I recently attended a Lean Six Sigma conference. It’s always interesting to hear evangelists from various industries in different countries sharing their experiences with improving efficiency, effectiveness, and moving towards a culture of high performance and continuous improvement.

It never fails to surprise me how dogmatic many are about their particular flavor of methodology. Within the Lean Six Sigma camp there are Six Sigma purists who will partake of no Lean. There are Lean gurus who speak not of Six Sigma. Then there are the fusionistas, who happily take the best bits of both. (Personally, I’m willing to utilize any tools that get results within a structured framework.) Some proudly advertise their allegiance, while others refuse to be pigeonholed and embrace a more neutral term such as Process Improvement or Operational Excellence. As a pragmatist I tend towards the latter - in my experience, for every person out there in a position of influence who is pro a “Big M” methodology, there will be another who is equally (or more!) anti that same methodology. So why provoke resistance to change over a mere label? Well, that’s just my two cents!

Read the rest of this entry »

I’d like to share with you a little set-piece that I often use with clients as a learning aid.  I call it (rather unimaginatively!) my “Google Maps exercise” and it makes some very neat points with regards to process decomposition and modeling best practices.

A common challenge I encounter is that people get bogged down with figuring out the level of detail they should go to. This isn’t because of the lack of a definitive standard for process levels - I think the root cause of the difficulty is simply that process modeling is not an exact science.  In fact, much of it is quite subjective.

So, the exercise usually goes something like this…

Read the rest of this entry »

Do not be alarmed. This post is not an instruction manual on the finer points of BPMN. For those of you who wish to indulge, this should provide you with many hours of entertainment.

Rather, I want to reflect upon a few thoughts about process modeling, and share some practical hints.

And whilst Blueprint is my favorite modeling tool in existence, the following comments are equally applicable whether you’re using sticky notes, a white board, or the back of an envelope. (I’ve also seen bits of string used quite creatively!)

Process modeling is a process in itself. Therefore, like any other process, we can aim to improve its efficiency, effectiveness and flexibility. So instead of approaching modeling in an ad-hoc manner, how can we make it more repeatable, reduce the cycle time, raise quality and customer satisfaction?

To me, process modeling is fundamentally an exercise in communication. A model may be generated in order to share information between members of a project team about the way the process currently works. Or to share information between the project team and the stakeholders. Or with vendors. Or between a business expert and a business analyst. Or a business analyst and a developer. In all of these instances, the process modeling is not meant to be an end in itself, but a means to identify, verify, and inform interested parties about the way the process is, could or should be.

If we accept the model as an abstraction of reality, a visual representation of various process attributes, then the question arises not so much as to whether a process model is right or wrong, but, like a conversation between two people - is it effective or ineffective? Does it convey useful meaning to the intended audience, or not? A meaningful communication forms a sound basis for action - but a confusing, misleading or ambiguous one cannot be expected to yield a high quality outcome. Garbage in, garbage out.

How then, to create effective, clear, useful communication about a process?

Read the rest of this entry »

BPM project durations are usually measured in weeks-to-months - not months-to-years. With this velocity, you can’t afford to get stuck in the rut of traditional “define & design” techniques based on multiple rounds of 1-on-1 analysis meetings. In fact, I’d go so far as to label this as rework which increases a project’s cycle time!

I’m an enthusiastic supporter of the workshop format, where not only speed, but also quality, visibility and buy-in are greatly enhanced compared to the 1-on-1 approach. You could say it’s a way of applying process improvement methods to the way we carry out process improvement itself (or “PI²” as I like to call it).

In a previous blog, I shared some secrets of success for the “2 x 6 workshop“. One of the critical success factors is utilizing a facilitator - “an impartial, objective analyst to run the session, keep it crisp and in-focus”. Let’s dive into that a bit more. Why do we need the facilitator role, how does it add value to the process of process improvement, and how can it be done well?

Read the rest of this entry »

Getting started with BPM makes many people nervous, and for good reason.  Change can bring uncertainty and fear - and hence often generates resistance.  In response to this type of internal skepticism and unrest, I frequently recommend conducting a 2×6 workshop when initially analyzing your processes to engage and excite the people who live the processes every day.

But before I tell how to run a 2×6 workshop, I would like to put it in context:

BPM is first and foremost a discipline to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and agility of a business, from a process viewpoint, to deliver real business value.  That being said, you have to do a certain amount of rewiring PEOPLE and your organization before you can start worrying about the software.

To really drive BPM in your organization, you need strategies in place to make the shift a bit easier for your workers to consume.  People don’t want change to be forced upon them.  But if you present them with an opportunity to help drive that change, then they can become fully invested as participants who help shape their own future.  So when you begin your initiative and need to take stock of where you are, you do some process analysis.  How do you get started?

Read the rest of this entry »

When your organization’s products are intangible, like an investment CD or a retirement plan, it’s sometimes difficult to identify waste or inefficiencies in your business.  Today I want to discuss some of the unique attributes of financial services organizations and how to look at these businesses through the prism of process to find problems that are often overlooked.

Financial services often tend to think of themselves as very different from other types of organizations.  For example, many firms have organically grown along the lines of “functional silos” based on different types of product, reinforced by separate IT applications supporting these product categories. Yet, every organization shares similar horizontal functions such as human resources, finance or accounting.  These functions alone offer more than enough opportunity for delivering business value through a BPM initiative.  But, I promise there’s more!

Financial services companies are generally very IT-intensive, and open to new technology and approaches to problem solving.  However, it can be difficult for these organizations to determine which solutions fit their needs the best - or even which problems to address - since their products are not tangible like a car or any product that you can hold in your hand.  If you can’t see your product, it can be difficult to see your problems like “defects” and “waste”.

Furthermore, regulatory monitoring & reporting requirements such as Sarbanes Oxley and Basel 2 have weighed heavily on this industry. Combined with global economic factors such as the credit crunch, there’s huge pressure on financial services companies to increase visibility, transparency and controls whilst reducing costs and simultaneously improving customer service.

In steps BPM…

Read the rest of this entry »