Bpr Business Process Reenigneering

content Topics Page No. Introduction 4 Overview 5 History 6 BPR method actingological analysis 7 Advantages and disadvantages of BPR 9 Case analyze- I 11 Case study- II 13 Conclusion 24 References 24 1. portal none organisation surgical operation re-engineeringis a line of credit counsel strategy, origin tout ensembley pi aceered in the primaeval mid-nineties, foc use on the analysis and rule of transactionflows and merelyt againstes within an makeup. BPR aimed to cooperateorganizationsfundamentally second thought how they do their written report in nine to breakstandingally modifycustomer service, diminishedoperational lives, and break down world-classcompetitors.In the mid-1990s, as mevery as 60% of the circumstancescompanies adduceed to either set prohibited initiated reengineering efforts, or to train plans to do so. BPR seeks to help companies radically restructure their organizations by centreing on the ground-up build of their furrow extremit yes. fit in to Davenport (1990) a byplay exploit is a set of logically colligate tasks performed to achieve a delimit melodic line outcome. Re-engineering emphasized aholistic concentrate on on employment objectives and how adjoines relate to them, encouraging full-scale recreation of procedurees quite a than iterative optimization of sub do workes.Business process re-engineering is as well known as subscriber line process design, bloodline transformation, or line of reasoning process swop focal point. Fig 1 2. OVERVIEW Business process re-engineering (BPR) began as a private sector technique to help organizations fundamentally rethink how they do their go bad in order to strikingally advance customer service, cut operational address, and endure world-class competitors. A key arousal for re-engineering has been the continuing ripening and deployment of sophisticated schooling systems and ne iirks.Leading organizations atomic image 18 becoming bolder in utilise this technology to support innovative concern processes, rather than refining current miens of doing work. Reengineering guidance and relationship of Mission and bring in deales to Information Technology. Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) is essentially rethinking and radically designing an organizations animated resources. BPR, however, is to a greater extent than scarcely business improvising it is an approach for redesigning the way work is through to better support the organizations relegation and reduce costs.Reengineering starts with a high-level judgment of the organizations mission, strategic goals, and customer take ups. Basic questions argon asked, much(prenominal) as Does our mission need to be redefined? Are our strategic goals aline with our mission? Who are our customers? An organization whitethorn find that it is operating on supposed assumptions, particularly in terms of the wants and inescapably of its customers. Only later the organiz ation rethinks what it should be doing, does it go on to decide how high hat to do it.Within the framework of this basic judging of mission and goals, re-engineering focuses on the organizations business processesthe move and procedures that goern how resources are use to piss products and services that meet the needs of particular customers or markets. As a integrated ordering of work steps crosswise magazine and place, a business process idler be decomposed into specific activities, measured, modeled, and improved.It peck also be completely redesigned or eliminated altogether. Re-engineering identifies, breaks, and re-designs an organizations core business processes with the aim of achieving dramatic avails in critical cognitive operation measures, much(prenominal)(prenominal) as cost, quality, service, and speed. Re-engineering recognizes that an organizations business processes are commonly fragmented into sub processes and tasks that are carried out by several specia lized available areas within the organization.Often, no one is liable for the everywhereall feat of the entire process. Re-engineering maintains that optimizing the performance of sub processes can result in around benefits, moreover can non yield dramatic improvements if the process itself is fundamentally inefficient and outmoded. For that reason, re-engineering focuses on re-designing the process as a complete in order to achieve the superlative possible benefits to the organization and their customers.This drive for satisfyingizing dramatic improvements by fundamentally re-thinking how the organizations work should be done distinguishes re-engineering from process improvement efforts that focus on functional or chalk upitive improvement. 3. HISTORY In 1990, Michael Hammer, a source professor of com consecrateing device science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), publish an article in the Harvard Business canvass, in which he claimed that the major (ip) challenge for managers is to exterminate forms of work that do non add value, rather than using technology for automating it.This asseveration implicitly incriminate managers of having foc employ on the wrong issues, namely that technology in general, and more specifically schooling technology, has been used primarily for automating existing processes rather than using it as an enabler for making non-value adding work disused. Hammers claim was simple Most of the work be done does not add any value for customers, and this work should be removed, not accelerated through automation. Instead, companies should re withdraw their processes in order to maximize customer value, turn minimizing the consumption of resources required for delivering their product or service.A similar idea was advocated by doubting Thomas H. Davenport and J. Short in 1990, at that time a member of the Ernst & axerophthol untested research center, in a physical composition published in the Sloan Ma nagement Review This idea, to unbiased review a confederations business processes, was rapidly select by a huge number of firms, which were striving for re reinvigorateded competitiveness, which they had lost imputable to the market entrance of foreign competitors, their softness to satisfy customer needs, and their insufficient cost structure.Even well- effected management thinkers, such as shaft of light Drucker and Tom Peters, were accepting and advocating BPR as a new joyride for (re-)achieving success in a dynamic world. During the following years, a fast growing number of publications, books as well as journal articles, were give to BPR, and many an different(prenominal) consulting firms embarked on this movement and develop BPR methods. However, the critics were fast to claim that BPR was a way to dehumanize the work place, increase managerial control, and to justify downsizing, i. e. major reductions of the ork force, and a metempsychosis of Taylorism under a diff erent label. condescension this go over, reengineering was adopted at an accelerating pace and by 1993, as many as 60% of the Fortune 500 companies claimed to either affirm initiated reengineering efforts, or to have plans to do so. This trend was fueled by the fast betrothal of BPR by the consulting industry, but also by the study Made in America, conducted by MIT, that showed how companies in many US industries had lagged idler their foreign counterparts in terms of competitiveness, time-to-market and productivity.Development after 1995 With the publication of critiques in 1995 and 1996 by some of the early BPR proponents, coupled with abuses and misuses of the concept by others, the reengineering fervor in the U. S. began to wane. Since then, considering business processes as a starting point for business analysis and redesign has become a widely accepted approach and is a standard part of the change methodological analysis portfolio, but is typically performed in a less r adical way as originally proposed.More recently, the concept of Business Process Management (BPM) has gained major attention in the corporate world and can be considered as a successor to the BPR stray of the 1990s, as it is evenly driven by a striving for process capability supported by selective information technology. Equivalently to the critique brought forward against BPR, BPM is now accused of focusing on technology and regardless the bulk aspects of change. 4. BPR METHODOLOGY BPR methodology is a structured sequence of activities that constitutes the typical BPR project. BPR refers to a re-design of business processes by using IT.Its methodology is to give a guideline or progress of how the business process to be re-designed. There are number of methodologies for an organization to practice. According to S. Muthu, L. Whitman and S. Hossein Cherahhi , there are 5 voices of BPR methodologies. To be simple, a consolidated methodology has been developed from those 5 methodo logies. That is similar to the 5 frames mentioned in class visioning, mobilization, process redesign, murder and monitoring & angstromere maintaining. Fig 2 Phase 1 Triggering & angstrom unit operation of instrument VisioningThis phase is to design the visions and channelions that a attach to should go with in order to improve efficiency of the targeted business processes and customer satisfaction. In this stage, the organization should identify the reengineering opportunities, enabling technologies and direct impact on customers. Phase 2 Mobilization In this phase, a reengineering police squad should be formed. The team should outline the performance goals, BPR plan and budget. Processes to be redesigned should be selected. IT great deal are involved to make sound judgment on IT infrastructure and propose information for better business process redesign.Phase 3 Process Redesign This stage is to analyze and compare AS-IS processes and TO-BE processes. After identifying th e potential improvements of the existing processes, modeling methods can be used to develop the TO-BE models. Integration can be done afterwards. Phase 4 slaying Training platforms are initiated in this stage to provide the skills of fitting the TO-BE processes. IT infrastructure and the organization are also need to be adjusted to fit the TO-BE processes. Phase 5 Monitoring and MaintainingThe new processes should be monitored and special on a continuous basis, especially the progress of action and the results. To carry out a good BPR methodology, organizations are recommended to consider each phase carefully. Each phase should be comprehensive enough for execution to drive for a success in achieving the organizations vision and strategy. Business Process Reengineering Principles * Organize around outcomes, not tasks . * Have those who use the output of the process perform the process. Subsume information-processing work into the real work that produces the information. * Treat g eographically spread resources as though they were centralized. * Link parallel of latitude activities instead of integrating their results. * Put end points where the work is performed and build controls into the process. * Capture information once and at the source. 5. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF BPR Business process reengineering (BPR) is a program that systemically breaks down the process a business uses and starts over with new, more efficient methods &8212 basically a redesign or a reboot.A business process is a collection of procedures, steps or activities the business uses to get the product from breeding to the customer. Businesses use BPR for various reasons, including cutting costs and ameliorate overall payoff. Nevertheless, BPR also has its drawbacks. * Identifies hazardous and Encourages Ideas The aim of BPR is to help businesses pinpoint obsolete steps, items or workers in a business process. For extype Ale, if four workers perform a task, the business may discover only 2 workers can get the job done during reengineering. BPR encourages employee input and participation.The workers who have familiarity with the processes under study can point out flaws and persona ideas for improvement. * Requires Investment and the Right Business Types BPR typically requires an investment, particularly in technology. Outdated methods, such as doing a task by hand, face replacement by computer programs. The programs improve efficiency and reduce errors, but the troupe must invest in the software and training, a costly selection for companies looking to cut expenses immediately. Not all business types benefit from BPR. For example, a manufacturing company may not have the resource of edesigning processes without sacrificing safety or product quality. * Cuts cost and Improves Functionality Removing unnecessary steps cuts down on time and confusion among workers. Assigning tasks that triune workers would typically handle to one worker gives customer s a clear point of allude for help or service. Even by investing more money in technology at the start, companies typically deport money over time with the redesigned methods. For example, improving or updating electronic components incurs an up-front cost, but saves money over time by eliminating errors delinquent to outdated components. Lowers Worker morale Some workers may not accommodate to the BPR changes, and those assigned new responsibilities can become overwhelmed. Other workers become obsolete if their elemental function is eliminated as part of a process overhaul. Management must provide support and guidance during BPR. Failure of the management team to assist workers and set an example during the BPR process may lead to hardship, disorganization and staff problems. RISKS IN BPR * Advocates report failure rates of 50% to 70% * Sutcliffe 1999 reviewed difficulties * Employee exemption to change * Inadequate attention to employee concerns unbefitting staffing * Ina dequate tools * Mismatch of strategies & goals * wishing of oversight * Failure of leadership commitment 6. CASE STUDY- II Mahindra & Mahindra Implementing BPR swindle The grapheme examines the reasons behind automobile major Mahindra & Mahindras decision to go through a Business Process Reengineering (BPR) program. The case explores in detail the implementation procedure at the company and the benefits that accrued from the BPR program. In addition, the case discusses the concept of BPR, its benefits, and the steps that need to be taken to ensure the success of such initiatives.Issues Examine the benefits that a BPR program can offer to an organization when it is effectively enforced MMs Problem Plants In the mid-1990s, Indias largest multi profit vehicle (MUV) and tractor manufacturer MM was facing serious problems at its Igatpuri and Kandivili defines in Maharashtra. The plants were suffering from manufacturing inefficiencies, poor productivity, long production c ycle, and sub-optimal output. The reason highly under-productive, militantly trades unionized, and bloated workforces.The company had over the years been rather lenient towards run the plants and had frequently crumbled under the pressure of union demands. The work culture was also reportedly very unhealthy and corruption was widespread in various departments. Alarmed at the plants dismal condition, Chairman Keshub Mahindra time-tested to terminus the problem by sacking raft who allegedly indulged in corrupt practices. M&M also tried to implement various voluntary retreat schemes (VRS), but the unions refused to cooperate and the company was unavailing to reduce the labor force.During this period, M&M was in the process of considering the implementation of a Business Process Reengineering (BPR) program throughout the organization including the manufacturing units. Because of the problems at the Igatpuri and Kandivili plants, M&M inflexible to implement the program s peedily at its manufacturing units. The program, developed with the help of the UK-based Lucas Engineering Systems, was first implement on an experimental basis at the engine plant in Igatpuri. Simultaneously, an exertion was initiated to assess the potential benefits of implementing BPR and its effect on the unions.M&Ms management was not impress to learn that the unions expressed extreme fretfulness at the decision to implement BPR and soon went on a strike. However, this time around, the management make it clear that it would not bear to union demands. Soon, the workers were surprised to see the companys higher-ranking staff come down to the plant and work in their place. With both the parties refusing to work out an agreement, observers began casting doubts on the prox of the companys grand plans of reaping the benefits of BPR. Background NoteMahindra Mahindra Ltd. (MM) was the flagship company of the Mahindra root word, one of the top ten industrial houses in India . The companys history dates back to 1945, when two brothers, J. C. Mahindra and K. C. Mahindra, decided to start a business of general-purpose utility vehicles. The brothers formed a company, Mahindra & Mohammed Ltd. , in association with their friend Ghulam Mohammed. In October 1947, the first batch of 75 jeeps was released for the Indian market. In 1948, the company was renamed Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.Over the undermentioned hardly a(prenominal) decades, the group promoted many companies in areas as diverse as hotels, fiscal services, auto components, information technology, infrastructure development and trading to name a few (Refer Exhibit I for M&Ms history). Though MM had established itself in the markets and was among the leading players in many of the segments it operated in, it realized that some of its businesses were not close related to its core business. This realization attach the beginning of the biggest change exercise since the companys inception. In 1 994, a major restructuring exercise was initiated as part of a BPR program.M&M introduced a new organizational model, in which various divisions and companies were regrouped into six distinct clusters of related businesses, each headed by a president. M&Ms core activities, self-propelled and tractors were made autonomous business units. The other activities of the group were organized into infrastructure, trade and financial services, telecommunication and automotive components. According to company sources, the full-length exercise was intended to develop a conceptual map to provide counselor-at-law for the future growth of various business lines.It was decided that, in future, the group would sustain its expansion to the identified thrust sectors. The two main operating divisions of the company were the automotive division, which manufactured UVs and LCVs, and the get up equipment division, which made tractors and farm implements. The company employed over 17,000 people and had six state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities spread over 500,000 square meters. The plants were situated at Kandivili (MUVs and Tractors), Nasik (MUVs), Zaheerabad (LCVs, Voyager, three-wheelers), Igatpuri (Engines) andNagpur (Implements and tractors) Excerpts rough BPR The concept of BPR was popularized in the early 1990s by Michael Hammer and James Champy in their best-selling book, Reengineering the Corporation. The authors said that radical redesign and reorganization of an enterprise was necessary to demean costs and increase the quality of service. According to them, IT was the key enabler for that radical change. Hammer and Champy matte up that the design of the workflow in virtually large corporations was based on assumptions around technology, people and organizational goals that were no yearlong valid.They recommended seven principles of reengineering for streamlining work processes and, consequently, achieving significant levels of improvement in quality, time management and cost (Refer Table I) MMs Experience with BPR By the mid-1990s, BPR had become a popular tool globally, with many leading organizations implementing it. However, when M&M undertook the exercise, it was still a new concept in India. M&Ms workforce, as mentioned earlier, resisted this attempt to reengineer the organization.Soon after the major(postnominal) staff began working on the crop floors, the first signs of the benefits of BPR became evident. Around a coulomb officers produced 35 engines a day as compared to the 1200 employees producing 70 engines in the pre-BPR days. After quintet months, the workers ended the strike and began work in exchange for a 30% take hike. As the situation returned to normalcy, BPR implementation gained momentum. MM realized that it would have to focus on two issues when implementing the BPR program reengineering the layout and method of working, and productivity The FutureSumming up the companys BPR experience, Anand Mah indra said, Let me put it in a simple way. If we have facilities in Kandivili today, which are not just surviving but thriving, it is all due to BPR. 8. CONCLUSION The reengineering profoundly changes all aspects of business and people. Part of the organization is easy to change by reinventing a way to work. However, the other part, people, is very difficult to change. In particular, it requires not only jobs and skills change but also peoples styles the ways in which they think and deliver and their attitudes what they believe is important about their work.These are indispensable factors to determine whether reengineering succeeds or not. leading must help people to screw with these changes. 9. REFERENCES * Business Process Change Reengineering Concepts, Methods, and Technologies by Varun Autor Grover and William J. Kettinger * Business process reengineering breakpoint strategies for market potency by Henry J. Johansson * Business process reengineering an executive resource f or implementation by Harold S. Resnick * www. bus. iastate. edu/ for case study references.