Search results

Re‐engineering is the latest in a long line of performance improvement programmes with which US industry has experimented during the last decade. The radical approach taken by re‐engineering is the main characteristic setting it apart from any of its predecessors. Re‐engineering is based on the premiss that the best way for a corporation to make significant improvements is to take a clean sheet of paper and ask itself “if I were to start this company over from the beginning, what would I do?” Now, two years after the introduction of this unusual approach, many corporations are finding their efforts have failed. By analysing these case studies, several key topics have arisen which explain why some organizations have completed their re‐engineering programmes without meeting their expectations. First discusses re‐engineering in detail, and then addresses several of these recent developments.

Achieving more from less is a preoccupation of many organizations in the turbulent 1990s. Midst the maelstrom of apparently mutually exclusive organizational objectives, managers respond to what may turn out to be the siren call of business process re‐engineering. Rapid assimilation of business process re‐engineering into managerial practice in the 1990s is arresting. However, a number of articles on the subject have been based on hyperbole rather than evidence. Considers and examines theoretical antecedents of business process re‐engineering within the context of this decade’s challenges. Uses empirical evidence to provide evidence‐based critical success factors for business process re‐engineering programmes. Discusses indications for future research in business process re‐engineering. Places emphasis on the need to bridge the lacuna between business process re‐engineering theory and evidence‐based practice.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a model for improving health services provided by the pre‐employment medical fitness check‐up system affiliated to Egypt's Health Insurance Organization (HIO).

Operations research, notably system re‐engineering, is used in six randomly selected centers and findings before and after re‐engineering are compared. The re‐engineering model follows a systems approach, focusing on three areas: structure, process and outcome. The model is based on six main components: electronic booking, standardized check‐up processes, protected medical documents, advanced archiving through an electronic content management (ECM) system, infrastructure development, and capacity building. The model originates mainly from customer needs and expectations.

The centers' monthly customer flow increased significantly after re‐engineering. The mean time spent per customer cycle improved after re‐engineering – 18.3±5.5 minutes as compared to 48.8±14.5 minutes before. Appointment delay was also significantly decreased from an average 18 to 6.2 days. Both beneficiaries and service providers were significantly more satisfied with the services after re‐engineering. The model proves that re‐engineering program costs are exceeded by increased revenue.

Re‐engineering in this study involved multiple structure and process elements. The literature review did not reveal similar re‐engineering healthcare packages. Therefore, each element was compared separately.

This model is highly recommended for improving service effectiveness and efficiency.

This research is the first in Egypt to apply the re‐engineering approach to public health systems. Developing user‐friendly models for service improvement is an added value.

As health care organizations seek innovative ways to change financing and delivery mechanisms due to escalated health care costs and increased competition, drastic changes are being sought in the form of re‐engineering. This study discusses the leader's role of re‐engineering in health care. It specifically addresses the reasons for failures in re‐engineering and argues that success depends on senior level leaders playing a critical role. Existing studies lack comprehensiveness in establishing models of re‐engineering and management guidelines. This research focuses on integrating re‐engineering and leadership processes in health care by creating a step‐by‐step model. Particularly, it illustrates the four Es: Examination, Establishment, Execution and Evaluation, as a comprehensive re‐engineering process that combines managerial roles and activities to result in successfully changed and reengineered health care organizations.

Recent surveys show that process‐reengineering (BPR) has had widespread adoption in western countries. This has been motivated by case studies where drastic improvements in quality, productivity, cost reduction and competitiveness have been reported. The rate of failure in re‐engineering attempts, though, has been reported to be equally high. It is estimated that over 70 per cent of all re‐engineering attempts fail to produce bottom‐line improvements. Describes one such failed attempt in a large public organization in Brazil. As a result of the re‐engineering attempt, the organization had its IT infrastructure significantly improved, and the access to IT was decentralized by the downsizing of computer applications from a mainframe to a local area network. On the other hand, no radical changes in the organization’s business processes had resulted, despite the US$ 8 million invested in the BPR attempt. Moreover, even though some processes had been automated, almost no staff reduction was effected. The lack of layoffs meant that even the increase in efficiency in those processes, which by no means was radical, was not realized.

Patient process recognition and re‐engineering (PPR) has become a major concern of recent health care development and management. This paper discusses the position of the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK; where it is at present and where it aims to be. It suggests that the work of the current government in developing community care is central to the work of both the Leicester Royal Infirmary and the Peterborough Hospitals NHS Trust, when building relationships between primary (community) and secondary (hospital) health care provision. This paper aims to examine whether and how PPR can improve patient processes in the NHS. It does this through a case study of PPR in Peterborough Hospital.

Business process re‐engineering (BPR) is certainly one of the latest buzzwords and is the subject of great interest and also great controversy. Organizations need to shake themselves out of complacency to close competitive gaps and achieve superior performance standards ‐ the reason why many have embarked on huge BPR projects. In view of the high risks associated with radical change, there are, however, many problems associated with BPR. For some BPR is going off the rails before it is properly understood, and many BPR exercises are not delivering the goods. Sometimes, organizations are expecting “quick fixes”, thus displaying their lack of understanding of a complex system. It is unreasonable to expect quick results when so much change is involved, especially when these business processes involve not only machines, but also people. Many believe, such as Mumford, that the management of change is the largest task in re‐engineering. Many people perceive re‐engineering as a threat to both their methods and their jobs. Owing to this recognition, many authors concentrate on the need to take account of the human side of re‐engineering, in particular the management of organizational change.

Looks at how some organizations are turning away from total quality management (TQM) and looking in another direction to solve their problems. The new concept is “re‐engineering”. It offers breakthrough solutions for what seem to be intractable problems. Discusses why TQM is now coming under criticism and presents the case for re‐engineering (a radical way to rethink the way in which organizations work). Describes Hammer and Champy’s nine fundamentals to re‐engineering and shows that many of the concepts/techniques are not new but are appropriate in their timing. Evaluates the role of TQM versus re‐engineering and concludes that re‐engineering neither replaces nor is a substitute for TQM; in fact they both add value and are complementary. Corporate warriors will need to know how to use both.

This special “Anbar Abstracts” issue of Work Study is split into six sections covering abstracts under the following headings: Operational research and statistics; Project management, method study and work measurement; Business process re‐engineering; Design of work; Performance, productivity and motivation; Stock control and supply chain management.

Why should anybody outside the USA care about the attempt to reorganize the Disability Determination Service (DDS) of the Social Security Administration (SSA)? Part of the answer to this question has to do with the assumptions and approaches which were used. In fact, the attempt to reorganize DDS is one of the first well‐documented attempts to re‐engineer a major agency in the public sector. Given the excitement in the private sector about re‐engineering and its potential and possible cost, public managers everywhere should develop a better understanding of what re‐engineering is all about. The use of a case study seems to be a promising way for framing and illustrating some of the important questions about the use of re‐engineering in the public sector.