Requirements and Summary of Results

Abstract

Masys Inc. regards Business Process Redesign as a suitable means of bringing about a substantial improvement in its business performance. In the run-up to the “Masys direct” BPR project various consultants made presentations, each praising their own “incomparably good” approach. At the same time uncertainty is growing within Masys about which interpretation of BPR should be adopted, and whether the Organisation Department would be in a position to undertake BPR projects without the help of external consultants. Specifically, Masys needs quick, straightforward answers to the following questions:

• • Methods: The BPR methods seem to use diverse terminology to conceal similar contents. How can Masys compare and evaluate BPR methods? What are their fundamental differences? Masys is already using methods for TQM and the introduction of package software. What kind of links exist between these and the new BPR methods?

• • Tools: Masys is initially impressed with the wide-ranging functionality of the tools on offer. There are doubts, however, about whether complex simulation functions and interfaces with CASE systems are really needed. Consequently, Masys wants to identify the crucial features of their future BPR methods for which tool support seems appropriate. How can it then derive specific requirements for these features, e.g. the style of graphical representation? And by no means of least importance are the costs and benefits of tool use.