Mohammad A. • I think as-is phase is very important because (1) it represents the base for us to start from in improvement process, as (to be) process should result from handling the improvement opportunities in (as is) process "as-is process should lead to to-be by concentrating on eliminating non-value adding activities and simplifying the (as-is)" , and (2) it ensures the involvement of process people as they share us the information of the (as is) process and have chance to give suggestions about to-be, then it increase the ownership of new to-be process

Anne R. • Hi Mohammad, thanks for your reply!

One of the arguments against detailed as-is process analysis I have heard is that it precisely hinders the involvement of the people as they may be afraid to be evaluated. Focusing on the 'to-be', and making a fresh start based on their suggestions (without bringing the current process in a detailed picture), would then ease participation.

You don't agree?

Mohammad A. • Hi Anne,

Business process improvement can be driven from various dimensions, it can be vision (strategic) driven, customer driven, or benchmark driven; it depends of the scope of BPR project, but whatever the process improvement is, it should start by taking a look on the existing processes.

As I said you need a ground to start, and then drive your improvement activities toward a specific goal (vision, benchmark, or customer requirement).

If you make a fresh start based on process people suggestions I think you will be (1) miss the opportunity to overcome real existing process bottlenecks (weak points), and (2) may the process people lead you to something they want (not the real life existing process want) may be to avoid any excess work or any new ways of work.

The problem of people fear to be evaluated or fired should be overcome by a powerful change management program, one that concentrates on people involvement and empowerment in order to make transition period more easily, and by change the mindset that BPR is not a downsizing program, it’s an improvement program.

Some companies encourage their people for improvement activities by announcing that if any process release some resources according to new improved method of work, the resources released will be participate in one (Kaizen Teams) and have more training to be in quality circles, and other improvement activities, which people find that work more amazing than their previous regular work.

Anne R. • Thank you for the additional explanations. I like the approach of providing an incentive for potentially released resources the way you described.

Matthew W. • If you do not understand your current processes and what is and is not working then you will fail to successfully define and implement new processes. Even if management offers explicit direction on new processes, you need to know what is your starting point. Several reasons: 1) Leverage what is already in place, 2) Socialize change and, regardless of management direction, gain acceptance and support from the team that will be responsible for doing or managing the processes, and 3) identify and fix the existing problems that likely are leading to the new process needs. Otherwise, you'll get processes that are essentially DOA.

Anne R. • Right, I completely agree. Thanks for the input, Matthew.

Steven B. • What is a problem?

Knowing just the current state does not answer this any more than just knowing where you want to be in the future state. We have to know bothe the current and future state of a process in order to measure the gap between. It is the gap that we refer to as a problem and it's size the magnitude of the problem. The gap can be characterized with many varying quality, speed, or cost metrics aligned to the customer and key strategic objectives.

I like to use the analogy of a map, where the current state is where you are standing now and the future state where you are going to be, and the path to get you there can be clear, straight, and easy or it can be long, difficult, and filled with obsticles. Without this knowledge, how can you plan, chart a path, know when you have achieved success, or if you are lost.

Sophie B. • I agree with Steven's map view (and it's how the concept resides in my head); we've identified we're at point A, we agree we want to be at point Z. In how many stages do we make that journey? Are there any other decision points along the way? Maybe the terrain doesn't look as we expected it to when we started our journey (budgets, resource, buy-in, tools). We need to know where we started from AND not only where we want to be but how we know when we've arrived. Great discussion - I like to understand other concepts.

Jan H. • In my experience, there are 2 reasons for the "as is" analysis, one is to quantify the (business) case for change, which you cannot do without assessing the starting point. Second is to build the transition plan to migrate to the future state. Both require some level of understanding of the starting point, although not in excruciating detail.

Frank S. • I think it's important to develop a baseline from the as-is process to fully understand what the obstacles and constraints are in that process. This way you can determine if they have been fully resolved in the new process and if any new obstacles or constraints were introduced.

It is difficult for employees to develop ownership in a process if they are not fully involved in its development. It is unfortunate if the employees fear it is an evalution. Not being clear on the goals of the effort, insufficient support amongst the formal leaders, or an informal leader in the ranks spreading that fear are all possible causes for that fear.

Hammad A. • This depends really scenario to scenario but i believe detailed "as is" process analysis is the starting point for "to be" process or effective process improvement

TIMOTHY W. FOWLER (. • The typical statistical answers applies here....."IT DEPENDS"

Are there constraints?

Time?

Resources?

Money?

Pro-You have to KNOW where you are to get where you want...hidden items are often found in the Current State Mapping process...

Con-Begin with the end in mind if the current is royally-screwed and there is team consensus on the future state.

As a genral rule you get out what you put in...

Anne R. • Thank you all for the great input. The three main reasons for 'as-is' analysis that I can discern from this discussion so far are:

1. Being able to build a business case

2. Involve employees, i.e., socialize change

3. Knowing the current state to be able to successfully map out the path to desired goal

As for the 3rd point, the level of detail needed depends on the problem that is to be solved.

Vera S. • I would like to add that I have found "as-is" important for standardization followup as well, it was amazing to me how easy it was in healthcare for things to slide back into the "as-is" without clear cut understanding about as-is and why it needed to change. Possibly because "as-is" is so inbedded as "the only way" to do a process

Rudi N. • Hello Anne, here just some of my thoughts on your question. To begin with I really strongly believe that any process improvement effort if it will truly bring value to an organisation, needs to start from the perspective of the voice of the customer - the added value of the process needs to be defined from the perspective of the customer, after all it is the customer who in the end experiences the outcome of the process and we all know, because we are all customers ourselves, how bad some of those outcomes can often be.

Then secondly I do think it is wise to understand the as-is situation is - I think you can only improve if you know and understand what to improve and where to improve.

My third thought is that you not only need to understand the as-is process but also, and at least as important is the as-is mindset. Without understanding what it is that drives people to execute processes the way they do, you can only sub-optimise. if a process is truly going to be executed in the most efficient way, everything in the system that people work in needs to be in place to allow this. Dr Deming always used to teach that one needs to view your organisation as a system. The system will either support people or limit people in how efficient work can be done.

I hope this helps...
Regards, Rudi

Anne R. • Hi Vera, do you mean that you do a new 'as-is' analysis of the process after the improvement step to control the (sustainability of the) results? Or is your main point to have the process documented as a reference guideline for improved process execution?

Rudi, you are saying that having the desired customer output in mind is the first step before starting 'as-is' analysis. Do you have an example of how a different starting point in terms of VOC can affect the 'as-is' analysis?

Francisco H. • I think an as-is process analysis is important in order to plan the strategy for change. You cannot plan any change properly if you don't know what your starting point is. It's like starting to plan a trip without knowing where your trip is starting from, you won't know how much petrol you will need, or whether you need a car or a train. It is true you don't need to spend too much time and heaps of resources in detailing the as-is, but it should be good enough to give you a very good idea of where you are. Then, as Rudi states, the voice of the customer should be one of the first things you should look at, that is, the customer requirements, since you might end up making lots of improvements in areas that do not necessarily matter to your customer.

I hope my comment help you somehow.
Regards
Francisco

Robert G. • If you and your team of outside consultants do not understand the "as is" and the process conditions the client's staff you are working with, your "to be" will be without validity with the client.

A major step of the implementation process gap analysis between the "as is" and the "to be" is taking your client team by the hand and leading them thru the "gap" to the promised land of the "to be".

Do not get "sucked in" to discussions of the value of, or the amount of time spent on the "as is" analysis. That should be an agreed upon step in the project plan between the client management and the consultant project manager before project is launced.

karl B. • I totally agree with the need for 'as-is' before the 'to-be'. I have worked on recent I.T. project where the customer didnt want any 'as-is' analysis. The risks of this were explained to the customer, but they declined. As a result, gaps and risks were missed and the project timeline was extended as a result.
This was a clear example of needing to do the 'as-is' stage, so my advice is do it and you'll save yourself money, time, stress, angry customers and upset fellow work colleagues.
regards
Karl

Lanre B. • As-Is for me is important, its the baseline...the improvement starts from the as-is and your ROI is calculated based on the improvement between the as-is and the to-be, The fear of not getting cooperation from the business or resistance can be reduced by ensuring that the process owners contribute to the improvements. I make the business owners to give me the improvements and i credit it them, I sometimes lead them to the improvement even when i have done a thorough analysis.