Why does bpr fail

The large percentage of reported BPR related failure prompted Guimaraes and Paranjape [3] to examine CSFs in practical application settings of organizations.

Using 19 CSFs determined from gathered literature. The main themes in the factors listed revolved around strong project leadership, good communication across all levels of the organization, competent and positive IT personnel, and careful planning for all aspects of the project before implementation.

The results of the study indicated that CSF varied among companies and project phase. Also, it was discovered that many CSFs are dependent on the outcomes of preceding phase. The primary reasons for conducting research surrounding BPR and technology integration are to discover best practices, uncover explanations for failure, and develop strategies to enhance or correct the process [3]. The identified failure factors of both BPR and other process related strategies are discussed below along with recommendations made by each examined country.

In Africa, many organizations that use BPR to enhance operations do not achieve the desired results. This is attributed to incorrect implementation and not the process itself. It was determined that technology issues are really people issues and must be managed that way [3]. The results of Mlay et al. Failure factors have been largely equated to human factors in Africa and the need for company-wide inclusion of the project, and open communication on all levels was expressed [2].

It was concluded in Asia that organizational change brought on by ERP and BPR implementation is the biggest contributing factor to organizational innovation and performance. However, these processes tend to occur only among entities that have the resources needed to develop new technology.

The focus of this study was not on success or failure factors of BPR, but rather an argument showing the positive impacts of ERP and BPR implementation on achieving organizational innovation, longevity, and a competitive advantage. In that regard, a lack of resources would be considered a failure factor in that it hinders initial implementation [4]. The two failure factors considered by Kayo et al. Because hiring someone for the extent of their lifetime is common practice in Japanese companies, short-term or external IT professionals are not easy to find.

The bottom-up practice focuses on compromise and mutual understanding, thus weakening the decision-making process. The empirical findings of the study confirmed that less customized software and strong BPR management are of crucial importance to successful implementation. Natarajan [6] listed 23 problems that libraries have in relation to implementing new IT systems. These included lack of training, low resources, improper IT integration, communication problems, resistance to change, inadequate focus, and undefined objectives.

A lack of adequate training and missteps in process selection and communication were viewed as failure factors. The authors also discovered that there is a threshold point that is considered to be the point of maximum tolerance for the degree of change. Once past this point, the risk of failure is magnified. This model is a hybrid of BPR combined with concepts used to reduce portfolio selection problems.

Farughi et al. BPR failure factors were not identified, rather BPR was put forth as a means for identifying current problems in IT, operations and the execution process. It was determined that a large failure factor of BPR in the U. Other failure factors include a lack of IT support and weak project leadership. Recommendations made based on the outcome of the study were to provide strong and motivating project leadership, make sure the company has a strong start, and provide effective IT support throughout the entire process [3].

In review of the literature, several comparisons were discovered. The tactical layer of an organization includes the workflows, work activities, the hands-on staff performing the work activities and supporting policies, procedures and technology. Together, these elements comprise business processes. Best practice tip: Effectiveness, efficiency and agility at the tactical layer is essential.

However, fully engaging and analyzing the operational organizational structure and reporting relationships layers of the organization is equally important and essential to achieving sustainable results. Transformational change requires a deep understanding of the organizations business processes — work activities, workflows, procedures, roles, supporting technology, etc.

My experience is that many BPR initiatives are based on high-level superficial analysis. Superficial analysis is simply not deep enough to identify the underlying patterns and root causes of pain points in a process. Best practice tip: Conduct deep analysis. Tactical issues in business processes are relatively obvious assuming deep rather than superficial mapping and analysis is performed - see 5 above.

Strategic issues are far more abstract and complex. The underlying patterns that need to be disrupted and reengineered cross many layers and dimensions of an organization. Best practice tip: Step outside a tactical mindset and look at the big picture across the enterprise.

The opportunities to improve and transform an organization must be proactively developed, operationalized and implemented. Looks great on paper, but it takes a proactive team to make it happen. Best practice tip: Implementation of BPR opportunities must have milestones, metrics and timelines that are closely monitored. Continually adjust the plan as necessary.

Change management is the people side of BPR. Regardless of the dysfunctionality of a process, people are typically comfortable with existing processes, activities and procedures, and are naturally resistant to change and leery about changing anything — roles, level of authority, reporting relationships, methods, etc.

Best practice tip: Deeply engage staff at all levels of the organization in all aspects of the initiative. Also, new IT tools are only going to provide appositive outcome if they are adopted and used effectively and that brings us to my second thought on training and communication.

Careful benchmarking and measurement, rigorous planning and successful implementation of IT tools all contribute to the success or failure of reengineering initiatives. A successful BPR project will demand excellent leadership, outstanding communication and the ability to motivate and manage staff. In other words, just what we would expect from good leadership, however, leadership will also be managing radical change created by BPR, which will also fuel the need to adapt and amend expectations.

Would you like to learn more about Business Process Reengineering? So why is business process re-engineering making a comeback? So, should BPR be used and if so, under what circumstances?

Here are my thoughts: Is there a real need? In short, for pretty much any task, individual employees were empowered to simply opt out or refuse to take part. Given the process improvement efforts have the potential to sometimes uncover individual weakness or group challenges, it's not a surprise that there may be some angst when improvement efforts are undertaken.

In one organization, I was stunned to discover the kinds of items that people could simply refuse to do, seemingly without repercussion. In that environment, the process improvement efforts were extraordinarily challenging and required much more dedication and time from the project leadership team than I've seen in other efforts.

In another example, for a substantial process improvement effort, a VP had promised access to certain members of her team for a period of months with a verbal promise that no other significant objectives would be put before those people until our efforts were complete. As you may have guessed, that promise did not hold and the team was pulled in too many different directions, resulting in failure since no one would budge on the due dates for any initiative. Mitigation: In these environments, take a slow, measured approach to the initiative and make certain that leadership is squarely on board before proceeding.

Ensure that the importance of the project trickles throughout the organization. Consider tying awards or some kind of compensation to outcomes to ensure reasonable participation. Further, get all commitments in writing along with fallback dates that are automatic in certain conditions, such as when a team member falls ill or when a promise is not kept. In some cases, organizational culture is to blame for the failure of some efforts and for the shortcomings of some members of the team.

However, when the organization itself is sound, you may have a team member that is either hostile or less than engaged in the overall effort.

Because the team is theoretically comprised of those with a stake in the process being discussed, everyone needs to be fully involved in order to get the best results.