Topic 4.

BPI and BPR

Zhukova Sofya Vitaljevna, zhukova.sofya@gsom.pu.ru
Approaches within BPM
2

Business
Business
Process
Process
Reingineering
Orientation

Six
FO BPO TQM BPI BPR
Sigma

Business
Functional Total Quality Process
Specialization Management Improvement
Business Process Management

… is a systemic, structured approach to

analyze, improve, control, and manage
processes with the aim of improving the
quality of products and services.

3
After Second World War: USA versus Japan and Europe
4

Demand for American goods was so high that corporations’

main concern was insufficient capacity. This meant there was
little concern for product quality or catering to customer
requirements. Consumers, starved of goods during the
Depression and war years, bought anything American
companies were selling.
As trade barriers lowered in the 1970s, United States
corporations began to find competition from European and
Japanese companies both in domestic and export markets.
Because of higher average income, consumers demanded
more customized goods and services. They were no longer
satisfied with whatever corporations sold them.
Clients are unsatisfied
5
O. D. Power & Associates‘ 1989 survey

For example, the performance of American automobiles

improved 8 percent in 1989. Japanese cars improved 17
percent, and European cars improved 21 percent. Consider
the results of a survey conducted in the United States and
Japan:
Clients are unsatisfied
6
O. D. Power & Associates‘ 1989 survey

For example, the performance of American automobiles

improved 8 percent in 1989. Japanese cars improved 17
percent, and European cars improved 21 percent. Consider
the results of a survey conducted in the United States and
Japan:
Result versus Process
7

Japan is described as a process-oriented and people-

oriented society whereas the U.S. is described as a results-
oriented society. In a results-oriented society, only results
count. In a process-oriented society, improvement efforts
count. Results-oriented tends to focus only on the what, thus
neglecting the how, while the process-oriented focuses on the
how, neglecting the what. Both have demotivating and
defocusing issues.
Business process orientation: Masaaki Imai
8

Masaaki Imai, a leading Tokyo-based management

consultant, unequivocally stated at that time that “kaizen
strategy is the single most important concept in Japanese
management — the key to competitive success” (Imai,1986).
Kaizen, as explained by Imai, is the overriding concept
behind good management: a combination of philosophy,
strategy, organization methods, and tools needed to compete
successfully today and in the future. The philosophy
component of kaizen is one of continuous improvement of
everything, every day, and involving everyone. Imai proposes
that the implementation of kaizen will lead to an organization
with reduced conflict and improved connectedness across the
departments of the firm.
Kaizen philosophy
9

(a) recognizing that there are problems and establishing

a corporate culture in which everyone can freely
admit these problems;
(b) taking a systematic and collaborative approach to
cross-functional problem-solving;
(c) a customer-driven improvement strategy;
(d) significant commitment and leadership of kaizen from
top management;
(e) an emphasis on process and a process-oriented way
of thinking;
(f) a management system that acknowledges people’s
process-oriented efforts for improvement.
Business process orientation: William Deming
10

Deming, W. E. (1986) Out of the Crisis, MIT Press

Edward Deming developed the “Deming Flow Diagram”

depicting the horizontal connections across a firm, from the
customer to the supplier, as a process that could be
measured and improved like any other process. Deming
began to introduce the statistical quality control methods he
developed at the Census Bureau to industrial corporations.
He gradually developed a prescriptive set of practices that
have been labeled Deming’s 14 points.
Deming’s 14 points
11

1.Constant improvement of product and service

2.Adopt the new philosophy.
3.Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality.
4.Move towards a single supplier for any one item, on a long-term
relationship of loyalty and trust.
5.improve quality and productivity, and thus constantly decrease cost.
6.Institute training on the job.
7.Institute leadership
8.Drive out everyone’s fear
9.Break down barriers between departments.
10.Force asking for zero defects and new levels of productivity.
11.Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor
12.Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker of his right to pride of
workmanship.
13.Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement.
14.Put everyone in the company to work to accomplish the
transformation.
Business process orientation: Kaoru Ishikawa
12

While Deming focused on organizational practice and

behavior to achieve quality with his 14 points, Kaoru Ishikawa
focused on the importance of senior management in quality
improvement, and he extended quality improvement to the
business processes. He introduced the concept of the quality
circle organization, continuous improvement philosophy, and
bottom-up analytical methods such as cause and effect
diagrams.
Business process orientation: John Byrne
13
Business Week, December 13, 1993

John A. Byrne provided the popular foundation for this area of

investigation when he described the old organizational model
as a vertical organization, an organization whose members
look up to bosses instead of out to customers. Too many
layers of management still slow decision-making and lead to
high coordination costs. The answer, said Byrne, is the
horizontal corporation.
The horizontal corporation is described as eliminating both
hierarchy and functional boundaries and is governed by a
skeleton group of senior executives that includes finance and
human resources. Everyone else is working together in
multidisciplinary teams that perform core processes
such as product development.
Functional Corporations: Good management, bad quality
14

William Deming
Adam Smith John Byrne,
Henry Ford Kaoru Ishikawa
Frederick Taylor Massaaki Imai

Functional corporation Total Quality

Specialization increase Management (TQM)
quality Quality improvement
Cross Functional processes vs. Functional silos
15
Six Sigma
16

A Six Sigma is a business management strategy, originally

developed by Motorola. Six Sigma seeks to identify and
remove the causes of defects and errors in manufacturing. It
uses a set of quality management methods, including
statistical methods, and creates a special infrastructure of
people within the organization. The path for Six Sigma to
accomplish its goal is the Define, Measure, Analysis,
Improve, and Control (DMAIC) methodology. Sigma is as
much a corporate culture as it is a tool for process
improvements. Recently, another Six Sigma methodology,
Design for Six Sigma (DFSS), has gained popularity.
Six Sigma
17

The term "Six Sigma" is derived from a field of statistics

known as process capability studies. Originally, it
referred to the ability of manufacturing processes to
produce a very high proportion of output within
specification. Processes that operate with "six sigma
quality" over the short term are assumed to produce
long-term defect levels below 3.4 defects per million
opportunities (DPMO).
One Sigma = 690,000 DPMO = 31% efficiency
Two Sigma = 308,000 DPMO = 69.2% efficiency
Three Sigma = 66,800 DPMO = 93.32% efficiency
Four Sigma = 6,210 DPMO = 99.379% efficiency
Five Sigma = 230 DPMO = 99.977% efficiency
Six Sigma = 3.4 DPMO = 99.9997% efficiency
The empirical results of Six Sigma
18

GE cost savings from Six

Sigma of $2 billion in 1999.

Motorola - cost savings of

$16 billion from 1986-2001

Black & Decker cost

savings of $60 million in
2000

Honeywell - cost savings of

3.5 billion from 1995 to
2001
Globalization and Internet era
19

Products Services
The Forum Corporation reports that customers are five times more
likely to switch to another supplier because of poor service than
because of poor product quality or price issues. Customers will pay up
to 30 percent more for an average product if they receive outstanding
service from the organization. Throughout the 1980s, most companies
focused their major efforts on correcting and improving their production
processes. But then management realized that it had been working on
the wrong part of the business. The production process for an average
product accounts for less than 10 percent of the product value, and the
service industry that provides most of our jobs is 100 percent business
processes. For years we have focused our efforts on measuring,
controlling, certifying, and correcting our production processes. As a
result, business processes became the major cost factor in our
companies.
Functional view and problems
20

The functional structure is positioned as having hand-offs

between functions that are frequently uncoordinated. The
functional structure also does not define complete
responsibility and ownership of the entire process.
People in functional silos focus on what is best for
that function, many times at the expense of other
functions. This means that while the individual function
benefits, oftentimes the firm as a whole loses. Too often,
what is being managed is power and authority, not the
activities that bring value to the customer.

Without changing our patterns of thought we will not be

able to solve the problems we created with our current
patterns of thought
--- Albert Einstein
Business process orientation: Thomas Davenport
21

Davenport’s process approach implies adopting the

customer’s point of view. A measure of customer
satisfaction with the process output is probably the priority
measure of any process.

No one is managing the ship, only pieces of it. This is

expensive, time consuming, and does not serve customers
well. The solution proposed is that the interfaces between
functional or product units be improved or eliminated, and
sequential flows across functions be made parallel through
rapid and broad movement of information.
Approaches comparison
22
Automation attack
23

The first rule of any technology is that automation applied to an

efficient operation will magnify the efficiency.
The second is that automation applied to an inefficient operation
will magnify the inefficiency.
(Bill Gates, Microsoft Corporation)

The answer lies in Bill Gates’ observation. Automating

something doesn’t fix its underlying problems; it just helps
them to occur more quickly, in vastly increased numbers
and at greater frequency.

‘Why don’t organizations fix their processes before they

look to automation solutions?’
Business process orientation: Michael Hammer
24
"Reengineering Work: Don't Automate, Obliterate"
by Michael Hammer Harvard Business Review, July-August 1990
Companies rarely achieve radical performance improvements
when they invest in information technology. Most companies
use computers to speed up, not break away from, business
processes and rules that are decades, if not centuries, out of
date. But the power of computers can be released by
"reengineering" work: abandoning old ways of working and
creating entirely new ones. Business process reengineering
(BPR) involves the breaking of old, traditional ways of doing
business and finding new and innovative ways. And from the
redesigned processes, new rules will emerge that will
determine how the processes will operate. The reengineering
process is an all-or-nothing proposition, the results of which
are often unknown until the completion of its course.
Business process orientation: James Harrington
25

Unfortunately, many businesses in the 1990s used the phrase

"reengineering" as a euphemism for layoffs. Other organizations
did not make radical changes in their business processes and did
not make significant gains, and, therefore, wrote the process off as
a failure. Yet, others have found that BPI is a valuable tool in a
process of gradual change to a business.
It should be noted that BPI focuses on "doing things right" more
than it does on "doing the right thing". In essence, BPI attempts to
reduce variation and/or wastage in processes, so that the desired
outcome can be achieved with better utilization of resources.
Business Process Improvement (BPI) is a systematic approach to
help any organization optimize its underlying processes to achieve
more efficient results.
Balancing People, Processes, and Technology
26
Business Process Management Life-Cycle
27

Business Process Management

Process Design starts with the design of efficient core
processes

Process Modeling takes the process

Process design and introduces costs,
Modeling resource use, and other constraints
that will affect the process lifecycle.

Buisness process management is about acheiving results. The

Process
ultimate goal of any process management intiative is to execute
Execution
the process design with a high degree of accuracy.

By monitoring BP, a company can track performance on a per-

Process
process basis. This allows your company to collect data on how
Monitoring
processes can be improved.

Business process management is about implementing constant

Process
improvements in the process structure that will result in greater
Optimization
efficiency and profit.
Iceberg syndrome
28

BPM is not a simple concept nor it is simple to implement – it is extremely

complex and difficult.

Iceberg typically only show about 10 percents of their mass above the water.
BPM is often like an iceberg – people and organizations only see what is
above the water. The interesting observation is that what appears above the
surface depends upon the viewer’s perception. For example a vendor sees
technology above the surface, a business analyst sees the processes, HR
sees change management, IT sees the technology implementation, business
management sees short-term gains (quick wins), cost reduction and simple
measures of improvement and the project manager sees short-term
completion of project tasks and the deliverables of the project.

The reality needs not only to be addressed but also made visible to the
organization. A ship could cruise very close to an iceberg on one side and not
hit anything, and yet do the same on the other side and sink. The visibility of
issues and activities is an important part of addresing them.
Approaches within BPM: from product management to
service management
29

Business
Business
Process
Process
Reingineering
Orientation

Six
FO BPO TQM BPI BPR
Sigma

Business
Functional Total Quality Process
Specialization Management Improvement
 30

BPI vs BPM
A business revolution (1993)
31

“Reengineering is 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 & Champy, 1993

Quotes from Hammer I
32

 "American managers . . . must abandon the

organizational and operational principles and
procedures they are now using and create entirely new
ones.... Business reengineering means starting all
over, starting from scratch.... It means forgetting how
work was done.... Old job titles and old organizational
arrangements . . . cease to matter. How people and
companies did things yesterday doesn't matter to the
business reengineer .... Reengineering ... can't be
carried out in small and cautious steps. It is an all-or-
nothing proposition."
Reengineering the Corporation
Quotes from Hammer II
33

 "In this journey we'll carry our wounded and shoot the
dissenters.... I want to purge from the business
vocabulary: CEO, manager, worker, job." Forbes
ASAP, Sept. 13, 1993
 "It's basically taking an axe and a machine gun to your
existing organization." Computerworld,Jan. 24, 1994
 "What you do with the existing structure is nuke it!" Site
Selection, February 1993
 "Reengineering must be initiated . . . by someone who
has . . . enough status to break legs." Planning Review,
May/June 1993
Key Words
34

 Dramatic
 Reengineering should be brought in “when a need exits for heavy blasting.”
 Companies in deep trouble.
 Companies that see trouble coming.
 Companies that are in peak condition.

 Business Process
 a collection of activities that takes one or more kinds of inputs and creates an
output that is of value to a customer.
Customer demand
35

 expect us to know everything

 to make the right decisions
 to do it right now
 to do it with less resources
 to make no mistakes
 expect to be fully informed
Why Reengineer?
36

 Customers
 Demanding
 Sophistication
 Changing Needs
 Competition
 Local
 Global
 Change
 Technology
 Customer Preferences
BPR is Not?
37

BPR may sometimes be mistaken for the following:

 Automation is an automatic, as opposed to human, operation or
control of a process, equipment or a system; or the
techniques and equipment used to achieve this. Automation
is most often applied to computer (or at least electronic)
control of a manufacturing process.
 Downsizing is the reduction of expenditures in order to become
financial stable. Those expenditures could include but are
not limited to: the total number of employees at a company,
retirements, or spin-off companies.
BPR is Not?
38

involves paying another company to

 Outsourcing
provide the services a company might
otherwise have employed its own staff to
perform. Outsourcing is readily seen in the
software development sector.
emphasizes small and
 Continuous improvement
measurable refinements to an organization's
current processes and systems. Continuous
improvements’ origins were derived from total
quality management (TQM) and Six Sigma.
 Reengineering & Continuous Improvement--Similarities
39

Reengineering Continuous Improvement

Similarities
Basis of analysis Process Process
Performance measurement Rigorous Rigorous
Organizational change Significant Significant
Behavioral change Significant Significant
Time investment Substantial Substantial
 Reengineering & Continuous Improvement--Differences
40

Reengineering Continuous Improvement

Differences
Level of change Radical Incremental
Starting point Clean slate Existing process
Participation Top-down Bottom-up
Typical scope Broad, cross-functional Narrow, within functions
Risk High Moderate
Primary enabler Information technology Statistical control
Type of change Cultural and structural Cultural
Business process orientation: James Harrington
41

Unfortunately, many businesses in the 1990s used the phrase

"reengineering" as a euphemism for layoffs. Other organizations
did not make radical changes in their business processes and did
not make significant gains, and, therefore, wrote the process off as
a failure. Yet, others have found that BPI is a valuable tool in a
process of gradual change to a business.
It should be noted that BPI focuses on "doing things right" more
than it does on "doing the right thing". In essence, BPI attempts to
reduce variation and/or wastage in processes, so that the desired
outcome can be achieved with better utilization of resources.
Business Process Improvement (BPI) is a systematic approach to
help any organization optimize its underlying processes to achieve
more efficient results.

41
AS-IS and TO-BE models
42

A model of today’s business is often called an as-is

model, to contrast with a model of a desired future
situation, a to-be model. The terms “as-is” and “to-be”
work for all business modeling disciplines. An as-is
organization model and a to-be organization model
show today and tomorrow for the organization. It is
common to have a single as-is process model and
several different to-be process models. Several
alternatives are evaluated to decide which is the best
business processes for the future.
Techniques for Modeling the As-Is Process
43

 To build an as-is model we have to:

 Build the team;

 Organize and initiate the modeling session;
 Develop RD;
 Develop CFD.
Difficulties with As-Is Modeling
44

 Possible problems:
.
 Securing or coordinating participation, and dealing
with “mystery areas”;
 Applying a process orientation when it is not
appropriate, and vice versa;
 Facilitation or modeling issues arising during the
session;
 The role of systems in a process model;
 Disagreements and multiple process versions.
As-Is model analysis – not only improve
45

 Drop/abandon: This process is not necessary, or the benefit will never

justify the cost. It is rare, but we had a case where a software license
validation process cost several hundred thousand dollars per year and
consumed skilled resources, but delivered no benefit (never uncovered
problems). The company decided to abandon the process rather than
reengineer it.
 Outsource: It would be a more effective use of resources to have a
supplier carry out the process. Traditionally, this has been the choice
for generic, infrastructure activities such as cleaning and catering.
 Leave as is: The process is fine; the issues were elsewhere (e.g., no
one follows the process, or training is needed). Apply the 10% rule: if
the new process will not be at least 10%, better leave it alone.
 Improve: The basic structure of the process is okay, but specific
improvements are possible.
 Redesign: The process should be fully redesigned.
Goals of creating TO-BE models
46

 The primary goals of “Characterizing and Designing

the To-Be Process” are:
.
 Produce a description of the important characteristics of the to-be
process in terms of the process enablers—workflow design, IT,
motivation and measurement, and so forth. Collectively, these are the
specifications for the new process.
 Develop swimlane diagrams at increasing levels of detail (handoff, flow,
etc.) depicting the process workflow that supports the desired
characteristics of the process or processes.

One way to look at this is that we’re starting with conceptual process
design—we will identify the main concepts and characteristics of the new
process, and only then do we perform detailed process design by
specifying the workflow.
Techniques to build TO-BE process model
47

 Brainstorming.
 Find the bottlenecks.
 Find the redundant activities.
 Find the activities that can be performed
simultaneously
 Find the non value added activities and try to reduce
the number.
 Sometimes it is important to expand the set of
activities in order to reduce the time of service.
 Sometimes it is impossible to reduce time and cost
expenses at the same time.
Routing of tasks
48

 Any process can be modeled with three types of

routing.
Sequential
Parallel
Conditional
Iterative


Routing of tasks (continued)
49
 Sequentional

 Parallel
Routing of tasks (continued)
50

 Conditional

 Iterative
As-Is process model example – What’s wrong here?
51
As-Is process: anxious customers
52

 Let’s look at an example of an as-is process for seating customers. The

as-is process is purely manual - no technology supports the host in her
job of seating the customer.
 A dining party waits until a table is available, and they either check
periodically with the host or just wait until the host informs them that a
table is available.
 Studying the as-is process provides an understanding of how work is
performed today as well as some insight into problems. For example,
when a table is not available, the dining party waits in the Wait for Table
activity. For some customers, this is an anxious wait because they are
unsure whether they have been forgotten.
TO-BE process model example
53
To-Be process: anxious customers
54

 At some family-oriented Mykonos restaurants, pagers are provided to

waiting diners. Pagers make the waiting less anxious for some diners,
because they do not have to periodically ask the host if they have been
forgotten. Diners have a feeling of assurance that they are queued in a
system, and they can relax and enjoy waiting for their pager to buzz.
 To-be variant of process incorporates activities that use a paging system.
When a dining party is asked to wait in Ask Party to Wait, they are given a
pager. At any point the party might choose to leave. If they leave they
return the pager. If they stay, when the pager notifies them that a table is
available, they return the pager, the host assigns the table and the diners
are seated.
 By comparing the to-be process with the as-is process we can see which
activities are performed differently and which new activities are needed.
Redesigning Little Italy Restaurants
a case study by Ned Kock
Little Italy Restaurants
56

• Started with one

restaurant
Restaurant
Restaurant

Restaurant
• Grew into a chain of
Food
items Food 30 independent
items
Food
items
restaurants with their
Restaurant own kitchens

• Kitchens were later

Central
kitchen
re-modeled so their
size was reduced
Start
• Dish preparation was
centralized
The problems
57

Problems:
-In 40% of the deliveries,
food items arrive late.
Restaurant
-In 20% of the deliveries,
Restaurant
food items go to wrong
Restaurant
Food
items Food
restaurants.
Food
items
-60% of the orders for food
items
Restaurant
items are only partially fulfilled.

Central
kitchen
Goal:
Bring all the percentages
above down to 5%.
 Diagram 1
Issue FIRF 1
(Kitchen’s Assistant
Restaurant -Food items
manager) -FIRF1 manager
manager

-Food items

Check FIRF 2
Chef (Assistant
-FIRF2 manager) FIRF1s
-FIRF1

-FIRF2

Completed
orders
Schedule 3
-FIRF2 production
FIRF2s -Completed
(Chef)
order details

-FIRF2 Sign FIRF3 5

(Assistant
-FIRF3
manager)
4
-FIRF2 Coordinate food
Ordered production -FIRF4
(Chef) -Delivery
FIRF2s
details
6
Restaurant -Upcoming Plan delivery
-Delivery deliveries
manager (Delivery team)
details
7
FIRF1s = Unchecked FIRFs, with data received from restaurants Make delivery
FIRF2s = Checked and priority-coded FIRFs (Delivery team) -Delivery
FIRF3s = Ready-marked FIRFs plan
FIRF4s = Signed FIRFs, referring to completed orders
Foster asynchronous communication

Eliminate the synchronous “food items

request” interaction between restaurant
manager and kitchen’s manager, by
allowing the restaurant manager to enter
food items directly into a “food items
requests” data store.
 Diagram 2
Issue FIRF 1
(Kitchen’s Assistant
Restaurant -Food items
manager) -FIRF1 manager
manager

-Food items

Check FIRF 2
Chef (Assistant
-FIRF2 manager) FIRF1s
-FIRF1

-FIRF2

Completed
orders
Schedule 3
-FIRF2 production
FIRF2s -Completed
(Chef)
order details

-FIRF2 Sign FIRF3 5

(Assistant
-FIRF3
manager)
4
-FIRF2 Coordinate food
Ordered production -FIRF4
(Chef) -Delivery
FIRF2s
details
6
Restaurant -Upcoming Plan delivery
-Delivery deliveries
manager (Delivery team)
details
7
FIRF1s = Unchecked FIRFs, with data received from restaurants Make delivery
FIRF2s = Checked and priority-coded FIRFs (Delivery team) -Delivery
FIRF3s = Ready-marked FIRFs plan
FIRF4s = Signed FIRFs, referring to completed orders
Eliminate duplication of information

Eliminate the “completed orders” data

store, by making “food items requests”
a static data store.
 Diagram 3
Issue FIRF 1
(Kitchen’s Assistant
Restaurant -Food items
manager) -FIRF1 manager
manager

-Food items

Check FIRF 2
Chef (Assistant
-FIRF2 manager) FIRF1s
-FIRF1

-FIRF2

Completed
orders
Schedule 3
-FIRF2 production
FIRF2s -Completed
(Chef)
order details

-FIRF2 Sign FIRF3 5

(Assistant
-FIRF3
manager)
4
-FIRF2 Coordinate food
Ordered production -FIRF4
(Chef) -Delivery
FIRF2s
details
6
Restaurant -Upcoming Plan delivery
-Delivery deliveries
manager (Delivery team)
details
7
FIRF1s = Unchecked FIRFs, with data received from restaurants Make delivery
FIRF2s = Checked and priority-coded FIRFs (Delivery team) -Delivery
FIRF3s = Ready-marked FIRFs plan
FIRF4s = Signed FIRFs, referring to completed orders
Reduce information flow
63

Eliminate data flows between two

process functions and themselves:
Assistant manager storing unchecked
FIRFs (or FIRF1s) for later use.
Chef storing FIRF2s for later use, and
chef storing ordered FIRF2s for later
use.
 Diagram 4
Issue FIRF 1
(Kitchen’s Assistant
Restaurant -Food items
manager) -FIRF1 manager
manager

-Food items

Check FIRF 2
Chef (Assistant
-FIRF2 manager) FIRF1s
-FIRF1

-FIRF2

Completed
orders
Schedule 3
-FIRF2 production
FIRF2s -Completed
(Chef)
order details

-FIRF2 Sign FIRF3 5

(Assistant
-FIRF3
manager)
4
-FIRF2 Coordinate food
Ordered production -FIRF4
(Chef) -Delivery
FIRF2s
details
6
Restaurant -Upcoming Plan delivery
-Delivery deliveries
manager (Delivery team)
details
7
FIRF1s = Unchecked FIRFs, with data received from restaurants Make delivery
FIRF2s = Checked and priority-coded FIRFs (Delivery team) -Delivery
FIRF3s = Ready-marked FIRFs plan
FIRF4s = Signed FIRFs, referring to completed orders
Reduce control
65

Eliminate the “check FIRF” activity

(conducted by the assistant
manager) and “sign FIRF3” activity
(conducted by the assistant
manager).
These are unnecessary control
activities that just delay process
execution.
 Diagram 5
Issue FIRF 1
(Kitchen’s Assistant
Restaurant -Food items
manager) -FIRF1 manager
manager

-Food items

Check FIRF 2
Chef (Assistant
-FIRF2 manager) FIRF1s
-FIRF1

-FIRF2

Completed
orders
Schedule 3
-FIRF2 production
FIRF2s -Completed
(Chef)
order details

-FIRF2 Sign FIRF3 5

(Assistant
-FIRF3
manager)
4
-FIRF2 Coordinate food
Ordered production -FIRF4
(Chef) -Delivery
FIRF2s
details
6
Restaurant -Upcoming Plan delivery
-Delivery deliveries
manager (Delivery team)
details
7
FIRF1s = Unchecked FIRFs, with data received from restaurants Make delivery
FIRF2s = Checked and priority-coded FIRFs (Delivery team) -Delivery
FIRF3s = Ready-marked FIRFs plan
FIRF4s = Signed FIRFs, referring to completed orders
Redesigned process

Restaurant 1
manager Coordinate food
production
(Chef)

-FIR
-Food items -FIR
completion
status

Food items
-FIRs to be
requests
delivered
-Delivery 2
details
Make delivery
-FIR delivery (Delivery team)
status

Note: The diagram above assumes that a computer

system will: (a) Schedule production, (b) Schedule delivery.
Process implementation

Restaurant PC connected to
manager the Internet
through a Web Web server
browser running a
restaurant
management
system
Internet
-Food -Food
items items

-FIR
-FIR
-FIRs to be completion
delivered status
Chef
-FIR delivery
status
Requested
food items

Kitchen
staff

Delivery
team

Final slide
Examining scenarios – WHAT-IF table
69

KPIs
TO-BE MODEL
70

 TO-BE model is an improved model – result of business process

mapping and analysis activities (as a rule the result of at least three
alternatives analysis).
 It is important to specify KPI improvement associated with new way of
doing things.
 TO-BE model is the basis for further automation (if needed).