BPM is a comprehensive methodology which helps design and maintains all aspects of your organization with all the sole function of meeting or exceeding their customer’s wants and needs both effectively and efficiently. BPM efforts to continuously increase the business processes either in incremental steps or with radical changes.
BPM is a mix of these power tools (and some more) helping the business to document, understand, measure and improve their business processes. BPM aid to create well documented and streamlined processes, that happen to be vital to ensure consistency, traceability while focusing towards shared strategy and satisfaction goals.
Considering the different origins, skill sets and backgrounds of any “typical” BPM and “typical” Lean Six Sigma practitioner, there are some deployment facts working against both methodologies:
1. Lack of information of each other: Most BPM teams and BPM Software Companies know very little about Lean Six Sigma and viceversa. BPM traditionally has been utilized and deployed for an information technology effort. LSS is thought of as an operational tool for manufacturing and / or back office processes, not software development.
2. BPM is practically constantly accompanied by a business-wide software tool, and needs an application vendor over a periodical grounds for training, new releases, technical support, etc.
3. BPM is generally deployed as gestion des risques or from higher up management levels. 4. Six Sigma and Lean are already in most cases manufacturing efforts; and many recently operations management directives. Like a foot note, some of the most successful Six Sigma deployments were executive management mandates (Motorola, Allied, Bank of America, to mention a couple of).
5. Six Sigma tools do not have a huge technology foot print, with software requirements mostly at some of the organization’s desktops. Its deployment is normally driven in the beginning by consulting organizations and then passes to internal resources (a course Office is actually a typical modus operandi).
6. Neither BPM nor Lean Six Sigma specialist is traditional a difference and Integration Management expert or trained specialist. This information vacuum causes hiccups from the deployment and acceptance of either methodology through the stakeholders.
7. Neither BPM nor Six Sigma come with an integrated data collection tool, creating always a delay in data gathering which hampers a quick deployment and execution. Both rely on a 3rd party layer to perform data gathering and data readying for analysis.
BPM tools are very effective in creating business interactions and communications models, mapping processes and workflows, as well as capturing key metrics and resources connected to those processes. However, many BPM teams find it hard to understand which processes will be the top priority for the business and which defects will be the most critical to resolve for almost any given process. BPM lacks of quantitative ranking methods and statistical tools to prove significance. Teams sometimes use several “hunches” and past experiences to choose how prioritize design and implementation techniques for new or improved processes. LSS has much to offer BPM teams in this field – through tools like Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA), risk prioritization index and Value Stream Mapping (VSM). So, conceptually, BPM and LSS ought to be a fantastic fit.
BPM is also a thin methodology to observe the sustainability of the process change after implementation of those changes. Once process changes have already been deployed, a project is closed and also the consultant systems analyst goes home, or starts a fresh project. Tools like statistical process control and non-existent within the BPM tool set, leaving the operational leadership with (maybe) a great deal of reports, at best real-time. LSS offers via SPC, a wealth of proven and robust tools specifically tailored to particular quantitative variables; designed to monitor stability, trending and within control operational status.
BPM tools permits storage of key data and key metrics for your different artifacts which are created and employed in a project. However, will not provide for a strong statistical analysis of the data. As a matter of fact, a lot of the BPM data stores are for simple figures (just like an average), curtailing itself for any more accurate data analysis, like hypothesis testing or a regression model to forecast future process performance. Along with the few software tools designed with discrete or 58dexepky Carlo simulators are rarely deployed.
Obviously and key to its success, LSS tackles specific defects in a specific set of operations in just a specific business process. This method is extremely good at eliminating defects. However, generally LSS lacks of a great deal of enterprise-wide view of the business strategy, objective and goals, its actors along with the organization surroundings. It is an area where BPM includes a very strong showing. So, conceptually, BPM and LSS needs to be an incredible fit.
Lean Six Sigma also falls short when tries to incorporate tools for computer automation and knowledge technology designs (both vital is nearly all of our business processes rich in integration and automation). BPM lends a helpful hand with use cases, event modeling, business class models, subtype and package models. Conceptually, again BPM and LSS must be a fantastic fit.
It might be very apparent that Six Sigma Lean and Business Process Management (BPM) neither can standalone. Organizations that master the integration of both can have a better rate of financial success when building and implementing process to adopt any organization to get a closer amount of customer happiness and global competition.
BPM or LSS tend not to consider Change nor Integration Management or some of its derivatives when communicating changes with their stakeholders and much less on their customers. These important aspects of buying to the changes and managing smooth transitions and changes are not considered in any way in every project plan, or are left towards the assumed expertise in the project manager.
The past portion of this paper will present actionable suggestions to both BPM and Six Sigma practitioners to counter any natural resistance to change that can typically emerge from the organization when facing changes.