Description: Process maps provide a shared high level understanding of end-to-end business processes in a business domain. The method focuses on what activities take place, rather than how, and helps identify all kinds of opportunities for improvement (not limited to technology changes).
Goals: Goals of this resource are:
Shared understanding of current and future state high level value streams of the end-to-end business processes in a domain
Defined and agreed upon scope for analysis of a problem space
Reaching a broader, domain level understanding of relationships between business processes, and opportunities for improvement at the domain level
The current-state process definition can potentially identify areas of waste and informs the design of the future state process
Often outcomes of a business process mapping exercise lead to business process redesign that will later support technology change/implementations. BPM (Business Process Modeling) is a good method to get consensus on process and getting business owners to own business process change rather than demanding technology changes that likely will just support bad process. BPMN (Business Process Model Notation), which is an extension, of UML, provides a standard set of symbols for describing the components of a process.
Context: Some of the situations that can trigger the analysis are:
A business unit may come to IT asking for a solution, and the method can be used to take a broader view of the domain and assess whether the proposed solution addresses the highest priority pain points
An architect may decide the analysis is needed in a business domain where major changes are expected
A Lean improvement project to remove waste from process area
The process mapping exercise can require significant involvement by multiple subject matter experts, stakeholders, and management across the domain.
The process mapping exercise provides a better understanding of a business domain to support:
Planning of initiatives
Planning of services
Prioritization of projects
Process/service improvement efforts
Lean efforts
Source: The primary references on this page originated from Alec Sharp (Clariteq), but process analysis and process mapping in general are long-standing industry approaches. Process mapping developed out of understanding of the Toyota Production Systems (TPS) that seeks to continually remove waste from a system that results in a product or service. The basis of TPS refers to Deming’s view of the system view of the organization that produces a product or service.
A business unit may come to IT asking for a solution, and the method can be used to take a broader view of the domain and assess whether the proposed solution addresses the highest priority pain points
(expand on this as a scenario)
An architect may decide the analysis is needed in a business domain where major changes are expected
(expand on this as a scenario)
During strategic planning engagement with stakeholders, it may become evident that internal (e.g. self-service) or external (e.g. regulatory) factors imply changes to or improvement of an activity or process that must be understood before any meaningful dialog about a technology solution can take place.
A Lean project with process participants involved in current state mapping and future state design.
Roles:
Business Analysis: requirements elicitation, discovery interviews, root cause analysis
Facilitation: Leading a group through the process modeling workshop
Should this be a capability in the EA Team?
Participants with subject matter expertise
Understanding of the different types of process waste
http://www.bptrends.com/using-scope-models-for-process-analysis-fast-results-for-a-hurry-up-world/
Targeting systemic issues across the domain that are otherwise not visible. While specific issues will also be discovered, focus needs to remain on the systemic. Additional efforts can be launched to resolve the specific issues.
Potential pitfalls in applying the method include:
Many exception processes or steps will be raised that need to be tracked, but bracketed out of the main high level process
Finding ways to involve the “true” end customer perspective; finding good representatives for this can be difficult
Staying focused on the “what” instead of delving into the “how” of the process.
Terms:
End-to-end business process - the full business process as it crosses multiple teams/organizations, not just as perceived within one organization
Business Owners - required to buy into value of process mapping and helping to define the scope of business process needs
Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) - business process owners or people that have specific knowledge of key capabilities and procedures within the business domain
Needs Assessment - Often business process mapping can be a good method to use to help business owners understand their true business needs
Tools: Tools that create standard BPMN should be preferred. This will promote consistency across teams and will help enable workflow automation.
Outcomes of the method provide a current state assessment of a business domain that can later be analyzed to:
achieve shared understanding among participants of exercise
collaboration amongst stakeholders to create and own the current state of business
produce technical gap/fit analysis
future state business re-design
Business process mapping is the first step in understanding a business domain with the expectations of gaining higher efficiencies post redesign and/or technological improvements.
...and as of January 2024 the examples from UW are broken, but being assessed:
The following methods could follow from this method:
More detailed/lower level: As-is and to-be workflow models (swimlane diagrams)
Same level, different perspective: Semantic Data Models
Before this method, other methods that it could be helpful to have completed are:
Architecture Methods > Process Maps
...and as of January 2024 these two links from UW are broken but being assessed:
Want to help with this page? Please see the Method Contributor Guide.
Stewards for this page:
Dana Miller, University of Texas at Arlington
Piet Niederhausen, University of Washington
Other contributors:
Luke Tracy, University of Michigan
J.J. Du Chateau, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Jason Myers, University of Washington
Leo Fernig, University of British Columbia
Robert Dein, Miami University
Paul Schurr, University of Washington
Powered by a free Atlassian Confluence Community License granted to Internet2. Evaluate Confluence today.