<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

A ROI of Process Modelling

All Posts

A ROI of Process Modelling


Dilemma? Every day, many thousands of hours are invested in creating business process models. Across the country, around the world, this is a massive investment in time, money, and energy. Is there a satisfactory return on modelling?

  1. Does your organization get maximum benefit from its investment in process modelling?
  2. As a modeller, do you personally feel your models make a difference?
  3. Do process models have a positive impact on the performance of your organization?
  4. Are there better ways to consistently develop useful process models?
  5. What is a ‘good’ process model?
  6. Can we consistently achieve process modelling excellence across our organizations?
Modelling activity is increasing across all architectural perspectives. This is driven by many factors including: increasing interest in process-based management, rapid increase in BPMS use, the complex needs of integrated EA modelling, and process-based standards compliance requirements.

Andreas Havliza will be presenting this masterclass at the 2015 Building Business Capability Conference in Sydney this August. The class provides clear, practical guidelines that can be applied immediately for effective process modelling by individuals and teams. It also answers the questions most frequently asked by modellers, those who manage them, and those who use their models. The masterclass is a breakthrough experience for process modellers and those who manage them.

New Call-to-action

Related Posts

How To Replace Random Acts of Management With a Metamodel of Improvement

The simple existence of a problem is not enough reason to invest in fixing it, perhaps not now, perhaps not ever. Organizations need a systemic approach to define what good looks like, assess current performance, and make evidence-based decisions about which performance gaps to close. The Tregear Circles replace random acts of management with a metamodel for continuous process improvement. I have recently encountered several examples of the idea that higher process performance target scores are obviously better than lower ones, just because they are … well … higher; that setting a target of, say, 95% is, without doubt, better than a target of 88%, and in striving for improvement we should go 'as high as possible'.

Why Open Source Thrives on Cooperative Competition

Although I’ve spent the majority of my career on the consulting side of the fence I’ve also spent ten years on the client side, in senior IT roles, where I purchased a lot of software.  It was in 2006 that software sales people started offering alternatives to the traditional model of licence plus annual maintenance for proprietary software. These sales people were offering SaaS solutions and subscription-based open source software, neither of which I seriously contemplated buying.  Given that SaaS and open source software are now an everyday part of the IT landscape - why was I entirely unwilling to consider them a dozen or so years ago? The answer is simple. In neither case did they offer the benefits they do today, and, worse, the people selling them struggled to articulate what the real benefits of their offerings actually were. For the purposes of this post I’ll leave the SaaS model aside to instead focus on open source software. 

3 Ways to Measure the Usefulness of BPM

  In the fair dinkum department, the most important question about BPM must be "is it worth the effort?" It works in theory, but does it work in practice? What is the return on process? How should we measure, and report, the outcomes of process-based management?   The Wrong Answer Let's deal with the wrong answer first. It's not about the artifacts. No organization has a business problem called "we don't have enough process models." It is not a business improvement outcome to say we've trained 50 people on Six Sigma analysis, or appointed some process owners, or modelled a process architecture, or assigned process KPIs — these are all necessary, but none is sufficient. To the executive not yet fully engaged with the promise of process-based management, all this activity might sound more like a problem than a solution, more like a waste of resources than a successful outcome. And if that is all that is happening, she would be correct. We need good models, architecture, methods, and training — a metamodel of management — they are a means to an end, but not an end in themselves. Just having management tools is not the point; we must use them to deliver real organizational performance improvement. If our process management and improvement activities are not delivering measurable, objective, proven organizational performance improvements — improvements better than we might have otherwise achieved — then our process activity is, by our own definitions, waste.