Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyze and illustrate the needs and expectations of the industry from a newly hired engineering candidate for an entry‐level position involving business process reengineering (BPR). The paper aims to highlight the changing role and the new emerging face of business process design, analysis, and management, its relevant contents and methodologies, its new role, and emergence of a value of BPR, which has been redefined.

The growing interest and the importance of the role of business processes in organizations have promoted the development and implementation of an undergraduate level course on BPR at Stevens Institute in 2006. This research involved a survey of some potential employers during a recent redesigning of this course. The survey collected information from the employers on how important and relevant are the topics on BPR that are covered in the course for an entry‐level BPR related position.

The findings indicate a strong support from the employers for BPR curriculum. Of the 19 BPR topics on which information was collected from the employers, 63 percent were rated as “extremely important” and “very important”. The two highest rated areas of BPR were ability to research and collect process related data (3.8), and ability to use graphical methods to map the current or reengineered processes (3.5).

One of the limitations of this research is the size and representation of the data collected. A more broader sample would extend this work into a framework for BPR skill set and knowledge at various levels of experience.

The implications of this research are to both the academic community and potential employers. This paper provides useful knowledge on what skill sets are relevant for an entry level BPR professional in an economy, which is predominantly going to be dependent on efficiencies from business processes.

The paper provides value to those seeking entry‐level positions in terms of the knowledge and skill sets required to fulfill such a role effectively. The paper also provides guidance to faculty on areas needed to focus on in a BPR curriculum content and pedagogy and prepare students for practical situations. With the increasing role of service orientation in managing information systems – the importance of business process definitions and their reengineering cannot be undermined.

BPR can be deconstructed into four different identities. In the first place it is a product of the management fad industry. In the second place it is part of a neo‐Taylorist movement because of the following characteristics: a top‐down streamlining of operations, unproblematic acceptance of typical Taylorist solutions and the prevalence of assertions that the outcome for workers is an upgraded work content. In the third place BPR is a euphemism for downsizing. Downsizing is much more at the core of BPR than some of its proponents would have it. Finally, BPR functions as a non‐normative, descriptive label for process oriented change. The paper seeks to show how the different identities of BPR interact and get into one another’s way.

Most of the 50 largest organizations in Finland have undertaken business process re‐engineering (BPR) projects during the last five years. This study concentrated on business process re‐engineering projects in 21 large Finnish organizations. Of the 21 organizations interviewed, six represent manufacturing industry, seven large public institutions or enterprises, and eight belong to the trade and services sector. The objectives of the study were to shed light on BPR projects in large Finnish organizations in terms of their scope, focus and adopted change management practices. Respectively, a threefold conceptual framework was developed for the study. The findings of the study show that the firms in the trade and services sector have undertaken very comprehensive BPR initiatives. BPR projects in the public sector have been slightly more limited. Manufacturing companies seemed to have the most limited approach to BPR. In change management, all studied organizations identified questions related to change navigation as the most important problem area in the actual management of the BPR projects. On the other hand, management involvement was clearly perceived as the area where the organizations’ capabilities were the strongest. As to the preconditions for a successful BPR project, four major conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the study. First, the broader the projects are in terms of scope and focus, the better the overall results. Second, strong management involvement is a basic requirement for a BPR project to succeed. Third, change navigation is the most critical area of concern, clearly differentiating successful BPR projects from the less successful ones. It is also the area where organizations encounter the greatest problems in BPR project implementation. Fourth, personnel involvement, as well as training and development projects, play a supportive role in BPR and are usually handled quite well in the organizations.

Business process re‐engineering (BPR) has been widely promoted as a technique for organisational survival in an increasingly competitive environment. The initial message and language of BPR was radical, calling for the obliteration of traditional methods of processing business. Organisations were encouraged to reinvent themselves. However, survey and case study evidence of the success rate of BPR projects has been disappointing. As a result, BPR is under revision, with new definitions and new remedies on offer. When examined, the similarities between the revised language of BPR and TQM are striking. This suggests that incremental process improvements are the more viable option for organisations seeking to improve quality and performance.

Organizations that adopt new practices employ managers to make decisions about how to materialize these practices. I examine how these managers move between the meanings and resources found in extra-local and local realms. I find that managers’ practices shift over time from adapting BPR practices to inhabiting BPR as an idea. Managers’ approaches are shaped by each organization’s history of efforts to introduce extra-local ideas. Rather than adapting BPR practices, managers draw on change tools, techniques, and methods that have worked in the organization and integrate BPR work into ongoing interactions, activities, and language in the local context.

The purpose of this paper is to establish a supported and validated reference point for Machiavellianism as an antecedent to the contemporary management philosophy of business process reengineering (BPR).

This paper analyzes BPR and Machiavellianism by using the seminal work of Hammer and Champy (1993) on BPR and the original writings of Machiavelli coupled with the personal correspondence of Machiavelli with his contemporaries.

The findings of this research indicate that the constructs of Machiavellian thought transcend the five centuries since the publication of The Prince, and can be found in the contemporary managerial framework of BPR. This comparison of historical leadership frameworks demonstrates how recent management decisions in companies show the rise of Machiavellian as BPR. In an analysis of these theories, the authors show similarities in five significant tenets of business leadership and argue how these repackaged ideas and prescriptions undermine employee-centric advances.

This comparison reviews the managerial frameworks presented in Machiavelli’s The Prince and Hammer and Champy’s book Reengineering the Corporation through the theoretical tenets of leadership.

Employment of Machiavellianism and BPR results in an expendable utilization of followers and employees. Implications abound for modern managers, as the authors emphasize the elements and outcomes which lead to deleterious organizational outcomes.

In an analysis of these theories, the authors argue how these strategies undermine employee-centric advances within human relations by embracing these repackaged ideas and concepts.

This research leverages historical perspective to provide a qualitative understanding of the follies of recycled versions of Machiavelli’s ideas. The overall study and inquiry of BPR from a leadership perspective is not robust and leaves antecedents and influences critically unevaluated.

The study aims to design a holistic multi-stage hierarchical model that leverages the firm's knowledge-enabled distinctive core competencies (DCCs) and builds enduring and profitable customer relationships to achieve sustainable competitive advantage (SCA) in dynamic and challenging environments. It developed a knowledge-enabled customer-centric competitiveness strategy (KCCS) model that integrates four pillars: business process reengineering (BPR), knowledge management (KM), customer relationship management (CRM) and competitiveness strategy. It also proposed a BPR model to enable cross-functional cooperation and coordination for firms dealing with customers, provided a blueprint for KCCS's successful implementation and compared the KCCS model with other customer-centric (CC) approaches.

This study adopted an exploratory research design based on a literature review of relevant studies. It has systematically analyzed 130 articles and books from Scopus, the Web of Science, Google Scholar and other renowned databases from 1982 to 2022. The analysis involved identifying and selecting relevant literature and conducting thematic research to develop a theoretical KCCS model that integrates BPR, KM, CRM, competitiveness strategy and the firm's SCA into a KCCS model.

This study developed an integrative KCCS theoretical model rooted in the extant literature in BPR, KM, CRM, competitiveness strategy, DCCs, SCA and other fields. The study proposed a BPR model as a significant component of KCCS that enables cross-functional cooperation and coordination, which are often troublesome for firms in their dealings with customers. The study also provided a blueprint for successfully implementing the KCCS model and compared the KCCS model with other CC approaches.

This study filled many research gaps in the literature in which knowledge-enabled CC frameworks are widely scattered. It offered a conceptual multi-stage hierarchical KCCS model that combines interrelated elements of BPR, KM, CRM, and competitiveness strategy. It proposed a BPR model as a significant component of the KCCS that enables cross-functional cooperation and coordination, which frequently form barriers when dealing with customers. It also provided a blueprint for successfully implementing the KCCS and compared it with other CC approaches.

Business process re-engineering (BPR) initiatives are complex endeavours which require many factors to ensure success. However, most studies focus on the organisational processes and improvement within the organisation itself and less on the project team and management dynamics. The study aimed to identify factors that enabled the completion of a BPR, in a technical firm, based on reflections on the project management style.

The study entailed a descriptive and interpretive case study with reflections from project team members. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and content analysis.

Findings revealed that critical success factors for BPR in a technical firm include project leadership and sponsorship, organisational culture and attributes, team dynamics and the nature (activities), and duration of the process.

The findings will benefit project managers in improving their competence and project success through reflective practice. The identified factors could be used in future projects of a similar nature and size to improve how organisations execute BPR projects.

The study used reflections to identify success factors for BPR in a technical firm.

Describes an action research study of a computer‐mediated business process redesign (BPR) group in a New Zealand university. The BPR group used an integrated BPR framework, which comprises a group process methodology, called MetaProi, and an asynchronous groupware tool. BPR group members were from two different departments and successfully redesigned two course‐related processes. Reveals some possible effects of computer mediation on BPR groups, namely: lower demand for leadership skills, much lower overall running cost, and much lower degree of interaction. No impact on the group effectiveness was observed. Also indicates that computer mediation lowers barriers to, and, in turn, fosters more interdepartmental communication. This favours the occurrence of new BPR groups involving different departments. On the other hand, indicates that those groups lead to more threats to management, which can lead to lack of support from managers for future BPR groups. Finally, suggests that strategic BPR groups, as opposed to those dealing with local operational issues, can better benefit from computer mediation when this is combined with face‐to‐face and other types of oral interaction.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the critical success factors of business process reengineering (BPR) in higher education (HE).

Empirical case studies collected from three private higher education institutions in Malaysia, which have embarked on BPR successfully.

Seven factors were found to be critical to BPR implementation success. The factors are teamwork and quality culture, quality management system and satisfactory rewards, effective change management, less bureaucratic and participative, information technology/information system, effective project management and adequate financial resources.

The paper provides a framework for future research to explore organisational development in making BPR happen successfully.

This research contributes to studies of BPR in HE context, by considering the soft issues in its implementation.