5. Conclusion and Future Development
5.5. Future Research
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
60
5.4. Limitation
Readers should pay attention to the following constraints. First, this research collects the data through case interviews that might suffer from reflexivity.
Second, a single case study might lack cross-company or cross-industry application. Third, the research subject is a subsidiary of a multinational company.
A different corporate culture may require a subtly different way to conduct a BPM project.
5.5. Future Research
The author of this study suggests a cross-case study to expand research subjects in the future. This will allow researchers to identify whether informal activity is a general facilitator of a BPM project. This will not only increase research robustness but also create a greater understanding of applying BPM to the supportive process across companies.
Besides, future research may develop a framework that incorporates methods to lower employees’ resistance to the ABPMP PDCA cycle. The BPR2 model is seemly the only way of coping with the high failure rate of BPM projects, yet it has not been under the umbrella of BPM. This direction will certainly help many practitioners to properly execute BPM projects in the future.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
61
References
袁方(2002)，社會研究方法，台北：五南出版社。
Aalst, W. M. P.Van Der. (2013). Business Process Management : A Comprehensive Survey. ISRN Software Engineering, 2013, 1–37.
Alibabaei, A., Bandara, W., &Aghdasi, M. (2009). Means of Achieving Business Process Management Success Factors. In Proceedings of the 4th
Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, 25-27 September 2009 , Athens University of Economics and Business, Athens.
Association of Business Process Managment Professional. (2013). BPM Common Body of Knowledge Version 3.0. United States of America:
Springfield.
BCG. (2016). Transformation - Delivering and Sustaining Breakthrough Performance. (L.Faste &J.Hemerlin, Eds.). The Boston Consulting Group.
Bernardo, R., Galina, S. V. R., &Pádua, S. I. D.de. (2017). The BPM lifecycle.
Business Process Management Journal, 23(1), 155–175.
Buh, B., Kovačič, A., &Indihar Štemberger, M. (2015). Critical success factors for different stages of business process management adoption – a case study. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28(1), 243–258.
Burlton, R. (2001). Business Process Management.pdf. Indianapolis, USA: Sams Publishing.
Champy, J. (1995). Reengineering Management. United States of America:
Harper Business.
‧
Davenport, T., &Short, J. (1990). The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and BusinessProcessRedesign. Sloan Management Review, 31(4), 11–17.
Deming, W. E. (1953). Statistical techniques in industry. Adv Manage, 18(11), 8–12.
Dumas, M. (2015). From Models to Data and Back: The Journey of the BPM Discipline and the Tangled Road to BPM 2020. In H. R.Motahara-Nezhad, J.Recker, &M.Weidlich (Eds.), Business Process Management - 13th International Conference, BPM 2015. Springer.
Dušan Gošnik, Tin Pofuk, K. K. (2015). Business process management (BPM) in Slovenian manufacturing companies. In International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship; Zagreb (pp. 732–739).
Fiedler, K. D., Grover, V., &Teng, J. T. C. (1995). An empirical study of information technology enabled business process redesign and corporate competitive strategy. European Journal of Information Systems, 4(1), 17–
30.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretaton of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Hammer, M. (1990). Rengineering work: Don´t automate, obliterate. Harvard Business Review, 68(4), 104–112.
Hammer, M. (2002). Process Management and the Future of Six Sigma. MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(2), 26–32.
Hammer, M. (2010). What is Business Process Management? In J.vomBrocke
&M.Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on Business Process Management 1:
‧
Introduction, Methods and Information System (pp. 24–36). German:
Springer.
Hammer, M., &Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: a manifesto for business revolution. United States of America: Harper Business.
Hammer, M., &Steven Stenton. (1999). How process enterprises really work?
Harvard Business Review, 22(11), 11.
Harmon, P. (2010). The Scope and Evolution of Business Process Management.
In J.vomBrocke &M.Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on Business Process Management 1: Intorduction, Methods and Information System (pp. 57–
101). German: Springer.
Hung, Y.-Y. (2006). Business Process Management as competitive advantage: A review and empirical study. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 17(1), 21–40.
Jeston, J., &Nelis, J. (2008). Business Process Management: Practical Guidelines to Successful Implementation (Second). United Kingdom:
Elsevier.
Jurisch, M. C., Palka, W., Wolf, P., &Krcmar, H. (2013). Which Capabilities Matter For Successful Business Process Change? Business Process Management Journal, 20(1), 3.
Khosravi, A. (2016). Business process rearrangement and renaming. Business Process Management Journal, 22(1), 116–139.
Kirkor, B. (2010). Towards An Integration Of The Lean Enterprise System , Total Quality Management , Six Sigma And Related Enterprise Process
‧
Lee, R. G., &Dale, B. G. (1998). Business Process Management: a review and evaluation. Business Process Management Journal, 4(3), 214–225.
Lee, S. M., &Asllani, A. (1997). TQM and BPR: symbiosis and a new approach for integration. Management Decision, 35(6), 409–416.
Macedo de Morais, R., Kazan, S., Inês Dallavalle de Pádua, S., &Lucirton Costa, A. (2014). An analysis of BPM lifecycles: from a literature review to a framework proposal. Business Process Management Journal, 20(3), 412–
432.
Makhlouf, M., &Allal-Cherif, O. (2015). Pertinence and feasibility of a unifying holistic approach of IT governance. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Vol. 2015–March, pp. 4575–
4584).
Milan, R., Milan, B., Marko, C., Jovanovic, V., Dalibor, B., &Avramovic, N.
(2014). Implementation of Business Process Reengineering in Human Resource Management. Engineering Economics, 25(2), 211–222.
Munehira, T. (2014). Control Mechanism for Social Business Process
Management. Japan Society for Information and Management, 34(3), 103–
114.
Palmberg, K. (2009). Exploring process management: are there any widespread models and definitions? The TQM Journal, 21(2), 203–215.
Ranganathan, C., &Dhaliwal, J. S. (2001). A survey of business process
reengineering practices in Singapore. Information and Management, 39(2),
‧
Reijers, H. A., Wijk, S.van, Mutschler, B., &Leurs, M. (2010). BPM in Practice:
Who Is Doing What? In R.Hull, J.Mendling, &S.Tai (Eds.), Business Process Management: 8th International Conference (p. 379). Berlin:
Springer.
Roeser, T., &Kern, E.-M. (2015). Surveys in business process management – a literature review. Business Process Management Journal, 21(3), 672–718.
Rummler, G. A., &Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organisation Chart (second). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Serban, A. I. (2015). Managing Transformation : Business Process
Reengineering or Total Quality Management. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Science, 5(5), 81–86.
Skrinjar, R., &Trkman, P. (2013). Increasing process orientation with business process management: Critical practices’. International Journal of
Information Management, 33(1), 48–60.
Stoddard, D. B., &Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995). Business process redesign : Tactics for managing radical change. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(1), 81–107.
Trkman, P. (2010). The critical success factors of business process management.
International Journal of Information Management, 30(2), 125–134.
vomBrocke, J., &Rosemann, M. (2015). Handbook on Business Process Management 2. Handbook on Business Process Management 2: Strategic
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
66
Alignment, Governance, People and Culture, Second Edition.
Wangen, G., &Snekkenes, E. A. (2014). A Comparison between Business Process Management and Information Security Management. In 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, ACSIS’14 (Vol. 2, pp. 901–910).
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Fifth). United States of America: SAGE Publications.
‧
在同一個Function 下，不同 Department 的溝通也會有問題存在。
過 去 的 專 案 ， 大 部 分都 聚 焦 在 和 顧 客 會 直接 接 觸 的 部 門— Operation, Customer Service, Finance。Commercial 我們接觸的少，
他們重點在軟性技能上，就是維護顧客關係，關係能好是建立在 我們提供好的服務給他們，這些和顧客有所接觸的點，我們叫 touch point，絕大多數的接觸點，都落在 Operation, Customer Service, Finance。在去年，因為大環境和內部的種種因素，終於
‧
指標，因為You can’t improve what you can’t measure，接著，我 們會和Function Head 有一場 meeting，重點在傳達問題為何？和 怎麼解決？為了讓這場會議順利進行，我們還需要去想改善這個‧
compensation process 的專案，我們希望 BP 不只是不排斥，我們
需要他們engage，所以總經理對 HR 的組織架構做了調整，原本
recruiter 回報給 resourcing manager，resourcing manager 和 BP 是 合作關係，現在recruiter 直接回報給 BP，resourcing manager 從 缺，這個位置已經缺很久了，所以總經理才會做這個組織調整，
‧
process 和 compensation approval process 就是最好的例子。
8. 在一個專案中，需要取得哪些資訊才能執行？
‧
還有double digit 的成長，現在沒有了，但也是 8~9%，total market 沒有成長我們怎麼成長？增加收入或減少成本嘛，我們是兩件事 在我們公司司機往上爬到country head global head 的故事很多，
在我們公司發展機會很大，但是年輕人就是不考慮，所以在台北 compensation process 做得好，順便一起做，剛好 onboarding 在 EOS 抨擊到不行，所以都是時機到了，專案就開始了。
‧
RO [Regional Office] 確認相關的 policy，另外我不是同是訪問兩
位 recruiter，我是個別訪問，這麼做的好處是我可以 identify 不
一致的地方，也有請集團的法務確認勞基法相關規章，以上這些 資訊是協助我畫出現行的流程圖，流程圖畫好之後，針對我選擇 出來的check point 去尋找 KPI，以前這個流程其實沒有在 review KPI，所以這邊的資訊蒐集滿難的，還好 recruiter 有註記一些 key point 完成的時間，我才有辦法計算 time to recruit & process time
這些指標。有 business problem，有現行流程圖，就可以開始 下去。之後就是training 和 handover meeting。
3. Compensation Approval Process 專案有設定專案目標嗎？
有，在一開始畫好流程圖後，可以很明顯的看出來流程問題，比 方說，原本的流程是紙本進行的，紙本會毀損，毀損就要重做重
‧
名字和日期，然後沒有任何章則規範offer letter 和 compensation report 不能一起跑，兩個流程的參與者是一樣的；基於發現的這些問題，我們的目標就訂在縮減一半的流程時間，並且讓number
of damaged report 降為零。
4. 請問Compensation Approval Process 原本的流程為何？
原本的核薪流程包含兩個流程，一個是Compensation Approval，
另一個是Offer Letter Approval，我如果講太快，你可以提醒我放 慢速度， Compensation Approval 從用人主管出任用決定後開始，
這個任用決定可能是用 email 或電話的方式告知 recruiter，
recruiter 在收到任用決定後，開始準備 report，然後印出來給運
務員首先pass 到 HRBP，接著到用人經理，然後視部門的階層可
能會有2nd level manager，接著到 Function Head, HR Head, 最後
是GM，在 GM 核准後，整個紙本報告會被送回到 recruiter 手上，
然後Recruiter 去告知 C&B Team，C&B 專員就會開始準備 Offer Letter，Offer Letter 要 pass 給 HR Head 和 Function Head 簽名，
最後回到C&B 專員手上，C&B 通知 recruiter offer letter 已經簽 核完畢，recruiter 就會打電話給 candidate 做後續確認，這就是原 本的核薪流程。
5. 那改善後的流程呢？
改善後的流程，Compensation report 和 offer letter 是一起跑的，
因為簽核人是一樣的，為了讓流程可以一起跑，recruiter 現在要
‧
首先兩個流程合併起來跑，然後新流程下C&B 不負責 offer Letter，
整個流程不需要Courier 傳遞文件，整個流程是數位化的，這就
是不同點。
7. 請問Compensation Approval 和 Onboarding 專案間如何連貫？
我想你要問的是Compensation Approval Process 的改善專案如何
帶出Onboarding Process 的改善專案對吧？從技術面來看，是因
為Compensation Report 數位化後，Report 裡面的 Candidate Name, Job Code, Position Code, Onboard date 都可以被系統抓出來然後 加以應用，而 onboarding process 中剛好需要這些 data，所以順 理其章的，onboarding process 就直接長在 Compensation approval process 之後，當然整個流程就是架構的 SharePoint 平台上，這也 確實是原本流程進行的順序，只是原流程中間會有一個很長的停
頓時間，而現在沒有；不從技術看，從時機點來看，也是剛好2016
年的員工滿意度調查報告中，HR 的分數不甚理想，被其他員工 列為最需改進的 HR Service 就是 Onboarding Process，原本的 onboarding process 有多不堪呢，就是沒有任何一個 new hire 可以 在報到當天拿到員工帳號，員工帳號在我們公司非常重要，你需 要的是Compensation Approval Process 的改善非常成功，原訂的
目標都漂亮達成，讓 HR 很有面子，所以才能夠欣然接受
onboarding process 的討論。
‧
做的事 情 和 Compensation Approval Process 差不多，只是在 Onboarding Process 專案中就沒有甚麼下班後的應酬，就是為了
原本的onboarding process 在 onboard date 當天開始跑，在 HR 做
新人的orientation 之前，會請新人填寫員工資料表，填寫完畢後，
這個資料表會被送去 C&B 專員做勞健保加保的資訊，同時
recruiter 要把員工資料表的資訊輸入到 Regional System 做背景
調查，通過 region 背景調查後，C&B 專員就可以把員工資料輸
入到HRIS 中，這套系統會在一天後產生員工職編，C&B 專員在
收到系統產生的員工職編後，會把員工職編轉寄給 Recruiter，
Recruiter 收到後轉寄給用人主管，由用人主管上 Global IT system 去申請員工帳號，員工帳號會在一天後產生給用人主管，用人主
‧
‧
5. 能不能和我介紹一下以前的Compensation Approval Process？
以前的核薪流程就是先跑核薪報告，再跑 offer letter，那我們
[Recruiter]負責出核薪報告，C&B 做 offer letter，核薪的流程就 是我們[Recruiter]做完報告後，整份報告請運務員送給 HRBP 簽 核，再給用人主管，一路簽到function head, HR head, GM 最後回 到我們手上，然後我們再通知C&B 做 offer letter，那錄取通知書 因為有法律效力的因素，要給HR Head 和 Function Head 簽名，
‧
我的年資是兩年，主要負責IT, Finance, Commercial, HR 的招募。
2. 請問是甚麼原因讓Onboarding Process 改善專案起跑呢？
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
79
這中間有刪掉一個步驟，原本是由C&B 把職編寄給我們，然後
我們轉寄給用人主管，現在C&B 直接把信寄給用人主管，那我
們就不經手職編的轉寄。
5. 新的Onboarding Process 成效如何？
就目前為止來說還不錯，以前是每個新人都fail 嘛，現在除非一
些急需 onboard 的例子，但這種情況非常少，不然都可以在
onboard 前產出員工帳號，所以是有達成原本專案設定的目標，
讓每個新人都能在報到日當天拿到員工帳號。