[.ca] Reengineering the Corporation (ISBN 1857880978)

Some great ideas, but not thoroughly thought-out:
This book has some great ideas, particularly the idea to take a fresh look at processes. For any established process, it's likely that enough has changed since the process was born that the process is no longer the best way to get from the beginning to the result. This book is well written and easy to read and the examples are especially useful in illustrating the major benefits of reengineering. Unfortunately, many of points are not as well-thought out. For example, the book advocates building teams around discrete processes but fails to realize that this just moves companies from horizontal silos to vertical silos. These vertical silos cause different but still serious problems. Also, the book mentions the critical role of Information Technology, but fails to realize that they can often lead reengineering efforts because if they have a solid knowledge of the business and new technologies they are in the best position to see the new possibilities. Another confusing area is that book indicates certain problems that should be overcome in an initial reengineering project such as functional departments and lack of understanding of reengineering continue to be problems for subsequent reengineerings. Many of the questions that are not answered in this book are answered in John Case's "Open-Book Management". Open-Book Management and Reengineering have many things in common including empowered workers, performance measured by results, and coaching managers, but Open-Book management does a much better job of explaining what really drives these changes and how they can best be aligned.

Process is still King:
This booked rocked the business world when first released circa 1994. It kicked off one of the largest monetary windfalls that the consulting industry has known in recent history. Many would argue that the revolution failed. Certainly there were more than a few (understatement) high profile failed projects to point to. But the same could be said about SAP, CRM, the Web, etc., etc. The reason for most of these failures has more to do with our inability, from an organizational perspective, to adequately handle complexity and chaos, than with the soundness of the underlying ideas and business premises. The consulting industry has often exploited these inabilities for its own gain, regardless of any value that was ultimately received by the customer. However distasteful that might have been for many project participants, we should be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water. These process centric ideas, brilliantly put forth in this effort, are important, and becoming more so every day. The web is all about either fundamentally changing and transforming existing business processes, or inventing processes previously unimagined, fueled by powerful enabling technologies. This book provides a solid foundation for process based thinking and is still a valuable read today.

Manifesto or Miscalculation?:
According to Hammer and Champy, business process reengineering "is the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service, and speed" (p. 35). It is important that you do not confuse business process reengineering with other types of change management. It is not incremental change, down-sizing, total quality management, nor a "doing more with less" strategy. In business process reengineering, quantum changes are made to core processes, which results in far greater advances. Not only are the emerging business processes vastly different from what was previously in place, but the entire organization must change also. Employees, managers, core processes and business relationships will change in a reengineered company, and the change is significant. The authors say this process-based approach will benefit three types of companies: 1) Those in deep trouble 2) Ones who are not yet in trouble but have the foresight to see future problems and 3) Those in peak condition but are looking to take a greater lead over their competition. The authors present their case in a well-written manner and use frequent real world examples to great effect. I would like to see the authors use future printings to update the currency of their examples. They also need to examine the internet's role in reengineering. The few pages in the updated introduction are not adequate. The most recent printing does include an updated introduction where they remark on reengineering's successes and why it is still relevant today. This printing also adds a very useful frequently asked questions section to clarify their position on business process reengineering and lessons learned since the initial printing. This book is for mid- and senior-level managers who believe whole-scale process changes are warranted. Also, entrepreneurs will glean important ideas for developing sound business processes. It is ideal for students studying management, organizational behavior, or process change. The author's compelling argument may not be for all business situations but their provocative manifesto deserves a thorough examination and serious consideration in today's business environment. Some readers will no doubt find reengineering as a panacea; others will see it as a relevant alternative. Read the book and judge for yourself. I recommend this book.

Book review:
James Champy and Michael Hammer published a key book in 1990. It is called Reengineering the Corporation. They define reengineering as "fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvement in critical measures of performance". Allowing for the excesses of words such as dramatic improvement and fundamental rethinking - everyone wants to sell a book and get some consulting revenue! - what Champy and Hammer are reminding us is that the human relations movement in management is only one part, and that scientific management still has a role. Frederick W. Taylor, credited as being the originator of scientific management, may be used as a bogey-man to scare children but there was and is sense in what he said. The same goes for Champy and Hammer. Their view is that any organisation needs to review its processes - indeed the very way that it works - to ensure that what is does is necessary and central to its needs, skills and concerns. Process engineering has a long and respectable history. There are ways to do things that are more effective than others. Processes in organisations do become cumbersome over time and many existing processes in any organisation are probably unnecessary. A UK based organisation, known as B & Q, once had a room set aside next to the CEO's office in which worked the Cut the .... committee. Their job was to review every system, process, report and control in the company to ensure that it was really necessary and really did add value. Systems and processes are like cupboards, basements and lofts. They can contain all sorts of unnecessary junk and garbage and need regular review. (They do not often get it!) However, Champy and Hammer want to go well beyond the analysis and improvement of business processes. They want organisations to take a completely fresh look at what they want to achieve and how they achieve it. They argue for a blank sheet of paper as the start point. Such an approach would call into question everything that the organisation does now. Despite their critics - and there are very many indeed - most organisations spend too much energy on operations not central to their core activities. Most organisations have too much overhead. Champy and Hammer's fresh look at least motivates an organisation to examine everything and to hold nothing as a given. Their critics are from the human relations movement side of management thinking. Henry Mintzberg calls reengineering, "just the same old notion that new systems will do the job". The truth may be that the relevance of more or less ml_topi_mngt_hrmv human relations movement and of more or less scientific management is situational. Some companies are more systems than others. In some companies, constant and daily repetition of quality is vital and such companies are like systems. McDonalds is the classic case. Stuart-Kotze has argued that organisations and leadership can have three orientations - Inspiration, People empowerment and System (he calls them task, people and system) - and that the relevance of each depends upon the organisation's situation. Perhaps the main problem with reengineering has been that it is seized upon by the numbers people and used as a justification for staff reduction. Perhaps also every new idea, or re-statement of an old one as in the case of reengineering, is that they are taken to be the whole truth instead of part of it. New ideas are sold by academics and consultants as the total answer. Reeingineering is one of a series of such total answers from organisation and methods to participative management, to human asset accountancy, to MbO (Management by Objectives), to empowerment and TQM (Total Quality Management), all of which are highly respectable contributions to the art of management but none of which is the only answer.

A management classic:
What if you started your company from a blank slate with serving the customer as the end goal? This question is at the heart of Re-engineering the Corporation, a book that started a wave of corporate restructuring. At it's heart, the book offers the reader tools for staggering leaps of improvement (Cut cycle time from a week to 2 hours) by focusing on processes instead of internal organizations. Instead of asking, "How do we improve what we do?" the reader is challenged to ask, "What is absolutely required to serve the customer?" The book is broken up in sections of theory followed by case studies where re-engineering did meet the lofty goals. There is an evangelical zeal with the book. By nature of it being a manifesto for revolution, the authors are out to inspire in addition to educate. It isn't enough that you understand reengineering, you must go out and do it. The main criticism of the book comes from the authors own admission that two thirds of reengineering projects fail. If that's the case, does it pay out to begin a project like this? Or are more modest goals really appropriate? How does one avoid a major failure? The length of the book (in the spirit of the content, the book is very concise!) doesn't permit the authors to answer these questions. It's up to the individual manager to best decide how to apply the lessons in the real world.