Implementation of ERP, to achieve integration and real-time information sharing, information transmission speed, the reduction in the level of information processing, and inevitably a number of new demands on business processes; that business processes must be the application of information technology to match .
After the implementation of ERP, stating the need to restructure business processes and streamlining the agency most typical example is the preparation of production plans. In the manual management mode, sales, production, supply and even shop, and many other departments must prepare plans; ERP system, but with time coordinate product structure model, the marketing, production and procurement and supply integrated into the three main core businesses together, as long as there sales planning, production and procurement plans naturally generated by the system operator, the situation changes, information feedback up quickly adjusted. Many enterprises, the original sales, planning, production, supply and many other departments should prepare plans, now from one department can be completed. This situation, if the business process does not change from one department to complete the work, If I have to do it by a few departments, non-hell broke loose can not be; just as high in cars traveling on bumpy dirt roads, horsepower is also run faster then big . In fact, some manufacturing industry in the implementation of ERP, they all withdrew one sector, in information technology support organization flat, and business processes, shortening, and adaptability to environmental change has greatly improved, customer satisfaction is also a natural be increased accordingly.
However, in the absence of the implementation of ERP System prior to the revocation of a department can do is clearly not acceptable. Revocation department or organization is a flat result of information, rather than conditionality. In other words, in some cases, if there is no information technology support, business processes can not be arbitrarily changed arbitrarily. In a television interview program, the STAR group of respondents who once referred to the failure of their business process reengineering one of the reasons is the application of information technology has not kept up.
Radical and incremental
In 1993, "Reengineering the Corporation" The book, Hammer to the BPR is defined as: "From the basic (fundamental) and a thorough rethinking of (radical) re-design of business processes in order to achieve the key performance, such as cost, quality, service and response speed of a breakthrough (original dramatic improvement of the translation) in progress. "
"Fundamental" and "completely" easy to be understood as a radical approach, associated with radical political views and factions, often dogmatic or mechanical implementation, resulting in failure to achieve the desired results, and even subjected to a lot of criticism.
Eight years later, that is, in 2001, Hammer in the second edition "Reengineering the Corporation", there was no change in this formulation, in his view the spirit of this formulation is not wrong. In the preface he wrote later on: "When the press asked him to write a new version, they found written in the last century, in the 21st century is still correct and effective."
So, what should be on how to correctly understand the Hammer's "fundamental" and "complete" mean?
In fact, Hammer's book in 1993, has explained the "fundamental" and "thorough" significance. He writes: "fundamental" refers to the most basic business problems, from the crux of the problem began thinking; that its intention is to look at the essence of the spirit rather than the phenomenon, is a fundamental rather than the symptoms. The "complete" refers not to be subject to any limitations of the prior to consider the issue is to propose the best solution, and then under the constraints and the actual conditions be amended. Its intention is thinking, the first not too much to consider constraints and restrictions; If not, think the problem will never find the best solution, nor did the final "noble goal." As can be seen, Hammer was speaking of thinking, rather than talks about the intensity of reform, can not be mixed up.
In 1995, the north-west London, Cranfield School of Management, Information Systems Research Center, a senior research fellow Joe Peppard and Philip Rowland, in his co-author of "The Essence of Business Re-engineering, 1995" a book that according to years of practical experience to view, proposed business process reengineering should take a gradual approach. They gave BPR is defined as: "BPR is an improvement philosophy. Its goal is to redesign the organizational and operational processes in order to make these processes to maximize value-added content, to gain incremental performance improvement to continue. This would only apply to a single process, but also applies to the entire organization. "
|
