Critical Review
The papers chosen for comparison are “BPM for Change Management: Two Process Diagnosis Techniques” written by de Pádua, da Costa, Segatto, de Souza Júnior, and Jabbour (2014) and “A Process Model of Managing Organizational Change during Business Process Redesign” by Sikdar and Payyazhi (2014). They both consider ways to change management within companies and disclose possible ways of introducing new techniques for implementing these methods. The articles have some similarities and differences concerning the measures and techniques of change management.
The article written by de Pádua et al. (2014) aims to compare the results from applying two diagnostic techniques, using the target audience for the experiment. The participants of this test were two groups that analyzed certain methods independently of each other. The paper written by Sikdar and Payyazhi (2014) includes the justification of the problem from a scientific point of view and considers a special model for change management. In the first case, the approach is experimental, and in the second, it is theoretical.
Concerning change management measures, the authors of the first article use a behavioral factor, expecting to see the result of the reaction of the target audience to changes. In the second article, the authors use a combination approach as their goal is to compare two techniques for improving management. Both papers are similar in that each applies a scientific approach to the implementation of the task. They differ in the way to achieve the goal and, as well as the focus on the problem.
De Pádua et al. (2014) use the stated practices based on the fact that their techniques can be considered as additional measures, since neither modeling nor CRT (“current reality tree”) is the dominant method, and neither technique can exclude the importance of using the other. Therefore, the stages of their realization do not depend on the order of implementation. Sikdar and Payyazhi (2014) introduce their management plan through successive stages of workflow reorganization. According to Jeston and Nelis (2014), BPM projects may be implemented by various means. Thus, the difference between the two articles is in the framework of change management used and the steps of its introduction.
Practical Implications
Both articles can have practical significance in case of their implementation. The contribution of the research conducted by Pádua et al. (2014) is quite obvious. The study helps to consider two methods that are rather favorable and reasonable. In the field of management, the results of this study can help both in diagnosing the existing management course of the company and in introducing a new technique. For me, as for a practitioner, this work could have significance, since the results of the research make it clear that employees are not limited to one course of work, and they have an opportunity to go in a direction that is convenient for them.
As for the study conducted by Sikdar and Payyazhi (2014), the results of their research can simplify the process of change management and facilitate the task for both leadership and executive bodies. Muthalagu (2017) remarks the use of BPM; he notes that this process may help to achieve a quality assessment of the standardization of a particular company’s work. It means that all organizational changes during the implementation of the business process will be quite quick and fruitful.
From the position of a manager, I would try to take into account the data of this study and consider the fact that there is no need to get a large target group involved in the testing of this technique. As a practitioner, it would also be convenient for me to work on such a scheme as the acceleration of the activity of personnel, in my opinion, is an indicator of a successful operation of a manager. Consequently, the efficiency of work will increase, while the introduction will not take a long time.
Conclusions
Despite the fact that BPM is a rather topical discipline, it is necessary to observe some additional factors for its full and favorable introduction (Rosemann & vom Brocke, 2015). It means that the implementation of a particular business program may require the involvement of not only managers but also an experimental target group, as it is shown in the article by Pádua et al. (2014). Therefore, the quality of work performed depends on the willingness of its participants to help program developers with the implementation process and rapid realization.
Hammer (2014) claims that BPM is a comprehensive and advanced system for managing organizational operations. Accordingly, it probably takes quite a lot of time for its high-quality implementation. Nevertheless, Sikdar and Payyazhi (2014) have proved that the successful application of this technique in practice does not require either long development and implementation, or numerous working resources. All operations can be performed within one company without involving third-party specialists. Employees with sufficient skill level can take part in change management and contribute to the improvement of work.
Thus, the successful implementation of the process of improving the management system is quite an up-to-date and current discipline. It is enough to think strategically and implement one of the possible ideas to achieve a good result. Various studies of many scientists can help build a course program. In the process of introduction, it is important to focus on the interests of a particular company and work on what will be most beneficial for it.
References
De Pádua, S. I. D., da Costa, J. M. H., Segatto, M., de Souza Júnior, M. A., & Jabbour, C. J. C. (2014). BPM for change management: Two process diagnosis techniques. Business Process Management Journal, 20(2), 247-271.
Hammer, M. (2015). What is business process management? In J. vom Brocke & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on Business Process Management 1 (pp. 3-16). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
Jeston, J., & Nelis, J. (2014). Business process management (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Muthalagu, I. (2017). Data modeling for engineering change management processes in engineering industries. International Journal of Computer Engineering & Technology, 8(1), 3-24.
Rosemann, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2015). The six core elements of business process management. In J. vom Brocke & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on business process management 1 (pp. 105-122). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
Sikdar, A., & Payyazhi, J. (2014). A process model of managing organizational change during business process redesign. Business Process Management Journal, 20(6), 971-998.