Entrepreneur: Start & Grow Your Business

Beyond predictable workflows: enhancing productivity in artful business processes.


by Hill, Charles^Yates, Robert^Jones, Carol^Kogan, Sandra L.
IBM Systems Journal • Oct-Dec, 2006 •

INTRODUCTION

In most companies, managers are under pressure to reduce costs and improve productivity. In this paper, we give a practitioner's perspective on some of the challenges of improving workforce productivity and offer some emerging technical solutions that can be used to support an activity-centric approach to managing work.

Industrialization of information work

Businesses have made enormous investments in enterprise applications from vendors such as SAP AG and Siebel, Inc. We begin by discussing the role of these solutions in enhancing productivity and the limits of their capabilities.

In a complex business process, each actor performs only some of the steps, and few people fully understand how the entire process works. Enterprise applications codify and compartmentalize the steps to guide users through the task at hand.

Although very expensive to implement, enterprise applications are commercially successful. They are used by a great number of companies and are considered to be mission-critical.

We consider processes managed by enterprise applications to be industrialized when they are formalized enough to achieve consistent results that are largely independent of the users. An enterprise application can furthermore achieve economies of scale in a process when the benefits it delivers increase with the number of employees involved in the process. (Other important functions of enterprise applications not directly concerned with employee productivity, such as rapid supply chain communications, regularity, and compliance, are not considered here.)

Prescriptive, highly formalized process applications have enjoyed great success. There are, however, definite limits to this approach. One immediate problem is how to enable business people to use enterprise applications. To extend their value beyond a core group of highly trained users, companies implement self-service user interfaces that enable employees to quickly accomplish routine information-processing tasks without intervention by specialists. Many human resource (HR) processes, such as hiring, promotions, and performance reviews, are candidates for self-service because they require the participation of individual employees and the transmission of personal information.

To support the delivery of self-service user interfaces, IBM enables users of IBM Lotus Notes * to access processes in SAP and other systems, (1,2) and IBM WebSphere * Portal Server (3) can also integrate a variety of systems, including SAP and Siebel. Microsoft is now working with SAP to bring processes into the Microsoft Outlook ** client. (4) These initiatives show that it is possible to significantly broaden access to enterprise applications.

Limits on the industrialization of information work

As laudable as these efforts are, profitable use of enterprise applications for enhancing productivity has its limits. When the cost of formalizing a process is too high, an alternative approach is needed. Some of the factors that limit the industrialization of information work are scale, risk of lock-in, dependency on incumbent systems, and artful processes. We discuss them in the following subsections.

Scale

Because of the high cost of entry, some companies, especially small ones, cannot adopt enterprise applications. In an organization of any size, the cost of implementing a particular process may outweigh the productivity benefits for the users affected. Thus, at least when considering productivity goals, the complexity of the process and the size of the workforce involved need to be considered.

Risk of lock-in

Many companies, regardless of size, choose not to move certain processes into an enterprise application because of the dangers of locking in a process determined by a third-party vendor. For example, rather than use a job-posting module that comes with an enterprise application, a company might use a more efficient online service, such as Monster.com, competing on the open market for new employees and saving costs at the same time. As more compelling online services become available, this consideration becomes more important. On the other hand, the need to differentiate an aspect of customer service from that of competitors may also lead a company to avoid a standard solution and develop a more custom approach. (5)

Dependency on incumbent systems

Most large organizations have many incumbent legacy systems. Because some processes depend on legacy systems that are too costly to replace, the processes cannot be moved into the preferred enterprise application, even if managers wanted to move them. Furthermore, many processes cut across IT system boundaries. For example, to bring a newly hired employee on board can involve such activities as transactions with the HR system, an account request into the systems administration group, bookings for education and training, and communication with the hiring manager. Again, such processes may be too expensive to reimplement.

Artful processes

Aside from the issues of scale, lock-in, and dependency, certain types of work simply cannot be formalized well enough to safely entrust to an enterprise application. The goals and methods of some processes change too quickly over time; for example, the process of designing high-technology products. In some processes, it is primarily the content in each process instance--rather than the process itself--that determines the outcome; for example, a request for proposal (RFP) process. (6) Most important, many highly specialized processes are developed or refined locally at the individual or small-team level such that the process cannot easily be separated from the specific people who perform it; for example, managing client relationships in professional services firms. While the framing process may be stable at an abstract level, the key details are not. They depend on the skills, experience, and judgment of the primary actors. We denote these kinds of processes artful in the sense that there is an art to their execution that would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to codify in an enterprise application.

Long tail of business processes?

In certain industries, such as professional services, artful processes are clearly the norm. (7,8) However, artful work is not always easy to detect. When enterprise applications were first deployed to automate the sales process, over-reliance on the formalized aspects of the process sometimes caused major business failures. With hindsight, no one disputes that there is an art to selling that cannot be captured in a process application. More generally, there are many difficulties associated with accurately modeling business intentions in enterprise applications. (5) Perhaps more work is artful than is readily apparent.

Indeed, we wonder if there is a long tail of business processes (Figure 1). In certain statistical distributions, "... a high-frequency or high-amplitude population is followed by a low-frequency or low-amplitude population which gradually 'tails off'. In many cases the infrequent or low-amplitude events--the long tail--... can cumulatively outnumber or outweigh the initial portion of the graph, such that in aggregate they comprise the majority." (9) Were it possible to create a distribution of business processes ordered by the amount of resources invested in them, we wonder if the total investment in the many less formalized processes far outweighs those implemented in enterprise applications. If so, a renewed focus on enhancing productivity in these kinds of processes is surely imperative.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Claims of the existence of a long tail of processes have in fact been made before, (10,11) although we have not found any published data to support the claims. This is an important area to address in future empirical research. Meanwhile, one point of evidence supporting this view is that enterprise application vendors are actively seeking to make their systems more accessible to a larger proportion of the employee base. It suggests that most employees today do not directly interact with enterprise applications, and it suggests that the processes the employees are executing are apparently largely unsupported by the enterprise applications.

Outline of our current research

As artful work is clearly central to many businesses, we propose that productivity will be increased by supporting and enhancing artful processes rather than by stripping them down to highly formalized industrial methods. The focus of our research is to find ways to improve productivity by enabling the primary actors--regular business people--to define and continually improve their processes rather than follow a centrally planned model. We call this shift the democratization of process. It means creating new decentralized IT architectures that enable business people to more easily exploit a web of existing and emerging IT services in their diverse daily activities. In the remainder of this paper, we present our research into ways of achieving that result.

The widespread use of ad hoc collaboration and personal information management tools to help execute business processes is already documented. (12-17) In the next section, we present two additional user studies that we conducted to learn how business people get their work done. The first study provides a cross-sectional view of a range of changeable and flexible processes in five companies. The second study looks in detail at the interactions involved in the hiring process at a small company and identifies specific "pain points" (impediments to productivity) that need to be addressed. In particular, this study illuminates the pivotal role of the lead actor in this process as an integrator of people and information across organizational and system boundaries. Using anecdotes from customers, we confirm that this is not an isolated pattern, but a common concern in many processes.

In the following section, we examine some important bottom-up forces that shape business processes. We need to understand and embrace these forces in order to design an architecture to enhance artful processes. We examine the increasing role of end users in IT decision making, the importance of ad hoc collaboration tools in artful processes, and the rise of decentralized IT services.

In view of these forces, companies need to redesign and reassemble their business processes in a more flexible way that better reflects the way that people really work. The modern business process touches many IT capabilities, including ad hoc collaboration tools, departmental solutions, enterprise applications, and online services. A walled-garden approach in which all services are contained within one software system is unacceptable. Maximizing choice is important, and centralizing all process definitions in enterprise applications is counter-productive.

However, if process definitions are no longer centralized, what alternative organizing principles can be used to avoid a descent into chaos? An activity-centric approach promises the ability to organize artful work productively while preserving user choice over the services employed. (18-23) The core idea of activity-centric computing is to organize computer-based work in terms of the activities that people are doing rather than in terms of the tools used. We devote a section to presenting some design principles for an activity-centric solution, with particular focus on the need for a decentralized architecture.

There is a long history of attempts to make the computing environment more modular and service-oriented, with the goal of bringing power over service selection closer to the end user. Generally, these attempts have not lived up to expectations. So why is the time right now? Many previous attempts failed because the cost and complexity of the engineering approach proved too great for widespread adoption. However, the recent emergence of sophisticated applications and integration methods on the Web, known collectively as "Web 2.0," (24) shows new promise because the methods are generally simple and have already proven that they can be widely adopted in the decentralized environment of the Web. We identify enabling technologies that will permit users to capture, share, and reuse work practices, and link them to the widest possible range of supporting services while allowing for their decentralized design, development, and deployment. This approach will provide a foundation for more productive work environments that users can incrementally adapt and refine as their needs evolve.

USER STUDIES

In this section, we first summarize a user study aimed at understanding how people who do knowledge work manage their processes. We also present a detailed use-case analysis of the hiring process in a small consulting firm, and we summarize some related customer anecdotes.

Ethnographic study of business processes

In 2003-2004, we conducted user research at five different companies to learn how knowledge workers get their work done. We did an observational study, shadowing people as they did their work and then interviewing them at the end of the session. At least two people from each site were interviewed, and each visit lasted approximately three hours. Participants were all from the Boston area and included IBM customers, non-customers, and business partners. All were knowledge workers and considered to be subject-matter experts in their field.

After observing participants as they did their work, we asked about the processes and procedures they used to get their work done and how they collaborated with others to get work done. We took note of all the checklists, procedures, and flowcharts. Table 1 offers a sample of the processes observed and discussed. Many of these were printed and hanging on a wall or bulletin board, some were handwritten, and all were annotated. The annotations made reference to exceptions, so there were several versions of each checklist to be used under certain conditions.

Some processes were simple, such as how to schedule the monthly meeting or how to buy a book. Others were more complex, such as reporting and tracking adverse events in a clinical trial. We also found that some processes were occurring exclusively by e-mail or instant messaging. Recreating the process or tracking it involved searching and filtering e-mail many different ways to ensure that the latest information was available.

Processes were hard to track, difficult to monitor, and hard to reuse. Some participants felt that each time a new instance was initiated, they had to start over from scratch. They described their processes as idiosyncratic and always under modification. One participant said that his work is always the exception--and that's the rule. Most of the communication was happening asynchronously and was partly paper-based. The workflow modeling tools available were considered too complex for these types of processes and were inaccessible to these knowledge workers.

We also collected artifacts from the study, such as a new employee checklist and a work request form. Several versions of the new employee checklist were posted: one for new hires from the United States and another for non-U.S. citizens. Another version was for people working offsite. This work is described in more detail by Kogan and Muller in this issue. (25) Here we briefly summarize some key findings:

* Collaboration tools are often used for processes involving time management and meeting logistics.

* Use of formal process systems is supplemented with personal information management tools, such as reminders.

* Use of formal process systems is reserved for enterprise-level processes, not personal or department-level work.

* Participants identified a diverse set of business processes, such as design reviews, requests for proposals, and clinical trial protocol development.

* Participants described their work as idiosyncratic and frequently modified--there are always exceptions, and processes need to be flexible to accommodate these conditions.

Use-case analysis for the hiring process in a small company

The following use case was obtained from interviews with an HR employee at a small information services company. We conducted it to examine in detail how the process really works. The names are fictitious.

Overview

Lucy works in the HR department of a small company. Hiring is one of her main responsibilities. The hiring process at her company varies substantially from one case to the next. The level of the position being filled and the current economic conditions affect the approach taken. For example, hiring decisions for lower-band positions can be made within the HR group, while more senior positions involve the candidate preparing and delivering a presentation to senior analysts within the organization. If the company is in a period of growth, managers are automatically allowed to backfill vacated positions, whereas in leaner times, backfilling is subject to approval.

To execute the hiring process, Lucy and her team expend significant manual effort bridging disparate IT systems, including dedicated tools, such as a vacancy-posting system, and ad hoc collaboration tools, such as e-mail and the phone. The pain points experienced in doing this work are localized to the HR team and, in this small company, are largely invisible to the IT department. Even if they were noticed, while it might in theory be possible to run this process as a workflow in an enterprise application, doing so would probably not be cost-effective nor would it fully support the kinds of communication and collaboration required.

The following partial use case describes a portion of the hiring process at Lucy's firm. It starts with the decision to post a vacancy and finishes with the first candidate being screened by phone.

Actors and goals

The following actors participate in this use case:

* Frank, the hiring manager (manager of the group with a vacancy)--Makes the ultimate decision as to whether to hire a candidate

* Lucy, HR hiring specialist--Performs the initial filter of candidates and only forwards to Frank those that she deems appropriate

* Debra, Lucy's assistant--Performs administrative functions for Lucy

* Emma, Lucy's boss

Use case steps

A summary of the use case is given in text form below and visually in Figure 2.

1. Emma informs Lucy that Frank has a vacancy.

2. Lucy and Frank exchange e-mails on the text of the job description and then meet to finalize.

3. Lucy posts the vacancy in the online service with the text from the e-mail.

4. Lucy asks Debra to search the online service for viable candidates (i.e., those who have not explicitly applied for the job but have the necessary skills).

5. Debra searches the online service and sends Lucy e-mails with viable candidates by detaching the resumes from the online service and sending them as e-mail attachments.

6. Lucy reviews applicants from the online service (both those who have applied for the position and those whom Debra found).

7. Lucy forwards the candidates whom she deems viable in an e-mail to Frank.

8. Frank responds with an e-mail to inform Lucy of the candidates whom he wishes to pursue and those whom he wishes to reject. He also includes his initial thoughts on the candidates.

9. Lucy sets up interviews by phone for herself and the candidates.

10. Lucy takes notes during the interviews by phone.

11. Lucy informs Frank of the candidates whom she thinks Frank should also interview by phone.

12. Frank sends back a list of the candidates whom he would like to interview by phone.

13. Lucy forwards this list to Debra and asks Debra to set up interviews by phone for the candidates with Frank.

14. Frank takes notes on the candidates during his interviews by phone.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Lucy's pain points

The following impediments to productivity are identified in this use-case analysis:

* Navigation across system boundaries--To fill a particular vacancy, Lucy must interact with at least five different systems, namely: her e-mail, her calendaring system, the job vacancy system, the application used when new employees come on board, a word processor (for taking notes), and her phone. There is no simple navigation available to her that allows her to move items in one system to related items in another.

When Lucy's calendaring system informs her that her next meeting is an interview by phone with a potential job candidate, Lucy needs to quickly locate the candidate's resume, the candidate's phone number, and the e-mails from Frank pertaining to the viability of the candidate. All of these documents form a single logical work task: Determine if this candidate is the best candidate for the open position. However, the system bounda