How to derive better processes understanding and improving design capability

(1)

How to derive better processes

–

understanding and improving

design capability

Process consolidation – The case of Suncorp

Prof. Michael Rosemann,

A/Prof. Marcello La Rosa

BPM Discipline

Information Systems School

Faculty of Science and Engineering

Queensland University of Technology

Brisbane Australia

James Couzens

Solution Architect

(2)

Each process is varied by product & brand

End to end process has between 250 & 1,000 process steps

Source: Guidewire reference models

Product

Dev

Sales

Service

Claims

• Estimated total number of process steps:

15,000

• Total number of models:

3,000+

30 variations

500 steps

Home



Motor



Commercial



Liability



CTP / WC



(3)

Have you ever experienced any

problem in managing your process

model collection?

(4)

How many of these are real differences?

Real Differences

vs

(5)

Z

N

O

F

H

G

R

P

Q

I

M

J

T

P

Q

Commercial property insurance

X

P

Q

R

S

D

A

B

E

F

H

G

I

Home insurance

A closer look at Suncorp’s repository

• 363 models

•

279 clones:

(6)

Not just a coincidence…

SAP R/3

reference model for ERP:

• 595 models (size from 5 to 119 nodes)

479 clones:

13.8% gain

IBM BIT

library for insurance:

• A: 269 models (size from 5 to 47 nodes)

174 clones:

9% gain

• B3: 247 models (size from 5 to 42 nodes

)

(7)

The problem of cloned fragments

• Clones may be modified independently,

leading to unwanted

inconsistencies

• Clones hide potential

efficiency gains

• Clones make individual process models

larger than they need be, thus affecting

their

comprehensibility

(8)

Not only “exact” clones!

There are also “approximate” clones, i.e. similar fragments

“

Victoria Beckham and Kate Middleton – Similar Fashion Sense

”

(International Business Times)

Determine if

invoice relates to

claim

Complete

customer

reimbursement

Identify invoice

for claim

Complete

third party

reimbursement

?

(9)

Approximate clones: a closer look

L

D

A

B

E

I

H

L

A

B

E'

I

X

H

(10)

Approximate clones in Suncorp’s repository

• 243-309 clusters of approximate clones (60% similarity) after

refactoring exact clones from the repository

(11)

Process model “jungle”

• Proliferation

of variants

• Stagnating

improvement initiatives

• Inability to turn

agile

Need for

innovative design capabilities:

(12)

Process model consolidation

1. Feudalism (current situation)

One separate, independent model per variant

2. Weak Federation

One top-level model per variant, but shared sub-processes

3. Strong Federation

One model per variant, models synchronized via change

propagation

4. Unification

(13)

Each process is varied by product & brand

End to end process has between 250 & 1,000 process steps

Source: Guidewire reference models

Product

Dev

Sales

Service

Claims

• Estimated total number of process steps:

15,000

• Total number of models:

3,000+

30 variations

500 steps

Home



Motor



Commercial



Liability



CTP / WC



1. Feudalism

(14)

Z

N

O

F

H

G

R

P

Q

I

M

J

T

P

Q

Commercial property insurance

Z

N

O

R

M

J

T

Commercial property insurance

X

F

H

G

I

Z

N

O

R

M

J

T

Commercial property insurance

X

Y

2. Weak federation

Extract cloned fragments and store them as separate

sub-processes. If approximate clones, first standardize.

X:

Y:

L

X

R

S

D

A

B

E

Home insurance

Y

P

Q

F

H

G

I

L

P

Q

R

S

D

A

B

E

F

H

G

I

Home insurance

L

X

R

S

D

A

B

E

Home insurance

F

H

G

I

(15)

3. Strong federation

Store process models as “fragments”…

L

P

Q

R

S

D

A

B

E

F

H

G

I

Home insurance

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

F6

F7

F8

Home insurance

Version 1.0

RPST

(16)

Horizontal sharing

…add pointers for sharing

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

F6

F7

F8

Home insurance

Version 1.0

F20

F21

F22

Commercial property insurance

Version 1.5

F5

F6

F7

F8

(17)

A

B

A

C

B

Change propagation

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

F6

F7

F8

F20

F21

F22

Home insurance

Version 1.0

Shared

fragments

Commercial prop. insurance

Version 1.5

Propagation policy:

Instant

Propagation policy:

Instant

Home insurance

Version 1.1

Commercial prop. insurance

Version 1.6

Synchronize via change propagation at the level of

single fragments

(18)

Vertical sharing

X

P

Q

R

S

D

A

B

E

F

H

G

I

Home insurance

Version 1.0

X

P

Q

R

S

D

A

B

E

F

H

G

I

Home insurance

Version 1.1

X

F3

?

(19)

Vertical sharing

F1

F2

F3

F6

F7

F8

Home insurance

Version 1.0

F11

F10

Home insurance

Version 1.1

F3

F4

F5

F9

E

X

E

F2

F1

(20)

Fragments can be edited concurrently if an edited

fragment is not related to another edited fragment

Concurrency control

X

P

Q

R

S

D

A

B

E

F

H

G

I

Home insurance

Version 1.0

(21)

4. Unification

sb.855 sb.865 sb.753 sc.107 cs.106 sc.213 bc.213 bs.180 bc.920 bc.925 cs.926 cb.926 sb.810 sb.857 Return Management

Loss or Damage Management bs.861 sb.856 cb.delivery bs.860 cb.212 bs.850 sb.870 bs.820 [else] bc.812 [payment correct] cs.210 cb.210 sc.820 bc.820 bc.812 sc.920 bs.report sc.925 sc.108 bc.108 cb.210 / cb.224 bc.820 sb.180 cb.214 bc.213 sc.213 cb.240 cs.240 sb.832 sb.889 bs.846 sb.889 sb.832 sb.852 [-] (re-do request) timeout timeout timeout bc.107 cb.106

(may contact a new carrier) sb.843 bs.confirmation bs.869

bs.840

timeout (no new carrier)

timeout cs.217 cb.217 sc.227 bc.227 bc.250 cs.163 cb.163 bc.204 sc.204 cb.990 sb.163 sb.163 bs.163 bs.163 sb.163 bs.163 bs.163 sb.163 sb.163 sb.163 bs.163 bs.163 sb.163 bs.163 bc.216 bs.163 sb.163 sc.215 cs.990 sc.pickup sc.216 bc.163 sc.163 cb.163 cs.163 bc.163 sc.163 sc.211 cs.163 cs.163 sc.163Pickup AppointmentRequest

Pickup Appointment Confirmation sc.163 Pickup Appointment Request Pickup Appointment Confirmation bc.163 bc.163 cb.163 cb.163 cs.163 cs.163 sc.163 sc.163 bc.216 sc.216 bc.163 bc.163 cb.163 cb.163 reset reset bs.853 bs.754 sb.notification bs.notification c: cs.214 cs.214 [repeat]

Merge in one über model based on “similar” fragments

sb.855 sb.865 sb.753 sc.107 cs.106 sc.213 bc.213 bs.861 sb.856 cb.delivery bs.860 cb.212 bs.850 sc.108 cb.214 bc.213 sc.213 cb.240 cs.240 sb.832 sb.889 bs.846 sb.889 sb.832 sb.852 [-] (re-do request) timeout timeout sb.843 bs.confirmation bs.840 cs.217 sc.227 bc.250 cs.163 cb.163 bc.204 sc.204 cb.990 sb.163 sb.163 bs.163 bs.163 sb.163 bs.163 bs.163 sb.163 bc.216 sc.215 cs.990 sc.pickup sc.216 bc.163 sc.163 cb.163 cs.163 bc.163 sc.163 cs.163 cs.163 sc.163Pickup AppointmentRequest

Pickup Appointment Confirmation sc.163 Pickup Appointment Request Pickup Appointment Confirmation bc.163 bc.163 cb.163 cb.163 reset reset bs.853 bs.754 sb.notification c: cs.214 cs.214 sb.855 sb.865 sb.753 sc.107 cs.106 sc.213 bc.213 bs.180 sb.810 sb.857 Return Management bs.861 sb.856 cb.delivery bs.860 bs.850 sb.870 bs.820 sc.108 bc.108 sb.180 cb.214 sb.832 sb.889 bs.846 sb.889 sb.832 sb.852 [-] (re-do request) timeout timeout timeout bc.107 cb.106

(may contact a new carrier) sb.843 bs.confirmation bs.869

bs.840

timeout (no new carrier)

timeout cs.217 cb.217 sc.227 bc.227 bc.250 cs.163 cb.163 sb.163 sb.163 bs.163 bs.163 sb.163 bs.163 bs.163 sb.163 sc.pickup bc.163 sc.163 cb.163 cs.163 bc.163 sc.163 sc.211 cs.163 cs.163 sc.163 sc.163 bc.216 sc.216 bc.163 bc.163 cb.163 cb.163 reset reset bs.853 bs.754 sb.notification bs.notification cs.214 cs.214 [repeat]

=

+

≈

(22)

Über model: characteristics

1. Behavior-preservation

2. Traceability

3. Reversibility

Commerial+Home

insurance

A

D

C

B

Home

insurance

A

D

C

Commercial

prop. insurance

A

B

C

+

=

variation

point

(23)

Suncorp: example of merging by product

Motor

v 1.0

Home

v 1.0

Commercial

v 1.0

CTP

v 1.0

Suncorp Base

v 1.0

CTP

v 2.0

merging

configuration

Liability

v 1.0

Suncorp Base

v 2.0

(24)

Variants merging @ Suncorp

We run our

merging algorithm

over a collection of Suncorp models:

1. Motor claim initiation + Personal claim initiation

(25% of which merged manually @ Suncorp in

130 man-hours)

2. Motor claim lodgement + Personal claim lodgement

(25)

Which approach fits best your organization?

Weak federation

Unification

Strong federation

Feudalism

Max

Min

(26)

Where do I start?

1. Simplify individual process models [refactoring]

(enforce modelling conventions, e.g. labels, layout, degree of abstraction)

2. Remove repository redundancies [weak federation]

(extract cloned fragments and store these as reusable sub-processes)

3. Identify similarities and merge [unification]

Results:

• Smaller and cleaner models

• Less models

(27)

15 ,0

00 pr

oce

ss

st

eps

3,000

process steps

Minimise process model complexity

[refactoring]

Standardise across brands

[weak federation]

Merge across products

[unification]

(28)

Apromore Initiative (www.apromore.org)

• Large initiative among 7 universities

• Supported by Suncorp and ARC (over 1M$)

• Aim: develop an open-source, highly scalable,

SaaS platform to manage process model collections

• Service areas:

1. Evaluation

Check adherence to benchmarks and reference models

2. Advanced Filtering

Identify similarities or cloned process fragments to refactor

3. Clever Design

Assemble existing fragments to create new process models

4. Enhanced Presentation

(29)

Common process representation

P

Q

R

D

A

B

Life insurance (BPMN)

Apromore Canonical Process Format

B

A

X

C

D

F

Home insurance (EPCs)

A

B

D

R

P

Q

A

B

D

E

F

(30)

Apromore: Suncorp benefits

• Build awareness

• Understand differences and causes for these differences

• Achieve simplification

• Identify and consolidate common business functions

• Achieve centralisation

• Centralise support for non-core processes across LOB

• Identify opportunities for partnering

(31)

Does any of this benefit apply to

your organization?

(32)

Apromore: Engaging the community

1. Donate code, it’s open source!

• Donate plugins “as-is”

• Donate patches

2. Join the Apromore Consortium

• Sponsor a particular feature of Apromore

(33)

• Monitor the quality of your repository

• Automatically enforce quality rules

• Justify improvement initiatives against quality goals

• Enhance your process models with “live” data

• Performance information: waiting time, execution time,

bottlenecks…

• Conformance of executed processes with the models

(34)

What features would your

organization benefit from?

(35)

Key Messages

• Most organizations have significant investments in

process modelling

• Many repeat the development of those processes

with every new initiative

• Apromore helps release the latent value that lies in

process models

Design by Confidence

VS

(36)

James Couzens

[email protected]

More information at

www.apromore.org

This presentation includes slides adapted from J. Cornes, M. Dumas and C. Ekanayake

Prof. Michael Rosemann,

A/Prof. Marcello La Rosa

[email protected]