Business Process Review at
Kingston University
An overview of KU’s 7 steps of review
Some of the lessons learnt and
critical success factors
About KU
• Approx 18,000 students
• 7 faculties of varying size
– School structure in larger faculties
– Income related budgets for faculties
– Autonomy and authority of Deans
• 10 corporate/service departments
Objectives for BPR
• To deliver high standards of service
• To reduce duplication of effort
• Encourage development of harmonised
more streamlined procedures
• Clarify roles and responsibilities
– clearer division of labour between parts of
the University
Approach and methodology
Project management (formal project documentation) and inclusive
Implementation of recommendations a separate project
BPR Steering Group
Project Team B (4-6 members)
Project Team A
Workshops team A
Key business/ process owners
& stakeholders/key members
from operational environment
BPR Manager and Business Analyst
Workshops team B
(up to 25 people)
Project team plus
staff involved in the process
7 key steps of review at KU
1.
2.
3.
4.
Project initiation – including PDD
Desk review
Interviews
Workshops
–
a) fact-finding b) process redesign
5. Review options and develop preferred
solutions
6. Report Preparation
7. Presentation to Project Board
Step1 – project initiation
• For each process first agree a project definition document:
– Define your aims
– Define the scope
• start & finish of process, inclusions, related processes, exclusions
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Define process objectives and measures
State expected business benefits of potential improvements
Define known constraints
State deliverables and expected resource requirement
Provide a high level work plan
Suggest the project team and team member’s roles
Do a thorough stakeholder analysis
Start a risk analysis
Define your success factors, a communication plan
Suggest the time for the post-implementation review if possible
A word about stakeholder analysis
• Lots of people can be affected by the change
• To ensure a positive contribution seek to
–
–
–
–
Understand who they are
What influence/source of power they bring to bear
And what they have at stake
Then establish a process to actively manage
stakeholders through communication
• Your analysis can be based on
– Impact, orientation, need and/or power
Lesson 1
•
•
Be thorough in your
analysis
Be proactive and
communicate
–
–
–
Don’t ignore key players
Seek out and manage
individual key stakeholders
Seek out and manage
individuals who may be
“road-blocks”
Power - Low
Interest - Low
Power - Low
Interest - High
Minimal effort
Keep informed
Power - High
Interest - Low
Power – High
Interest - High
Keep satisfied
Key players
Business Process Review of xxxx processes - Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder
Interest/requirement from the
project
What the project needs from them Notes
Currently operating the processes and Knowledge of existing process, views and xxx staff to be involved at every
therefore potentially affected by process ideas.
stage of the project, through direct
change.
Opinions on improvement options
participation and communications
Ultimately responsible for operating (practicality etc).
about progress.
redesigned processes.
Co-operation in anticipation of
implementation.
Deans, Heads of
Participants in xxx processes and
Knowledge of existing process, views and Representatives to be invited to
Departments
customers of these processes. Therefore ideas.
appropriate workshops.
likely to be affected by changes.
Opinions on improvement options.
Xxx management Responsible for delivering the current Knowledge of existing process (including To take active part in the BPR work.
team
and redesigned processes.
process objectives and performance), views
and ideas.
Knowledge of regulatory and legislative
requirements and strategic vision.
Opinions on improvement options.
Staff from related Operating parts of the personnel
Knowledge of current process, views and To be consulted with and invited to
functional areas
processes or customers of them.
ideas.
participate in workshops.
Therefore potentially affected by
change
Executive
Define business strategy and priorities. Knowledge of strategic and plans,
To be consulted with and reported
Ensure that the University operates
management experience.
to.
within the law.
Requirements for reports.
Guidance on direction of project.
BPR Project Board Managing body for the BPR project
Guidance on direction of project.
Progress reports will be provided to
Monitor project’s progress.
the BPR Project Board for
Provide support in management of project discussion.
risks and constraints.
Outputs from the project will be
made available to the BPR Project
Board.
xxx staff
Start your risk log now
Risk Risk
No
Probability
Low=1
High=5
Impact
Low=1
High=5
Risk Factor
Probability X
Impact
Measures to mitigate
risk/Contingency
1
2
5
10
To try to ensure availability of staff without
necessitating re-arrangement will be
mitigated wherever possible by
Forward planning and notice
Communication stressing the importance of
the work and the support of managers in
backing up this message.
Contingency would be to substitute
alternative staff with equivalent knowledge if
possible.
If the risk becomes critical the Project
Sponsor and BPR Project Board would need
to reconsider the viability and scope of the
project within its current timeframe.
Lack of availability of staff or other
stakeholders to input knowledge of current
practice, or delays in obtaining this input.
The effect of this occurring would be the
delay or non-completion of deliverables
within the proposed timeframe and an
additional risk of recommending process
improvements that were not based on
complete information.
Review
Date
High level project plan
High level project plan for Business Process Review of xxxx activity
Week commencing 01-Mar
Activity & sub-tasks
No of days
Project initiation
Project team meeting
Green fields/blue skies meeting
1.5 hrs weekly
Desk Review
8
Interviews
22*
Workshops - summary task
1) process fact finding
2) process re-design options
Review options & develop
preferred solutions - summary
Produce new process models
Validate new process models
28*
08-Mar
1
15-Mar
2
22-Mar
3
29-Mar
4
21*
0.5
2
2
11.25*
5
1
Report Preparation - summary task
Write report with project team
Finalise & circulate
14*
Project board presentation
0.5
5
2
* = days contain elapsed time
# Project team moves into implementation planning from here
05-Apr
5
12-Apr
6
19-Apr
7
26-Apr
8
9
03-May
10
10-May
11
17-May
12
24-May
13
31-May
14
07-Jun
15
14-Jun
16
21-Jun
17
28-Jun
18
Steps 2 and 3
1. Project initiation – including PDD
2. Desk review
3. Interviews
•
•
•
•
Required to get an overview of current process and
problems and use this to:
Draft a high level current process map “as is”
Start your issues log
Plan how to approach the workshops to ensure you
can achieve the results you want
–
–
Think carefully about how to structure these and what
groups to put together
Admissions example
Admissions example
Desk review & interviews revealed serious
conflict between faculties and centre because
– Central department was established to improve
response times to applicants
– Based on assumption 80% applications
could be processed centrally
– This was translated into “should”
– But reality was 50% applications
required academic scrutiny
Step 4
1.
2.
3.
4.
Project initiation – including PDD
Desk review
TIP
• Start fact finding workshop
Interviews
with validation of your desk
researched current process
Workshops
a) fact-finding
b) process redesign
steps map
– Helps settle attendees
– Easier to correct what’s wrong
than start from blank sheet of
paper
– Teases out differences in
process
– Teases out issues
Lesson 2
•
Separate fact-finding &
redesign workshops
Usually 1 week apart
Enables move to solution finding
TIPS
– Have good chocolate biscuits!
– Half day sessions work well
(9am – 2pm)
– Working lunch encourages useful
informal discussions to happen
– Write up “findings” for validation, additions &
corrections by workshop attendees
Lesson 2 continued
Provide clear guidance for each workshop
•
•
•
Explain what you mean by process review
Explain your methodology and approach
Tell them what you expect from them
–
•
Give ground rules for the workshops
Tell them what output the workshop should be
–
Eg for fact-finding workshop together you will define:
•
•
•
The “As Is” process map, showing ownership of steps and
critical path, identifies some measures of the process
(including elapsed time if appropriate)
A consolidated and categorised issues log
The requirements/objectives of the process
Use process step analysis
WHAT
WHY
INPUT
- What are the
inputs?
- Who are the
suppliers?
-What are the
standards and
how are they
measured?
- What is done in this
- Why do we do this
process step?
Process Step?
- Is there a clearly defined
- Is its purpose
method for doing the step,
clear?
with clear performance
standards?
THE
HOW
PROCESS
STEP
- How is this process
step done?
-Is there the capability
to achieve the standard
(skills, equipment,
facilities)?
- Is all the information and
knowledge available?
HOW WELL
-How well is this process
step done?
- Is its actual performance
measured and compared
to the standard?
- Is corrective action taken
when required?
OUTPUT
- What are the
outputs?
-Who are the
customers?
-What are the
standards and
how are they
measured
Identify the cause of problems
People
Procedure &
methods
Effect is xxx
Equipment &
technology
Plant &
resources
Aim is “to identify improvements, not to apportion blame”
Step 4 continued
1.
2.
3.
4.
Project initiation – including PDD
Desk review
TIPS
• Write up notes from workshop
Interviews
quickly – agreed process, list of
issues, process objectives;
Workshops
circulate these for validation,
a) fact-finding
b) process redesign
ask for additions thought of since
the session
• Start redesign workshop with the
agreed objectives and categorised
issues list output from fact-finding
workshop eg from admissions:
Example - objectives of admissions
• To select and recruit suitable applicants to
the right courses
• To optimise process to meet recruitment
targets
• To embody good practice
– ensuring it remains appropriate as the
recruitment environment changes
• To provide high quality service to
applicants
Example of key issues in
admissions
– Conflict exacerbated by lack of clarity
• about roles & responsibilities
• about terms & definitions
– Inefficiency, non-adherence to SLAs
– No central deposit of information
– Resource issues
– Inadequate information flow
Process redesign workshop
• Develops ideas for an
improved process,
based on our agreed
requirements
• Creates a “To Be”
roadmap by
Is it required ?
Should you
do it ?
Can it be
automated ?
Does it
add value ?
– Critically evaluates and
challenges the status quo
Is it duplicated ?
– Looks for creative alternatives
– Looks for more efficient ways to
achieve objectives
Can it be simplified ?
– Asks questions of each process
step, such as:
TIP - for complex processes ‘Critical Evaluation’ is a
useful technique to manage redesign in steps
Purpose
FACT
CHALLENGE
OPTIONS
WHAT is achieved? Is it NECESSARY? What else COULD
WHY?
be done?
Place
WHERE is it done? WHY there?
SOLUTIONS
What SHOULD
be done?
Where else COULD Where SHOULD it
it be done?
be done?
Sequence WHEN is it done?
WHY then?
When else COULD When SHOULD it
it be done?
be done?
Person
WHO does it?
WHY that person?
Who else COULD
do it?
Who SHOULD do it?
Means
HOW is it done?
WHY that way?
How else COULD
it be done?
How SHOULD
it be done?
7 key steps of review at KU
1.
2.
3.
4.
TIP
• Remember to write up notes
Project initiation –from
including
re-designPDD
workshop
quickly; circulate for
Desk review
validation and additions
before reviewing options &
Interviews
developing preferred
solutions
Workshops
– a) fact-finding b) process redesign
5. Review options and develop preferred
solutions
Final steps - project team develops
preferred solutions
– Takes ideas generated at workshops
– Looks at other HEIs for ideas and possibilities
– Evaluates and develops preferred options
TIP
• May be useful to bring some faculty representation to the project team
6 elements of good process
1. Customer (end-user) focus
2. Adds value (not cost)
3. Responsibilities clearly
owned
4. Those operating understand
the process
5. Well measured
6. And continuously improved
6 principles of good process design
1. Streamline (remove duplication)
2. Simplify (common standard approach)
3. Move decision points (to as early in the
process as possible)
4. Remove linear or sequential steps (adopt
parallel steps where possible)
5. Take a multi-skill/team base approach
6. Use technology as an enabler
Administrative principles
appropriate to any process - JISC
•
•
•
•
•
•
Do it ONCE
Do it RIGHT
Do it QUICKLY
Keep it SIMPLE
TRUST me
I am ACCOUNTABLE
TIP
• Validate preferred options with key stakeholders
Example conclusions from admissions
• A fundamental lack of trust between
central dept and faculties
• Distancing of admissions tutors
from central dept and vice versa
• All staff involved in admissions
feeling disempowered and
frustrated
• Difficulty in managing the process
centrally due to lack of data input to
student records system
Key changes in redesign
• Accepted the changed environment and
– Removed the assumption that the majority of
undergraduate applications be centrally processed
– Required adequate resources for the additional
academic decision making and interviewing
• Acknowledged the process as a joint activity
• Accepted control of information in corporate
system was critical to managing the whole
process
• Adopted a process whereby the “decision” was
part of a timely process
• Embedded customer relationship management
Steps 6 and 7
Project initiation – including PDD
Desk review
Interviews
Workshops
1.
2.
3.
4.
–
5.
6.
a) fact-finding b) process redesign
Review options and develop preferred solutions
Report Preparation
•
•
7.
Project team develops preferred options into a business
case for change
models the redesigned processes
Presentation to Project Steering Group
•
Ultimate decision making point
Undergraduate Admissions - New
Timeframe
SEAS
Rec
UG6
Faculty
Precursors to
the annual
recruitment
cycle
Receipt of
electronic file from
UCAS
Working
Day 0
minus up
to 15
Working
Day 0
Receipt of paper
application form &
log on SITS
WD 0 +2
CRM Letter 1:
acknowledge receipt
of application
0
Receipt of GTTR/
NMAS
applications
3
2
1
Complete by End
September
Measures &
dependencies
100% acknowledged
within 2 days
MIS reporting to
identify number
outside 2 days
4
CRM
framework
2
Application
Checks
Rec
UG8
9
1st stage fee
assessment:
Interview all?
Yes
Direct
100% within 3
days of
acknowledgement
MIS reporting to
identify number
outside 3 days
Except DDA
where report
should be marked
against 6 days
from
acknowledgement
CRM Letter 2:
invitation to
interview
5
WD 0 +5
Except for
applicants
referred for
assessment
of disability
(DDA) then:
WD 0 +10
No
Centrally applied
selection criteria?
No
Yes
Application meets
selection & minimum
entry criteria?
No
For FASC no
interview:
WD 0 +10
or DDA
WD 0 +15
Refer to
faculty for
scrutiny of
applications
5
Rec
UG 4
Offer decision?
Yes
6
No
For FASC with
interview:
WD 0 +20
or DDA
WD 0 +25
7
7
Interview
A
Rec
UG 10
100% within 15 days of
log out on SITS. MIS
reporting to identify
number outside 15
days not attended
interview
Hours per week required for faculties to interview applicants referred to faculties for academic
consideration, ie Faculty Applied Selection Criteria (FASC), as at 9 May 2003
100
90
80
70
Line indicates standard
working week of 37
hours
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Business
Art, Design & Music
hours if interview 100%
Arts & Social Sciences
hours if interview 75%
hours if interview 50%
Science
hours if interview 25%
Technology
Lesson 3
Communicate widely
– Used BPR internal web page provides
•
•
•
briefings prior to workshops
updates on findings and interim bulletins
final reports with recommendations & process models
– Invest time in a “roadshow” to present and
discuss findings and recommendations
•
•
•
Tailor the approach to take account of structure and
culture of your organisation
Visit sites if campus is not on one location
Use appropriate forums/committees to get colleagues to
understand and therefore support change
Lesson 4
Be flexible
– Be responsive to constructive criticism
– Be prepared to review your
recommendations
– Take account of feedback and concerns
from your stakeholders
– They may be right !! – example from
admissions
Faculties invited to comment on
• CRM plan and timeframe maximums
• Principles
– Removal of assumption of majority processed by central
dept
– Academic decision making absolute (no matriculation checks
by central dept)
– Use of corporate system for all steps in process
• Process
– Allocation of roles and responsibilities, particularly:
• Faculty/central department split
• Single faculty contact point
• Interview administration
Lesson 5
Manage expectations of benefits
• Tendency to expect to £ savings from
change
• Address qualitative benefits of new
processes
• Measure what you are doing now
•
•
marker to demonstrate improvement against
Model the costs of new processes
Lesson 6
Enable change in policy
– BPR may result in recommendations that
require change in policy
•
•
•
Decide best approach to achieve the desired
change
Use established good practice guidelines to
underpin your arguments for change
Use benchmarks from other organisations
where appropriate
Lesson 7
Be patient, hold on to your goals
Agree a time for post implementation review
• Compare against measurements of current
processes to demonstrate benefits achieved by
change
• Be aware of the time lag before being able to
demonstrate improvement
–
Many processes are based on the annual cycle of events in
academic administration which makes it more difficult to
maintain momentum and motivation because of the delay
in showing improvements have been achieved
A word about implementation
• Separate project for implementation
• Project best led by process owner
– Ensures line management authority for action
– Manages clash of resource for operational responsibilities
• Project management approach to implementation
– Project steering group/board to manage progress with BPR
manager as a member to
•
•
•
•
Provide continuity from review
Assist project team to understand objectives to be achieved
Assist project team to establish project plan
Ensure original recommendations not watered down because
of difficulties during implementation
What we achieved
• Harmonised procedures
• Clarified roles and responsibilities
• Developed user confidence & trust in the
process and central department
– increased demand for central processing now
• All processing recorded in corporate system
– Enables recruitment and admissions strategies to
be measured and analysed for effectiveness
– Provides mechanisms for continuous improvement
What we achieved (continued)
• Improved quality of service & response time to
applicants
• At least 80% applications processed within the
timeframes
• 45% of those processed within 5 working days
• Because we removed duplication of effort and
reduced costs
– U/G 11.5% efficiency gain; P/G 2.2% efficiency gain
• Able to cope with growth
49% increase in applications between 2001/2-2005/6
(average for comparator group 16%) – UCAS annual datasets
40% increase in offers made to applicants
% Growth in UCAS Applications (UG) since 2001/02
50.0%
Kingston
45.0%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
Regional
National
Comparators
15.0%
10.0%
New Universities
5.0%
0.0%
2001/02
-5.0%
-10.0%
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
TARGET FOR 06 ENTRY =80%
75%
90%
85%
% on time
Oct 2005 - July 2006
Week by week trend
100%
95%
80%
70%
6
2 7.7 .0 6
2 2.7 .0 6
1 7.7 .0 6
1 2.7 .06
7 .7. 0
2 .7. 066
2 7.6 .0 6
2 2.6 .0 6
1 7.6 .0 6
1 2.6 .06
7 .6. 0
2 .6. 066
2 8.5 .0 6
2 3.5 .0 6
1 8.5 .0 6
1 3.5 .06
8 .5. 0
3 .5. 066
2 8.4 .0 6
2 3.4 .0 6
1 8.4 .0 6
1 3.4 .06
8 .4. 0
3 .4. 066
2 9.3 .0 6
2 4.3 .0 6
1 9.3 .0 6
1 4.3 .06
9 .3. 0
4 .3. 066
2 7.2 .0 6
2 2.2 .0 6
1 7.2 .0 6
1 2.2 .06
7 .2. 0
2 .2. 066
2 8.1 .0 6
2 3.1 .0 6
1 8.1 .0 6
1 3.1 .06
8 .1. 0
3 .1. 06. 05
2 9.1 2. 05
2 4.1 2. 05
1 9.1 2. 05
1 4.1 2 5
9 .12 .0 5
4 .12 .0. 05
2 9.1 1. 05
2 4.1 1. 05
1 9.1 1. 05
1 4.1 1 5
9 .11 .0 5
4 .11 .0
% Acceptances via Clearing - 2001/02 to 2005/06
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
KU Total
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
1
2
3
4
5
Critical success factors
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Respected top level sponsors; proactive champions
of change
Independence and internal knowledge of BPR team
Inclusive approach to review that involves
stakeholders
Project management approach to review &
implementation
Good planning – adequate time & resource
Separate implementation and
Plan procedures to support new operational process
Remember balance of resource: design of change = 20% effort
implementation of change = 80% effort
7.
Accept the transitional steps in process of change
and retain your determination!
Thank you for listening
Paula Thorne-Jones
BPR Manager
p.thorne-jones@kingston.ac.uk