Welcome to the BPR Tutorial Series

Home - Bookstore - Tutorials - Best Practices

Best practices in project startup and team creation
Excerpts from the 2002 Best Practices Benchmarking Report

Startup activities

Nearly 90% of project teams established clear boundaries and project scope at startup. Over 80% documented the project objectives, scope and timeline. The results from 2002 paralleled the findings in the 1999 study.

Project driving force

Over two-thirds of participants classified their project as being driven from the “Top-Down” at the directive of upper management.

Most important activities in starting a project

The most common theme from study participants was creating awareness for the "need for change." This acknowledgment of the need for change had to exist within the team, executive leadership, affected employees and pertinent stakeholders in the change.

Creating and illustrating the need for change was the number one startup activity. This change management task involved analyzing current data and processes within the organization, researching what others were doing and effectively communicating the business issues and need for change to the critical parties.

The top-five activities that teams carried out were:

1. Communicating the need to change and securing support from top management, including: forming a steering committee, selecting an executive sponsor, gaining buy-in from regional and divisional managers, securing project budget.
2. Establishing the scope and boundaries of the project to limit commitments and prevent scope creep in the future.
3. Clearly stating the objectives and outcomes of the project and ensuring that they were communicated to and shared by all critical parties.
4. Understanding and documenting the current process at a high level and assessing the needs and requirements of a solution.
5. Assembling a competent team by conducting team building activities, selecting knowledgeable and skilled members, defining team roles and expectations, and recruiting cross-functional members.

Team selection

Teams in 2002 used nearly identical criteria for selecting their members as in the 1999 BPR study. Over 70% used the following two criteria when selecting their team members:

- team members that were representatives from different functional areas to be impacted by the project
- individuals that had a solid understanding of the current processes

The most common “Other” responses included a strong interest and willingness to participate, open-minded and outside-the-box thinking, and demonstrated leadership qualities.

The primary incentive for team members to participate was recognition by management with nearly half of all participants citing management recognition as the primary driver. 

“Other” represented one-third of the responses. The top responses for “Other” included:

• make a difference and improve the status quo and the work processes,
• were assigned or selected to participate by management or required by job function and duties,
• wanted to develop themselves both personally and professionally,
• wanted to increase job security and ensure the success of the company.

Support team – internal staff or external consultants

More than 60% of participants had a support team, defined as one or more trained participants skilled in reengineering design.

Top contributors to effective teams

Participants cited a number of "team" factors that contributed to the project’s success. The top factors cited are:

1. Team members demonstrated a dedication to the project. They were enthusiastic, had a feeling of ownership and a genuine dedication to seeing the project succeed.
2. The team had commitment and support from top management.
3. The team shared a clear vision of the objectives and goals of the project and had a common focus and understanding of project success.
4. Members demonstrated intellectual capital, including: skills, expertise, experience
5. Members had a good understanding of the current business, departments and functions, specific problems and processes involved.
6. The team was committed to the company and the need for the organization to undergo change.
7. The team worked well together.
8. A strong team leader or project manager supervised the project.
9. The team utilized quality and timely communication.

Top inhibitors to successful teams

Study participants cited many factors that inhibited team success. In priority order, the factors that hindered project success were:

1. Organizational culture did not value change and impeded project success.
2. Regular duties of team members resulted in a lack of time to focus on the project.
3. Selfishness or hidden agendas of particular members negatively impacted the team.
4. Resistance from upper management and bureaucratic forces.
5. A lack of knowledge, training or appropriate skills by team members.
6. Poor communication between team members.
7. Lack of political or financial support necessary to sustain and succeed with the project.
8. Unclear vision and misunderstanding around the nature and end-result of the project.
9. Team members showed a fear and lack of confidence in their ability to evoke change.

Time commitment

The amount of time that team members are able to commit to the project, based on the 2002 results, is steadily decreasing from the levels in 1997 and 1999. 

Team size

More than two thirds of study participants indicated that the optimum number of team members on a reengineering team was four to nine.

Co-location

The majority of teams, 52%, were co-located for their projects. Even a higher percentage, 59%, recommended co-location.

Training for BPR teams

In 1997, over 60% of teams received training, but in the 2001 study, just over 40% received training. Study participants mentioned a variety of training that they used with the team. The most common training included BPR and reengineering design training, change management training, technology training on the tools and software of the project and process mapping or modeling.

Lack of training was cited as a key lesson learned and the number one thing teams would do differently next time.

What should be done differently when preparing a reengineering team?

Participants in the study suggested several actions and methods to improve the selection and preparation of the team. In priority order, the things teams would do differently on their next project were:

1. Increase training in the areas of BPR, change management, technology, and management principles.
2. Conduct rigorous selection of team members with an emphasis on qualities like talent, creativity and diversity.
3. Increase individual time and professional commitment to the project and its success.
4. Encourage senior management’s involvement and support of the project.
5. Establish clear goals and objectives at the onset of the project.

The ADKAR model for change management should be followed when introducing changes in business processes and systems. The basic steps include:

1. Generate awareness of why the change is needed. Describe the business reasons for the change and the risk of not implementing the change.

2. Create desire to participate in the new business processes.

3. Share knowledge on how the program will work when it is implemented. Provide education to employees around the skills and behaviors they will need to be successful with the new program.

4. Create the ability to work effectively in the new process. Provide the necessary training and coaching so employees can apply the required skills and behaviors in their day-to-day work.

5. Reinforce the new way of doing work. Make it difficult to return to the old processes. These steps should be completed with both existing employees and new hires during the training process.

If you could benefit from improved change management as you implement changes in your business processes and systems, refer to the “Change Management Toolkit” and the “Employee’s Survival Guide to Change” (call 970-203-9332 for details or to to the  Change Management Learning Center).  These resources are designed especially for managing the human side of change.

Find out more in the 2002 BPR Best Practices report.