e-journal of Practical Business Research Business Process Benchmarking Implementierung Jörg Puchan, Sophia Zapf, Fee Schubert-Stöcklein, Christian Willige puchan@hm.edu Erschienen im e-journal of Practical Business Research unter: http://www.e-journal-of-pbr.info Die Ergebnisse des Projekts Business Process Benchmarking an der Hochschule München werden in einer Folge von Sammelbänden schrittweise zusammengefasst, die im e-journal of Practical Business Research erscheinen. Im zweiten Sammelband e-journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Band II Gesamtkonzeption (Hrsg. Puchan/Gann) (12/2012) wurde der Gesamtentwurf des Projekts ausführlich dargestellt. Der vorliegende Beitrag ist ein Exzerpt des Handbuchs of Business Process Benchmarking. Im Gegensatz zu den vorangegangenen Publikationen werden in diesem Teil keine neuen wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse vorgestellt. Ferner geht es darum, vorliegende theoretische Projektergebnisse sinnvoll zu bündeln und für den Praxiseinsatz aufzubereiten. Grundlage dafür bildeten sowohl die Sammelbände I und II und die im Rahmen des Forschungs- und Entwicklungsprojekts entstandenen Abschlussarbeiten. In dieser Publikation wird jedes Kapitel des Handbuchs so knapp wie möglich vorgestellt, damit der Leser einen Eindruck über Aufbau und Inhalt des vollständigen Handbuchs vermittelt bekommt. Zitation: Zapf, Sophia; Schubert-Stöcklein, Fee; Willige, Christian; Puchan, Jörg (2013): Manual. In: e-journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Implementierung (Hrsg. Puchan) (09/2013), DOI: 10.3206/0000000053
Business Process Benchmarking Implementierung Projekt Business Process Benchmarking (BPB) Forschungs- und Entwicklungsprojekt der Fakultät für Wirtschaftsingenieurwesen Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaften München Wiss. Leitung: Prof. Dr. Jörg Puchan Autoren: Jörg Puchan, Sophia Zapf, Fee Schubert-Stöcklein & Christian Willige 02.09.2013
Abstract Der vorliegende Beitrag ist ein Exzerpt des Handbuchs Manual for the Practical Implementation of Business Process Benchmarking. Im Gegensatz zu den vorangegangenen Publikationen werden in diesem Teil keine neuen wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse vorgestellt. Ferner geht es darum, vorliegende theoretische Projektergebnisse sinnvoll zu bündeln und für den Praxiseinsatz aufzubereiten. Grundlage dafür bildeten sowohl die Sammelbände I und II und die im Rahmen des Forschungs- und Entwicklungsprojekts entstandenen Abschlussarbeiten. In diesem Teil wird jedes Kapitel des Handbuchs so knapp wie möglich vorgestellt, damit der Leser einen Eindruck über Aufbau und Inhalt vermittelt bekommt. Bitte wenden Sie sich bei verstärktem Interesse an dem kompletten Handbuch an den Projektleiter Prof. Dr. Jörg Puchan, Professor an der Fakultät für Wirtschaftsingenieurwesen an der Hochschule München. Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite I
Index Abstract... I Index..... II List of Figures... III List of Abbreviations... IV 1 Structure of the manual... 1 1.1 Structure with regard to content... 1 1.2 Graphic structure... 1 2 Benchmarking Method Munich (BM 2 )... 2 2.1 Description... 2 2.2 Overview... 2 2.3 Approach... 4 3 Reference Process Model Munich (RPM 2 )... 5 3.1 Description... 5 3.2 Overview... 5 3.3 Approach... 6 4 Key Figures... 7 4.1 Description... 7 4.2 Overview... 8 4.3 Approach... 8 5 Tool... 9 5.1 Description... 9 5.2 Overview... 9 5.3 Approach... 10 6 Prospect... 11 Bibliography... 12 Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite II
List of Figures Figure 1: Structure of chapters... 1 Figure 2: Cycle of the Benchmarking Method Munich... 2 Figure 3: Overview of BM 2 Types regarding special aspects... 3 Figure 4: Steps and Responsibilities of Sub Item Self-assessment... 4 Figure 5: Inputs and Outputs of Sub Item Self-assessment... 4 Figure 6: Method in the RPM 2... 6 Figure 7: Key Figure Cluster... 7 Figure 8: Differentiation Hard and Soft Key Figures... 8 Figure 9: Key Figure Mask... 10 Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite III
List of Abbreviations BPB BM 2 KPI PPI RPM 2 Business Process Benchmarking Benchmarking Method Munich Key Performance Indicator Process Performance Indicator Reference Process Model Munich Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite IV
1 Structure of the manual 1.1 Structure with regard to content The complete of Business Process Benchmarking consists of an Index, a List of abbreviations, the chapters Introduction, Benchmarking Method Munich (BM 2 ), Reference Process Model Munich (RPM 2 ), Key Figures, Tool and an Appendix, a Glossary and a Word Index. In this short version the last three named parts have not been included. 1.2 Graphic structure As mentioned above the manual is divided into the essential chapters Benchmarking Method Munich (BM 2 ), Reference Process Model Munich (RPM 2 ), Key Figures, Tool. Every chapter in the full-version is structured in the same way, means a general introduction part ( Description ), a view of regarded information for the chapter ( Overview ) and instructions and tools for the cause of action ( Approach ). In addition to the subchapters there exists a chapter guide (s. Figure 1) and a coloured index in three colour shades at the margin on the right hand side of the manual to facilitate the orientation between the chapters. Description What is it about? Overview What is needed? Approach What has to be done? Figure 1: Structure of chapters Source: Own presentation Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 1/12
2 Benchmarking Method Munich (BM 2 ) 2.1 Description The Benchmarking Method Munich (BM 2 ) is a newly created method. Like all benchmarking methods it is meant to measure process performance and to compare the results with reference values. BM 2 has been developed to make it possible to benchmark across different industries and to adjust the benchmarking to the individual needs of companies. The method is a structured and generic way to understand which activities should be done for reaching the different BM 2 Types. 2.2 Overview Every type is composed of the following five phases: Tailoring, Planning, Execution, Gap Analysis and Improvement. The subsequent steps of each of these phases include the necessary activity and the required input and output. Figure 2: Cycle of the Benchmarking Method Munich Source: Lugauer et al., 2012: p.27 The following table will help to make a decision which type of the BM 2 should be selected. Choosing the suitable method strongly depends on the reasons and intentions why a company wants to benchmark their processes. The BM 2 Type 1 Current Maturity Level will allow the customer to take a general survey of the company s current maturity level and the ability to benchmark. It s recommended for customers who want to get a feeling for what benchmarking is in general and how this organization will be able to benchmark. Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 2/12
The idea of the BM 2 Type 2 is to offer the customer an opportunity to benchmark his business processes with the existing database and with a benchmarking partner. Through the partnerships with various industry partners the tool is capable of providing a variety of cross-industry data. If the company has selected its partner before starting with the benchmarking project, BM²Type 3 is the right choice. It is not necessary that the selected partner has to be in the database and therefore the selection can be much more precise. The company is able to choose the suitable benchmarking partner with regard e.g. to branch, turnover, size and form of company, number of employees or region. Due to this afore mentioned advantage, it is a very detailed and conscientious approach in BM²Type 3. Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Required experience in benchmarking low high high Personnel costs low medium high Expenditure of time low medium high Compare with the best medium medium high Competitive benchmarking high low low Useful for a rare and specific process low low high Figure 3: Overview of BM 2 Types regarding special aspects Source: Lugauer et al., 2012 (b): p. 7 Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 3/12
2.3 Approach This chapter will show you how to proceed with the Benchmarking Method Munich BM 2. It contains the explanation of the five phases as well as all required subsequent steps. Depending on which BM 2 Type you choose, the necessary steps vary. To get a feeling for how the approach is structured in the complete manual, phase 1 Tailoring is exemplary depicted with its sub item Self-assessment and expectations : Sub Item Self-assessment and expectations : The self-assessment and expectations session allows finding out about basic benchmarking capabilities as well as the fundamental direction of the benchmarking project. By answering some basic questions the foundation of an adequate tailoring will be established. Fill-out checklist A S BS BE PO PU BPMgr BT BPPE Figure 4: Steps and Responsibilities of Sub Item Self-assessment Source: Lugauer et al., 2012 (b): p. 13 Input Activity Output BM 2 checklist Fill-out checklist Filled BM 2 checklist Figure 5: Inputs and Outputs of Sub Item Self-assessment Source: Lugauer et al., 2012 (b): p. 13 Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 4/12
3 Reference Process Model Munich (RPM 2 ) 3.1 Description The Reference Process Model Munich (RPM 2 ) is a flexible and adaptable process model. It allows converting the modelling and documentation of any process in every enterprise into a comparable structure. The importance of comparability appears e.g. in determining key figures, which are needed to start the benchmarking. 3.2 Overview Every company needs to satisfy their customers needs to be successful. But this can only be fulfilled if the customer requirements are known and realized. For the conversion from requirement to satisfaction, enterprises make use of processes. Hence they have an overview to manage, control and improve their products or services. In the Reference Process Model Munich these processes are grouped in three different areas: 1. Management Processes consisting of Plan Enterprise Strategy, Govern Enterprise, Manage Finance, Manage Enterprise Risk and Manage Sustainability. 2. Core Processes incorporate Customer Relationship Management, Supply Chain Management and Product Lifecycle Management. 3. Enabler Processes which involve Manage Human Resources, Manage Quality, Manage IT- System, Manage External Relations, Manage Knowledge and Innovation, Manage Enterprise Effectiveness, Manage Environment & Health & Safety and Manage Assets & Facilities. Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 5/12
3.3 Approach To get the same basis before starting with benchmarking, every process should be adapted to the RPM 2. The adaption ensures the comparability by same preconditions and enables the validation regarding completeness and consistency. The whole method, starting with defining requirements and finishing with the validation, is portrayed below: Figure 6: Method in the RPM 2 Source: cf. Konrad et al., 2012 (b): p. 22 Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 6/12
4 Key Figures 4.1 Description Within the project BPB key figures are divided between the main fields of process efficiency and process effectiveness. Process efficiency reflects the economical aspect of a process. Process effectiveness is seen as the rate of target achievement. The key figure for process efficiency is called a Process Performance Indicator (PPI). For process effectiveness, the key figure is called a Key Performance Indicator (KPI). These clusters contain several key figures (s. Figure 5), which help to get a methodical approach to fulfill all requirements for an analysis of KPI and PPI. This key figure cluster has to be created for every process. Figure 7: Key Figure Cluster Source: cf. Seifert et al., 2012 (a): p. 18 Finally, all key figures shall be aggregated to one PPI and one KPI. To keep the informative value detailed, the cluster will be aggregated horizontally to the next higher level. Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 7/12
4.2 Overview The key figure clusters are divided in Hard Key Figures and Soft Key Figures. This differentiation is important for the kind of compilation. Figure 8: Differentiation Hard and Soft Key Figures Source: Own presentation The measurability of Hard Key Figures is given and understandable through the quantitative recording. These figures have to be accessible in the company and can be compiled automatically or manually. Soft Key Figures are not measurable by hard facts like objective data. Moreover, Soft Key Figures are subjective and have to be measured by e.g. evaluation scales in questionnaires to transfer subjective data into mathematical values. For the two key figure cluster (process quality, customer satisfaction) generic multi-attributive surveys have been developed to achieve the aim of transferring subjective data into mathematical values/ results. The surveys are all listed and described in the manual. 4.3 Approach In the subchapter Approach in the complete manual, the recording of hard key figures is shown and explained exemplary by a human resources process. For the recording, it is important to split the process into several sub-processes on the third level. For each sub-process, key figures per cluster have to be derived. These key figures have to be recorded in the key figure form, whose parameters are explained in the manual. Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 8/12
5 Tool 5.1 Description The tool is so far a prototype, which is based on Microsoft Access. With this first prototype it will be possible to perform the validation of the entire research project. In the future the aim will be to develop software that is available and practicable for all kinds of companies. A fully functional benchmarking software on the basis of an existing BPM-Software is under construction. It is being developed together with our industry partner Softproject. The implementation is expected by October 2013. 5.2 Overview The roles within the tool prototype are SuperAdmin, Admin and User. SuperAdmin has extensive rights. The SuperAdmin enables one person of the client company to be admin. Only the SuperAdmin will hand over the access data like username and password to this person. Admin is able to enter, review or delete data inside his or her own company. User has the least rights. Depending on the target and work, he or she is able to: enter data check data management check report management report errors configure dashboard search select benchmarking Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 9/12
5.3 Approach The manual offers a step-by-step instruction including screenshots and a description of the handling of the tool. The description is structured in the same way for each possible operation within the tool. First of all stands the topic in the headline, which is followed by the step-by-step instruction. An example is given here: Key Figure Step 1: Click on»key Figure«. Figure 9: Key Figure Mask Source: Own presentation Step 2: Fill the required information into the mask. The explanation on the right shows which information is mandatory, necessary only during benchmarking or company specific. Step 3: Save the data by clicking the button»save data report«. Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 10/12
6 Prospect It is obvious that this publication provides the reader only with a small insight into the complete manual. For further information about the project Business Process Benchmarking in general or the in particular do not hesitate to visit the project s homepage: http://wi.hm.edu/forschung/aktuelle_forschungsprojekte/bpb/index.de.html At the moment there are a few projects in progress to validate the already existing results and the so far scientific findings. After finishing them in autumn 2013, a third anthology will be published. Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 11/12
Bibliography Puchan, J., Gann, T., Konrad, T., Seifert, L., Nagel, C., & Jäck, D. (2012): Projektstruktur und Begriffe. In: e-journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Band I Grundlagen (Hrsg. Puchan/Gann) (07/2012), DOI: 10.3206/0000000044 Konrad, T., Schreyer, T., Puchan, J. & Gann, T. (2012): Reference Process Model Munich (RPM 2 ). In: e-journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Band II Gesamtkonzeption (Hrsg. Puchan/Gann) (12/2012), DOI: 10.3206/0000000049 Lugauer, W., Gann, T., Zapf, S., Jäck, D. & Puchan, J. (2012): Benchmarking Method Munich (BM 2 ) Quick Reference Guide. In: e-journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Band II Gesamtkonzeption (Hrsg. Puchan/Gann) (12/2012), DOI: 10.3206/0000000050 Seifert, L., Lindner, A., Vo, H., Drexler, M., Puchan, J. & Gann, T. (2012): Prozesskennzahlen. In: e-journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Band I Grundlagen (Hrsg. Puchan/Gann) (07/2012), DOI: 10.3206/0000000047 Seifert, L., Drexler, M., Puchan, J. & Gann, T. (2012), Prozesskennzahlen. In: e- Journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Band II Gesamtkonzeption (Hrsg. Puchan/Gann) (12/2012), DOI: 10.3206/0000000051 Nagel, C., Jäck, D. & Puchan, J. (2012), BPB-Tool-Entwicklung. In: e-journal of Practical Business Research, Sonderausgabe: Business Process Benchmarking Band II Gesamtkonzeption (Hrsg. Puchan/Gann) (12/2012), DOI: 10.3206/0000000052 Projekt BPB; Zapf, Schubert-Stöcklein, Willige, Puchan Seite 12/12