How To Facilitate The Business Process Mapping?
Welcome July,
Semoga dengan memasuki bulan Juli ini kita semua masih tetap semangat menjalani semester kedua di tahun 2012. Well, pada tulisan saya sebelumnya yang berjudul Introduction Business Process telah kita ketahui bersama mengenai definisi dan manfaatnya. Di kesempatan kali ini saya ingin menambahkan lagi materi mengenai Business Process yang saya dapat dari hasil diskusi dengan rekan-rekan sesama member Business Process Mapping Group yang ada di LinkedIn beberapa waktu yang lalu. Agar lebih singkat berikut ini petikan hasil diskusi dengan topik "Bagaimana cara untuk memfasilitasi tim dalam mendefinisikan business process-nya" yang dibuka oleh salah satu member.
Semoga dengan memasuki bulan Juli ini kita semua masih tetap semangat menjalani semester kedua di tahun 2012. Well, pada tulisan saya sebelumnya yang berjudul Introduction Business Process telah kita ketahui bersama mengenai definisi dan manfaatnya. Di kesempatan kali ini saya ingin menambahkan lagi materi mengenai Business Process yang saya dapat dari hasil diskusi dengan rekan-rekan sesama member Business Process Mapping Group yang ada di LinkedIn beberapa waktu yang lalu. Agar lebih singkat berikut ini petikan hasil diskusi dengan topik "Bagaimana cara untuk memfasilitasi tim dalam mendefinisikan business process-nya" yang dibuka oleh salah satu member.
Kevin O'Malley, PMP, CSM
I would like to get your advice on how to facilitate a group though the process of defining a business process. What methods and techniques do you use? Any books on facilitation would be good. Thks
Mike Lanyon
at last a discussion on Business Process, yay!
Stefanie Karp
I really like the Rummler-Brache methodology. They have some info on their website, including a short case study on "what is a process and why should you care?"
http://www.rummler-brache.com/case-studies-and-white-papers While it does not go as deep as how to facilitate, it's a good reminder to start with a Critical Business Issue, and desired performance measures for the process. If you don't have everybody on the same page, with the same goal in front of them, the facilitation will be very difficult and all over the place.
Also, the book "Mining Group Gold" has some good suggestions for how to harness the power of people in meetings; I've found that much of what they recommend works really well for Business Process Improvement facilitation:
http://www.crmlearning.com/mining-group-gold
Hope that helps a little bit!
Kevin O'Malley, PMP, CSM
Thank you Stefanie. I checked out the Rummler-Brache site and saw that it has a lot of valuable information. I have their first book and recently reread it. I also see they have a comprehensive BPM methodology. By method, I am looking for step-by-step guide for leading a team though a process mapping session. For example, do you simply start with the trigger event and then ask the group " tell me what happens after this event"? I'm just curious how others run these session.
Stefanie Karp
1. First, start with a Project Definition Worksheet, in which you identify the process, the process sponsor(s), the process owner(s), the process output/input, the process scope (first and last step), the process customer and participants. The important part is including the process performance measure(s) including current level of performance and desired level of performance (i.e. the goals for the BPM Project). The cross-functional group, with participants from every dept that is affected by the process, absolutely needs to agree on these and "sign off" on the Project Definition Worksheet before you start the next steps:
2. Mapping the "as-is" process; since everybody agreed on the scope of the process, you already have your first step, so you put that on the map, then have the group talk through the steps, in as much detail as possible. Typically, during the discussion, you will begin to see some disconnects and/or bottle necks in the process, which are things that you will be looking to resolve in the next step. Keep a list of those disconnects or identify them somehow on the map you are creating.
3. Go over the process goals, which lead into the discussion of the "Should" process design. Facilitate the design of the draft "should" process, making sure it addresses the list of disconnects and can meet the goals, as measured by your identified performance measures. Develop a summary description of each proposed change.
4. Once these changes and the newly designed process has been approved by the group, by the process owner, and by the process sponsor(s), move on to.
5. Create an implementation plan. This is your typical project management type of plan, with action steps identified, along with who will perform them, and by when. Often, the implementation will also require some sort of communication plan.
6. Finally, put a system in place for monitoring the performance of your redesigned process at regular intervals, to make sure it "sticks" and continues to meet the requirements. I would probably have regular check-ins with the group members involved in the process design, to see how the process is working, and most importantly, to see whether there are additional opportunities for improvement.
Also, don't forget to look at any other processes that might be affected by changes in your primary process, to make sure you are not "disturbing" other systems that actually function. (In fact, those processes that are "touched" by your primary process redesign should also be included in the Project Definition Worksheet)
Stefanie Karp
One thing re. mapping: make sure to write every step in the process as an "action" i.e. starting with a verb. so your probing questions shouldn't be "what comes next" but more along the lines of "who does what next?" (keeping in mind that some actions happen in parallel)
Kevin O'Malley, PMP, CSM
Thank you Stefanie. Very good points.
Fletcher Groves III
The approach to process mapping that Stefanie laid out is more-or-less the format that we follow.
In flowcharting a process, you have a choice of techniques; we tend to use cross-functional flowcharts on the AS-IS and IDEF0 process models on the SHOULD-BE (we use IDEF because we find benefit in heirarchical process models for teaching the improved process).
I do recommend that you be prepared to gather the metrics of the current state outside of the flowcharting sessions, because our experience is that the team typically will not have what you need.
Stefanie Karp
Good point, Fletcher. What are IDEFO process models?
Fletcher Groves III
Stefanie, IDEF refers to a series of modeling languages originally developed by the DOD.
They are all similar, but I would characterize IDEF0 as a heirarchical process model that gradually reveals increasing levels of process detail through a combination of graphic and text diagrams.
There are several vendors with IDEF apps. I am an iGrafx strategic partner, so I am most familiar with their product. Here is a link to their site: http://igrafx.com/products/idef0/
Stefanie Karp
Thanks! I originally worked with iGrafx s/w when I first started working in process improvement. I'll check it out, as it's way more sophisticated than some of the tools I'm using now.
Robert Starinsky
@Kevin:
I have a document set available that discusses my S-I-P-O-C based, facilitated process mapping approach. Please send an e-mail address via private Linked-In message and I would be happy to forward these materials to you.
Regards,
Bob
Budi Andryan S. Pandia
Hi Kevin,
There are many type of methods can be used in defining the process itself and the most powerful is the "question". If we don't ask the process owners, we'll not know what is the real problem existed. The method used to make it more systematic and easy to understand.
The purpose of business process mapping in general is to do the analysis and improvement. My experience in facilitating business process mapping indicates that there will be a resistance possibility from the process owners, especially if we are internal facilitators.
Well, I think it also very important for us to understand about the behavioral science and more personal approaches in explaining our goals. Do you have more ideas?
Stefanie Karp
I agree with Budi that it's good to have outside facilitators - besides the fact that it forces everybody to "behave", it often brings a fresh perspective to an old "we've always done it this way" attitude towards the process being examined. Keeping the focus on goals and on how the redesigned process will improve the workflow and lessen the frustration of all involved (and most importantly, the customer!) helps with the resistance element.
Then again, sometimes you may have to let people voice their frustration, to clean the air, then move on. My rule is always: if you're going to bring up a negative, follow it with a way that you would solve it.
Robert Starinsky
I echo Stefanie's sentiments - outside facilitators work best. It's not simply the resistance factor that we help overcome, or that we bring a fresh perspective, it's also helpful in that we typically don't know the client processes and that drives us to keep asking questions in an unbiased way, flushing out more details and ultimately driving toward being able to help the group itself question the value and wisdom of what happens in each step of the process.
Regards,
Bob
Mike Lanyon
at last a discussion on Business Process, yay!
Stefanie Karp
I really like the Rummler-Brache methodology. They have some info on their website, including a short case study on "what is a process and why should you care?"
http://www.rummler-brache.com/case-studies-and-white-papers While it does not go as deep as how to facilitate, it's a good reminder to start with a Critical Business Issue, and desired performance measures for the process. If you don't have everybody on the same page, with the same goal in front of them, the facilitation will be very difficult and all over the place.
Also, the book "Mining Group Gold" has some good suggestions for how to harness the power of people in meetings; I've found that much of what they recommend works really well for Business Process Improvement facilitation:
http://www.crmlearning.com/mining-group-gold
Hope that helps a little bit!
Kevin O'Malley, PMP, CSM
Thank you Stefanie. I checked out the Rummler-Brache site and saw that it has a lot of valuable information. I have their first book and recently reread it. I also see they have a comprehensive BPM methodology. By method, I am looking for step-by-step guide for leading a team though a process mapping session. For example, do you simply start with the trigger event and then ask the group " tell me what happens after this event"? I'm just curious how others run these session.
Stefanie Karp
1. First, start with a Project Definition Worksheet, in which you identify the process, the process sponsor(s), the process owner(s), the process output/input, the process scope (first and last step), the process customer and participants. The important part is including the process performance measure(s) including current level of performance and desired level of performance (i.e. the goals for the BPM Project). The cross-functional group, with participants from every dept that is affected by the process, absolutely needs to agree on these and "sign off" on the Project Definition Worksheet before you start the next steps:
2. Mapping the "as-is" process; since everybody agreed on the scope of the process, you already have your first step, so you put that on the map, then have the group talk through the steps, in as much detail as possible. Typically, during the discussion, you will begin to see some disconnects and/or bottle necks in the process, which are things that you will be looking to resolve in the next step. Keep a list of those disconnects or identify them somehow on the map you are creating.
3. Go over the process goals, which lead into the discussion of the "Should" process design. Facilitate the design of the draft "should" process, making sure it addresses the list of disconnects and can meet the goals, as measured by your identified performance measures. Develop a summary description of each proposed change.
4. Once these changes and the newly designed process has been approved by the group, by the process owner, and by the process sponsor(s), move on to.
5. Create an implementation plan. This is your typical project management type of plan, with action steps identified, along with who will perform them, and by when. Often, the implementation will also require some sort of communication plan.
6. Finally, put a system in place for monitoring the performance of your redesigned process at regular intervals, to make sure it "sticks" and continues to meet the requirements. I would probably have regular check-ins with the group members involved in the process design, to see how the process is working, and most importantly, to see whether there are additional opportunities for improvement.
Also, don't forget to look at any other processes that might be affected by changes in your primary process, to make sure you are not "disturbing" other systems that actually function. (In fact, those processes that are "touched" by your primary process redesign should also be included in the Project Definition Worksheet)
Stefanie Karp
One thing re. mapping: make sure to write every step in the process as an "action" i.e. starting with a verb. so your probing questions shouldn't be "what comes next" but more along the lines of "who does what next?" (keeping in mind that some actions happen in parallel)
Kevin O'Malley, PMP, CSM
Thank you Stefanie. Very good points.
Fletcher Groves III
The approach to process mapping that Stefanie laid out is more-or-less the format that we follow.
In flowcharting a process, you have a choice of techniques; we tend to use cross-functional flowcharts on the AS-IS and IDEF0 process models on the SHOULD-BE (we use IDEF because we find benefit in heirarchical process models for teaching the improved process).
I do recommend that you be prepared to gather the metrics of the current state outside of the flowcharting sessions, because our experience is that the team typically will not have what you need.
Stefanie Karp
Good point, Fletcher. What are IDEFO process models?
Fletcher Groves III
Stefanie, IDEF refers to a series of modeling languages originally developed by the DOD.
They are all similar, but I would characterize IDEF0 as a heirarchical process model that gradually reveals increasing levels of process detail through a combination of graphic and text diagrams.
There are several vendors with IDEF apps. I am an iGrafx strategic partner, so I am most familiar with their product. Here is a link to their site: http://igrafx.com/products/idef0/
Stefanie Karp
Thanks! I originally worked with iGrafx s/w when I first started working in process improvement. I'll check it out, as it's way more sophisticated than some of the tools I'm using now.
Robert Starinsky
@Kevin:
I have a document set available that discusses my S-I-P-O-C based, facilitated process mapping approach. Please send an e-mail address via private Linked-In message and I would be happy to forward these materials to you.
Regards,
Bob
Budi Andryan S. Pandia
Hi Kevin,
There are many type of methods can be used in defining the process itself and the most powerful is the "question". If we don't ask the process owners, we'll not know what is the real problem existed. The method used to make it more systematic and easy to understand.
The purpose of business process mapping in general is to do the analysis and improvement. My experience in facilitating business process mapping indicates that there will be a resistance possibility from the process owners, especially if we are internal facilitators.
Well, I think it also very important for us to understand about the behavioral science and more personal approaches in explaining our goals. Do you have more ideas?
Stefanie Karp
I agree with Budi that it's good to have outside facilitators - besides the fact that it forces everybody to "behave", it often brings a fresh perspective to an old "we've always done it this way" attitude towards the process being examined. Keeping the focus on goals and on how the redesigned process will improve the workflow and lessen the frustration of all involved (and most importantly, the customer!) helps with the resistance element.
Then again, sometimes you may have to let people voice their frustration, to clean the air, then move on. My rule is always: if you're going to bring up a negative, follow it with a way that you would solve it.
Robert Starinsky
I echo Stefanie's sentiments - outside facilitators work best. It's not simply the resistance factor that we help overcome, or that we bring a fresh perspective, it's also helpful in that we typically don't know the client processes and that drives us to keep asking questions in an unbiased way, flushing out more details and ultimately driving toward being able to help the group itself question the value and wisdom of what happens in each step of the process.
Regards,
Bob
Clare McCarthy
I agree on all points about the benefit of outside facilitators.
When I facilitate process mapping sessions, I focus on the to-be process and don't bother mapping as-is processes. Mapping as-is can be so time-consuming and draining that there is little enthusiasm left for the to-be mapping. I find the team identifies their disconnects as they debate the appropriate next steps and ownership for the to-be process. I recommend producing drafts of the new processes and reviewing them with the team asap, e.g., review drafts next morning or after lunch. The drafts demonstrate that progress is being made during the sessions, which are often challenging for the participants.
Stefanie Karp
I would never suggest trying to do all this in one session; in fact, I typically allow for separate sessions for each step, with some time for review in between. I don't think you can identify disconnects w/out talking through the current process and identifying the root causes of what doesn't work. This does not need to be formally captured; in fact, I often create this (or let participants create it) with post-it notes on large draft paper. It's during this session that the discussion slowly evolves into finding solutions, but I don't believe in skipping the "as-is" mapping step.
Kevin O'Malley, PMP, CSM
Hi Stefanie, have you received training in Rummler-Brache methodology?
Stefanie Karp
Yes, I went through a full 5-day train-the-trainer course (albeit almost 15 year ago), something I highly recommend. It included hands-on exercises in small teams, and a really excellent facilitator handbook which I still consult regularly when I need a refresher.
Clare McCarthy
Given the difficulty of getting adequate representation for process mapping sessions, I try to schedule 2.5 day blocks of time once a month for 2 - 3 months. I review the previous day's work in the morning and send out drafts of the entire session's maps and meeting notes with a week of each session.
Re: as-is process, I find that as the team discusses each step and appropriate ownership of that step, issues with the current process are exposed. We then explore root causes. This is a gentle way to expose any disconnects between management understanding of the business versus how it is actually executed, which is a tender spot for many organizations. So it really depends on the political needs of the organization with which you are consulting.
Fletcher Groves III
I will simply say this: understanding and measuring the current state of the process is a vital component of any BPI effort. For us, it is formal, it is rigorous, and we would never attempt to redesign an existing process without it.
I agree on all points about the benefit of outside facilitators.
When I facilitate process mapping sessions, I focus on the to-be process and don't bother mapping as-is processes. Mapping as-is can be so time-consuming and draining that there is little enthusiasm left for the to-be mapping. I find the team identifies their disconnects as they debate the appropriate next steps and ownership for the to-be process. I recommend producing drafts of the new processes and reviewing them with the team asap, e.g., review drafts next morning or after lunch. The drafts demonstrate that progress is being made during the sessions, which are often challenging for the participants.
Stefanie Karp
I would never suggest trying to do all this in one session; in fact, I typically allow for separate sessions for each step, with some time for review in between. I don't think you can identify disconnects w/out talking through the current process and identifying the root causes of what doesn't work. This does not need to be formally captured; in fact, I often create this (or let participants create it) with post-it notes on large draft paper. It's during this session that the discussion slowly evolves into finding solutions, but I don't believe in skipping the "as-is" mapping step.
Kevin O'Malley, PMP, CSM
Hi Stefanie, have you received training in Rummler-Brache methodology?
Stefanie Karp
Yes, I went through a full 5-day train-the-trainer course (albeit almost 15 year ago), something I highly recommend. It included hands-on exercises in small teams, and a really excellent facilitator handbook which I still consult regularly when I need a refresher.
Clare McCarthy
Given the difficulty of getting adequate representation for process mapping sessions, I try to schedule 2.5 day blocks of time once a month for 2 - 3 months. I review the previous day's work in the morning and send out drafts of the entire session's maps and meeting notes with a week of each session.
Re: as-is process, I find that as the team discusses each step and appropriate ownership of that step, issues with the current process are exposed. We then explore root causes. This is a gentle way to expose any disconnects between management understanding of the business versus how it is actually executed, which is a tender spot for many organizations. So it really depends on the political needs of the organization with which you are consulting.
Fletcher Groves III
I will simply say this: understanding and measuring the current state of the process is a vital component of any BPI effort. For us, it is formal, it is rigorous, and we would never attempt to redesign an existing process without it.
Semoga bermanfaat.
Thanks for reading.
Salam Excellent,
Budi Andryan S. Pandia
Thanks for reading.
Salam Excellent,
Budi Andryan S. Pandia
Komentar
Competency Mapping Process