Harbarian process modeling: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:46, 7 December 2016

Latest revision as of 20:43, 11 July 2024

(12 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Multiple issues|

{{Format footnotes|date=December 2016}}

{{Ref expand|date=December 2016}}

{{Underlinked|date=December 2016}}

}}

[[Image:Sample_HPM_Process_Diagram.png|thumb|300px|right|HPM Process Diagram]]

'''Harbarian process modeling (HPM)''' is a method offor elicitingobtaining internal [[process]] information and visually documentingfrom an organization's internal processes in an effective and simplisticthen manner.documenting Thisthat methodinformation providesin a high-levelvisually overview of processeseffective, orsimple workflows, so that any stakeholder can readily read and understand the informationmanner. The HPM method involves two levels:

# Process diagrams: High-level overviews of specific processes or workflows.

The HPM method involves two levels:

# [[Process Diagram|Process diagrams]]: High-level overviews of specific processes or [[Workflow|workflows]].

# Systems diagrams: Mapping how each process is correlated, as well as various inputs, outputs, goals, feedback loops, and external factors.

==HPM method purpose==

The primary purpose of the HPM method is to first elicit process information from all relevant [[Stakeholder (corporate)|stakeholders]] and subsequently document existing processes completed within an organization. This method addresses the problem of workplace [[inefficiency within an organization]], which can largely be attributed to the majority of processes being undocumented and informally completed.

The formal documentation of processes offers to replace [[ambiguity]] and uncertainty with clarity and [[Transparency (behavior)|transparency]] for the work being completed, both for process stakeholders and for [[Upper Management|upper management]]. The development of formal documentation also provides the opportunity to reassess process [[efficacy]]. Stakeholders will be given the chance to offer their innate insight into process strengths, weaknesses, and redundancies. The culmination of these efforts should result in an evident increase to overall workplace efficiency within the organization.

==HPM output==

The final output of the HPM method is the formalized master documentation of an organization's or branch's workflows and processes. This collection is divided into specific ''process series'', each for a specific group or team. Each process series is divided into the team's major workflows which are individually documented into HPM process diagrams. Each process series also includes an ''HPM systems diagram'' which shows the relationships and connections between the various processes, [[Input–output model|inputs]], outputs, [[feedback loops]], external environment, and system goals.

===HPM process diagram===

HPM process diagrams provide a high-level overview of a specific workflow or process completed by a [[business unit]]. These diagrams are not meant to provide detailed instructions on procedures or codes, but instead address all major steps, decisions, and evaluations that are included in a process. Once finalized, these documents can be used as a reference for anyone in the organization. For example:

* The process owners can utilize the diagrams to train new employees.

* Other groups can reference the diagrams for enhanced understanding &and communication.

* Upper management can reference the diagrams for increased process transparency &and [[decision-making]].

HPM process diagrams can be customized to fit the specific needs of an organization, however, typically include:

* Process title

* Process phases

* [[Timeline]] (if applicable)

* Sequential process steps

* Legend/key

===HPM system diagram===

HPM system diagrams provide a [[Holism|holistic]] view of a set of process diagrams. The system focuses on the connections and relationships between various processes. These diagrams also address the system as a collection of:

* Inputs

* Transformations

Line 49 ⟶ 47:

# project package submission.

===Initial elicitation &and collaboration===

The first phase of the HPM method involves scheduling and meeting with each major team that makes up an organization or branch. Meetings are then conducted in the form of an interview and followed a detailed protocol to establish the meeting purpose, convey expected benefits, and to elicit information about the respective team's processes.

Meetings begin with an explanation of the purpose, as well as a list of expected benefits to each team: Clarification should then be given to all questions posed by stakeholders to ensure buy-in from all members of the respective team.

# increased productivity,

# increased worker satisfaction,

# increased innovation,

# reduced turnover,

# reduced uncertainty, and

# reduced role ambiguity.

Clarification should then be given to all questions posed by stakeholders to ensure buy-in from all members of the respective team.

Next, each team should provide a high-level overview of all of the major processes they complete on a regular basis. Each of these processes can then be discussed in detail. The [[Chronology|chronological]] order of tasks for each process is elicited and inputs, outputs, operations, decision points, and evaluations are identified.

===Preliminary documentation===

Line 68 ⟶ 58:

===Follow-up elicitation & collaboration===

After all preliminary HPM process diagrams are drafted, follow-up meetings with each of the teams is conducted. These meetings open with a review of the respective team's HPM process diagrams for accuracy. This review also serves as a means to prime stakeholders for the three stages of [[brainstorming]]: (1) prepare the group, (2) present the problem, and (3) guide the discussion.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.mindtools.com/brainstm.html|title=Brainstorming: Generating many radical, creative ideas|last=|first=|date=|website=Mind Tools|publisher=|accessdate=7 September 2016}}</ref>

====Prepare the group====

Line 74 ⟶ 64:

====Present the problem====

Once prepared for brainstorming, teams are tasked with problem identification. While the act of formally documenting processes innately addresses existing problems with process efficiency and [[ambiguity]], brainstorming is meant to focus on further solving these problems. This involves a brief independent reflection for each stakeholder of their existing processes' efficacy, strengths, and areas that could be or need to be improved.

====Guide the discussion====

Line 80 ⟶ 70:

=====Discovery=====

The first stage, discovery, appraises stakeholders and existing workflows, identifying what already works well and "appreciating and valuing the best of 'what is'".<ref>{{cite journal|title=A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry|author1=David L Cooperrider|author2=Diana Whitney|date=2001|journal=Public administrationAdministration and publicPublic policyPolicy|volume=87|pages=29|publisher=Marcel Dekker, Inc.}}</ref> Stakeholders are asked AI-based questions designed to elicit the best of their respective team. For example, stakeholders could identify personal strengths of specific stakeholders, strong points within existing processes, and environmental factors that enabled the team to operate at their best.

=====Dream=====

Line 86 ⟶ 76:

=====Design=====

The third stage, design, focuses on teams articulating how they could turn what was identified in the dream stage into a reality.<ref name=":0">{{cite book|author1=Cooperrider, D.L. |author2=Whitney, D|year=2001|chapter=A positive revolution in change|editor1=Cooperrider, D. L.|editor2=Sorenson, P.|editor3=Whitney, D.|editor4=Yeager, T.|lastauthorampname-list-style=yamp|title=Appreciative Inquiry: An Emerging Direction for Organization Development|pages=9–29|___location=Champaign, IL|publisher=Stipes}}</ref> indicate that "once strategic focus or dream is articulated attention turns to the creation of the ideal organization" and the "actual design of the system" (p.&nbsp;10). Questions should focus on action planning and identifying where specific improvements could be made within existing processes to make their optimistic futures tangible. Where the dream stage asked stakeholders to overlook deficits and struggles, the design stage asked stakeholders to develop new solutions that fixed or bypassed existing issues by using the teams' strengths.

=====Destiny=====

The fourth stage, destiny, concludes the AI process by having teams develop a plan to sustain what was identified in the first three stages. Utilizing the positive momentum built throughout the brainstorming session, stakeholders are likely to agree to perform specific actions. [[Cognitive dissonance]] theory postulates that by making a public commitment of behavioral intent, stakeholders will feel a strong need to maintain consistency between their words and their actions.<ref>{{cite book|title=[[Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)]]|author1=Carol Tavris|author2= Elliot Aronson |date=2007|publisher=[[Mariner Books]]|isbn=978-0544574786|title-link=Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)}}</ref> For this reason, questions focus on eliciting self-identified commitments from stakeholders. For example, stakeholders were asked to identify a small action they could each do immediately to help make their envisioned future become a reality. These answers served as public commitments to the rest of their team.

===Final documentation===

At this point, all relevant information has been elicited from the organizational teams and is ready to be documented. First, HPM process diagrams should be updated to reflect feedback and insights from stakeholders. Second, the collective HPM process diagrams of each team are reviewed and analyzed. Systems thinking is then applied to identify a "deeper understanding of the linkages, relationships, interactions and [[Behavior|behaviours]] among the elements that characterize the entire system".<ref>{{Cite book|url=httphttps://www.who.int/entity/whosis/whostat/EN_WHS09_Full.pdf?ua=1|title=World Health Statistics 2009|last=|first=|publisher=World Health Organization|year=2009|isbn=9789241563819|___location=|pages=33|quote=|via=}}</ref>

==Business psychology concepts==

The HPM method utilizes four core concepts derived from business psychology: (a) [[flowcharts]], (b) [[brainstorming]], (c) [[appreciative inquiry]] (AI), and (d) [[systems thinking]].

===Flowcharts===

[[Flowcharts]] are "easy-to-understand diagrams that show how the steps of a process fit together".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMC_97.htm|title=Flow Charts: Identify and Communicate Your Optimal Process|website=www.mindtools.com|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref>They provide a visual reference to stakeholders so that steps can clearly be followed in a chronological order. Flowcharts are "used commonly with non-technical audiences and are good for gaining both alignment with what the process is and context for a solution".<ref>{{Cite book|url=http://www.iiba.org/|title=BABOK: A guide to the business analysis body of knowledge (3rd Ed.)|last=|first=|publisher=International Institute of Business Analysis|year=2015|isbn=|___location=|pages=320|quote=|via=}}</ref>

This [[neuroscience]] tool was incorporated into the HPM method for its numerous applications: (a) defining a process, (b) standardizing a process, (c) communicating a process, (d) identifying bottlenecks or waste in a process, (e) solving a problem, and (f) improving a process.<ref>(Mind Tools, 2016a)</ref> Flowcharts provide a useful and straightforward visual reference for all members of an organization. Utilizing flowcharts offers increased process transparency and decreased ambiguity, often resulting in an increase to overall workplace efficiency.

===Brainstorming===

[[Brainstorming]] is an effective neuroscience tool that can be used with groups to generate ideas that draw on the experience and strengths of all stakeholders. This tool was incorporated into the HPM method for its potential to provide teams with the opportunity to "open up possibilities and break down incorrect assumptions about the problem's limits." <ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.mindtools.com/brainstm.html|title=Brainstorming: Generating Many Radical, Creative Ideas|website=www.mindtools.com|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref> Additionally, studies have shown that groups that engage in brainstorming "can be cognitively stimulated as a result of exposure to the ideas of others".<ref>({{Cite journal|last1=Dugosh,|first1=Karen Leggett|last2=Paulus,|first2=Paul B.|last3=Roland, &|first3=Evelyn J.|last4=Yang,|first4=Huei-Chuan|title=Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming.|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|volume=79|issue=5|pages=722–735|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.722|year=2000)|pmid=11079237 }}</ref> This implies there is a [[Synergy|synergistic]] relationship among stakeholders' individual strengths and the ideas generated throughout a brainstorming session.

===Appreciative inquiry and the 4-D cycle===

[[Appreciative inquiry]] (AI) is based on recognizing a "positive core" by appreciating the qualities and strengths of the people who make up an organization.<ref>{{cite journal|title=A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry|author1=David L Cooperrider|author2=Diana Whitney|date=2001|journal=Public Administration and WhitneyPublic (2001)Policy|volume=87|publisher=Marcel Dekker, Inc.}}</ref> assert that "human systems grow in the direction of what they persistently ask questions about and this propensity is strongest and most sustainable when the means and ends of inquiry are positively correlated" (pp.&nbsp;3–4). This implies that asking positive and optimistic questions will likely guide a group or organization towards a positive, optimistic future.

AI involves four key stages, known as the 4-D cycle: (1) discovery, (2) dream, (3) design, and (4) destiny.<ref name=":0" /> Each stage engages stakeholders in appreciating their organization, constructing a holistic appreciation for the people they work with, and creating a "positive core" that allows the organization to change and grow.

AI was incorporated into the HPM method for its promotion of positive perspectives to stakeholders.,<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Cooperrider, D. L.|author2=Srivastva, S.|date=1987|title="Appreciative inquiry in organizational life"|journal=Woodman, R. W. & Pasmore, W.A. Research in Organizational Change Andand Development|volume=1|___location=[[Stamford, Connecticut]]|publisher=JAI Press|pages=129–169}}</ref> the creators of AI, assert that AI focuses on the positive philosophy behind the approach rather than viewing AI solely as a problem-solving technique. AI-based questions can be used to elicit constructive ideas and solutions from stakeholders throughout the elicitation portion of the project.

===Systems thinking===

[[Systems thinking]] is a theory that provides stakeholders with an "understanding [of] how the people, processes, and technology within an organization interact allow[ing] business analysts to understand the enterprise from a holistic point of view".<ref>(IIBA,{{Cite 2015,book|url=http://www.iiba.org/|title=BABOK: A guide to the business analysis body of knowledge (3rd pEd.)|last=|first=|publisher=International Institute of Business Analysis|year=2015|isbn=|___location=|pages=191)|quote=|via=}}</ref> While traditional forms of analysis look at specific parts of a system, systems thinking looks at the "big picture," focusing on the interactions between parts including dependencies and synergistic relationships.<ref>({{cite web|last1=Aronson,|first1=D.|title=Overview 1996)of Systems Thinking|url=http://www.thinking.net/|access-date=2016-12-07|archive-date=2007-09-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070905005743/http://www.thinking.net/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

While there are many approaches and models of systems thinking,<ref>{{cite book|title=The Social Psychology of Organizations|author1=Daniel Katz|author2=Robert L. Kahn |publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons]]|edition=2nd|date=1978|isbn=978-0471023555}}</ref> provide an [[open system (systems theory)]] that analyzes a system by its (a) inputs, (b) throughputs or transformations, (c) outputs, (d) feedback, and (e) environment. This model has been adapted for use in analyzing each of the organizational teams as a system through their (a) inputs, (b) transformations, (c) outputs, (d) feedback loops, (e) goals, and (f) environment.