毕博：业务流程设计方法2.DOC

29
BUSINESS PROCESS DESIGN METHODOLOGY GUIDE

SECTION THREE

METHODOLOGY SECTIONS
SECTION 3 – ENGAGEMENT TYPE SELECTION
The BPDM Guide provides the practitioner with step by step guidance for each of the three types of business process design engagements that practitioners commonly encounter. This section characterizes and compares those three engagement types. It provides the practitioner with a criteria for determining which engagement type is the most appropriate for a given client situation and with detailed information around planning the work typically done during this pre-engagement period.
Engagement Types
The engagement types vary based on the magnitude of the future state change and the related level of effort.
The three types are called:
• Tactical Design
• Strategic Design
• Transformational Design
The table below profiles the engagement types. These parameters will help the practitioner understand the basic differences between the engagement types. This table is not intended to be used as an estimating tool. The table below (Figure 3.1) profiles the engagement types.
Figure 3.1 Engagement Type Variables

The variables in the table above are important factors for selecting the engagement type. But they are not the sole criteria. The practitioner must also consider the client’s ultimate purpose for BPD. It may be part of a larger strategic shift or it may be laying the foundation for an ERP installation. All of these kinds of miscellaneous variables must also be weighed in the selection process.
TACTICAL DESIGN
The objective of tactical design is rapid and cost-effective operational improvement. Typically the client will have little appetite for any significant investment and is trying to improve performance within current state constraints and existing capabilities. Tactical design does not provide a future state design deliverable. Figure 3.2 below illustrates the three major stages of a typical Tactical Design engagement. Figure 3.3 graphs the engagement lifecycle correspondent to the resources needed during each major stage.
Figure 3.2 Tactical Design

Figure 3.3 Tactical Design Engagement Lifecycle

STRATEGIC DESIGN
The aim of strategic design is to significantly change business process that span single discreet business units or functional areas. The engagement is typically staffed with a single team of practitioners who work on it for the entire duration. Strategic engagements include design future state activity sets. First sentence change "process" to plural, "processes".  Change "discreet" to "discrete".  Add to end of paragraph, "Figure 3.4 outlines the major stages of a Strategic Design engagement. Figure 3.5 graphs the engagement lifecycle correspondent to the resources required during each of the major stages.
Figure 3.4 Strategic Design Activity Sets

Figure 3.5 Strategic Design Engagement Lifecycle

TRANSFORMATIONAL DESIGN
Transformational design includes designing more than just business processes. True transformational design changes not just components of capabilities, but whole capabilities, creating a new infrastructure and ultimately a new culture. Often this engagement type is proceeded by a strategy engagement.
Transformational engagements are typically structured in one of two ways: ‘Phased’ or ‘Multi-Tracked’.
Phased Engagements
Phased engagements are most common. They are characterized by a hard constraint around resources. Either the consultant or the client has only enough people or funding to do one set of processes at a time. Phased engagements of course require considerably more time than the alternative. The advantage is that a single team of practitioners can staff it moving from phase to phase. So coordination and control are relatively easy. (Figures 3.6, 3.7)
Figure 3.6 Transformational Design Activity Sets – Phased Approach

Figure 3.7 Transformational Design Engagement Lifecycle – Phased Approach

Multi-tracked Engagements
Multi-tracked engagements require multiple practitioner teams and client teams. They also require a coordination mechanism like
a mini-project management office (PMO). The advantage is speed. In theory a large transformational engagement would have the same approximate duration as a strategic engagement. To be successful, the practitioner must maintain consistent standards and delivery across tracks that are moving concurrently and autonomously. This approach also requires the client to deal with a much greater degree of organizational disruption than a phased engagement. (Figures 3.8, 3.9)
Figure 3.8 Transformational Design Activity Sets – Multi-Tracked Approach

Figure 3.9 Transformational Design Engagement Lifecycle – Multi-Tracked Approach

The Engagement Type Selection Activities
All of the activities included in this activity set are aimed at selecting the appropriate engagement type for the client’s situation
and building a sound and compelling business case that prompts the client to initiate the BPD work. (Figure 3.10)
Figure 3.10 All BPD Engagements Start Here

ACTIVITY SET 1 – SELECT ENGAGEMENT TYPE
Activity 1.1 – Determine Client Objectives
The objective of this activity is to document the client’s general business objectives and performance trends, and to reach a shared understanding with them about how their objectives would be supported by process design and related performance improvement changes.
The practitioner should identify any ‘burning platform’ issues which are prompting the client to take action. The practitioner should also determine if other major initiatives are already underway or are planned and what impact they would have on their efforts.
The primary source of this information will be the potential engagement sponsor(s) and other persons they designate. Typically, information is collected from one-to-one interviews and small group discussions which may or may not be facilitated. It is always prudent for the practitioner to enter into such discussions using a well conceived interview guide.
GO TO TECHNIQUES SECTION – INTERVIEWING, PAGE 166
The duration and the effort related to this activity are difficult to generalize, it may be impacted by many factors like the existing relationship between the practitioner and the client and the practitioner’s overall familiarity with the client’s business.
In the event the potential client has no clear business strategy in place it may be appropriate to include an experienced strategy consultant in these discussions.

Activity 1.2 – Validate Business Strategy
The objective of this activity is to confirm that the client’s design objectives support their existing enterprise and operational strategies. This alignment is critical to the success of any design engagement.
The practitioner should understand and be able to articulate at this early stage the implications of the changes that would be required to achieve the client’s objectives. This is especially important when the sponsor is not a part of the enterprise’s executive management team and may not understand the enterprise level impact of some business unit level design changes. This activity will conclude with a review of findings with the sponsor, the output of which often details linkages and drivers and may serve as the first component of the Engagement Business Case. In cases where the practitioner finds a misalignment they should attempt to adjust the client’s objectives.
The primary sources of this information are often documents that describe strategies, business plans and supporting material. Secondary sources are often the same people that provided information for Activity 1.1. Much of it can even be collected during same interviews and meetings as long as the practitioner is prepared and the interview guides and collection tools are structured properly.

Activity 1.3 – Conduct Pre-Engagement Diagnostic (optional)
This activity is optional and is not recommended unless it is absolutely necessary. But situations do sometimes arise that make it necessary to perform a brief diagnostic before the engagement letter is actually signed. The sponsor might be too skeptical to move forward, they might want proof of the practitioner’s ability before making any commitment, or they may be having difficulty gaining a consensus around the merits of process design with their colleagues—they may need to create a ‘burning platform’.
The objective is to reach a tipping point. To that end the practitioner is creating a presentation that provides snapshots of target processes and capabilities, illustrations of related performance gaps, and an approximation of benefits that could be generated by process design. A word of caution, the practitioner should not begin developing specific improvement recommendations or future state designs without a signed engagement letter.
The practitioner should execute the work rapidly, precisely and with minimal disruption to the client’s organization.
The practitioner begins by taking stock of the materials collected to date, targeting processes and capabilities, and identifying a number of subject matter experts who will be the primary sources of information. The preferred information collection method is interviews with the subject matter experts individually or in small groups. It is also advisable to tour the target work areas and observe line worker activity as unobtrusively as possible. Try to stop short of full blown workshops because of the level of disruption they cause and the amount of preparation they require. Make sure that all output is validated by the SMEs before it is presented to the sponsors.

Activity 1.4 – Select BPD Engagement Type
The activity begins by compiling all of the output generated to date. Next develop the criteria for the selection. The practitioner has to answer a set of questions related to a number of variables. Let’s call them Engagement Selection Variables. They often include:
• Client Sponsorship – how much authority does the potential client sponsor have in the organization? And a harder question…how much influence do they have?
• Scope – how large is the organizational space that the client wants changed? Does the sponsor own that space? Are there impermeable boundaries within that space?
• Improvement Levers – how much improvement does the client want?
• Client’s Investment Appetite – how much is the client willing to invest?
• Future Benefit Harvest Timeframe – when does the client want to start accruing the benefits from the process improvement investment?
• Engagement Duration – how many internal resources is the client willing to dedicate and how long is the client willing to dedicate them? When and for how long does the practitioner have the appropriate consultants available?
• Change Readiness – how much change and disruption is the organization willing to tolerate? Does the organization have a good track record regarding change initiatives?
This information can be collected during Activity 1.1 and 1.2. Conduct an additional interview with the sponsor to collect any missing information. Once the practitioner has accurately answered and analyzed these questions they should be able to select the appropriate engagement type. Note that the answers have to be carefully considered. Six of the seven may clearly point to one engagement type but the seventh may make it impossible. This activity should not be considered complete until the sponsor and practitioner have agreed on an engagement type.

Activity 1.5 – Build the Engagement Business Case (Optional)
This activity is optional. A business case may be presented to the sponsor before the practitioner begins to craft the Statement of Work (SOW) for the engagement. But it is not always required. The sponsor may make a decision to proceed without it in an effort to accelerate the BPD effort.
This initial business case often simply validates the need for the change effort and defines and thoroughly describes the type of business process design engagement that will best suit the clients needs. The required information should be in the practitioner’s possession at this point though it is sometimes necessary to meet with a controller or finance SME to collect additional information. It will also be necessary for the practitioner to understand how the client keeps score, what measures do they consider most important, how do they calculate key results, and what hurdle rates do they use for investments.
GO TO TECHNIQUES SECTION – BUILDING A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS, PAGE 235

GO TO EXAMPLE SECTION – FUTURE STATE BUSINESS CASE PRESENTATION, PAGE 306

Activity Set #1 Commit Point
Selecting the right engagement type enables the practitioner to rapidly move through a potential engagement’s first Commit Point where the client indicates to the practitioner that they wish to proceed with the development of a formal Statement of Work for a particular engagement type.
It is difficult to estimate a duration for this activity set (aka, the sales cycle). It depends on the both the client’s willingness and BearingPoint’s appetite. All of this work could be completed in two days or two weeks or two months.

ENGAGEMENT TYPE SELECTION