page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
page 22
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
page 59
page 60
page 61
page 62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page 66
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page 98
page 99
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
page 104
page 105
page 106
page 107
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
page 114
page 115
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124
page 125
page 126
page 127
page 128
page 129
page 130
page 131
page 132
page 133
page 134
page 135
page 136
page 137
page 138
page 139
page 140
page 141
page 142
page 143
page 144
page 145
page 146
page 147
page 148
page 149
page 150
page 151
page 152
page 153
page 154
page 155
page 156
page 157
page 158
page 159
page 160
page 161
page 162
page 163
page 164
page 165
page 166
page 167
page 168
page 169
page 170
page 171
page 172
page 173
page 174
page 175
page 176
page 177
page 178
page 179
page 180
page 181
page 182
page 183
page 184
page 185
page 186
page 187
page 188
page 189
page 190
page 191
page 192
page 193
page 194
page 195
page 196
page 197
page 198
page 199
page 200
page 201
page 202
page 203
page 204
page 205
page 206
page 207
page 208
page 209
page 210
page 211
page 212
page 213
page 214
page 215
page 216
page 217
page 218
page 219
page 220
page 221
page 222
page 223
page 224
page 225
page 226

The second article in a new series describes the new business process transformation framework as it applies to a real business process requirement By Rick C. Burris and Robert E. Howard, Oliver Wight Principals, with contribution from Tom Mercer, value chain group model architect Using the dictionary 8 www. bus- ex. com JANUARY 10 I n the first article of this three- part series, we discussed the long list of enterprise resource planning ( ERP) system implementation failures and introduced a new technology framework for accomplishing business process transformation in those implementations. We introduced an efficient and effective, holistic process design approach. This approach ensures balance is maintained throughout the design process among the key drivers of business transformation success: people, process, and tools. Studies on the subject of ERP failures have clearly identified that the primary cause of failure is the difficulty companies, and their people, have in properly and quickly articulating the process design needed for success. They fail because the companies and their people lack the skills, knowledge, and tools required to successfully incorporate best practices, the business needs, and system capabilities into a transformational framework. This article will further describe the new business process transformation framework as it applies to a real business process requirement. We will present a value chain scenario developed in ValueScape ( an enabling modeling tool) from an extensible resource model ( XRM) dictionary that contains integrated best practice process flows, enabling definitions, policies, procedures, and practices with complementary metrics and functional role definitions. The business issue A global company has determined that its master scheduling process has continually failed to produce the anticipated results. It is a cumbersome, costly, and ineffective key process that impacts directly the company's operational performance and business success. It has been a number of years since the initial ERP installation, which included master scheduling functionality. The ERP functionality was selected and configured using the typical " user- defined requirements," which were largely reflective of what was then current practice. That initial design proved to be flawed and, over time, was no longer capable of scheduling according to the business requirements and needs. As a result, the master supply planner has developed many off- line ( outside ERP) spreadsheets and other non-integrated, work- around practices in order to produce a master supply plan and related schedules. Schedule attainment results remain low when measured against actual production. After repeated efforts to " simply use the software as designed," it has become clear that to produce different results, the company needs to take a different approach. This approach includes taking a hard look at how the scheduling process needs to operate to ensure product availability and how the ERP system must be configured to support the needed process attributes.

A key value in utilizing pre- populated process designs in XRM dictionaries is that companies do not have to literally start with a blank sheet of paper when developing the process designs. They can start with the process framework that represents best practices and then ask, " what will we need to change to adapt this process design to our business and planning needs?" The approach of starting with a business process framework enables the process design to be completed in less time. Instead of the company's planners focusing on the administrative tasks involved in documenting the process design on a blank sheet of paper, they can focus on the critical thinking needed to ensure that the process design reflects what is needed to be successful. This critical thinking includes comparing current company practices to the best practice models and challenging the need for deviation. This approach produces a truly transformational design for the company as measured by its goals for process performance. The process of transformational design In developing the process designs, the company tasks internal teams to produce final process designs. In this case, the company has decided to re- engineer the master supply planning process using business process transformation framework ( BPTF) methodology. The company has arranged for outside expert help to guide their use of the BPTF methodology to develop the business process design. This methodology includes conducting redesign workshops, using a modeling tool called ValueScape. ValueScape consists of a pre- defined extensible resource model ( XRM) which contains industry best practices for integrated planning and control. These best practices are based on Oliver Wight's extensive experience over 40 years in developing process designs and on the best practice standards contained in the Oliver Wight Class A Checklist for Business Excellence, Sixth Edition. The process designs include integrated workflows, roles, responsibilities, and performance measurements in what is called an XRM model dictionary. The information in the dictionary is drawn upon as a baseline for the new design and applied to the specific nuances and needs for this company. Figure 1- Example of the extensible reference model ( XRM) dictionary JANUARY 10 www. bus- ex. com 9 Strategic management: The business process transformation framework