Abdous2011.pdf

This article was downloaded by: [Trent University] On: 09 October 2014, At: 05:48 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjhe20

Towards a framework for business process reengineering in higher education M'hammed Abdous

a

a

Center for Learning Technologies , Old Dominion University , Norfolk , Virginia , USA Published online: 08 Jul 2011.

To cite this article: M'hammed Abdous (2011) Towards a framework for business process reengineering in higher education, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 33:4, 427-433, DOI: 10.1080/1360080X.2011.585741 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2011.585741

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management Vol. 33, No. 4, August 2011, 427–433

Towards a framework for business process reengineering in higher education M’hammed Abdous∗

Downloaded by [Trent University] at 05:48 09 October 2014

Center for Learning Technologies, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, USA In this paper, a conceptual and operational framework for business process reengineering in higher education is proposed. The outline of a sequential and non-linear four-step framework designed to reengineer higher education administrative and academic processes is presented. The first two steps, initiating and analysing, are used to examine, document, and flowchart the process targeted for reengineering; the last two steps, reengineering/implementing and evaluating, are intended to prototype, put into operation, and assess the effectiveness of the reengineered process. Early involvement of stakeholders, an in-depth understanding of the organisational and socio-cultural context, sustained support from senior leadership, and planned leveraging of information technology are critical to successful implementation. Keywords: business process reengineering; higher education; information technology

Introduction In spite of academics’ often-sceptical stance against business process reengineering and other management concepts (Birnbaum, 1988), which may seem foreign to the organisational culture of higher education, many institutions of higher education have engaged in a reengineering of their internal administrative and academic processes. According to a study conducted by Educause (2005), higher education institutions have invested heavily in business process reengineering by leveraging information technology to improve services and to reduce costs in several areas including finance, human resources, business intelligence, teaching and learning, advancement, and student services. This interest in rethinking existing processes and procedures has been driven mainly by budget shortfalls, information technology infusion, and external pressures for improved accountability and efficiency, and the aging of the infrastructure surrounding administrative and financial information (Chae & Poole, 2005). However, despite this enthusiasm and the heavy investment from institutions of higher education, few studies have examined the overall effectiveness and outcomes of reengineered processes in higher education. Additionally, with the exception of the above-mentioned Educause study, Allen and Fifield (1999), and the work of Mehran, Alinaghi, and Mozaffar (2004), Okunoye, Frolick, and Crable (2006, 2008) and, to some extent, Penrod and Dolence (1992) and Belarmino and Canteli (2001), very few studies have proposed a comprehensive framework to reengineer processes in higher education environment. This paper seeks to fill this gap by proposing a conceptual and operational framework for process reengineering in a higher education environment. *Email: [email protected] ISSN 1360-080X print/ISSN 1469-9508 online © 2011 Association for Tertiary Education Management and the L H Martin Institute for Higher Education Leadership and Management DOI: 10.1080/1360080X.2011.585741 http://www.informaworld.com

428

M. Abdous

Downloaded by [Trent University] at 05:48 09 October 2014

Next, it will define the concept of business process reengineering and map, in a detailed fashion, the key phases associated with business process reengineering in higher education. In conclusion, it will discuss the key contextual variables necessary for successful implementation. Process reengineering framework In their seminal work on business process reengineering, Hammer and Champy (1993) define reengineering as ‘the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical temporary measures of performance, such as cost, service, quality and speed’ (p. 46). Closer to the organisational culture of higher education, Penrod and Dolence (1992) define reengineering as ‘using the power of modern information technology to radically redesign administrative business processes in order to achieve dramatic improvements in their performance’ (p. 8). From these two definitions, it can be understood that the ultimate goal of process reengineering is to achieve efficiency and effectiveness by radically rethinking existing processes, whereas the goal of total quality management is to undertake process change gradually by working in incremental steps (O’Neill & Sohal, 1999). Since it follows the business process reengineering perspective, our framework is inspired by two main sources: (1) a retrospective analysis of a mid-size university’s experience in reengineering several internal processes, such as an academic staff development management system (Abdous, 2005), a syllabus creation process (Abdous & He, 2008a), and the reengineering of various processes within a distance learning unit (Abdous & He, 2007; Abdous & He, 2008b; Abdous & He, 2009), and (2) the existing business process reengineering literature (Ahmad, Francis, & Zairi, 2007; Davenport & Short, 1990; Macintosh, 2003; O’Neill & Sohal, 1999). Since it combines these two sources (in which practice has been nurtured by theory), our framework provides a well-grounded tool to use when reengineering processes in the higher education environment. It should be acknowledged that the underpinning design of this model is grounded in models already used by many tertiary institutions and in the business environment, but the framework is specifically designed to be used by institutions of higher education. As shown in Figure 1, our framework is structured around four sequential non-linear phases. Initiation This phase is aimed at identifying and understanding the purpose, the rationale, and the objectives of the targeted process. This phase requires active participation from all stakeholders to document and to understand the environmental dynamics and the risks associated with the proposed reengineering process (den Hengst & de Vreede, 2004). To this end, administrative processes such as financial systems require heavy involvement by daily end-users (i.e. administrators and, to a lesser extent, faculty and students), whereas academic processes such as course management systems require heavy involvement by faculty and students. Indeed, early involvement of all stakeholders is critical to cultivating a supportive environment, documenting existing processes, and soliciting feedback. As an outcome of this preparatory phase, a process reengineering team with a project plan outlining goals, roles and expectations, timeline, communication plan, working procedures, and deliverables should be established. To this end, the goals should be reasonable and achievable, with a clear and defined role and expectation for each team member. In addition, the communication plan, preferably supported by a website with commenting

Figure 1. Process reengineering framework.

Downloaded by [Trent University] at 05:48 09 October 2014

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 429

430

M. Abdous

capability, should emphasise the potential usefulness and benefits of the business process reengineering on shared work practices.

Downloaded by [Trent University] at 05:48 09 October 2014

Analysis This second phase involves an in-depth analysis of the process tasks and procedures by analysing tasks, reviewing risks and assumptions, and identifying potential causes of resistance and inertia. With the documentation obtained during phase one, the outcome of this analysis phase is used to flowchart the process by working closely with managers and staff to document various processes, sub-processes, and tasks. A visual presentation of the existing process dependencies and interdependencies is not only critical to mapping the core tasks and procedures of the process, but is also foundational for the reengineering process itself. In addition, the process reengineering team should identify gaps, inefficiencies, redundancies, and unnecessary activities in the current process. In this regard, frontline users of existing systems are solicited and encouraged to recommend improvement ideas (new features, functionalities, etc.), to think outside the box, and to challenge existing practices. User input during this analysis phase is critical to the entire business process reengineering. Reengineering This third phase is the core of the process and is intended to design the features and functionalities of the reengineered process, with the active participation of and feedback from all appropriate personnel and users. After flowcharting the steps of the redesigned process, a user interface is designed to allow key users to prototype and test various features and functionalities. This on-going participative approach during the reengineering phase is intended to capture users’ concerns and feedback early in the process so that a consensus can quickly be reached as to the workability of the reengineered process. As the process is refined, the process reengineering team should focus on training the various users and stakeholders (staff, faculty & students) about how to use the system. The process reengineering team should use these training opportunities to gather feedback on the usability, ease, and intuitiveness of the system. In addition, once the prototype is completed and tested, the process reengineering team should outline key measurement variables and should relate them to business process reengineering purpose and objectives. Implementation The implementation phase is intended to address users’ and stakeholders’ issues and concerns by running multiple iterations of tests on the designed prototype. This phase requires the active participation of all the process reengineering team members to work closely with front-line users in implementing the system to ensure that it is working properly. During this phase, it is critical to continue data gathering and monitoring, particularly by using analytics tools to track, capture, and analyse usage patterns and behaviours, in order to optimise the user experience. Evaluation The evaluation phase’s purpose is to find out how well the redesigned process is accomplishing its objectives of effectiveness and efficiency. In terms of effectiveness, the

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management

431

Downloaded by [Trent University] at 05:48 09 October 2014

evaluation should focus on the end-users’ satisfaction with the redesigned system and its intuitiveness, and on the level of improvement in overall organisational processes and services. More importantly, this evaluation should examine the contribution made by the redesigned system in achieving the organisational objectives. In terms of efficiency, besides streamlining operations processes, a cost benefit analysis can reveal the amount of savings gained from the reengineered process. In addition to these two dimensions (effectiveness and efficiency), the evaluation could examine several other areas, including the level of the contribution of the redesigned process in the changing of the culture and practices of the unit or department. Contextual considerations Against the background of the resistance to change which characterises higher education institutions and the high rate of failure of Business Process Reengineering (BPR) in industry (Bandara, Alibabaei, & Aghdasi, 2009), it is critical to underline that a successful implementation of this framework hinges on several success factors (Bologa, Muntean, Sabau, & Scorta, 2009). Among these factors, three key variables were identified: 1. An in-depth understanding and familiarity with the organisational and sociocultural context and with the organisation’s dynamics and politics (den Hengst & de Vreede, 2004) are necessary. Understanding the organisational culture and dynamics is critical for facilitating the business process reengineering implementation and for anticipating potential roadblocks and resistance (Keup, Walker, Astin, & Lindholm, 2001). This in-depth understanding is critically relevant in the realm of higher education, as it should be conceded, with Jarvis (2001), that some universities are bogged down by internal politics, bureaucratic procedures, and traditionalism. 2. Clear vision, involvement, and support from senior leadership (O’Neill & Sohal, 1999; Parijat, Saeed, & Pranab, 2011) are necessary for success, sustained by a ‘capacity for action’ (Greenwood & Hining, 1996). Indeed, strong, continuous, and consistent support from leadership is critical to the overall implementation and sustainability of the new process. Hammer and Champy (1993) reported the absence of leadership as a key reason behind the failure of other business process reengineering implementations. Indeed, any challenge to outmoded and obsolete structures, processes, and practices can face fierce resistance from stakeholders comfortable with the status quo. Resistance to change is pervasive in higher education; hence the need for ‘readying the environment for change’ by encouraging open communication, by emphasising the big-picture vision, and by maintaining trust among the administrators, the faculty, and the students (Keup et al., 2001; Yang, Ting, & Wei, 2006). 3. The intelligent leveraging of information technology as an enabling, dynamic, and scalable tool (Ahmadet al., 2007; Kohli & Hoadley, 2006) is the third critical piece to consider. As an enabling tool, technology plays a key role during all of the phases of the business process reengineering process, particularly in finding efficient and imaginative alternatives to existing practices. Otherwise, there is the potential risk of using technology to replicate and maintain antiquated processes and practices. In seeking to use technology as lever for business process reengineering, it is critical to ensure that the business process reengineering team has a comprehensive understanding of capabilities and limits of various technologies involved in the reengineering process.

Downloaded by [Trent University] at 05:48 09 October 2014

432

M. Abdous

Conclusion Since it is based upon both business process reengineering research and the experience of a middle-sized university in its redesigning processes, this proposed framework offers a flexible roadmap for the reengineering of processes within the higher education environment. The proposed model is rooted in the organisational culture of higher education, and actively engages all stakeholders to undertake an in-depth analysis and then to take ownership of the reengineering process. The application of the framework enabled us to uncover inefficiencies, to reduce paper handling, to increase efficiency, and to achieve operational improvements at our university, while reducing academic workload and reducing overall cost. Far from its being another management fad foreign to higher education, if it is applied thoughtfully and gradually as process-oriented thinking, business process reengineering can contribute to a thorough and comprehensive rethinking of some of the out-dated practices used ubiquitously throughout institutions of higher education. References Abdous, M. (2005). Designing a faculty development portal and architecture. Proceedings from The 21st Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, Madison, Wisconsin. Retrieved from http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference/Resource_library/proceedings/05_1966.pdf Abdous, M., & He, W. (2007). Streamlining forms management process in a distance learning unit. Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 10(2). Retrieved from http://www. westga.edu/∼distance/ojdla/summer102/abdous102.htm Abdous, M., & He, W. (2008a). A design framework for syllabus generator. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(4), 541–550. Abdous, M., & He, W. (2008b). A framework for process reengineering in higher education: A case study of distance learning exam scheduling and distribution. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3). Retrieved from http://www. irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/535/1138 Abdous, M., & He, W. (2009). Implementing a large-scale integrated information system to reengineer and facilitate business functions in a distance learning unit. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(2). Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/jaln/v13n2/implementing-enterprise-information-system-reengineer-and-streamline-administrative-proce Ahmad, H., Francis, A., & Zairi, M. (2007). Business process reengineering: Critical success factors in higher education. Business Process Management Journal, 13(3), 451–469. Allen, D., & Fifield, N. (1999). Re-engineering change in higher education. Information Research, 4(3). Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/4-3/paper56.html Bandara, W., Alibabaei, A., & M. Aghdasi. (2009). Means of achieving business process management success factors. Proceedings from The 4th Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Athens University of Economics and Business, Athens. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/30074/ Belarmino, A., & Canteli, A. (2001). Business process reengineering and university organisation: A normative approach from the Spanish case. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 23(1), 63–73. Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organisations and leadership. San Francisco, MA: Jossey-Bass. Bologa, A.R., Muntean, M., Sabau, G., & Scorta, I. (2009). Higher education ERPs: Implementation factors and their interdependecies. WSEAS Transactions on Computers, 8(4), 651–660. Chae, B., & Poole, M. (2005). Enterprise system development in higher education. Journal of Cases on Information Technology, 7(2), 82–101. Davenport, H., & Short, E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information technology and business process redesign. Sloan Management Review, 31(4), 11–27. den Hengst, M., & de Vreede, G. (2004). Collaborative business engineering: A decade of lessons from the field. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(4), 85–114.

Downloaded by [Trent University] at 05:48 09 October 2014

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management

433

Educause. (2005). Good enough! IT investment and business process performance in higher education. Retrieved from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/ECAR/GoodEnough ITInvestmentand/41156?time=1203515704 Greenwood, R., & Hinings, R. (1996). Understanding radical organisational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022– 1054. Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Re-engineering the corporation, a manifesto for business revolution. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Jarvis, P. (2001). Universities and corporate universities. London: Kogan Page Limited. Keup, J.R., Walker, A.A., Astin, H.S., & Lindholm, J.A. (2001). Organizational culture and institutional transformation. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-1/culture.htm Kohli, R., &, Hoadley, E. (2006). Towards developing a framework for measuring organisational impact of IT-enabled BPR: Case studies of three firms. SIGMIS Database, 37(1), 40–58. Retrieved from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1120501.1120505 Macintosh, R. (2003). BPR: Alive and well in the public sector. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23(3), 327–344. Mehran, S., Alinaghi, M., & Mozaffar, A. (2004). Transformation of higher education system in a developing country: Case of decentralisation and reengineering of faculty hiring process. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ ID=36845&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html O’Neill, P., & Sohal, A. (1999). Business process reengineering: A review of recent literature. Technovation, 19, 571–581. Okunoye, A., Frolick, M., & Crable, E. (2006). ERP implementation in higher education: An account of pre-implementation and implementation phases. Journal of Cases on Information Technology, 8(2), 110–132. Okunoye, A., Frolick, M., & Crable, E. (2008). Stakeholder influence and ERP implementation in higher education. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research. 10(3), 9–38. Parijat, U., Saeed, J., & Pranab, K.D. (2011). Factors influencing ERP implementation in Indian manufacturing organisations: A study of micro, small and medium-scale enterprises. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 24(2), 130–145. Penrod, J., & Dolence, M. (1992). Reengineering: A process for transforming higher education. CAUSE, Professional Paper Series, #9. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/ pdf/Pub3009.pdf Yang, C., Ting, P., & Wei, C. (2006). A study of the factors impacting ERP system performance – from the users’ perspectives. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 8(2), 161–166.