Why Reengineering Projects Fail.

Abstract

Use of any trademarks in this report is not intended in any way

Towards A Methodology for the Pre-Stage of Implementing a Reengineering Project

“…Improper understanding of manager(s) about Business Process Reengineering (Arora & Kumar, 2000), poor management insight and lack of strategic viewpoint (Arora & Kumar, 2000;Grover et al, 1995), lack of senior manager's support (Arora & Kumar, 2000;Bergey, Smith, Tilley, Weiderman, & Woods, 1999;Grover et al, 1995;Hlupic et al, 2000;Sarker & Lee, 1999;Sung & Gibson, 1998), lack of managerial skills and motivations in making basic changes (Arora & Kumar, 2000), lack of managerial commitment and proper leadership (Arora & Kumar, 2000;Sung & Gibson, 1998), expanding conservative culture among senior managers (Sung & Gibson, 1998), lack of powerful persons in leading positions (Grover et al, 1995;Sung & Gibson, 1998), holding on to previous technical decisions (Bergey et al, 1999), lack of existing foreign consultant(s) (Grover et al, 1995), improper choice of supporters and sponsors (Davenport, 2013), improper duplication of foreign consultants' and contractors' procedures (Bergey et al, 1999).…”

“…Lack of proper planning to implement projects (Davidson, 1993;Grover et al, 1995), lack of enough time and improper time management (Grover et al, 1995), lack of budget and expense control (Arora & Kumar, 2000), inefficient resources and their management (Arora & Kumar, 2000, Grover et al, 1995, challenges in the assessment of project performance (Grover et al, 1995), insufficient understanding of customers' needs with respect to reengineering (Hlupic et al, 2000), lack of proper instruments to evaluate the effects of designed solutions prior to implementation Arora & Kumar, 2000, Grover et al, 1995, Hlupic et al, 2000Irani, Hlupic, & Giaglis, 2001;Sung & Gibson, 1998), lack of deduction and evaluation of necessities (Bergey et al, 1999), improper planning and decision making in actualizing the plan(s) (Bergey et al, 1999), non-systemic attitude towards the topic (Hahm & Lee, 1994), gradual and non-basic change in processes (Grover et al, 1995;Willcocks & Smith, 1995), insistence on substantial changes in processes (In other words there are two types of changes: a) minor changes which can be applied during a short period of time, and b) major, basic and fundamental changes which should be implemented over a long period in order to not collapse the system.) (Davenport, 2013;Grover et al, 1995), lack of proper methods to implement BPR (Davenport, 2013;Grover et al, 1995), insistence on adopting the White Page approach (an approach with a detailed analysis of existing processes) (Bergey et al, 1999), spending extra time to analyze the current processes (Grover et al, 1995;Hammer & Champy, 2009), focusing on designing the processes prior to implementation (Davenport, 2013), insufficient focus on the key processes (Arora & Kumar, 2000), unintentional and intentional choice of imperfect leaders in reengineer the organization (Bergey et al, 1999), lack of serious contribution on...…”

“…(Davenport, 2013;Grover et al, 1995), lack of proper methods to implement BPR (Davenport, 2013;Grover et al, 1995), insistence on adopting the White Page approach (an approach with a detailed analysis of existing processes) (Bergey et al, 1999), spending extra time to analyze the current processes (Grover et al, 1995;Hammer & Champy, 2009), focusing on designing the processes prior to implementation (Davenport, 2013), insufficient focus on the key processes (Arora & Kumar, 2000), unintentional and intentional choice of imperfect leaders in reengineer the organization (Bergey et al, 1999), lack of serious contribution on Business Process Reengineering (Bergey et al, 1999), lack of serious contribution on how the processes and the organization objectives are interconnected (Davidson, 1993).…”

“…Making mistakes in IT's role in Business Process Reengineering (Sung & Gibson, 1998), inefficient use of IT and its tools (Sung & Gibson, 1998), negative attitudes towards IT, spending extra time and money, lack of proper IT devices to related staff training, lack of ability in combining technologies (Arora & Kumar, 2000;Davenport, 2013), insufficient perception of IT's existing foundation (Davenport, 2013;Dennis, Carte, & Kelly, 2003;Grover et al, 1995;Hlupic et al, 2000;Hoffman, 1995;Jackson, 1997;Sung & Gibson, 1998;Teng, Jeong, & Grover, 1998;Terziovski, Fitzpatrick, & O'Neill, 2003), lack of creative usage of IT (Sung & Gibson, 1998), non-approval of simultaneous approaches of IT and BPR (Bergey et al, 1999: Willcocks & Smith, 1995, adopting the old models in mechanizing the current processes (Arora & Kumar, 2000;Hammer & Champy, 2009;Jackson, 1997), work force's dependence on the old technologies and improper training schedules (Bergey et al, 1999), Business Process Reengineering is not considered enough in software architecture (Bergey et al, 1999).…”

Culture Effect on Requirements Elicitation Practice in Developing Countries

“…Requirement can't be gathered out of the social context [3]. Robertson and Robertson call it "trawling for requirements" [4] meaning that you are likely to get more requirements than expected but it is better than getting less. It comes after project initiation and before system design.…”