based
Infrastructure Expansion Programs 2007 Documented BPM Case Studies Winner of BPM Award 2007
Provision of BPM Research Articles EA Handbook
SAP Payroll
2006 BPM Capability Portal BPM Promotional Material CD
Infrastructure Expansion Programs Inclusion of BPM Capability Framework
2005 Shared Services Redesign BPR Method Development
Mergers & Acquisitions
BPM Intranet BPMN Standard BPM Concept BPM Team Support
Standard Program & Project 2004 Investigation & Case Study on BPM Capability Framework
Mgt Framework
National Expansion Company Process Architecture Business Model Six Sigma Development
SAP R3 Implementation 2003 BPM Vision & Strategy IDEF0 Standard Enterprise Process Model
Business Process & Systems Program BPM Community
2002 Line of Business Process Modelling LEGEND
20/20 & RQRP Change Program Strategic
Governance
Alignment
Acquisition of EA Tool
Set up integrated businesses
2001 Methods
Information
Technology
Network Access Process Automation
2000 Y2K Process Mapping
People Culture
Y2K Business Continuity
Milestones
1999 Move to Commercialisation 1990 1996 Corp Quality Unit Established
Problem Statement
Factor Lessons on BPM Progression
Strategic Alignment Select projects that are of strategic importance and have senior management commitment.
Strong connections between strategy formulation and selection of process improvement initiatives helps to optimize resource planning and
allocation.
Defining end-to-end processes and assigning ownership and accountability for process performance, including linking to individual
performance measures, helps to optimize outcomes.
Governance Putting BPM governance in early ensures clear direction and leadership and a common terminology.
BPM governance needs to be integrated into an overarching corporate governance framework.
Process leaders need to be supported by their functional counterparts within an integrated governance framework to ensure
optimal process decision making.
Process related standards need to be developed throughout the journey as maturity increases in different areas.
Methods A standard notion helps to provide consistent, reusable models and process information.
The notation selected is not as important as its consistent application and ability to be supported by a suitable modeling tool.
Multiple complimentary methods for process improvement are beneficial for matching the method to the purpose improvement project.
Strong program and project management is needed to track the benefits for the organization from the improvement projects and the BPM
program itself.
Information Technology A common process modeling/repository tool is essential when progressing an enterprise-wide BPM approach.
Matching the tool to the purpose of the modeling becomes important over time.
People Hands-on involvement in projects is an effective way of learning and embracing the BPM approach.
Culture An organisational approach to BPM helps to improve sharing of process information.
Progression of BPM Implementation
(DeBruin & Doebeli, 2009)
8
Research Strategy, Methods
Governance Documentation &
Position Descriptions/Performance
Case Study
Reviews - gained understanding of
governance regime. Enabled coding
regime & interview questions
Research Conduct Interpret Conclude
Context Research Findings Research
Model
Literature Research Content Conclusion of
Interviews Development
Review Methodology Analysis the study
& Findings
Corporate Governance
BPM Practice 14 Interviews
BPM Governance BPM & BPI
Decision Making Roles & BPM Decision Making
Responsibilities BPM Roles & Resp.
Literature Review Findings: The capabilities required for BPM Governance
are researched however there seems to be minimal research on
approaches how to design the BPM Governance Capabilities most
appropriately for an organisation to enable process based decision
9
making
BPM Governance Capability
BPM Governance refers to the establishment of relevant
and transparent accountability, decision-making and
reward processes to guide desirable process actions.
This includes how process related decisions are made
at various levels within an organisation, how reward and
remuneration is related to process performance at both
an individual and at a ‘good-of-the-process’ level, how
standards and controls are used to improve the
consistency, repeatability and predictability of process
related actions and outcomes and how process
positions are defined, applied and integrated into the
organisational structure (de Bruin, 2009, 13:725).
10
Findings - BPM Governance
BPM Governance not included in Organisational
Governance Management Framework;
Management approach taken was more functional
then process based;
Roles & Responsibilities were more functional based;
Inconsistent application of BPOs was found;
BPM Practice Leader not empowered;
BPM Standards used on an ad-hoc bases; and
No common BPM terms and definitions across the
enterprise.
11
Findings - Strategic Alignment
Link between business strategy and business process performance
was vague;
Lack of full visibility and transparency of the Portfolio, Program and
projects efforts and performance; and
Business Process Improvement Plans were established ad-hoc,
reactive and often in response to reviews and investigations after an
incidence;
Allocation of budgets/investments were on functions not on end to end
processes;
Lack of benefits realisation.
…“There is a level of alignment and thought that goes into it more and
more. There is a concerted effort by senior management on how we
now approach these things and we are trying to link the BPIs to the
strategies and primary initiatives. However it has not yet fully filtered
through yet.”
12
Findings -Design/Analysis/Improvement
Some core & support processes were identified however they were
not proactively managed;
Methods like Six Sigma and Lean Management were used but mostly
within the boundaries of a function; and
No clear criteria was applied to select the most appropriate BPI
method.
…“Defined processes are only in some areas. We are relying on experts.
Processes are not defined and shared or followed. Some processes
are in such chaos. Statistically none of the processes are in control
and people are using their own methods to manage the chaos.”
…“The high level major processes are there and the work instructions
but there is a gap between.”
13
Findings - BPM Decision Making
Process change decision were made by project steering committees
which included mainly functional managers; and
Decisions on process performance was done mostly by functional
manager; and
Existing tension between process and functional management.
…“Process owners defines the process on a more macro level. What
needs to be done the business rules the value chains. Line
Management will defined the more tactical level processes and
process changes to meet the corporate requirement.”
…“Throughout the project often the steering committee makes the
decision and within is the project sponsor who might have the final say
and if that person is from a functional background he/she might be
bias towards her/his function on how the change the process..”
14
Findings - BPM Roles & Responsibilities
The role of the BPOs was unclear;
Roles that work “In” processes and the ones that work “On” the
processes are defined but not visible in the organisational structure as
some of them a project based;
…”There is a role to play on every level of the organisation. Everyone
needs to know why it is important to contribute to a process”…
BPM activities were not specified in everyone’s Position Descriptions
…”From an organisational perspective we should define the roles for
enterprise consistency and the ability to move process people across
business areas. Might have some junior and senior process analysts
in the business to assist and apply a consistent approach including
reviews etc...”
15
Model
1. Consider Organisational Environment - Org. Context
(Transformation 2008/2009, Split 2010)
2. Organisational Principles (federated, integrated business,
principle based, value discipline operational excellence,
customer intimacy
3. Organisational Structure – review the current organisational
accountability structure/budgeting process and BPM
reporting structure to gain an understanding on the decision
making framework;
4. Consider the findings of Investigation (Content Analysis &
Interviews)
5. Success Factors for BPM
16
Operationalisation GOC
Provision of Position Paper to senior executive
management including:
Recommendations of new accountabilities,
roles & responsibilities of all staff in relation to
BPM.
Recommendations on the deployment of the
model including lead and transformation team.
Defined list of required BPM Roles and
Responsibilities, Knowledge & Skill Requirements,
Performance Standards, Team Relationships and
Dependencies.
17
BPM Governance Model (GOC)
18
Role Engagement Model
Jeston & Nelis 2008
19
Conclusion – Organisation (GOC)
2009 Strategic Decision to split Organisation;
2009 Business Design Principles established for new GOC
organisation (customer intimacy, corp. centralised support functions);
2009 IMO established. Three streams: People, Process and Systems
– collaborative design;
2010 Business Principles defined by senior leadership team 2010
Common Outcome Groups to work across functional boundaries -
Charter developed;
2010 Value Chain developed – Process Owners identified (customers,
network & operations);
2010 Capability requirements identified – Org Structure designed;
2010 Process catalogue established;
2010 Roadmaps developed for deployment to build capability in
people, process and technology – phased approach;
20
Conclusion – Organisation (Private)
2009 Strategic Decision to split Organisation;
2009 PMO established to split – Legal and Financial separation by 1st
July 2010;
2010 Vision, Mission established by executive leadership team for
new private company to be floated end of 2010;
2010 Employee Value Proposition developed by staff;
2010 Business Design Principles to be established for new private
organisation;
2010 Establishment of Community of Practice to work across
functional boundaries - Charter being developed; and
2010 Value Chain to be developed – Process Owners to be identified;
21
The End
For more information contact
[Link]@[Link]
