Business Process Reengineering (BPR)

BPR is the idea of redesigning processes from scratch, not patching them. It came out of the early 1990s:

  • 1990: Michael Hammer, “Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate, Obliterate”, Harvard Business Review.
  • 1993: Hammer and James Champy, Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution, defining reengineering as the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in cost, quality, service and speed.
  • 1993: Thomas Davenport, Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology, treating IT as the enabler of process change.

Ideas that lasted

  • Organise work around end-to-end processes, not functions.
  • Question the purpose of each step instead of automating it as is.
  • Use information technology to change the process, not to speed up the old one.

What went wrong

BPR became associated with large downsizings and many projects that did not deliver; the radical, one-time approach gave way to continuous improvement (kaizen, lean) and to managing processes permanently, which is what BPM stands for. The key lesson: redesign needs process ownership and a monitoring loop afterwards (process-architecture-and-governance, bpm-lifecycle).

When to use it now

Use a radical redesign when the process is fundamentally wrong for current needs or technology (for instance a paper-based approval chain that a new platform makes unnecessary). Use incremental methods when the process is sound but inefficient. The redesign phase of the BPM lifecycle borrows BPR’s questions.

BPM hub, michael-hammer, thomas-davenport, hyperautomation-and-intelligent-automation, worked-example-order-to-cash-redesign

Open items

  • Month and issue of the 1990 HBR article were not verified.

Sources