Process Management and Re-Engineering

“BPMInstitute.org defines Business Process Management (BPM) as the definition, improvement and management of a firm’s end-to-end enterprise business processes in order to achieve three outcomes crucial to a performance-based, customer-driven firm: 1) clarity on strategic direction, 2) alignment of the firm’s resources, and 3) increased discipline in daily operations” (Tom Dwyer)

It could be suggested that many companies in todays’ market looking to improve their business would be attracted to this definition of BPM, Clarity of strategy, alignment of resources & increased discipline all infer that BPM will tighten up the existing structures rather than change them all together – this would be an attractive option to a company wanting improvements but needing to keep costs low.

BPM would also be more suited to a smaller company in which huge changes are not necessary or suited to a company which had allowed processes to develop rather than invented them, in this case implementing BPM could quickly identify if those processes were fit for purpose.

See Table below for a breakdown of the differences between BPM & BPR – (http://www.alagse.com)

BPR as discussed here https://sopinion8ed.wordpress.com/author/cmcoughlan/ is much more radical but will produce more quantitative results than BPM.

What do you think are the differences between BPM & BPR?

Marked difference between BPR and BPM
Aspect	BPR	BPM
Level of change	Radical, one step change	Evolutionary & continuous
Time taken for implementation	Long	Short time and smooth takeover
Starting point	Drawing board	Current processes and automation levels
Implementation	Huge effort required for the disruptive change	Incremental
Expanse	One major process at a time	Flexible – simultaneously across one or more / small or major processes
Methodology	Redesigning of business processes	Process and decision models
Enabling technology	Primarily IT	Primarily process technology
Involvement	Business and process experts	Process experts and all related people
Risk	High	Low
Outcome	Drastic	Incremental improvement
Cultural issues	Major concern	Not much concern
Implementation stress and concern	High	Low