BUSINESS
PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING: A PANACEA FOR REDUCING OPERATIONAL COST IN SERVICE
ORGANIZATIONS
Joseph Sungau
Mzumbe University, Tanzania, United Republic Of
E-mail: sungaujj@gmail.com; jsungau@mzumbe.ac.tz
Philibert C. Ndunguru
Mzumbe University, Tanzania, United Republic Of
E-mail: ndungurupc@yahoo.com
Submission: 19/06/2014
Accept: 03/07/2014
ABSTRACT
Organizations in today’s business environment
struggle on how to reduce operation cost for generating reasonable profit. In order to reduce Operational Cost, service
organizations have been working hard to identify techniques that facilitate
business processes improvement. In so doing, the global literature indicates
that service organizations adopt BPR technique as a panacea of reducing
Operational Cost. Despite a documented potentiality of BPR technique, a mixed
empirical results, findings and conclusions regarding the effect of BPR on
Operational Cost have been reported. Therefore, this paper aimed at assessing
and explaining effects of BPR on Operational Cost. The study used
cross-sectional survey design to investigate the effect of BPR on Operational
Cost. Intensive literature review enabled the construction of structural
measurement model, formulation of testable hypotheses and operationalization of
constructs. In order to test the model and hypotheses, data were collected from
ninety five (95) service organizations in Tanzania. Results of the study reveal
that BPR and delivering speed have no direct effects on Operational Cost; they
indirectly affect Operational Cost through the mediations of service quality.
Therefore, BPR influences first both service quality and delivery speed in
affecting Operational Cost of service organizations. It is now recommended that
service organizations should use BPR as panacea of reducing Operational Cost.
Keywords: Business Process Re-engineering, Operational
Cost, Service Organizations
1. INTRODUCTION
In today’s business environment, customers expect to
receive services that satisfy them regardless of the price they are willing to
pay (AGI, 2001). In this regard, organizations have been working hard to reduce
Operational Costs while offering what is required by customers. Organizations
work hard to reduce Operational Costs which results in setting service prices which
are afforded by majority of customers. The market rule is clear that unmet
customer demands and/or expectations force customers to shift to other service
providers (RUHL, 1997). Therefore, failure to meet customers demand and/or
expectation is like giving a chance to a competitor. To avoid this,
organizations have been working hard to improve their business processes in
order to improve or maintain their services for retaining and/or attracting
more customers (KOTLER, 2003).
Furthermore, in today’s business environment,
organizational effectiveness and efficiency have become watchwords in modern
businesses. Organizations have been working hard in order to identify
techniques that improve business processes for enhanced organizational
performance while meeting customer demands and/or expectations (MOTHOBI, 2002;
HEIZER; RENDER, 2011). As a result, several performance improvement techniques
have been identified. The techniques include Six Sigma, Lean and Total Quality
Management (TQM). The other techniques are Business Process Redesign, Business
Process Improvement (BPI), Business Process Management (BPM) and BPR to mention
the few (SLACK, et al, 2007; HEIZER; RENDER, 2011).
Amongst the performance improvement techniques, BPR is a
radical technique proven to be the most effective means of enhancing
organizational effectiveness and efficiency through improved business
processes. The technique complements the division of labor theory through
combining several tasks and using Information Technology (IT) (HAMMER; CHAMPY,
1993; BROERSMA, 1997; SUNGAU; MSANJILA, 2012). In that way, BPR reforms
traditional business processes for reduced Operational Costs (CHENGHU, 2007).
The adoption of BPR has resulted in several benefits (ADEYEMI;
AREMU, 2008). The benefits include reduced Operating Costs, improved quality
and service delivering speed (SLACK; CHAMBERS; JOHNSON, 2007). Other BPR
benefits include improved productivity (MAUREEN; CHU; LIN; YU, 1995),
dependability, flexibility (SLACK; CHAMBERS; JOHNSON, 2007) and finally it
brings competitive advantage to an organization over others (MAUREEN, et al.,
1995; MAGUTU, et al., 2010). In general,
the BPR technique brings salvation to many organizations.
Despite the potentiality of the technique, many BPR
projects have failed in some organizations. This is evidenced by studies by HAMMER
and CHAMPY (1993), STREBEL (1996) and YAHYA (2002), which revealed that about
70% of BPR projects failed. The failure of BPR implementation was due to
several factors that were faced by organizations. The factors include; lack of
effective methodology, inappropriate process and unrealistic objectives. Other
factors were over reliance on information technology (IT), lack of staff and
top management support (YAHYA, 2002) and lack of common definition of BPR (CHEN,
2001). These challenges have been overcome by including BPR in strategic
objectives of organizations.
Service organizations are more labor intensive than the
manufacturing organizations (SLACK, et al, 2007; HEIZER; RENDER, 2011). This
pressures them for effective business administration for better organizational
performance and increased accountability. As a result, this forces service
organizations to work hard to identify techniques to improve business processes
for reduced Operational Costs. Based on global literature, BPR has been
reported to be a technique that enables organizations to efficiently and
effectively deliver service to customers (DEBELA; HAGOS, 2011; ADEYEMI; AREMU,
2008; YAHYA, 2002).
In service organizations, BPR is principally a
transforming technique that enables service organizations to perfect business
processes, operations and structures, but many unsuccessful BPR attempts have
been due to the confusion surrounding BPR, and how it should be performed (KASSAHUN, 2012; WEERAKKODY, et al., 2011; COVERT,
1997). This has resulted in adopting BPR in a trial and error model, in other
words, practical experience to improve business processes for reduced
Operational Costs. However, despite its importance, BPR in service
organizations have been relatively little researched (KASSAHUN, 2012; ADEYEMI;
AREMU, 2008), this results in confusion of the BPR effect on Operational Costs.
In this regard, the current paper determines the effect of BPR on Operational
Costs.
2. BUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING
Business process is a system that produces a given output
or delivers a given service. It combines several processes. Several authors
have defined the concept business process although the key concept of the
definitions remains the same. The authors who defined business process includes
DAVENPORT and SHORT (1990), DAVENPORT (1993), HAMMER and CHAMPY (1993), STODDARD
and JARVENPEA (1995).
Based on their definitions, it can be deduced that
business process has three aspects; system (set of interrelated activities),
inputs (transforming and transformed resources) and desired outputs (good
and/or services). The system is a set/package of logical arranged activities in
such a way that it generates goods/delivers services after the transforming
resources act on transformed resources (SLACK, et al, 2007).
A definition by STODDARD and JARVENPEA (1995), which is
business process is a set of activities that transform a set of inputs into
outputs (goods and services) for another person or process using people and
equipment, is adopted in this study because the definition specifies types of
input, process and what business process has to offer to both organizations and
customers (output). Not only that, the definition categorizes the type of inputs
and outputs to the system.
Engineering is a branch of science and technology which
is concerned with the application of scientific, economic, social and practical
knowledge in order to design, build, and maintain structures, machines,
devices, systems and processes. In business processes, engineering is concerned
with designing or structuring of business processes.
Re-engineering is restructuring of an organization or
part of organization by removing non value adding processes or adding value
adding processes through renovation, automation and networking. Re-engineering
business process is restructuring part of organization. In re-engineering
business process, an organization needs to identify business processes that are
less effective in order to be perfected.
According to CHEN (2001), there is no commonly agreed
definition of BPR. Several authors have defined the term BPR in different
ways. HAMMER and CHAMPY (1993), MANGANELLI
and KLEIN (1994) and DAVENPORT and AREMU (1990) are among the authors who defined
BPR. In this study, the definition of Hammer and Champy was adopted. The
definition states that BPR is the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign
of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical contemporary
measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service, and speed. From the
definition of Hammer and Champy, the main concepts of BPR which can be deduced
are fundamental rethinking, radical redesign, process and dramatic improvement.
Not only that, the definition by Hammer and Champy is also regarded as a
starting point of BPR (CHEN, 2001).
BPR focuses on the outcome of activities derived from the
expectations and requirements of either internal or external customers. BPR
aims at achieving dramatic reduction in cost, improvement in quality and
reductions in cycle time (HAMMER; CHAMPY, 1993). The basic principle behind BPR
is the notation of starting from the very beginning, where old practices are
swept aside in favour of new creative and innovative processes (HE, 2005).
In contrast with other techniques, BPR is about dramatic
improvement of business processes through fundamental rethinking how the
organization’s work should be done. This thinking distinguishes BPR from other
business process improving techniques; which focus on functional or incremental
improvement (HAMMER; CHAMPY, 1993).
Although BPR differs from other business process
improving techniques but they share some common themes (BECKFORD, 1998). For
instance, both they start with needs of customer and work backwards. The
techniques that share some common themes with BPR include systems engineering,
benchmarking and activity based costing (ABC). Other techniques includes
scientific management, customer satisfaction measurement, cross functional team
building, business process improvement (BPI) and total quality management (TQM)
to mention few (BECKFORD, 1998).
Based on the shared themes, BPR is concerned with
redesigning of business processes, eliminating non value adding activities, and
application of information technology. Following the utilization of other
techniques’ concepts, BPR is known by many names, such as, core process
redesign, new industrial engineering and working smarter (CHEN, 2001). All of
them imply the same concept of integrating business process redesign and IT.
According to Hammer and Champy (1993), organizations
re-engineer their business processes depending on different situations. These
situations are categorized into three groups. Crisis management: The group
involves organizations that are facing crisis; they have no choice rather than
improving business processes. They re-engineer so that they move out of the
crisis. Anticipatory management: The group involves organizations that foresee
a crisis is approaching. These organizations re-engineer so that the coming
crisis won’t affect their business and Market leadership: The group involves
organizations that want to continue to be market leaders. The re-engineering
projects enable them to achieve their dreams by providing a better service than
the current one.
3. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN BUSINESS PROCESS
RE-ENGINEERING
A key stimulus for BPR is
the continuing development and deployment of sophisticated information system
and networks. This can be evidenced by leading organizations which have been
dominant in using technology to support innovative business processes, rather
than refining old ways of doing work (DODARO; CROWLEY, 1997).
Following the use of new technology, Information
Technology (IT) has been identified to be an enabler of BPR project in
organizations (SUNGAU; MSANJILA, 2012). For instance, by implementing BPR,
organizations explored opportunities provided by IT systems and tools to
automate business activities for improved services to satisfy customers (LAUDON;
LAUDON, 2006). Not only that, IT also
provides potential roles by creating more flexible, team-oriented, coordinative
and communication-based work capability in service organizations (WHITMAN,
1996).
HAMMER (1990) considers IT as the key factor in BPR for
organization that wants to witness a “radical change” in its operations. Not
only that, HAMMER (1990), AREMU and SAKA (2006) argued that IT is a strategic
resource that facilitates major changes in competitive behaviours, marketing
and customer service environment in achieving competitive advantages over
others. Furthermore, DAVENPORT and SHORT (1990) posted that IT should be viewed
as more than an automating or mechanizing force to fundamentally reshape the
way business is done. It should be noted that IT and BPR have recursive
relationship.
Meaning that IT capabilities should support the
re-engineered business processes while BPR should provide a conductive
environment for IT to work on. In this case, IT helps organizations to
facilitate changes promoted by re-engineering for improved OP (SHIN; JEMELLA,
2002; DAVENPORT; SHORT, 1990; HAMMER, 1990). According to DAVENPORT and SHORT (1990),
the roles of IT in BPR can be summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1: The role of IT in
BPR
Role of IT |
Organizational impact |
Transactional |
IT can transform unstructured business
process into standardized transactions |
Geographical |
IT can transfer information with rapidity
and ease across large distances, making business process independent of
locations |
Automation |
IT can reduce human labour in certain
process by replacing manual works |
Informational |
IT can bring vast volumes of detailed
information into a business process |
Analytical |
IT can bring complex analytical methods to
bear on a process |
Sequential |
IT enables changes in the sequence of tasks
in the process, often allowing multiple tasks to be worked on simultaneously |
Knowledge
management |
IT allows the capture and dissemination of
knowledge and expertise to improve the process |
Tracking |
IT allows detailed tracking of status, inputs
and outputs |
Reduction of
intermediaries/networking |
IT can be used to connect two parties within
a process that would otherwise communicate through intermediaries |
Source: Davenport and
Short (1990)
4. ATTRIBUTES OF BUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING
From literature review, it has been identified that, BPR
entails activities of business processes renovation, automation and networking
in improving business processes. These attributes enable to study BPR
scientifically. The attributes are presented here below:-
4.1.
Business process renovation
Before automating the functional units, the elementary
business processes are rearranged to form higher-level work process including
technical linkages and interfaces of different systems. Business process renovation allows process
redesign for the purpose of improving business operations. Renovating business
process involves streamlining key business processes, making of succession or
continuity of progression of work activities and sometimes combining other
business processes (CONVERT, 1997; SHIN; JEMELLA, 2002; LAUDON; LAUDON, 2006;
DEBELA, 2009).
In the renovation activity, several jobs need to be
integrated and compressed into one so that a single worker at that work station
need to assume full responsibility of all works (BROERSMA, 1997). BPR
compresses processes horizontally as well as vertically. Furthermore, BPR
empowers workers to make their own decisions with less interaction with their
managers. This has benefits of fewer delays and lower overheads (BROERSMA, 1997).
The business process renovation sequences tasks to be
done in a logical and natural precedence in which they can be performed.
Through this arrangement, it allows several works to be done simultaneously.
Furthermore, the sequencing of works in a logical and natural way leads to less
rework of tasks, which has been a major source of delays in many organizations
(BROERSMA, 1997).
In general, BPR through renovation involves eliminating
business processes that have no values to organizations, instead increases
Operational Costs. Not only that, renovation also targets on sequencing
activities in a logical way in order to deliver a product or service to
customers that has value (ATTARAN, 2003).
4.2.
Business
process automation
In the business process automation, BPR modify business
processes by transforming business process from manual to automated one. The
automation of business processes improves efficiency of an organization (SHIN;
JEMELLA, 2002; DEBELA, 2009). The automation process is achieved through the
application of IT. IT plays a major role in the BPR project as it facilitates
the automation of various activities of organizations. For instance, IT allows
organizational activities to be conducted at different locations to enable
quicker delivery of services to customers. Also, IT facilitates quick search of
customers’ information or data (SHIN; JEMELLA, 2002). Not only that, IT
facilitates rapid and paperless transactions.
In general automation allows an efficient and effective
change the manner at which work is performed through standardization and
centralization of business processes (ZYGIARIS, 2000). In the automation
process, IT directly drives the process through workflows, paperless document
management and online interaction. Automation does not only speeds up the
business process and decreases cost, but also delivers a more secure and
responsive service with an enhanced quality of process.
4.3.
Business process networking
Business process networking is the linking
activities/customers outside the section/organization to improve coordination
by using IT in an organization (VENKATRAMAN, 1994; ATTARAN, 2004). According to
ZYGIARIS (2000) in the 1990s when telecommunication technologies were becoming
abundant and low costing, BPR was becoming a world-wide applicable managing
technique for business upgrade. The networking of business processes enables
employees to operate as a team using intranet/extranets.
Not only that, the networking also facilitates the
workflow of activities and eliminating distances. Workers can work together
even though they are located in different places. In this case, the application
of IT eases commutation by networking workers/sections, facilitate
accessibility of organizational information and linking managers/sections to different
sections (AL-MASHARA; IRAN; ZAIRI, 2001; ATTARAN, 2004; HE, 2005; ADEYEMI;
AREMU, 2008; DEBELE, 2009). Therefore, IT is an enabler of BPR and improves
competitive position of an organization through networking organizational
workers, sections or customers (CHEN, 2001; SUNGAU; MSANJILA, 2012).
Furthermore, according to DAVENPORT (1993), information
and IT are rarely sufficient to bring about the process change; most process
innovations are enabled by a combination of IT, information and organization/human
resource changes. On the use of IT, HAMMER (1990) found that: IT could either
‘pave the cowpath’ of bureaucracy – unless the organization changed
drastically, its IT would continuously reflect and reinforce bureaucratic and
functional structures – or IT could help to create a learner, flatter and more
responsive organization, a suggestion which is thus distinctly divergent from
neo-classical economics, but only implicitly.
From this statement, it can be deduced that IT provides
fast processing and response by automating business processes through
networking (CHEN, 2001). IT capabilities facilitate the networking of workers
and provide ease information access and coordination across organizational
units. For instance, the internet can improve internal communication among
different departments, work groups, branches and individuals. BPR facilitates
also the external communication such as contact to customers, vendors,
suppliers, government agencies and even competitors. BPR helps to overcome
geographic barriers and thus enable broader acceptance of the process change.
BPR alters the existing business process and brings cooperation between various
departments using cross-functional teams instead of individuals working in
isolated departments (ATTARAN, 2004).
5. OPERATIONAL COST
Operational Cost is expenditures which are under the
direct control of the manager. The Operational Cost is made up of materials, labor
and facilities. The items that contribute to Operational Cost are equipment,
systems and communication costs.
Operational Cost is measured using objective measures such as amount of
money used/spent on each activity or subjective measure seeking opinions of the
managers responsible. In lowering Operational Cost, organizations need to
identify a unique way of delivering a service in order to gain a competitive
advantage (COVERT, 1997).
Operational Cost is improved when day-to-day expenses
incurred in running a business such as supplies, labour, inventory, facility
and material costs are minimized (ARMISTEAD; BOWMAN; NEWTON, 1995; JONES; NOBLE;
CROWE, 1997; ATTARAN; WOOD, 1999; GUNASEKARAN, et al., 2000; SLACK, et al,
2007; HESSON, 2007). For instance, service organizations have to make sure that
ordering costs are minimized as possible. The minimization of costs can be
achieved by minimizing the trips to the suppliers for ordering materials. This
can be minimized by networking the supplier and the service organization in
their relation. In this case, the transfer of order will be through emails, fax,
telecommunication and other software that facilitates the linking between the
supplier and service organization. By so doing, it minimizes operation cost to
an organization.
Furthermore, service organizations have to reduce labor
cost through minimization of number of employees involved in the business
processes. The minimization of number of employee is done by reducing the non-value-adding
processes, removing redundant work stations and automating business process.
This enables the service organizations to reduce input to the system while
increasing the number of customers served (CHAN; PEEL, 1998; GUNASEKARAN, et
al, 2000; HESSON, 2007).
6. BUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONAL COST:
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In reducing Operational Cost and improving delivering
speed, BPR supports the linking of customers with service organizations through
improved business processes. To ensure a good linkage, BPR improves business
processes by adjusting, combining and networking business processes in service
organizations which in turn improves productivity and service quality while
lowers Operational Cost and operational cycle time (COVERT, 1997; ADEYEMI;
AREMU, 2008; XIAOLI, 2011). By so doing, BPR brings customer satisfaction and
strengthen the domestic and international market competition among service
organizations.
According to literature view, the general assumption
drawn is that Operational Cost decreases if the organization adopts a proper
business process improving technique. In this regard, it is theorized that BPR,
through the activities of renovation, automation and networking, affects
service quality and delivering speed, which in turns reduces Operational Cost
of a service organizations directly and indirectly. The relationship between
constructs, are presented in Figure 1 below.
In summary, the research model presented in Figure 1 is
hereby represented in system of null hypotheses and equations. It should be
noted that since some criterions act as predictors of other criterions, SEM was
used to analyze the collected data.
Figure 1: Conceptual framework
H01: BPR has no correlation
with Operational Cost in service organizations.
H02: Service quality has no
correlation with Operational Cost in service organizations.
H03: Delivering speed has no
correlation with Operational Cost in service organizations.
7. METHODOLOGY
7.1.
Justification of paradigm and methodology
This study has used a positivist paradigm in order to
generate hypothesis that are empirically tested (NDUNGURU, 2007). The
structural equation modelling of the surveyed data was formulated to study the
interdependence of constructs. The constructs were studied by using multi –
items scales which were total aggregated to observed and latent constructs (COFFMAN;
MACCALLUM, 2005; VON DER HEIDT; SCOTT, 2007).
7.2.
Type of Research Design
Since the study aimed at determining the cause-effect
relationship between exogenous construct and endogenous construct, the study
design used in the study is a cross-sectional survey design. The design has
been used because it enabled the researchers to collect data for the study from
the sampled population at one point in time (BURNS; BUSH, 2002). Furthermore
the design was selected because it enabled the researchers to collect large
amount of data from a sizeable population in a highly economical way (HAIR et
al., 2003).
7.3.
Constructs and Operationalization of Constructs
Prior to designing the data collection questionnaire, the
operationalization of research constructs was very important (NDUNGURU, 2007; HAIR
et al., 2003). The operationalization was as presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Operationalization of constructs
Construct |
Operationalization |
Renovation
(Ren) |
The construct was measured using the
following items: - removing non-value adding activities (MAGUTU; NYAMWANGE;
KAPTOGE, 2010; AL-MASHARA; IRAN; ZAIRI, 2001), replacing old machines,
improvement of front and back offices, keep clear gangways and allocation of offices in an
organization |
Automation
(Auto) |
The construct was measured using the
following items: - level of use of IT, easy of locating customers detail and
IT infrastructures (HE, 2005) |
Networking
(Net) |
The construct was measured using the
following items: - easy of commutation (AL-MASHARA; IRAN; ZAIRI, 2001; HE,
2005), accessibility of organizational information and linking managers to different sections
(HE, 2005) |
Delivering
Speed (Spe) |
The construct was measured using the
following items: - shortening of cycle time to serve a customer, reduction of
delays in serving customer, fastness of communication, fastness in decision
making and the period taken to deliver a service since its request (AL-MASHARA;
IRAN; ZAIRI, 2001) |
Service
Quality |
The extent to which OP was improved by
reducing damage frequency, data entry error, documentation or invoicing
error, error on credit claims and number of customers returns. Service
quality level was assessed by using 5 Likert scale constructed statements
that were aggregated to service quality construct. The five statements are
constructed based on:- ability to deliver a promised service in accurate
manner, willingness to help customers and provide prompt services, ability to
inspire trust and confidence, improvement in physical elements of service
such as facilities and equipment and treating customers as individuals (PARASURAMAN;
ZEITHAML; BERRY, 1988; AL-MASHARA; IRAN; ZAIRI, 2001) |
Operational
Cost |
The extent to which OP was improved by
reducing Operational Cost such as supplies costs, overhead costs, labor
costs, inventory costs, facility costs and material costs. Operational Cost
level was assessed by using 5 Likert scale constructed statements that were
aggregated to Operational Cost construct. The five statements are constructed
based on:- reduction in number of employees, reduction in unit cost,
reduction in paper works and reduction of rework cost (AL-MASHARA; IRAN;
ZAIRI, 2001; HE, 2005; KIM; MAHONEY, 2008) |
7.4.
Study Area and Population
The study area was Dar es Salaam city - Tanzania. The Dar
es Salaam city was been selected because it is a major commercial city of
Tanzania with majority of service organizations.
The study population comprised of all service
organizations in Tanzania. The study included all service organizations which
have been in operations for more than two years because assessing Operational
Cost for organizations with less than two years of operations is illogical (OSTGAARD;
BIRLEY, 1996). However, from the collected data, it was identified that eight
service organizations were established after the year 2009. These service
organizations were retained for further analyses in order to meet the minimum
sample size requirement for the study depending on the number of parameters
under the study (KLINE, 2005).
The target population for the study was made up of
banking, public utility and pension fund sectors. Other sectors are insurance,
health services, airline and communication. The selected sectors were thought
to be knowledgeable with the elements of BPR. The units of inquiry of the proposed
study are service organizations, however, managers of the service organizations
were asked to respond to the questionnaire for the service organizations.
7.5.
Sample size, Sampling method and Data Collection
A rule of thumb dictates that if proportion of target
population having characteristics of interest is the samples size of is considered adequate
provided that is the tolerated risk
for estimating the proportion (NDUNGURU, 2007). In this study a 10% risk was
considered acceptable and thus the 100 service organization constituted the
sample size. Empirically, similar studies used sample size of 80 (ADEYEMI;
AREMU, 2008), 110 (HE, 2005), 39 (MAGUTU, et al., 2008) and 70 (ALTINKEMER, 1998),
to mention few.
Given the absence of a comprehensive sampling frame of
service organizations in Tanzania, quota sampling method was used to select
organizations. This non-probability method is a variant of stratified sampling
that is recommended in scientific studies in the absence of comprehensive
sampling frame (NDUNGURU, 2007). From the purposively selected sectors,
specified proportions of service organizations were purposively identified and
selected from a list of organizations obtained from National Bureau of
Statistics (NBS) (SAUNDERS et al, 2005).
In total, 95 service organizations responded to the questionnaires;
being thirty (30) banking, three (3) public utility, three (3) pension fund,
eighteen (18) insurance, twenty eight (28) health, seven (7) airline and six
(6) telecommunication organizations.
Data were collected by using questionnaires (5-point
Likert scale) with items for each construct. The questionnaire collected
categorical data which during data analysis were assumed to be interval scale
data (PERRY, 1998). Section managers were given questionnaires and they were
asked to fill in.
7.6.
Data analysis
The data analysis included preliminary, descriptive and
inferential. Preliminary analysis was confined to response coding, data cleaning
and screening, and normality testing. In addition, reliability and validity
testing and factor analysis were also undertaken. Factor loadings of at least
0.30 were considered for total aggregation (COFFMAN; MACCALLUM, 2005; PALLANT,
2007; SAUNDERS, et al., 2005). In addition, univariate and multivariate outlier
analysis was undertaken by assessing Z-score and Mahalanobis distance.
Descriptive analysis was confined to computing basic
statistics and frequency distributions. Both measurement model and factor
analyses were done, in the measurement model analysis; items that factor loaded
below 0.3 were eliminated and that which loaded above 0.3 were factor analyzed
to identify which items were factored out as one construct (COFFMAN; MACCALLUM,
2005). In this study items in each construct, were grouped as one component.
Therefore, they were total aggregated to respective constructs (PALLANT, 2007).
Inferential analysis assessed the cause-effect
relationship between constructs; testing of the association, ascertaining
direct effect and model fit and testing of hypotheses (SAUNDERS, et al., 2005; KLINE,
2005).
8. RESULTS AND FINDINGS
8.1.
Preliminary Results
From the results, all z – score ranged between -2.77494
and 2.20715 indicating that there was no univariate outlier in all constructs
of the study as Z-score are within recommended values; between ±3 (KLINE,
2005). For the case of multivariate outlier, assessment was done using
Mahalanobis distance. The assessment was done as outliers may be resulted after
a combination of several constructs (KLINE, 2005). The entered data were found
to have no multivariate outlier as p values were less than 0.001.
Furthermore, the assessment of normality indicated that,
data were univariate normally distributed as all skewness indices were less
than 3.0 and the kurtosis indices were less than 10.0 (KLINE, 2005). In
assessing multivariate analysis, the Kortosis critical ratio (c.r) values was
1.523, which is less than 1.96, indicating the presence multivariate normal
distribution of data. Therefore, the subsequent analyses (mainly hypothesis
testing) was done by using parametric formulas, such as Maximum Likelihood (ML)
estimations as used in SEM (TABACHNICK; FIDELL, 2001).
8.2.
Respondents Profile
Table 4 presents the frequency distribution and
percentage regarding sectors, working section of respondent and BPR experience
of organizations studied.
Over representation of banking (31.6%), health (29.5%)
and insurance (18.9%) sectors does not mean that in Tanzania there are more
banks, health service and insurance organizations. The over representation
followed purposive selection of organizations. More of these organizations are
involved due to the evidence from literature review that more of them have
adopted the BPR technique (TERZIOVSKI, et al., 2002; SHIN, 2002; HE, 2005;
ADEYEMI; AREMU, 2008; MINYAN; TONGJAN, 2009; XIAOLI, 2011).
In this study majority of responds belong in operations
(28.4%) and human resource (38.9%) sections. More are from these two sections
because in most organizations, operations sections are ones knowledgeable about
business processes. In the other hand,
more human resource managers responded in this study because it is the section
which is responsible for providing organizational information to external people.
Regarding experience, BPR practice is not a new feature
in the management of service organizations in Tanzania. This is evidenced by
findings of the study that majority (67.4%) of service organizations have
adopted BPR technique for over seven (7) years.
Table 4:
Respondent Profile
Item |
Categories |
Number of Respondents |
Percentage |
Sector of
the organization |
Banking |
30 |
31.6 |
Health |
28 |
29.5 |
|
Insurance |
18 |
18.9 |
|
Public
utility |
3 |
3.2 |
|
Communication |
6 |
6.3 |
|
Pension fund |
3 |
3.2 |
|
Airline |
7 |
7.4 |
|
Total |
95 |
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
Working section of the respondent |
Operations |
27 |
28.4 |
Finance |
13 |
13.7 |
|
Marketing |
9 |
9.5 |
|
Quality |
1 |
1.1 |
|
Human
resource |
37 |
38.9 |
|
General
manager |
8 |
8.4 |
|
Total |
95 |
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
Experience
in practising BPR |
Less 2 years |
8 |
8.4 |
Between 2
and 6 years |
23 |
24.2 |
|
Between 7
and 10 years |
28 |
29.5 |
|
More than 10
years |
36 |
37.9 |
|
Total |
95 |
100 |
8.3.
Structural regression analysis
The structural model was used to represent the causal
hypothesis of the study (KLINE, 1998). The results were presented in two parts;
structural models and its AMOS results and model fit summary. The model was
hypothesized to assess the relationship among BPR, service quality, delivering
speed and Operational Cost.
The objective of the paper is to determine the effect of
BPR on Operational Cost of service industry. This objective was hypothesized by
three hypotheses as presented in the conceptual framework. The conceptual
hypotheses were later translated into statistical hypotheses for statistical
testing. Figure 2 below presents the structural model to be assessed.
Figure 2: Model-Relationship among BPR, service quality, delivering speed
and Operational Cost
From the Figure 2 above, the factor loadings for
renovation (Ren), automation (Auto) and networking (Net) constructs are above
0.3. This indicates that the items are good measures of BPR construct.
Furthermore, from Figure 2 it was deduced that BPR has no direct effect on
Operational Cost (as 1 standard deviation of BPR causes 0.00 standard deviation
to Operational Cost). However, in studying Figure 2, it was observed that BPR
has indirect effects to Operational Cost. In the indirect effect, BPR improves
service quality which in turn lowers Operational Cost (such that, 1 standard
deviation of BPR improves 0.86 standard deviation of service quality; in turn 1
standard deviation of service quality lowers Operational Cost by 0.32 standard
deviation).
Furthermore, indirectly BPR lowers Operational Cost
through the improvement of delivering speed (1 standard deviation of BPR improves
delivering speed by 0.75 standard deviation, which in turn 1 standard deviation
of delivering speed lowers operation costs by 0.07 standard deviation). In
comparison, indirect effect of BPR to Operational Cost via service quality is
higher than that via delivering speed. Since the analysis used only
standardized parameters, the effects of error terms to endogenous constructs
are insignificant. The parameters that appear just above the observed
constructs show how data deviate from the mean in each observed variable.
8.4.
Indirect effects in the relationship between BPR and Operational
Cost
Figure 2 above, show that there are indirect
relationships between BPR and operation cost via service quality and delivering
speed. The results of indirect relationships are presented in Table 5 below.
Table 5: Indirect effect
between BPR and Operational Cost
S/N |
Constructs under assessment |
Indirect effect |
1 2 3 |
BPR and Cos Qua and Cos Spe and Cos |
0.331 0.000 0.000 |
From the results presented in Table 5 above, it was revealed
that there was indirect relationship between BPR and Operational Cost as it was
noted in Figure 2 above. Service quality and delivering speed had no indirect
relationship to Operational Cost as indicated in the Table 5 above. In this
case, there was a need to consider a reduced model of model to reflect the
identified relationships as presented in the Figure 3 below in order to
consider and test the significance of the indirect relationship between BPR and
Operational Cost.
Figure 3: The reduced model of model-Relationship
among BPR service quality, delivering speed and Operational Cost
From the Figure 3 above, the factor loadings for
renovation (Ren), automation (Auto) and networking (Net) constructs are above
0.3. This indicates that the items are good measures of BPR construct.
Furthermore, from Figure 3 it was deduced that BPR has indirect effect on
Operational Cost. In the indirect effect, BPR improves service quality which in
turn lowers Operational Cost (such as 1 standard deviation of BPR improves 0.43
standard deviation of service quality; in turn 1 standard deviation of service
quality lowers 0.33 standard deviation of operation costs).
Furthermore, indirectly BPR lowers Operational Cost
through the improvement of delivering speed (1 standard deviation of BPR
improves delivering speed by 0.55 standard deviation, which in turn 1 standard
deviation of delivering speed improves service quality by 0.44 standard
deviation and finally 1 standard deviation of service quality lowers operation costs by 0.33 standard deviation).
Since the analysis uses only standardized parameters, the effects of error
terms to endogenous constructs are insignificant. The parameters that appear
just above the observed constructs show how data deviate from the mean in each
observed construct.
8.5.
Mediation effect test in the relationship between BPR
and Operational Cost
The significance test in assessing results of indirect
effects between BPR and Operational Cost via service quality and delivering
speed are presented in Figure 2. Table 6, presents the results of SOBEL test
for assessing the significance of mediation effect between BPR and Operational
Cost.
Table 6: SOBEL test for
indirect effects between BPR and Operational
Cost
Constructs under mediation |
SOBEL test Statistic |
P value |
|
One tailed |
Two-tailed |
||
BPRàQuaàCos BPRàSpeàQua |
2.581 3.534 |
0.005 0.0002 |
0.010 0.0004 |
From Table 6 above, it was revealed
that there is significant () mediation effects in the relationship between BPR and Operational
Cost. Therefore, service quality and delivering speed are mediators of the
relationship between BPR and Operational Cost.
8.6.
Structural model goodness of fit for BPR and Operational
Cost
The goodness of fit for structural model that presents
the relationship between BPR and Operational Cost was assessed using several
indices. The results of goodness of fit are presented in Table 7 below.
Table 7: Goodness of fit of
the reduced model of model
Model |
GFI |
AGFI |
NFI |
RFI |
IFI |
TLI |
CFI |
RMSEA |
Default model |
0.963 |
0.869 |
0.943 |
.858 |
.973 |
.929 |
.972 |
.096 |
Saturated model |
1.000 |
|
1.000 |
|
1.000 |
|
1.000 |
|
Independence model |
0.531 |
0.344 |
0.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.359 |
Recommended values: AGFI, NFI, RFI, IFI,
TLI and CFI should be close to 1 and 0 ≤ RMSEA ≤ 0.1 (HOOPER; COOUGHLAN;
NULLEN, 2008; KLINE, 2005) |
From Table 7 above, it was revealed that the goodness of
fit of the model is very good. The model fit is very good because all the
indexes are close to 1 and that of the RMSEA fall in the recommended range (HOOPER;
COOUGHLAN; NULLEN, 2008; KLINE, 2005). Therefore, results indicate that there
were insignificant errors in measuring the endogenous constructs of model.
8.7.
Regression analysis for reduced model of model
A further analysis was done to assess the direction, regression
weights and the significance of the relationships between the predictors and
the criterions of reduced model of model. The assessment was based on
regression weights and p values among constructs. The results of the analysis
are presented in Table 8 below.
Table 8: Regression weights
of the reduced model of model
S/N |
Regressed constructs |
Unstandardized Regression weight |
S.E |
P value |
Standardized regression weight |
1 2 3 4 |
Spe<---BPR Qua<---BPR Qua<---Spe Cos<---
Qua |
0.434 0.292 0.382 0.242 |
0.085 0.071 0.078 0.073 |
< 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 |
0.546 0.425 0.443 0.325 |
From the results presented in Table 8, the regression
weights are positive and significant (). Therefore, BPR positively and significantly lowers
Operational Cost. The approximate mathematical relationship between constructs
is presented in equation 1 below.
9. Discussion of findings and Conclusion
9.1.
Discussion of findings
In determining the relationship between BPR and
Operational Cost in service industry, the findings revealed that BPR has no
significant direct effect on Operational Cost. However, BPR has indirect
effects on Operational Cost. Furthermore, from the findings, it was identified
that BPR indirectly improves service quality and delivering speed to improve
Operational Cost. In this case, BPR improves first level constructs (service
quality and delivering speed) which in turn affect the second level construct
(Operational Cost).
Therefore, BPR, service quality and delivering speed are
predictors of Operational Cost criterion. Service quality and delivering speed
are criterions that act as predictors of the second level effect. These
findings are somehow consistent with what was expected in this study because
some of relationships were not significant.
Based on the research question that “what is the effect
of BPR on Operational Cost of service industry?” the answer is that BPR lowers
Operational Cost to service industry by 10.96%.
In lowering Operational Cost, BPR has significant indirect effect of
0.331 to Operational Cost in service organizations. These findings supports the
findings by ZAHEER, MUSHTAQ AND ISHAQ (2008) which found that BPR reduces
human, money and time costs by 69%, 81% and 74% respectively, YAHYA (2002)
which found that BPR reduces overhead cost by 75% and HALL, ROSENTHAL and WADE (1993)
which found that BPR reduces Operational Cost by 20%.
Other studies which presented similar results are that of
DEBELA (2009) which found that 75% reduction in manpower cost is due to
adoption of BPR, and CHAMPY (1995) which found that BPR reduces Operational
Cost by 40%. There are some
discrepancies between study findings with other reported studies. The
discrepancies are due to the reason that the current study reports aggregated
effect of BPR on operation cost construct while other studies presented effects
of BPR on specific items of Operational Cost construct.
Not only that, some studies agreed that BPR reduces
Operational Cost by either stating the percentage of respondent which agreed or
not. For instant, the study by HE (2005) and CHAN and PEEL (1998) found that
86% and 60% of respondents found that BPR reduces Operational Cost
respectively, while the studies by TENNANT and WU (2005), ATTARAN (2004), SHIN
and JEMELLA (2002), KNIGHTS and WILMOTT (2000), RANGANATHAN and DHALIWAL
(2001), HESSON, AL-AMEED, and SAMAKA (2007) and RINGIM, RAZALLI and HASNAN
(2012) found that BPR reduces Operational Cost without stating the percentage
of effect or by what percentage of respondents agreed or disagreed on the
effect of BPR on Operational Cost.
From the items of the Operational Cost construct, it was
identified that in reducing Operational Cost, more specifically, BPR enables
service organizations to reduce paper works, decrease rework costs, decrease
unit cost and decreases number of employees in business processes. Therefore,
BPR lowers the inputs to an organization. The findings support the findings of SELLADURAI
(2002) and RINGIM RAZALLI and HASNAN (2012). In general, the effect of
BPR on Operational Cost was presented by equation 1.
Based on literature review, it was hypothesized that H1:
BPR has correlation with Operational Cost in service organizations; H2: Service
quality has correlation with Operational Cost in service organizations and H3:
Delivering speed has correlation with Operational Cost in service
organizations. In the discussion of the hypotheses of the study, it should be
noted that the hypotheses did not account the mediation effects; instead it
examined bivariate interactions of constructs. Some of these results did not
support the hypothesized relationships. However, when the indirect effect was
considered, the implied relationships in specific objectives and questions were
supported.
From the findings, in assessing H1 it was revealed that
BPR had no significant correlation with Operational Cost in service
organizations (β1 = 0; p > 0.05). This was due to the reason that BPR had no
direct effect on Operational Cost. In assessing H2, it was found that service
quality has significant correlation with Operational Cost in service
organizations (). This was due to the fact that BPR has indirect effect on
Operational Cost via service quality. Furthermore, in assessing H3, it was
revealed that delivering speed has no correlation with Operational Cost (). This was due to the reason that delivering speed had no
direct effect on Operational Cost.
9.2.
Conclusion
From findings and discussion it is now concluded that BPR
has no direct effect on Operational Cost; it indirectly affects Operational
Cost. BPR improves both service quality and delivering speed which in turns
affects Operational Cost in service organizations. Also, the effect of
delivering speed to Operational Cost is mediated by service quality. In this
case, service quality and delivering speed are mediators of BPR effects on Operational
Cost. Therefore, BPR is a panacea of reducing Operational Cost. From this
study, it is recommended that service organizations should adopt the BPR
technique in order to improve business processes that will provide delighting
services to customers at lower Operational Cost.
REFERENCE
ADEYEMI,
S.; AREMU, M. A. (2008). Impact
assessment of business Process re-engineering on organizational performance. European Journal of Social Sciences, v. 7, n. 1, p. 115-125.
AGI.
(2001). The theory of constraints and
its thinking processes. Jonal Program, New haven.
AL-MASHARA, M.; IRAN, Z.; ZAIRI, M. (2001). Business process
re-engineering: A survey of international experience. Business Process Management Journal, v. 7, n. 5, p. 437-455.
AREMU,
M. A.; SAKA, S. T. (2006). The impact of information technology on library,
Management: A Marketing Perspective in Advances in Management. A
Publication of Department of Business Administration, University of
Ilorin, Nigeria, v. 5, n. 1, p. 141-150.
ARMISTEAD, C. G.; BOWMAN, C.; NEWTON, J. (1995).
Managers’ perceptions of the importance of supply, overhead and operating
costs. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, v. 15, n. 3, p. 16-28.
ATTARAN, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between
information technology and business process reengineering. Information & Management, n. 41, p. 585-596.
ATTARAN,
M. (2003). Information technology and business-process redesign. Business Process Management Journal, v.
9, n. 4, p. 440-458.
ATTARAN, M.; WOOD, G. G. (1999). How to succeed at
reengineering. Management decision,
v. 37, n. 10, p. 752-757.
BECKFORD, J. (1998). Quality, a critical introduction. London:Routledge.
BROERSMA,
H. P. (1997). A theoretical approach to
Business Process Re-engineering. Thesis. Rand Afrikaans University, South
Africa.
BURNS,
A. C.; BUSH, R. F. (2002). Marketing
research: Online research applications (4th Ed). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
CHAMPY,
J. (1995). Reengineering management.
London: Harper Collins.
CHAN,
P. S.; PEEL, D. (1998). Cause and impact of reengineering. Business Process Management Journal, v. 4, n. 1, p. 44-55.
CHEN,
Y. (2001). Empirical Modelling for
Participative Business Process Reengineering. Thesis. University of
Warwick.
CHENGHU,
Z. (2007). The Bank IT outside wraps and its risk control. Journal of China Financial Computer, n. 4, p. 18 -24.
COFFMAN,
D. L.; MACCALLUM, R. C. (2005). Using parcels to convert path analysis models
into latent variable models. Multivariate
Behavioral Research, v. 40, n. 2, p. 235-259.
COVERT,
M., (1997), Successfully Performing
Business Process Re-engineering, Visible Systems Corporation.
DAVENPORT,
T.H. (1993). Process innovation.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
DAVENPORT,
T. H.; SHORT, J. E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information
technology and business process redesign. Slogan
Management Review, p. 11-27.
DEBELA,
T. (2009). Business process reengineering in Ethiopian public organizations:
The Relationship Between Theory and Practice,
JBAS, v. 1, n. 2, p. 20-59.
DEBELA,
T.; HAGOS, A. (2011). The design and
implementation of business process reengineering in the Ethiopian public
sector: n assessment of four organizations. African Books Collective Limited.
DODARO,
G. L.; CRWLEY, B. P. (1997). Business
process reengineering assessment guide. United States General Accounting
Office-Accounting and Information management Division, 3rd Version.
GUNASEKARAN,
A.; CHUNG, W. W. C.; KAN, K. (2000). Business process reengineering in British
company: A case study. Ogistics
Information Managenmen, v. 13, n. 5, p. 271-285.
HAIR, J. F.; BUSH, R. P.; ORTINAU, D. J. (2003). Marketing
research: Within a changing information environment (2nd Ed),
New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
HALL, G.;
ROSENTHAL, J.; WADE, J. (1993). How to make reengineering really work. Harvard Business Review, p. 119–131.
HAMMER, M.,
(1990). Reengineering Work: Don't Automate, Obliterate, Harvard Business Review, p. 104–11
HAMMER, M.;
CHAMPY, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York: Harper Business.
HE, X. J.
(2005). A comparative study of Business Process Reengineering in China. Communication of the IIMA, v. 5, n. 2,
p. 25-30.
HEIZER, J.;
RENDER, B. (2011). Operations Management (10th Ed). New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
HESSON, M.
(2007). Business process reengineering in UAE public sector: A naturalization
and residency case study. Business
Process management Journal, v. 13, n. 5, p. 707-727.
HESSON, M.;
AL-AMEED, H.; SAMAKA, M. (2007). Business process reengineering in UAE public
sector: A town planning case study. Business
Process Management Journal, v. 3, n. 3, p. 348-378.
HOOPER,
D.; COUGHLAN, J.; NULLEN, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling:
Guideline for determining model fit. Electronic
Journal of Business Research Methods, v. 6, n. 1, p. 53-60.
JONES, T.
M.; NOBLE, J. S.; CROWE, T. J. (1997). An Example of the Application of
Production System Design Tools for the Implementation of Business Process
Re-engineering. International Journal
Production Economics, n. 50, p.
69-78.
KASSAHUN,
A. E. (2012). The effect of Business
Process Reengineering on public sector organization performance (A developing
economy context). PhD Thesis. RMIT University, Ethiopia.
KIM,
S.; MAHONEY, J. (2008). Resource co-specialization, firm growth and
organizational performance: an empirical analysis of organizational restructuring
and its implementations. Working Paper.
KLINE, R.
B. (2005). Principles and Practices of
Structural Equation Modeling (2nd Ed). New York: The Guilford
Press.
KOTLER, P. (2003). Marketing Management (11th Ed). Pearson Education Inc,
Delhi.
KNIGHTS, D.; WILMOTT, H. (2000). The reengineering revolution? Critical studies of corporate change.
London: Sage.
MAGUTU, P. O.; NYAMWANGE, S. O.; KAPTOGE, G. K.
(2010). Business process reengineering for competitive advantage: Key factors
that may lead to the success or failure of the BPR Implementation (The Wrigley
Company), African Journal of Business
& Management, n. 1, p. 135-150
MANGANELLI, R. L.; KLEIN,
M.M. (1994). The re-engineering
Handbook: A step-by-step guide to business transformation. New York: American
Management Association.
MINYAN, Y.; TONGJAN, Z. (2009). The empirical analysis
on the structural model of business process reengineering of National
Commercial Banks. Journal of Reformation
and Strategy, n. 3, p. 69-72.
MOTHOBI, M. (2002). Business process re-engineering: Improving business operations.
Dissertation. The University of Wales.
NDUNGURU, P. C. (2007). Lectures on research methods for social sciences. Research Information and Publications
Department, Mzumbe University.
OSTGAARD, T. A.; BIRLEY, S. (1996). New venture growth
and personal networks. Journal of
Business Research, v. 36, n. 1, p. 37-50.
PALLANT, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS
version 15 (3rd Ed).
Singapore: Markono Print Media Pte Ltd.
PARASURAMAN, A.; ZEITHAML, V.; BERRY, L. (1988). SERQUAL:
A multiple item scale for measuring consumer perception of service quality. J Retail, n. 64, p. 12-40
PERRY, C. (1998). A structural approach to presenting
theses: Notes for students and their supervisors. Australian Marketing Journal, v. 6, n. 1, p. 63-68.
RANGANATHAN, C.; DHALIWAL, J. S. (2001). A survey of
business process reengineering practices in Singapore. Information & Management, v. 39, n. 2, p. 125-134.
RINGIM, K. J.; RAZALLI, M. R. (2011). Effect of
business process reengineering factors on organizational performance of
Nigerian banks: Information technology capacity as the moderating factor. International Journal of Business and
Social Science, v. 2, n. 13, p. 198-201.
RINGIM, K. J.; RAZALLI, M. R.; HASNAN, N. (2012).
Moderating effect of information technology (IT) capability on the relationship
between business process reengineering factors and organizational performance
of Bank. African Journal of Business
Management, v. 6, n. 16, p. 555-5567
RUHL, J. (1997). The Theory of
Constraints within a Cost Management Framework. Journal of Cost Management, p. 16-24.
SAUNDERS, M.; LEWIS, P.; THORNHILL, A. (2005). Research
methods for business studies. London: Pearson Profession Limited.
SHIN, N.; JEMELLA, D. (2002). Business process
re-engineering and performance improvement: The Case of Chase Manhattan Bank. Business Process Management Journal, v.
8, n. 4, p. 351-363.
SLACK, N.; CHAMBERS, S.; JOHNSTON, R. (2007). Operation Management (5th
Ed). London: Prentice Hall.
SELLADURAI, R. (2002). An organizational
profitability, productivity, performance (PPP) model: Going beyond TQM and BPR.
The journal of total quality management,
v. 13, n. 5, p. 613-619.
STODDARD D. B.; JARVENPEA S. L. (1995). Business
process redesign tactics for managing radical change. Journal of Management Information System, v. 12, n. 1, p. 61-107.
STREBEL, P. (1996). Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review, n. 3, p.
86-92.
SUNGAU, J; MSANJILA, S. S. (2012). On IT enabling of
business process re-engineering in organizations. Advanced Materials research, n. 404-408, p. 5177-5181.
TABACHNICK, B. G.; FIDELL, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th
Ed). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
TENG, J. T.; KETTINGER, W, J. (1995). Business process
redesign and information architecture: Exploring the relationship. ACM SIGMIS, v. 26, n. 1, p. 30-42.
TENNANT, C.; WU, Y. (2005). Research and concepts: The
application of business process reengineering in the UK. The TQM Magazune, v. 17, n. 6, p. 537-545.
TERZIOVSKI, M.; TITZPATRICK, P.; O’NEIL, P. (2003).
Successful predictors of business process reengineering (BPR) in fincial
services. Int. J. Production Economics,
n. 84, p. 35-50.
YAHYA, B. N. (2002). Business process re-engineering:
concepts, causes and effects. Journal of
Technical Industries, v. 4, n. 2, p. 102-110.
VENKATRAMAN, N. (1994). IT enabled transformation:
From automation to business scope redefinition. Sloan Management Review, v. 35, n. 2, p. 73-87.
VON DER HEIDT, T.; SCOTT, D. R. (2007). Partial
aggregation for complex structural equation modeling (SEM) and small sample
sizes: An illustration using a multi-stakeholder model of cooperative
interorganisational relationships (IORs) in product innovation. 21st ANZAM Conference, Sydney. 4 – 7 December, 2007.
WEERAKKODY, V.; JANSSEN, M.; DWIVEDI, Y. K. (2011).
Tranformational change and business process reengineering (BPR): Lesson from
the British and Dutch public sector. Government
Information Quarterly, n. 28, p. 320-328.
WHITMAN, M. E. (1996). IT divergence in reengineering
support: Performance expectations vs perceptions. Information & Management, v. 30, n. 5, p. 239-250.
XIAOLI, L. (2011). Correlation between business
Process reengineering and operation performance of National Commercial Banks. Journal of Innovation and Management, n. 7, p. 981-985.
ZAHEER, A.; MUSHTAQ, K.; ISHAQ, H. M. (2008).
Reengineering the procurement process in public sector organization: A case
study. International Bulletin of
Business Administration, 1451-143X
(3). Retrieved on April 10th, 2012 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.eurojournals.com/IBBA_3_04.pdf.
ZYGIARIS, S. (2000). Business process reengineering BPR: Report produced for the EC
funded project, INNOREGIO: dissemination of Innovation and knowledge management
techniques, HELLAS SA.