Chapter 5 - Managing Barriers to Reengineering Success

header3.gif (3154 bytes)

BPR OnLine Learning Center Series

Return to HOME

Managing Barriers to Business Reengineering Success

by Wolf D. Schumacher

CHAPTER 5

A FRAMEWORK

FOR THE IDENTIFICATION AND REMOVAL OF

BARRIERS TO BUSINESS REENGINEERING SUCCESS

To overcome pockets of resistance, I created a core group of 24 section

and department heads. They became part of the strategy and bought into it;

they then passed their commitment down to their subordinates. They were able

to counter resistance with one-on-one discussions. Peer pressure alone isn`t enough,

though we had to be vigilant, identify problems before they started,

and handle them sensitively.

Max Strebel, President and CEO, Union Bank of Switzerland

5.1. The Framework

Barrier Management is a new task for managers of Business Reengineering implementation projects. It supplements the technically oriented project steps with applicable Change Management intervention techniques. Barrier Management addresses complex people related implementation problems (Figure 5.1./1).

Figure 5.1./1 Relationships Between Business Reengineering Project

Management and Barrier Management

5.1.1. Project Management

Traditional Process management differentiates between process project management and process development management (Österle, 1995). Process project management describes the project management tasks of Business Reengineering, whereas process development management deals with the ongoing refinement of business processes. We concentrate on process project management and its relationship to Barrier Management.

Process project management has been broken into three steps, as defined in chapter 2 of this report.

The first step serves to prepare for the Business Reengineering project. The tasks are project initiation based on external triggers, visioning, goalsetting, and selection of business processes to be reengineered.

The second project step serves to redesign the selected business processes. This step takes the potentials of Information Technology into consideration and applies these to the business processes selected for reengineering.

The third step concerns the implementation of redesigned business processes into day-to-day operations. Transition to new work habits, and attainment of the goals perceived, are at the heart of this project step.

5.1.2. Barrier Management

Barrier Management is being performed parallel to the project management steps. Like a radar (Figure 5.1./1) it continuously checks the project environment for symptoms of barriers, identifies root causes, applies suitable intervention methods and techniques to the the domains of project, people, organisation and environment; finally checks the results of these interventions.

The closer the Barrier Management steps are to the project preparation step of process project management, the less costly possible barriers are to the overall Business Reengineering effort. The more barriers expand into the implementation phase of Business Reengineering, the more cost and time is associated to their identification and removal.

This chapter of the report is meant to help practitioners in their efforts to identify and remove barriers to Business Reengineering. For this purpose, checklists have been developed, which are presented in the remaining part of this chapter.

5.2. Search for and Identify Barriers

The successful identification of potential barriers depends on the successful search for symptoms of barriers. All events before and during the course of the project are systematically analysed regarding the emergence of symptoms for barriers. As an example Table 5.2./1 lists several symptoms regarding resistant behavior.

Symptoms of Constructive Resistance	Symptoms of Destructive Resistance
A person often voices concerns about how a particular issue is being downplayed by the project team.	Key people stay away from important project meetings, which need their input.
Some complain, that there is not enough information about the planned change available to them.	Some voice the alleged concerns of others: "I am only saying, what these people don`t dare to say".
High level of sick leave among affected employees.	Some object only in private, whereas in public they stay quiet.
Muttering: "It does not make sense that I present my ideas, you (project team) have already made your plans for me about anything. You don`t care about my thoughts".	Project team receives outright threats. " If you carry on with this, the company definitely will go down the tubes. You are responsible for us losing our jobs".
Requests, for explaining again about the objectives of the change. Typical question: "Where will I stand ?"	Loud, unsubstantiated opposition. Often over and over again: "I don`t understand what this is all about, I have my job to do. Someone has to work around here,".

Table 5.2./1 Typical Symptoms of Resistant Behavior

The language used in communication between resisters and project team plays an important role. Some believe, though, that quiet friendly voices stays for constructive resistance, and loud explosive language stays for destructive resistance. Often this is not the case. The language used is depending on the character, the social environment and other factors alien to the issue.

It is important, that the project team listens very carefully to the contents of the resisters' talk. Thus, non-talkers must be given the opportunity to talk. For example, in a project team meeting, one person was always talking very negatively about the project. Everybody else was quiet. He happened to be their boss. After the project team took their attention away from him, and towards the other people in the room, it turned out, that they were quite happy with the change.

5.3. Identify Root Causes

It is a mistake, to act upon barriers, without checking on root causes first. Acting upon barriers without knowing the root causes, may even yield additional barriers. Finding the roots, though, is not easy in project reality. The Stream Analysis technique can be applied successfully to identify root causes in the domains of project, people, organization and environment (Porras, 1987). Figure 5.3./1 shows the Stream Analysis chart of the root tracing for the barrier "Key person A stays away from important project meetings". This is the first symptom of an alleged barrier for destructive resistance in table 5.2./1.

Figure 5.3./1 Root Cause Analysis Applying the Stream Analysis Technique

The root cause analysis starts out with the barrier: Key person A stays away from important project meetings. The project content is to introduce work teams within an overall Business Reengineering effort. The analysis covers seven domains: project contents, project management, individual behavior, group induced behavior, organizational structure and cultures, as well as the public.

The tracing of the barriers to underlying causes yields the following root causes:

The Initiators did not define project objectives well enough to be prepared for culture clashes.
The project team did not yet explain to B his new role in the future organization. He was expected to be a coach to other people of the organization.
The old organization is still intact, i.e. A is acting along the lines of the old structure. The new structure is not yet implemented.
B`s wife in influencing B, to be careful regarding his own future within the company, which is impacting their family`s future.

Four root causes could be identified, based on one barrier of alleged destructive behavior of key person A. By tracing this problem to the root causes, a managerial shortcut punishing A, as would traditionally be the case, has been prevented.

The next step of Barrier Management is, to intervene at the root cause level. Eventually the barrier will disappear, A will participate in important project meetings, without being forced to do so by the project team.

5.4. Intervene at Root Cause Level

The objective of Interventions is, to remove root causes or to lessen their impact on the success of Business Reengineering efforts.

In the foregoing case, typical interventions include:

The project team redefines and broadly distributes project objectives.
The project team explains new roles to affected managers, in particular to B.
The project team (initiator) explains to everybody affected, that the old organizational structure is in a state of transition, i.e. that it is very important, to do today`s work, yet equally important, to participate in forming the new structure.
The project team would ask B to inform his wife about the changes taking place at the company, and to ensure her, that he will move to a new role within a foreseeable future. This serves to take away her fear.

Interventions have to applied systematically, to yield expected results. Interventions are applied by the change agent, initiator, and the project team.

Table 5.4./1 lists several questions, which help to facilitate the intervention process.

How will the organization address the resistant forces ?
What steps will be taken to avoid taking the easy way out ?
How will the strategic management tool, mission and strategy, be used to handle resistant forces ?
How will the strategic management tool, organizational structure, be used to help handle resistant forces ?
How will the strategic management tool, human resources management, be used to help handle resistant forces ?
How will roles be used to help handle resistant forces ?
How will rules be used to help handle resistant forces ?
How will responsibilities be used to help handle resistant forces ?
How will responsiveness be used to help handle resistant forces ?

Table 5.4./1 List of Questions Aimed at Possible Interventions

The second list of questions (Table 5.4./2) helps to facilitate the intervention process during the transition period (Hubbard, 1995).

How will you constructively confront retrenching behavior and identify behavioral issues for moving ahead ?
What will the people affected be doing differently ?
Who will have to let go of something and what will they have to let go (their roles, peer group, sense of competence, chance for promotion) ?
What will you do to handle each sign of grieving ?
What will you do or say to help employees through the disillusionment period of disenchantment ?
What will be done to address employee feelings regarding the "good old days" ?
What will you do to provide disoriented employees with information, direction, and a strategy ?
What will be done to give employees extra support and opportunities to get things off their chests ?
What can you and the organization do to compensate for the losses ? What can be given back to balance what`s been taken away -- status, turf, control, team membership, recognition, and feelings of competence ?
How will you explain, what is over and what is not over (specifically what is over and what is not, what policies and procedures are in force or not, what decisions still stand and which do not, what from the past stays and what goes )?
How will you mark the ending of the previous way (meetings with all employees, tearing down walls, etc.) ?
What methods will you use to identify the transition pace ?
What additional tools and support will you use to carry out (training, key management support, etc.) ?
What will you do to deal with your own potential anxiety that the change appears not to be moving fast enough ?
What will you do with people who want to go back to the old ways (avoiding the neutral zone and the new beginning) ?
What will you do to train managers and employees in the new skills they will need to succeed ?
What will you do to strengthen intragroup connections (i.e., informal luncheons, open houses, videotaping key events, status articles, etc.) ?
What will you do to make sure the concerns voiced don`t disappear (i.e. reporting back to them regularly, identifying what is being done on issues raised during each meeting, ensuring that at least some issues raised will lead to visible action) ?
What will you do to foster innovation in the organization while in the neutral zone (i.e. creating opportunities and systems to encourage employees to try new things, creating forums to question the way things are currently done, staff retreats, "no holds barred" policy reviews and problem solving, surveys, and suggestion campaigns) ?
What will you do to provide training and practice in the techniques of discovery, experimentation, creativity, and innovation ?
What will you do to rebuild trust among employees ?
What will you do to keep the shared vision and mission in front of the organization ?
What will you do to create a technical institutionalizing plan for the change to the new processes ?
What will you do to create a political institutionalizing plan for the change to the new processes ?
What will you do to create a cultural institutionalizing plan for the change to the new processes ?

Table 5.4./2 List of Questions Pertaining to Interventions in the Transition Period

Based on the literature review of Change Management approaches, table 5.4./3 summarizes the applicability of intervention methods and techniques to the root cause domains. High, medium and low in a field denotes the potential impact, an intervention has on underlying root causes within the resp. domain.

	Project Content	Project Mgmt.	People Individual	People Groups	Organiz. Structure	Organiz. Culture	Envir. Partner	Envir. Public
IM 1.:			high
IM 2.:			high	high		high
IM 3.:		medium	high	high		high
IM 4.:		high		high
IM 5.:		medium
IM 6.:	high	high	high	high	high	high
IM 7.:		high	medium	medium		high
IM 8.:		high	low			medium
IM 9.:		high		medium		medium	medium	medium
IM 10.:	high	high	high	high	medium	high	high	high
IM 11.:	high	high	high	high	high	high	high	high
IM 12.:		high	high	high
IM 13.:		high	high	high
IM 14.:	high	high	high	high		high	high

Table 5.4./3 The Impact of Intervention Techniques on Domains of Root Causes

5.5. Control Intervention Success

Intervention success is dependent on the time horizon and the complexity of a Business Reengineering effort (Figure 5.5./1). The situation is heavily polarized (quadrants II vs. quadrant IV).

While affecting changes in process redesign, structural redesign, project contents, and project management is not overly complex and can be accomplished in a relatively short time frame, so differ the other domains of change. Both complex and time-consuming are interventions to affect changes in individual and group behavior, as well as organizational culture.

Figure 5.5./1 Impact of Interventions on Change Domains

The changes in quadrant II are of a technical nature, whereas the changes in quadrant IV are of a human nature. Most failings of Business Reengineering projects teach, that human change efforts make the difference. Therefore controlling intervention success means, to measure changes in individual and group behavior, and to measure changes of the organizational culture, i.e to measure changes in the way people in the organization behave and work together.

A recent study of Business Reengineering projects in U.S. Electronic manufacturing companies found, that managers and project teams often underestimate the actions required to transform the way employees behave and work together (Majchrzak/Wang, 1996). Some believe, that simply changing organizational structures from functional units into process-based departments will let people shed their functional mind-sets and will forge them instantly into fully functioning work-teams, achieving common process goals. Typically this is not the case.

A number of critical factors, compiled from the study, and the author`s Business Reengineering hands-on experience are indicators, whether cultural changes actually took place (Table 5.5./1). The list can be used as a project audit tool.

Jobs within a business process have overlapping responsibilities. Business processes are seamlessly executable. Short cycle time are attainable through close cooperation within the business process.

Work is seen as platforms on which people mature and achieve happiness (Flow) by developing their competencies and as well as contributing to the success of the team and the organization.

Rewards (pay-system) are based on team and organizational performance.

Base pay is depending on competencies.

Work areas of people working together, to perform a business process are laid out, so that people see each other. If this is physically not possible, there are provisions installed, for letting people easily communicate with each other (e.g. e-mail, electronic conferences, regular face-to-face meetings).

Managers redesigned their own functions. Instead of micromanaging, they facilitate team efforts, helping teams to perform. Managers see their premier goals, to help teams in providing resources to that end, that teams reach their business goals (e.g. short cycle times, delivery on time, high quality levels, low transactional cost).

Managers are kept responsible for developing into leaders. There are programs, that help (or push) managers to leave the state of transactional leadership in favor of transformational leadership.

People who consistently did not support the organization´s change for better performance, or even act in negative aggressive ways (covert or overt) have been expelled from the organization.

Established work-procedures promote collaboration of employees among themselves, with managers, with customers and other partners of the organization (e.g. suppliers).

The organization`s infrastructure is supportive to team-work.

Skill development is aggressively pursued by everybody.

Continuous learning is a habit. There are learning programs implemented, which foster the systemic understanding of the interconnectedness within the organization and to the outside world.

Open dialogue is enforced. Improvement opportunities resulting from open dialogue between all people of the organization are aggressively pursued.

Peer-to-peer acknowledgements are not only words, but daily practice. As an employee, a person is first seen as a human being, and second an instrument of production. People sense this and devote their energy to achieving their team`s and the organization`s goals.

Continuous improvement is not a word, but a habit. A high number of improvements are implemented month after month. Improvements are highly acknowledged by co-workers and the management of the organization.

Downsizing, if part of the Business Reengineering effort is carefully executed, by giving affected people a real chance for a future life elsewhere. Nobody is robbed of personal pride. "Survivors" do not live in fear, to be a potential target of the next round of downsizing.

Win-win as opposed to win-lose thinking is predominant. People know, that the organization as a whole has to be successful in the marketplace. They act accordingly within the realms of their responsibilities.

Table 5.5./1 Indicators for Cultural Change

5.6. Conclusion

The Barrier Management framework can be considered a tool to secure the success of a Business Reengineering initiative. It does not replace the project plan or project management altogether. Rather, it supplements both. But Barrier Management typically take more of the project team`s time than the original project plan. This is, because Barrier Management is predominantly about people.

It is interesting to see the paramount importance of changes in people`s behavior, group behavior and in the organization`s culture as the prime indicators for the success of interventions. Lastly though, the economics indicate the success or failure of a Business Reengineering project: Customer satisfaction measured by repetitive sales, profit per staff member, return on capital, cost/income ratio, revenue, and operating profits are only but a few "hard" indicators of project success. The author claims, that it is the right culture and goal oriented people behaviors that generate long term "hard" success. This is often overlooked by supporters of technically oriented Business Reengineers. But as Business Reengineering co-inventor Davenport states, people make the difference (Davenport, 1996). What is the right culture, which underpins Business Reengineering success ? William E. Schneider defines four core cultures, an organization may own (Figure 5.6./1). By the concept of core culture he describes the nucleus of an organization`s culture. At the periphery though, an organization may display myriads of different cultural aspects (Schneider, 1994). Rephrasing above question: What is the right core culture, which underpins Business Reengineering success ?

Figure 5.6./1 Core Cultures of an Organization

Table 5.6./1 displays major characteristics and differences between the four core cultures (Schneider, 1994).

Core Culture	Advantages	Disadvantages
Control Culture Structured in a hierarchical fashion. Often bureaucratic. Roles and functions are clearly defined. Culture breeds functional specialists. Power and control are prime motivators.	Control culture organizations prevail in the history of successful companies. Orders (no questions asked) make things happen immediately.	Restraints everywhere. The culture is not attractive to individualists and innovators. Breakthrough changes, which require paradigm shifts are not easy to effect. This culture breeds resistance to change.
Collaboration Culture Springs from the family and sports analogy. The individual motivation is the need of affiliation, to be part of a successful team or organization. The culture emphasizes building trust.	Success is reached by building, developing and making use of effective teams. The organization brings in and relies heavily on people with diverse capabilities. People interactions are key. Leaders pay attention to open dialogue.	If not focused by common objectives, the culture tends to concentrate on people issues, rather than on business objectives. Lengthy discussion about the well-being of teams and individuals can hinder business success.
Competence Culture Often found in universities, the competence culture is based on the achievement motive, which has to do with accomplishing more and doing better than others. The objective is, to create an organization, that is best in product, people, technology, etc. The organization feels best at what it does (world-class excellence)	High performance standards. The organization offers considerable expertise, and strives to enhance those considerably. Great innovative achievements can be expected. Trendsetting, highly productive and future oriented. Good at adapting and changing. Individuals can stand out. Ongoing further development.	Taken to the extreme, the culture can lose direction. It might take people and their initiative for granted. People are treated insensitively, personal concerns may become annoyances. People may fear to say, that they don`t know. People feel they are constantly underperforming. People may be overworked and stressed out.
Cultivation Culture The base of this culture are religious organizations. It is one of faith. It heralds a system of beliefs or expectations that the organization and it`s people deem valuable. The cultivation culture organization acts the way it does because it has a purpose. People in the organization are often idealists, particularly in their approach to other people.	The culture does a good job of building commitment among people, who feel cared for. It values creativity and people`s aspirations. People feel inspired. Training and education have a high value to the organization. People can make mistakes, and not being punished. Unlike to other cultures, higher order values are put into action.	In excess, the culture lacks direction and focus. Many things may go undone, and projects may lay an the shelf. People may become moralistic and overly judgmental. Coordination of people may become cumbersome. The idealism may not take the organization further in solving real problems. Details are easily overlooked.

Table 5.6./1 Characteristics and Differences of Core Cultures

Most companies starting out Business Reengineering projects, own a control culture. They are attracted by the potential outcomes of controlling their business processes much better, and making better use of their Information Technology investments. Companies though, that do not understand the need to change their control culture to take people more into account, are prone to falter with their project. They may only find out to have technically changed, but have not reaped the potential benefits.

So what is the right culture, a company with an engraved control culture, should strive for ? Definitely it should move towards the collaboration culture with some elements of the competence culture. There may be cases of highly charismatic leaders turning an organization into a cultivation culture.

To move towards a collaboration culture, revolutionary changes in leadership is key. For managers, moving up the ladder of leadership to transformational leadership is mandatory.

Related Reengineering Resources

Reengineering Best Practices
Reengineering Toolkits and Document Templates
Business Process Reengineering Implementation
Change Management Strategies and Action Planning
Process Management and Improvement

Send questions to bpr@prosci.com

HOME

ProSci is a registered trademark of the Quality Leadership Center, Inc.