Premium
Business process redesign: the implications of tacit knowledge
Author(s) -
Fahey Liam
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
knowledge and process management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.341
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 1099-1441
pISSN - 1092-4604
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-1441(199806)5:2<110::aid-kpm17>3.0.co;2-h
Subject(s) - business process reengineering , tacit knowledge , knowledge management , explicit knowledge , business , process (computing) , leverage (statistics) , argument (complex analysis) , process management , computer science , marketing , biochemistry , chemistry , lean manufacturing , machine learning , operating system
Business process redesign or reengineering (BPR) swept like a tidal wave through North American and, to a somewhat lesser extent, European firms during the early and mid‐1990s. Its basic intent was to reconfigure, streamline and integrate the core work processes in the organization—in short, to reengineer how work is done. The need to do so in retrospect can hardly be questioned given the gross operating inefficiencies, organization redundancies and work disconnections that the movement manifestly revealed in so many business organizations. Yet it is equally evident that BPR promised more than it delivered, frequently failed to leave in its wake a healthy organizational culture, and occasionally pared the organization beyond its essential core. The argument advanced in this paper is that a fundamental reason why BPR did not deliver on its promises was its absence of attention to organization knowledge and especially to tacit knowledge. As practiced in most organizations, BPR did not avail of and leverage knowledge. Nor did it contribute to new knowledge. The intent of this paper is thus to bring knowledge concerns and issues to the forefront of process redesign. Its specific goal is to demonstrate the multiple ways in which tacit knowledge influences each of the major stages—and especially the early phases of each stage—in the redesign of any significant organization process. It especially emphasizes how tacit knowledge intervenes to impede the best intentions of process redesign advocates. The efforts of one large division (which we shall call APRO) to redesign solution (or product) development are used to illustrate the connections between tacit knowledge and BPR. APRO had long been one of the solution leaders in its industry. Few of its many rivals could match its history of continually upgrading its solutions. Most customers ranked APRO as the number one or two most innovative provider in the industry. Yet, the senior executive team believed that the division's solution development process was cumbersome, disjointed and protracted. The firm had not systematically reviewed or extensively modified how it developed and delivered its solutions for at least a decade. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Cornwallis Emmanuel Ltd.