| Welcome to the BPR Tutorial Series Return to INDEX |
 |
| Welcome to the BPR Tutorial Series Return to INDEX |
|
Summary of Findings from the BPR Leadership Behavior Study
by Norma Sutcliffe
Ph.D.Information Systems
The Anderson School at UCLA
Overview
Over 60 volunteers completed the BPR Leadership Effectiveness questionnaire. Some volunteered after receiving a letter and questionnaire in the mail while most volunteers responded to a solicitation they got over an Internet listserver. Two-thirds of the volunteers reported on their own leadership behavior on a BPR project while the remainder reported on another person's leadership behavior.
The next section gives the background and then follows with an overview of the people who answered questionnaires. Then the discussion turns to the findings from this study.
Background
In the past, many observers of the BPR phenomena had given a mixed message at best. They had emphasized that a successful BPR project was a top-down, directed affair yet the BPR team would "own" the implementation. The team would determine how to implement the BPR. If the project was the former then the leader would tell the team how to do its work rather than letting the team determine how it should be done. If the leader lets the team determine how the BPR should be done then it is no longer a top-down, directed affair.
Recently much has been written about the differences between managers and leaders yet there is very little evidence to support the distinction. Past studies found that successful leaders were always successful managers who were considered charismatic by other people.
Given some of the problems that past studies have found with the most popular leadership theory, here the emphasis was to look at what successful leaders actually did. This study used a framework that is a synthesis of several tested theories which has been used in other research.
Profile of Respondents
The average respondent was a male from 35 to 49 years old with over 5 years of experience at the company before the start of BPR who led a BPR team of almost 15 people. There were no leaders under 25 or over 59 years of age. There were 2 women who led BPR projects. The spread of company experience ranged from less than a year to 30 years while team size ranged from 2 to 70 people.
The projects occurred all over the globe with approximately one-third coming from the United States, one-sixth from Asia, and the remaining one-half from Europe, the Middle East and Australia-New Zealand.
The Findings
This study found evidence that a relationship exists between certain leadership behaviors and the outcome of the BPR project. In other words, leaders do influence how a BPR turns out. Certain behavior by the leader increases the probability that the BPR will be successful.
This study found evidence that leaders who used a style of leadership that is a better match to factors in the situation are more successful. Leaders who used styles that do not match well are less successful. A profile of the mix of situation factors was matched with a profile of the leadership styles used. Then the fit of these profiles was calculated. Successful leaders had a better fit.
The BPR projects tended to have teams that had motivated, highly skilled people who enjoyed working independently with little direct supervision on non-routine tasks. The successful BPR leaders tended to use leadership styles that were interactive or non-directive under these circumstances. That is, these leaders used styles where options and approaches were discussed with the team and even modified before implementation (interactive). They used styles where options and approaches were determined by the team and leader jointly (non-directive).
This study found evidence that successful leaders tended to balance the execution of leadership tasks. In other words, successful leaders tended to execute people-oriented leadership tasks as often as they executed work oriented leadership tasks. Less successful leaders tended to stress one type of oriented tasks over the other. The people-oriented leadership tasks deal with getting people on a team to communicate with one another, to manage conflicts, to supply both positive and corrective feedback, and to help people plan their careers. The work-oriented leadership tasks deal with setting and monitoring goals as well as getting any needed resources.
This study found no evidence that the level of leader involvement is related to the success of the project. Many people have commented that successful BPR leaders are heavily and consistently involved in running their BPR projects. This study did not find any evidence that this was the case.
This study found no evidence that there is a relationship between the number of BPR goals and the level of success the BPR achieved. In other words, the argument was that fewer BPR goals indicated a greater focus. Therefore, more successful BPR projects would have fewer BPR goals than less successful projects. Unfortunately no evidence was found that supported this argument.
Conclusion
This study found evidence that leadership was important for BPR, and that successful leaders used leadership styles that fit the situation and performed leadership tasks in a manner that was balanced between people and work.
Norma Sutcliffe, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
DePaul University
243 South Wabash Avenue
Chicago, IL 60604
NSutcliffe@cti.depaul.edu
Related Reengineering Resources
First Steps for Reengineering Team Leaders
Send questions to
bpr@prosci.com
The BPR Online Learning Center is sponsored by Prosci. Copyright 1996-2002. All Rights Reserved.
Tutorial Series | Bookstore | Articles | Books | Benchmarking | Mailing lists | Yellow Pages
Register | Search Other Sites | Comments | Home Page