PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10662000

How process enterprises really work.

Abstract

Many companies have succeeded in reengineering their core processes, combining related activities from different departments and cutting out ones that don't add value. Few, though, have aligned their organizations with their processes. The result is a form of cognitive dissonance as the new, integrated processes pull people in one direction and the old, fragmented management structures pull them in another. That's not the way it has to be. In recent years, forward-thinking companies like IBM, Texas Instruments, and Duke Power have begun to make the leap from process redesign to process management. They've appointed some of their best managers to be process owners, giving them real authority over work and budgets. They've shifted the focus of their measurement and compensation systems from unit goals to process goals. They've changed the way they assign and train employees, emphasizing whole processes rather than narrow tasks. They've thought carefully about the strategic trade-offs between adopting uniform processes and allowing different units to do things their own way. And they've made subtle but fundamental cultural changes, stressing teamwork and customers over turf and hierarchy. These companies are emerging from all those changes as true process enterprises--businesses whose management structures are in harmony, rather than at war, with their core processes. And their organizations are becoming much more flexible, adaptive, and responsive as a result.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M Hammer, S Stanton. How process enterprises really work.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10662000/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Technical evaluation of the potential for streamlining of equipment validation for fermentation applications.

The purpose of this article is to provide a few concrete examples of the potential to acceptably reduce the scope of validation and qualification testing based on scientific justification for the specific area of microbial fermentation. The key areas explored include: autoclave operational qualification (OQ) testing, autoclave load pattern testing, vessel sterilize-in-place testing, spore strip use and failure investigation, grouping of D-values for media and concentrated nutrients, influence of temperature on D-values, and equipment clean-in-place cleaning agent/recovery studies. Suggestions are offered based on technical data and engineering analysis of the procedures involved. Methodologies are described for how to evaluate the systems being tested relative to processing requirements to determine which testing might be minimized and which testing might warrant expansion. The ultimate risk to quality then must be evaluated by the designated quality control groups within the organization for the specific process and equipment in use.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗