Gestion des Risques – Four Ideas About How to Successfully Tackle Gestion des Risques.

Posted by Clay on March 29, 2017

BPM is actually a comprehensive methodology that assists design and maintains every aspect of your organization with all the sole intent behind meeting and/or exceeding their customer’s wants and needs both effectively and efficiently. BPM tries to continuously enhance the business processes in a choice of incremental steps or with radical changes.

BPM is a mixture of these power tools (and a few more) helping the business to document, understand, measure and boost their business processes. BPM assist to create well documented and streamlined processes, that are important to ensure consistency, traceability while focusing towards shared strategy and gratification goals.

Considering the different origins, skill sets and backgrounds of any “typical” BPM and “typical” Lean Six Sigma practitioner, there are many deployment facts working against both methodologies:

1. Lack of information of every other: Most BPM teams and BPM Software Companies know minimal about Lean Six Sigma and the other way round. BPM traditionally has been used and deployed for an i . t . effort. LSS is considered an operational tool for manufacturing and / or back office processes, not software development.

2. BPM is practically all the time accompanied by a business-wide software tool, and requires an application vendor on the periodical basis for training, new releases, technical support, etc.

3. BPM is often deployed as gestion des risques or from higher up management levels. 4. Six Sigma and Lean have been typically manufacturing efforts; and the majority of recently operations management directives. As being a foot note, among the most successful Six Sigma deployments were executive management mandates (Motorola, Allied, Bank of America, to say a few).

5. Six Sigma tools do not possess a large technology foot print, with software requirements mostly at several of the organization’s desktops. Its deployment is usually driven in the beginning by consulting organizations and then passes to internal resources (a Program Office is really a typical modus operandi).

6. Neither BPM nor Lean Six Sigma specialist is traditional a big change and Integration Management expert or trained specialist. This knowledge vacuum causes hiccups in the deployment and acceptance of either methodology by the stakeholders.

7. Neither BPM nor Six Sigma come with an integrated data collection tool, creating always a delay in data gathering which hampers a fast deployment and execution. Both count on a 3rd party layer to do data gathering and data readying for analysis.

BPM tools are amazing in creating business interactions and communications models, mapping processes and workflows, along with capturing key metrics and resources related to those processes. However, many BPM teams find it hard to understand which processes are the main priority to the business and which defects are the most critical to fix for almost any given process. BPM lacks of quantitative ranking methods and statistical tools to prove significance. Teams sometimes use a number of “hunches” and past experiences to make a decision how prioritize design and implementation approaches for new or improved processes. LSS has much to supply BPM teams in this area – through tools like Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA), risk prioritization index and Value Stream Mapping (VSM). So, conceptually, BPM and LSS must be a great fit.

BPM can be another thin methodology to check the sustainability of the process change after implementation of such changes. Once process changes have already been deployed, a project is closed as well as the consultant systems analyst goes home, or starts a whole new project. Tools like statistical process control and non-existent from the BPM tool set, leaving the operational leadership with (maybe) a great deal of reports, at best real-time. LSS offers via SPC, a wealth of proven and robust tools specifically tailored to particular quantitative variables; made to monitor stability, trending and within control operational status.

BPM tools enables storage of key data and key metrics to the different artifacts that are created and employed in a task. However, will not permit a solid statistical analysis of the data. In fact, most of the BPM data stores are for simple figures (like an average), curtailing itself for a more accurate data analysis, like hypothesis testing or possibly a regression model to forecast future process performance. As well as the few software tools equipped with discrete or 58dexepky Carlo simulators are rarely deployed.

By definition and key to its success, LSS tackles specific defects in a specific list of operations inside a specific business process. This method is very great at eliminating defects. However, on the whole LSS lacks of a wealth of enterprise-wide look at the organization strategy, objective and goals, its actors and also the organization surroundings. This is an area where BPM carries a quite strong showing. So, conceptually, BPM and LSS must be a fantastic fit.

Lean Six Sigma also falls short when attempts to incorporate tools for computer automation and knowledge technology designs (both vital is the majority of our business processes with higher integration and automation). BPM lends a helpful hand with use cases, event modeling, business class models, subtype and package models. Conceptually, again BPM and LSS ought to be a fantastic fit.

It might be very apparent that Six Sigma Lean and Business Process Management (BPM) neither can stand-alone. Organizations that master the integration of both could have a better rate of financial success when making and implementing process for taking any organization for the closer amount of customer satisfaction and global competition.

BPM or LSS will not consider Change nor Integration Management or any one of its derivatives when communicating changes with their stakeholders and much less for their customers. These main reasons of buying in to the changes and managing smooth transitions and changes are not considered whatsoever in any project plan, or are left to the assumed familiarity with the project manager.

The past area of this paper will show actionable suggestions to both BPM and Six Sigma practitioners to counter any natural resistance to change that will typically emerge from your organization when facing changes.