The second proposition (P2) is confirmed. The implementation of BPR in practice is an appropriate procedure for achieving the target of improving case company competitiveness.
The answer to P2 is addressed in this section by illuminating the study through the lens of achieved research results.
Figure 20. The P2 framework.
The fist article identified the most critical areas of the case company for improvement, which in turn were utilized in workshops in order to define the
development areas and prepare for identification of the objectivities of development actions.
The most important development areas can be nominated according to the indication of the CFI product group for one item, Prod#3, and the KPI group for four items: KPI#2, KPI#3, KPI#4 and KPI#5. The direction of the experience development index has only two values, and while the index indicates deterioration for two factors (Process #8 and Personnel #3), all other indicate remaining at the same level or improving. The importance index indicates that Prod#3, with a value of 0.99, and KPI#2, with a value of 0.97, are more important than the others.
It is extremely important to identify and direct the development actions to the most critical development areas from the very early stages of consideration of development actions. This point is not much discussed in the literature, with most practitioners focusing more on the later stages of the development action, such as the process-oriented approach, how IT is positioned relative to planned initiatives or a tool or methodology that is planned to be implemented during the development project.
Thomas Grünberg (2004) is a rare exception in this regard, drawing attention to the early stages of research by presenting two questions: where should developments begin? How should development work be carried out? The first question refers to the fact that the initial phase aims to identify the most critical areas of quality development needing improvement, while the latter refers to the question of what kind of tool or development methodology should be pursued (Grünberg 2004).
Article 2 considers the importance of a strategic approach in the context of different BPR models through a review of the BPR literature and by presenting three different core processes used in the case company.
The indication and consideration of important drivers turns out to be important as an intermediate stage when identifying the neediest areas for development within the organization, for making preparations for launching development measures, and for establishing appropriate development tools and development methodology.
A strategic standpoint is one of the most important drivers for designing and implementing BPR activities. Identifying strategically important major issues is vital in the early stages of investigation and preparation of development actions. Important strategic factors, such as strong executive direction and support for
the change and a clear vision of breakthrough business goals, help to set the preconditions for successful development work. Another important factor at the early stage is analysis of the current business process status in order to identify those parts of the business processes that work well and those that do not (Muthu et al. 1999, Balasubramanian 2006).
Article 2 presents a holistic framework for the BPR methodology and the case company’s requirements for the BPR. Some important points here are literature recommendations regarding methodology and the combination of these recommendations with company-specific issues, which are used in creating the BPR project plan and methodology, and determining the appropriateness of BPR information.
The focus of the theoretical viewpoint is on factors that support practical BPR implementation in the case company, rather than creating a completely new theory in the BPR realm. The intention is to apply BPR theory from the company standpoint, and ultimately, in the discussion section, to consider to what degree a new theory has been discovered.
It is important to clearly define the objectivities towards which an organization strives in order to successfully execute a BPR project. The difference between function- and process-based organizations has been defined. The limitations of function-based actions, like narrow targets and excessive focus on expense, thereby reducing resources for action, limit a corporation’s chances for success. Meanwhile, process-based actions offer great potential for achieving financial and other measurable objectivities, as well as the capability to create added value for the customer and increase the customer’s perception of quality.
The three core process models – CRM, PM and PDM – have been defined from the case company’s perspective and a short description is also presented of each of the main activities of the core processes. The BPR framework is presented from the perspectives of several authors and the case company’s main drivers. It is important to consider the BPR framework in a holistic manner. The presented models and case company’s main drivers are the starting point for further case company-specific BPR methodology and BPR project definitions.
Article 3, and particularly section 3 of that article – “BPR FRAMEWORK" – first reviews the key issues of the preliminary study of the company’s capabilities, discussed in the context of identifying organizational development actions and further identified through the process development objectives. Ultimately, at the end of the third section, BPR methodology development is considered. This is
followed by section 4 – “PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION" – in which WBS, pilot projects and an IT development project are introduced.
An important aspect of article 3 is its recapitulation of the research performed thus far and, from there, its identification of the practical implementation of BPR through methodology, pilot projects and IT development project.
In terms of time frame, the longest stage was the sixth phase: “work breakdown structure”. This stage can be considered to be the “development core" of the project. This stage began with the identification of existing processes, a review of the current operation, a detailed identification of current subprocesses, subprocess restructuring into a seamless entity, transition to a three core process model to replace the previous five core process model, identification and prioritization of development areas, and identification of the vision: "The road to the future".
As a result of these BPR activities, a process portal (based on the Microsoft SharePoint software), consisting of a process description section and an operational section, was designed and implemented. The processes are presented in a hierarchical manner, allowing users to drill down from the core process level into each subprocess. The operational section of the process portal provides all necessary functionality to run subprocesses in an operative manner.
Article 4 presents the practical implementation of the continuous improvement and follow-up measures. In accordance with the model set out in articles 2 and 3, a situation-specific BPR concept was created and, from there, the BPR project and continuous improvement practice were implemented. The strong customer orientation of this research is notable, with the context of the BPR concept being a key underlying factor (Uusitalo 2012, Uusitalo 2013, Uusitalo 2014).
The BPR concept consists of the following five sequential stages: preliminary study (article 1), BPR tool definition (article 2), BPR project definition and project implementation (article 3) and BPR continuous improvement / follow-up (article 4). The business development entity was implemented on the basis of the BPR concept, created in this study (Uusitalo 2013, Uusitalo 2014).
The concept formed for the development of BPR on the basis of this implemented project supplement the gap between BPR theory and empirical facts through a detailed description of the case study.
The framework of the study forms the BPR concept, developed, applied and tested in the case company development project. The business development BPR
concept was developed in a dynamic information age business environment in order to improve the company's competitiveness. This BPR concept complements the literature in this respect, and points to the development perspective according to which the starting point is the analysis of the unique situation of the case company and the development of a customer-oriented approach.
The BPR concept is examined in detail in article 4. Based on the study carried out, the simplified model of the BPR concept is shown in Figure 21.
Figure 21. BPR concept.
5.1.3 The development of business processes in order to significantly