Do You Have a Process Framework?

A recent paper by Andy Salunga ("Forrester's Framework for Process-Driven Organizations," dated April 18th), reminded me of a topic that has been on my list to discuss for some time now. In retrospect, I'm shocked I haven't covered it here yet, because I consider it a critically important aspect to successfully navigating your enterprise. Actually, I'm in the middle of a white paper that discusses our framework model, so this posting will serve as a peek under the covers at that as well.

"What, so you are competing with Forrester's referenced work?" Uh, no. They are different frameworks with different purposes. Think soup and sandwich, tea and crumpets, or gin and tonic; I prefer to consider them different yet complementary. Mutually supportive. It remains to be seen if they share that opinion (for what it's worth, Peter O'Neill didn't exactly run away with his hair on fire when he saw it), but I've had a few conversations and exchanges with Andy with regard to BPM and process integration; we are like-minded on a number of topics.

Back to Andy's paper.

Within Mr. Salunga's 15 page report, he covers industry trends, a few brief case studies to illustrate the value being process-oriented, a number of key concepts for success, and a Methods Assessment worksheet. The gist of the Forrester framework is that successful process-driven organizations focus on four dimensions: Technology, Culture and People, Governance and Structure, and Methods. Of course, it's how the elements described under each dimension interact with each other that is the real trick. I haven't seen it offered up to the general public yet, but if you are a Forrester customer, this work is worth your time and consideration.

On to our framework.

So, the Forrester document lays out what I will refer to as an "approach" framework. I am interested in taking that a step or two further by discussing a "functional" framework. What I mean by that is an actual graphical model that serves as an integration platform for pulling many of the elements that Andy discusses together, allowing the organization to visualize their operations and supporting process interdependencies. A structural foundation so that various functional process components can be mapped relative to each other.

We have had such a framework for a few years now. If you have heard me speak or watched one of my Webcasts in the last 18 months, you're probably sick of hearing about it. At the risk of overselling it or being branded a one-trick pony, it has become my opening gambit on just about any topic you can think of. I can subliminally work this puppy into a simple greeting as we pass on the street. It's my personal version of the steak sauce ad; "Yeah, It's That Important". It's my transformation epiphany.

OK, moving on now. But — it is really important. Trust me.

What started out as a way of keeping mentally occupied while I was waiting for jury duty (almost sat on a murder trial), grew into an integration obsession and eventually resulted in what we refer to as the Planview Integrated Business Process Management Framework. It was born out of necessity, as a mechanism to help customers visualize our product functional scope, give stakeholders a common model to understand their role in the business from their own vantage points, and thus relate to how different processes interact with each other. This model consumed a good amount of my time and energy over several months to fully codify and stabilize, but here we are now, and I have spent the last year and a half working with it and offering it up countless times to many different audiences. No one has been able to break it or refute it so far. The more I think about it and use it, the more convinced I am of the utility and perhaps necessity of such a framework when trying to build an integrated process environment.

The end result is a rectangular 2-D model to make it readily digestible, but the concept started out as a 3-D globe — your business world, or "ecosystem" as we are prone to describe it. It is a transformation model that reflects how technology interacts with overall organizational strategy; a mechanism to identify the current state and influences upon it, and how core business processes interact to achieve some future state.

At its heart is what I call the "dual fulcrums of business management" — the interaction of two pervasive trade-off decisions that permeates our business environment — demand versus capacity and cost versus benefit. Call it 'twisting the cube' on Forrester's four dimensions, but demand, capacity, cost and benefit constitute the keys to the castle. Technology, culture and people, governance and structure, and practically everything else, all exist for the sole purpose of eeking out the maximum results from these four atomic elements of business management.

Once the interrelationships depicted above are understood and combined with the transformation cycle, you have the underlying basis for our framework. All that is left to do from there is to map your enabling process streams and functional components on top of it, and bake at 350 for 45 minutes or until tender. Serve with a hearty helping of supporting detailed steps, marinated in a spicy drill-down vinaigrette.

If you want a deeper explanation of this model and the recipe for it, register for the Webcast, Integrated IT Management with ITIL v3: The Case for Action, Defining a broad IT Management Framework, and watch the first in our three-part ITIL integration Webcast series; the first half of the presentation discusses the framework whether you care about ITIL or not.

OK, from a PMO perspective, assuming IT Service Management isn't (yet) your bag, why do you care? The reason for opening the ITIL integration discussion with the framework is that it is a key mechanism for understanding how ITIL fits within the overall demand/capacity/cost/benefit scheme of things, along-with-all-the-other methodologies you may have in play.

Ah hah! It's all about finding and fixing the overlaps, gaps, disconnects and inconsistencies, my friends.

Besides that, it can help you map how your business applications support those processes, identify major intersections where data travels from one process to the next so you can find choke points or tap into the flow for key metrics. You can also use it to drive assessment of the process components within the framework to check for consistency of maturity, identify weak spots or improvement opportunities. It's a great tool for BPM architects. But wait! There's more! The first 100 callers will also get a lifetime supply of shared operational perspective across different stakeholders and organizations absolutely free!

Back to the title — I don't care WHO's process framework you use (not that there are a lot to choose from); the important thing is that you HAVE one. Otherwise, you are not going to be able to see the process forest for the trees. Something — anything — that allows you to understand and communicate your own organizational ecosystem and the fact that all processes are inputs and outputs to each other.

Anyway, check out the video. I'll let you know when the whitepaper is also available.

Comments

[Jay Tatum]

Dear Terry,
I enjoyed reading about what you are doing and wanted to make a suggestion and contribute to both your Intelligent Design and process. Concerning your "Demand, Benefit, Capacity, and Cost" graphic, I've played with an equilateral quadrilateral for the past 20 years to demonstrate the integration and transparency of four inter-related issues. Think of the "quad" as a 3 dimensional object that has four triangles folded together in a 3D format, like a pyramid, only with four triangled sides. I've made these out of plexiglass for presentations before (yes, rather crude) but it really helps to visualize and demonstrate the kind of process you describe. While I have used this for years in discussing the "Wesleyan Quadrilateral" to show the process relationship between four theologican topics, I have also used it as a process tool. I don't know how to do it within computer software to show it, but I'm sure you're tech-savvy enough to accomplish this. I think it would make a great contribution to the process you are pursuing and maybe even a novelty for one who can appreciate Intelligent Design.
One further point about the quad, as I call it. Once you build it, you can place it in a sphere and find the four corners of the earth. I just think it's cool. Hope you do as well. J