<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1907245749562386&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">

The Leonardo Blog

All Posts

Improving BPM capability and credibility


Essential for all of practitioners leading Business Process Management is to maintain the right balance between capability and credibility. BPM leaders must demonstrate, not only that they have the knowledge and tools to deliver effective change, but that they also merit the trust of the organisations they seek to change  

Increasing Capability

A common emphasis in organizations is on the development of BPM capability. This can be seen to have two related streams of activity: training and practice. There is a great deal of BPM training available. This includes  courses both on general process topics as well as specific http://www.leonardo.com.au/bpm-software-trainingBPM tool training. Personal reading and research, membership of “roundtable” or special interest groups and conference attendance are other examples of capability development via the ‘training’ stream.

The second stream for capability development is just as important. Genuine capability comes from practice and experience.

Practice usually comes in the form of project work – analysing, modelling, improving, explaining and implementing process improvement strategies. Another very important capability enhancement practice involves development and delivery of presentations on BPM topics and discussion of process issues with colleagues and peers.

Improving Credibility

Increasing credibility is a different, and often more difficult, task. Building credibility within an organisation is an internal marketing process. The objective is to have the idea of Business Process Management take route in the organisational culture.

There is no better marketing strategy than to continually report and promote successful projects. Success breeds success.  Project selection therefore becomes critical.  The “ideal” projects are those  that have a reasonable chance of delivering noticeable outcomes. A balance needs to be  struck between risk and relevance. Particularly in the early stages, a failed BPM project can sound the death knell for process work. It is equally true that successfully delivering a result that is inconsequential does not promote, and can even damage, credibility.

Senior executive support is needed if a process-aware culture is to develop.  The ‘executive floor’,  where the credibility needs to be highest, must be a key target of internal marketing.

Other activities can add to the development of credibility: briefings, newsletters, internal BPM forums, invited speakers from external organisations, support for formal study programs, explaining and celebrating successes. It’s about communication - communicating the core messages of BPM, relating them to the particular enterprise and telling the success stories.

Developing credibility is not about spin doctoring. The credibility must be genuine and not just a perception built via slick marketing. Undeserved credibility will not last long but it might just last long enough to do damage to the organisation and to the ‘process idea’.

Sustaining Credibility

Achieving high credibility is not the end of the story. Credibility needs to be sustained.  After ‘easy wins’ it may get harder to sustain the attention of the organisation and its senior decision makers. It is also possible for ‘quick wins’ to create unreasonable expectations for following projects. If credibility (and capability) are sustained long enough, process awareness becomes second nature and part of the culture.

An interesting characteristic of high levels of BPM maturity is that process-based management is so ubiquitous as to tend towards invisibility in the sense that there is less conscious awareness of “doing BPM”


Practical and pragmatic plans can be developed and implemented to nurture both capability and credibility. Organisations seeking to achieve effective process-based management should actively manage both vectors.

Making an organisation change-able. Making radical change unremarkable. Allowing change to happen more often, not less. These are hallmarks of contemporary management best practice. Effective BPM requires a continuous balance of Capability and Credibility.


New Call-to-action

Roger Tregear
Roger Tregear
Roger is a Consulting Director with Leonardo. He delivers consulting and education assignments around the world. This work has involved many industry sectors, diverse cultures, and organization types. Roger briefs executives, coach managers, and support project teams to develop process-based management. Several thousand people have attended Roger's training courses and seminars in many countries - and Roger frequently presents at international business conferences. Roger has been writing a column on BPTrends called Practical Process for over 10 years. This led to the 2013 book of the same name. In 2011, he co-authored Establishing the Office of Business Process Management. He contributed a chapter in The International Handbook on Business Process Management (2010, 2015). With Paul Harmon in 2016, Roger co-edited Questioning BPM?, a book discussing key BPM questions. Roger's own book, Reimagining Management, was published in 2016.

Related Posts

Buying-in to process-based management

One of the most difficult aspects of creating a climate of process-based management is achieving the required level of buy-in. It’s tempting to say “executive buy-in” but we need buy-in across the whole organization—having support only at the c-level is not enough to make sustained change. Getting the right people on board at the right time, and keeping them there, is often a serious challenge. Everyone is busy. Changing to a process-based management approach sounds more like a problem than a solution. In addition, we are often working in an environment where the organization is reasonably successful, so what problem are we trying to fix?

The Primacy of Process

As we start this new year I want to revisit the basic premise of my involvement in business process management and improvement — to explain it to you, to reassess it for myself, and to seek your feedback. My working life revolves around the certainty that organizations need to be fully committed to both continuous process management and continuous process improvement. Why is this so? In brief, it's the principle of the primacy of process. Let's unpack that and see if I can convince you of its pre-eminence — and, yes, I appreciate that, as this paper is originally published in the Business Rules Journal, that may not be easy! Do you want a simple, but effective, practical, but well-grounded, explanation of the role of business processes in management? After many years working on this question in organizations of many sizes and types, in different national and organizational cultures, I believe I can help you with a simple, effective, practical, and well-grounded meta-model of management.

Are We Too Good at Fixing Process Problems?

Arriving at your destination airport to discover that your checked-in bags are somewhere else is a sufficiently common occurrence to have travelers staring anxiously at the stationary carousel, then fixedly watching the point where bags are first seen, and then breathing a sigh of relief on seeing their bags finally appear. SITA reports1 that 4 billion passengers checked in 4.5 billion bags last year. While only about six bags per thousand passengers get lost, lost bags (more gently termed by the airline industry ‘mishandled baggage’) is a significant problem for airlines, airport owners and managers, and their customers. SITA further reports2 that in 2016 alone, baggage mishandling cost the industry US$2.1 billion, and in the period 2007-2016, the industry cost was a staggering US$27 Billion. The problem is easing3 with the use of new technology, but millions of pieces of luggage are still being ‘lost’ each year, costing the airlines significant amounts, and causing considerable aggravation for travelers.4