Shelly Sweet (i4process) published a great article about Change Management in Business Process Improvement (BPI) projects: part 1, part 2. » read the rest
Archive for the ‘Guests’ Category
Scott Francis about Legislating Competency
Scott Francis wrote a great post that very much resonates to our experience.
BPM projects are special because business processes are volatile by their nature. They are changing because (1) the business environment is ever changing and (2) our own understanding of what is the best way to do our job and to serve our customers is changing.
It happens all the time: as soon as the customer’s process is discovered and mapped, people at the customer side say: “do we really work this way?!” Meaning that it’s so obviously inefficient and ineffective. Yet it only becomes obvious after the analysis is done by a competent process team, not in advance.
This is why an attempt to do the process work traditional way - on the basis of rigid specifications and contract terms - is doomed. Here is how Scott describes it:
- Incredibly detailed specifications for the software, regardless of the native capabilities of the underlying software platforms.
- Named resources (staff) on the project, in the contract.
- The contract includes most or all of the specifications, binding the vendor to an exact implementation definition, and removing all doubt about what is desired.
- Having secured very rigorous contracts, with performance penalties and exacting specifications, the contract will also specify an extremely aggressive average rate for the personnel on the project.