Communicating a Business Process Solution

In a typical Business Process Solution project there will be a number of key members of the Project Team.  These might include a: Project Manager; Information Architect; Business Analyst; Solution Architect; Technical Architect; and the Development Team.  Their might also be key stakeholders such as a: CIO; IT Manager; System Administrator; and business users who may be directly involved in process itself.

These team members might come and go throughout the project and might not necessarily be full time in the project in the first instance.  Given that, how do we communicate the business process in such a way that the various levels of the project team, both the technical and non-technical alike  - not all of whom are on the project at all times – can quickly and/or easily be brought up to speed on the business process solution?

Let’s take a step back and understand the described Project Team:

·     Key Stakeholder(s) (Non-technical): Their interest is along the same lines as the Project Manager.  They want to see the Return on Investment promised to them.  Their interests in a Business Process Solution? Budget, time estimates, ROI.

·     Project Manager (Non-technical): in IT projects in general, PM’s usually come from an IT background at some point in time.  They might not understand the very technical elements of a solution; however they are generally IT savvy.  But what are their interests in a Business Process Solution?  Budget, scope, resources, time estimates.

·     Information Architect (Non-technical): bridges the gaps between the business, the information consumed, and how that data is utilized (governance plan) through the Business Process Solution.  Their interests in a Business Process Solution? Content or structures, governance of content.

·     Business Analyst (Non-technical): the face of the business user, they not only gather requirements but validate and verify those requirements.   This ensures that when this is communicated to the Technical Team, it is done so in a consistent way.   Their interests in a Business Process Solution? Requirements gathering - both business and functional.

·    Solution Architect (Technical): following on from the SOA and SOE and along with the information received from the Information Architect, to design a technology stack that confirms the business and functional requirements.  Their interests in a Business Process Solution? Solution design conforms to existing architecture models defined at the enterprise level, systems.

·    Technical Architect (Technical): creates the framework that will allow for the implementation of the solution design at a task based level.  Their interests in a Business Process Solution? Technologies, Tasks and systems.

·    Developers (Technical): purely technical, they follow the framework and complete the assigned tasks validated by unit tests.  These tests will also include some functional tests to meet the requirements gathered by the Business Analyst which will have been translated into test cases by the Technical Architect.  Their interests in a Business Process Solution? Test cases and tasks.

·    Business Users (Non-technical): these are the users that will be affected most by the Business Process Solution.  They will have described their duties to the Business Analyst.  Their interests in a Business Process Solution?  That they get what they asked for.

Imagine these types of people in terms of Levels.  Each Level of Person has a different agenda within the Project Team.  Given these diverse roles and responsibilities of the people within the team, how can we document the Business Process Solution in a way that each member(s) of the team understands what is being delivered.  How do we ensure that everyone is on the same page, when each of the Levels has very different interest or focus within the solution?

Before you jump to the conclusion: “well you just write a document at each level” – consider this: if each of the various team members wrote a document – who is the target audience of that document?  Essentially it is the Level below them in the chain.   If you’ve ever played the game Chinese Whispers, the more times someone passes what they heard to someone else etc; by the time it gets back around to the originator of the message, it generally sounds like something else.

You might then argue that: “we’re writing and not speaking; and we’re reading and not listening; therefore the above statement is mute”.  However, you can describe the above in terms of translation; each team Level reads the document passed down to them, and translates it into a document targeted for the Level below them.  Each translation changes the original description to the point that when it is presented back, it generally sounds like something else… sound familiar.

Example: I want something that has four wheels; a steering wheel; a seat; an engine; uses petrol… and they were describing a lawn mower. 

Example: There’s a similar one about the radio/iPod etc.  What’s this got to do with the Business Process Solution?

Back on point, how do we currently document business process?  There’s quite a number of ways – BMPN (Business Process Management Notation) diagrams; swim lane diagrams using software such as Visio; UML diagrams…. These are great for the Business Analyst to describe to the Solution and/or Technical Architects; but what about to: the Business User; or the CIO; or the Project Manager.  They don’t really care about interpreting the curved edge activity with an arrowed line adjoining it.

Information Architects might throw in a data flow diagram or something similar; Solution Architects will draw a type of technology stack diagram depicting the communication boundaries of each layer; and so on. 

How do we ensure that all these documents are being interpreted the same way?  Solving this question will go a long way in making a successful Business Process Solution.  An abstracted document containing parts of each Level within it would be a pointless exercise – no one would read it.  Pictures speak a thousand words, but just looking at a picture can leave too much to the imagination – does a picture of the Eiffel Tower let you know I’m talking about: amazing constructions; France; or Holiday Tours?  Maybe I was talking about screen resolution and the Eiffel Tower itself actually didn’t mean anything at all.

The answer I give to this problem, which I find works very well for Business Process Solutions, is: Story Boards.  Often a technique used for Web Sites and User Interface designs, this works well for Business Process as well.  

They can then be translated well into UML diagrams; they can describe a technology stack; they can describe the Actors (or end users); It can describe where the Return of Investment is, by highlighting key areas of improvement from the old process to the new process; It can highlight gaps where a new implementation has to be created and where we are piggy backing on legacy systems;  they can show how the data moves from one system to another and which user(s) are in control of that data; User stories and use cases are also a natural progression from here; most importantly, they can grow and shrink throughout the lifecycle of the project.

How?

How do we use the story board to do this?

Return of Investment:

Draw the current story and start colour coding the border of each story board can quickly show or highlight key stories that show how the process has improved.  Red, green, amber.  Red for things that are creating bottlenecks in the process; green for things we’ve improved or added to reduce the process, and amber for the status quo.

Then draw the new story and walk through this process in the same fashion highlighting again where the value-add is.  Before versus after images paint a very clear image to the key stakeholders of how and where they are going to see the improvements.  Even if they don’t go any further than this in the project, this still gives them value.  It shows where they are being inefficient, and how they can streamline their processes, if not now, in the future.

Budget/Time:

This goes to the core of the project and interests both the PM and the Stakeholders of the project.  When will this be delivered, and how much will it cost.  By highlighting very clearly and distinctly where the changes are occurring, we can then focus our attention on these types of matters.  Lots of green story boards would represent a lot of change, which in theory could represent lots of work.  Therefore more resources, budget and time required.

Content and Structures:

Defining the structure and the content of the story is key.  If we think about it in terms of a movie, the Information Architect would be providing the words coming out of the Actors mouth.  Or, in the case of a Business Process Solution, the information flowing from: the system; to the end user (or Actor); and back.  The story boards can move from an image of the Help Desk Actor staring at his computer as a new message comes in; and the next image can be the message itself as we imagine the Help Desk Actor reading it.

Technologies:

The Solution Architect can then provide the background descriptions on the Story Board, describing which technology the Help Desk Actor is using to see the message coming in: SharePoint 2010 through a K2 Worklist WebPart; and in the next image, using Outlook to open the email.

Tasks:

The Technical Architect can then provide the notes at the bottom of the Story Board describing the type of development or change needed to implement the technologies described in the story.

With all this, we can then walk both the Key Stakeholders and the general Business Users affected by the new process definition; and describe this in a simple and clear way.  It is at a level of abstract enough that it cuts through each of the levels of the Project Team.  They can then go and create their normal documents, but they can now do it with a common understanding of what they are describing; the person reading the document can then review it with a common understanding of what they are reading.  When you have a story that combines the picture with the description, it becomes a very powerful tool.  Handing this project over to the Change Management Team or a new Project Team member is also made simpler.  They don’t have to read streams of documents across the Levels, just read the before and after story boards and they are up to speed.

The Business User, who just wants what they asked for, well they still might not get it.  Budget, time, scope, resources and technologies will all contribute to them having to forgo something.  But chances are the project will go smoother, and if the communication lines are direct and often enough between the Technical Team and the Business Team, then they at least won’t be disappointed.  Henry Ford once said, “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses”… hopefully by documenting in this way before starting development, you’ll be able to deliver the car, and not another type of horse.

How to setup the Story Board:

I won’t go into the “before” story as this can be done in a similar way, this will just go through the “after” story.  The technology you use to present the story is completely up to you.  PowerPoint is a simple way, but you may have other tools that will do something better.

Actors: Start with the Key Actors… Just like they do in the movies, we do here.  Start with the Actors that this Story is mainly about.  If it’s across the organisation, then start with the big named ones.

Starring:

·         Human Resources;

·         Help Desk;

·         Middle Management; with 
·         Asset Management; and 
·         New Employee; 

Project Title: Give the Project a name if it doesn’t already have one. 

Presents:

·         The On Boarding Process

Story Board One: Give each story board a name.  This is something that can be used as a reference point from here on in.

          The Initiation:

·         Border Colour: Amber

·         Boxed Caption: Commencing the On Boarding Process through SAP system;

·         Picture: Two people shaking hands in an office;

·         Talk Caption: Person on the right: Congrats Bill, you’re hired for the position of Analyst, and will report to Joseph on Monday.

·         Notes Caption: Person’s name; position; manager; start date; SAP HR Form; Office access area; induction material;

Story Board Two:

           Initiation Form Details

·         Border Colour: Amber

·         Boxed Caption: SAP HR Form; SAP Database;

·         Picture: Wireframe of a SAP system Form with the fields to fill out being:

o   Person’s name: Bill Bilson;

o   Position: Analyst;

o   Start Date: Monday, 1^st February 2026;

o   Manager: Joseph Johnson;

o   Office Access Area: Level 1, Desk 286;

·         Talk Caption: Human Resources filling out SAP HR Form raised through Portal;

·         Notes Caption: SAP Form Details; Data stored in SAP;

Story Board Three:

Birth of Bill Bilson

·         Border Colour: Green;

·         Boxed Caption: SAP Database; K2 Workflow Process;

·         Picture: Database Server Cluster showing the SAP Database(s); typical K2 View Flow diagram depicting a workflow process.

·         Talk Caption: SAP informs the On Boarding Workflow Process to begin by passing the UserID for Bill.

·         Notes Caption: SAP Database; K2 Connect Event occurs; K2 Workflow process launch; User ID and Process ID captured and stored; K2 SmartObject storing these details;

Story Board Four:

Notify Help Desk

·         Border Colour: Green

·         Boxed Caption: K2 Worklist Task;

·         Picture: Help Desk Office with a group of users sitting at their desks, looking at their computers.

·         Talk Caption: I have a new task to do today; Looks like Bill Bilson needs a new Network Account created.

·         Notes Caption: Active Directory account creation; Email account creation; added to appropriate AD groups and Distribution Lists based on his role and position;

Story Board Five:

Create the Account

·         Border Colour: Red;

·         Boxed Caption: Add user to Active Directory; Add user to Exchange; Add users to AD Groups; Add user to Network Drives and other key source systems;

·         Picture: Four different source system data input screens; Source System (SS) 1 in top left, SS2 in top right; SS3 in bottom left; SS4 in bottom right: Ie.  |+|

·         Talk Caption: I need his: name, position; office location; and his manager to create this person in our systems;

·         Notes: Manual step that the Help Desk Person does; Closes the K2 Worklist Task once completed;

Story Board Six:

           Get some Hardware

·         Border Colour: Green

·         Boxed Caption: K2 Workflow Process; Asset Management Process;

·         Picture: Person dressed in blue overalls and yellow hat, picking up a box in a warehouse style Store Room filled with boxes and levels;

·         Talk Caption: Looks like I have an order for: a laptop (#236A); mouse (#237A); monitor (#238A); mobile phone (#987Z); IP Phone (#986Z) for User ID: #23;

·         Notes: Email notification sent to Asset Management Team; Assigns User ID to Hardware Asset Number through system integration;

… and so on…

I hope this is enough information to get the point across.  We can quickly see here where we are improving the system (through the Green slides: #3; #4; and #6); where we are continuing on with the current system (Amber – and we can look at ways to improve: #1; and #2); where we aren’t really providing anything that will improve the system, and at the same time potentially causing a bottle neck (Red Slides: #5).

Let’s look a little closely then at slide 5.  Certainly this would draw attention at the meeting room and would require further explanation.  Why is this slide Red? 

It’s the colour Red because it is manual.  It currently requires the Help Desk person to read the information coming from one system, and type it into another system(s).  There’s risk that they neglect to add the user to any one of the other source system cause Bill Bilson to come into work on Monday and not be productive.  It’s also Red because the information has already been collected and entered into a source system – SAP.  So why should we need to enter it manually into other source systems at all from that point onwards?  There would surely be valid answers to these types of questions: lack of resources available to extract information from SAP and auto-generate an AD Account or a DMS Account or to a specific location(s) in the Portal etc.     

We highlight it Red so that we know that this is an area that we can improve upon in the future.  It becomes something that everyone can quickly see and understand.  It can be a way of highlighting how the process did something similar at the Asset Management step, to show that it is possible.  How we’ve sync’d the data from SAP through the Workflow down to the source system and commenced the process of getting the user: Bill, set up for Monday with everything he needs; whilst also enabling the Asset Manager to see that User ID #23 has assets: #236A; #237A; #238A; #987Z; and #986Z; with the only human step being to physically deliver the hardware.

You might need more story boards, you might need less, but what this gives you is that distinguishable story that everyone across the various levels can understand and discuss.  From the very technical to the complete opposite of very technical… you still need the: Design Doc; Tech Spec; User Stories; Use Cases; Test Cases; and head cases to make it work.  For me, the story board exercise in a Business Process Solution is the missing link, and needs to start being the consistent link.