Advanced Business Process Management - Case Study Example

Table of contents Table of contents 1 1.0 Introduction 2 1.1 1st analytic hierarchy process 3 1.2 2nd analytic hierarchy process 4 2.0 Discussion 4 3.0 Usefulness 7 4.0 Conclusion 10 1.0 Introduction Business process management is an imperative aspect that is undertaken in each and every organisation. This is considering the fact that every organisation has diverse processes that go on therein. These processes therefore have to be managed and analysed accordingly. Various scholars have come up with hierarchies used to analyse business processes, workflow, work and human activity. (Ryan, 2009) These analytical hierarchies are made of different layers. One of the hierarchies consists of the goal at the topmost level, it then branches to four sections of criterion and then each of the four branches to three alternatives. In this case, the goal represents the parent node of the four criteria. This also clearly shows that the illustrated criteria are the children of the goal. (Saaty, 2010) It then narrows down to the fact that the three alternatives are the children of each criterion or each criterion is a parent to three major alternatives. The other analytical hierarchy process consists of four major layers. The topmost layer has the goal, followed by four criterions. These branch to the sub- criteria then finally to the alternatives. The priorities are defined as the figures related to the analytical process nodes. They show the relative weights of any group’s nodes. The numbers are usually absolute in nature. That is they do not have units. This means that a goal has priority of one thousand. In this case, the local priorities clearly illustrate the comparative weights of the nodes found in a sibling group in relation to the parent. (Briol, 2008) This clearly shows that each and every cluster of criteria’s local priorities and that of the sibling sub criteria sum up to one thousand. There are then the global priorities in this hierarchy. The global priorities in this hierarchy are sourced through multiplication of the global priority of the parent by the sibling’s local priorities. It is imperative to note that the sum of all sub- criteria’s global priorities in this analytical hierarchy is one thousand. This analytical hierarchy has a rule that is usually adhered to. This is the concept that all child node global priorities have to add up to the parent’s global priority. This means that the local priorities found in a group of children should sum up to one thousand. 1.1 1st analytic hierarchy process This analytic hierarchy process consists of the goal at the topmost level, it then branches to four sections of criterion and then each of the four branches to three alternatives. Source: (Saaty, 2010) 1.2 2nd analytic hierarchy process The topmost layer of this analytic hierarchy process has the goal, followed by four criterions. These branch to the sub- criteria then finally to the alternatives. Source: (Saaty, 2010) 2.0 Discussion An overall analysis of the hierarchies shows that the first hierarchy is simpler in its definition of the terms used to describe the hierarchical layers. The term parent and children are simply used to illustrate the hierarchical layers in the analytical hierarchy process. The second hierarchy that has four layers has no clear definitions of the hierarchical layers. (Sun, 2005) The aspects of local and global priorities that are used in the second type of analytical hierarchy process are not clear at all. The definition of using relative weights is very confusing to the reader and therefore needs more clarification from the author. The author still mentions nodes without first explaining to the reader what he means by the nodes. The use of priorities is not well defined in this case. This includes how the concept of summation of goals is considered one thousand. This leaves a lot to be desired on the part of the author. There are very high chances that there is bound to be potential confusion of meaning. This is in relation to the way the hierarchical layers in the analytical hierarchy process are defined. This is considering the fact that the terms local and global priorities are highly incorporated in defining the layers yet the terms in themselves have not been clearly defined. Furthermore the definitions make it quite complex to carry out comparisons of the various layers in the hierarchy. Yet this is a very key aspect in analysing processes and making the best choice among the process in organisations. This therefore makes the use of the analytical hierarchy process quite strenuous to the management team among other users. (McCaffrey, 2005) An overall analysis of the analytical hierarchy process shows that it can be very hard for the models to be understood by people who are not native English speakers. This is based on how the hierarchical layers have been explained by the authors. It is quite essential to note that the hierarchies are not just limited for use among English native speakers. This means that the authors need to have made efforts to ensure that the definitions, descriptions or explanations were made in much simpler language. One needs to know that the aspects of decision making are carried out through overall ranking of alternatives at hand. This is in relation to the alternative’s attributes. According to the analytical hierarchy processes, previous alternatives cannot change if new alternatives are added onto the decision quandary. It is however worth noting that once alternatives are added, changes are bound to occur on the previous alternatives. The authors of the analytical hierarchy processes therefore failed to explain how the addition of new alternatives can affect the existing ones. Yet the addition of alternatives in the real life situations is quite inevitable. (Vom and Rosemann, 2010) It is also evident that there is bound to be confusion related to the analytical hierarchy process and the terms used in information systems development. The programming language that is used in information systems development is quite different from that which is used by the authors of the two analytical hierarchy processes. The language used in information systems development is highly inclined to systems and software engineering. In this case, most of organisation’s systems are based on the information systems language. This aspect can create a lot of confusion in as far as interpreting the analytical hierarchy processes within organisations is concerned. This means funds have to be used in training stakeholders who are to use the analytical hierarchy processes to ensure that they are fully conversant with the relationship in the two language structures. This is also quite time consuming for the stakeholders in organisations. (Perez et al. 2006) 3.0 Usefulness A thorough analysis of the two hierarchies shows that there they have various potential usefulness to the participants in a business process management. This also includes participants in workflow analysis, and mapping project. The two hierarchies are quite essential to participants of business process management especially when making complex decisions that highly involve multiple criteria. This is considering the fact that the two hierarchies can help to capture objective and subjective measures of business processes. This therefore can provide a relevant mechanism that can be used in checking reliability of assessment measures. The two hierarchies are quite useful in analysing the alternatives given by team members in organisations. This therefore helps to overly reduce bias when making essential decisions such as employment or taking up various projects like as in the Massey processes. (Saaty, 2010) Through the use of these hierarchies, common oversight made during decision making process can be avoided. This includes failing to consider some of the alternatives while favouring those that the decision makers are inclined to. Other challenges that usually have negative effects on decision making include destructions, the lack of focus by team members and general poor planning. These challenges are normally quite costly since they influence wrong decision making. (Ryan, 2009) Furthermore the hierarchies give stakeholders the flexibility of decision making with ease. This actually reduces the stress on management during decision making process. The two analytic hierarchy processes are quite useful since they give both quantitative and qualitative aspects. This makes the decision made after using these hierarchies quite pragmatic and reliable in the long run. The hierarchies are quite useful in situations that are highly subject to human feelings, judgments and in making very essential decisions. This is more so in situations where the decisions have long term consequences. The two hierarchies are also quite useful in situations where alternatives in the processes are quite hard to compare and contrast. This also includes the situations when the processes and sub-processes are quite difficult to quantify. The hierarchies are also quite essential during the benchmarking process. This is where the processes within an organisation are compared. (Ryan, 2009) Another avenue where the hierarchies can be used is in line with management of quality within organisations. This relates to multidimensional issues of improvement of quality within organisations. Resource allocation is also another venture where the two hierarchies can be used. This usually entails allotting resources to available alternatives within the organisation. This also includes use in prioritisation in corporations. This is where the merit of alternatives is determined and not having to go through the ranking process. The hierarchies are also useful in forecasting, balanced scorecard, re-engineering of business processes, total quality management and quality function deployment. Considering all the factors illustrated above, I strongly believe that the two hierarchies are quite essential in the decision making process. (Saaty, 2010) It is also evident that business process modeling techniques such as BPMN and UML help in the process of defining business process hierarchy. The Business Process Modeling Notation illustrates business processes in a graphical manner. It therefore helps to define business process hierarchy since it shows various events in process. There is the starting event that can be correlated to the goal in the business process hierarchy. The intermediate events in the BPMN clearly illustrate the criterion in the business process hierarchy. The end events then show the alternatives in the business process hierarchy. (Debevoise, 2008) This therefore shows that business process modeling notation helps to define and in the overall comprehension of the business process hierarchy. Through the use of BPMN, it is easy to understand the business process hierarchy since the BPMN is simple and graphical in nature. A quick glance at the processes makes one to understand the goals, criterion and alternatives since it is graphic and easy to comprehend. This is considering the fact that each and every step has a unique graphical representation of connecting and flow objects. (Grosskopf, 2009) Business process modeling notation gives support to technical users of analytic hierarchy process. This is through overall provision of notation. This is normally quite sensitive to business users and this therefore enables them to illustrate and analyse complex semantics in business processes. This therefore helps all business stakeholders to understand the analytic hierarchy process. It is also through BPMN that unification of basic analytic hierarchy processes is carried out. (Briol, 2008) The Unified Modeling Language (UML) is also useful in understanding the definition of analytic hierarchy process. This is also because it has graphic notation and its visual models therefore help in understanding the analytic hierarchy process. This is more so when the hierarchies are used in systems that are software intensive in nature. It clearly helps to illustrate the activities, database schemas, actors, logical components, software components the programming language that are essential in analytic hierarchy processes. (Ambler, 2004) 4.0 Conclusion Business process management is one of the key areas that help in decision making process in organisations. Various scholars have come up with analytic hierarchy processes that help in analysis of business processes. One of the hierarchies consists of the goal at the topmost level, it then branches to four sections of criterion and then each of the four branches to three alternatives. The other hierarchy’s topmost layer has the goal, followed by four criterions. These branch to the sub- criteria then finally to the alternatives. The aspects of local and global priorities that are used in the second type of analytical hierarchy process are not clear at all. The definition of using relative weights is very confusing to the reader and therefore needs more clarification from the author. The two hierarchies have potential usefulness to the participants in a business process management. The two hierarchies can help to capture objective and subjective measures of business processes. The hierarchies are quite useful in situations that are highly subject to human feelings, judgments and in making very essential decisions that have long term consequences. The hierarchies can be used is in line with management of quality within organisations. This relates to multidimensional issues of improvement of quality within organisations. Resource allocation is also another venture where the two hierarchies can be used. This usually entails allotting resources to available alternatives within the organisation. All this shows that the analytic hierarchy processes are constructive and they therefore need to be incorporated by stakeholders in business process management. References Ambler, S. (2004): The Object Primer: Agile Model Driven Development with UML 2. Cambridge University Press Briol P. (2008): BPMN, the Business Process Modeling Notation Pocket Handbook. LuLu Press Debevoise, N. et al. (2008): The MicroGuide to Process Modeling in BPMN. BookSurge Publishing Grosskopf, D. (2009): The Process: Business Process Modeling using BPMN. Meghan Kiffer Press McCaffrey, J. (2005): Test Run: The Analytic Hierarchy Process; MSDN Magazine Perez et al. (2006): Another Potential Shortcoming of AHP; TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Volume 14:1 Springer Berlin/Heidelberg Ryan K. (2009): A computer scientist's introductory guide to business process management (BPM), ACM Crossroads 15(4); ACM Press Saaty, T. (2010): Principia Mathematica Decernendi: Mathematical Principles of Decision Making. Pittsburgh; Pennsylvania; RWS Publications Sun, H. (2005): AHP in China; in Levy; Jason; Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Honolulu, Hawaii Vom, B. and Rosemann, M. (2010): Handbook on Business Process Management: Strategic Alignment, Governance, People and Culture (International Handbooks on Information Systems) (Vol. 1). Berlin: Springer Read More