1. Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to component based business models and, more particularly, to techniques for transforming an enterprise using a Component Business Model.
2. Background Description
Existing approaches to business transformation are restricted by the limited perspectives supported by each approach. Traditional approaches focus on process by process analysis and corresponding improvements, and may not consider aspects of the business that are related to a process, such as the people involved in the process, how the people are organized, and technology and operational considerations, but whose significance for the business as a whole are not evident from the perspective supported by traditional approaches. Furthermore, traditional approaches are not good at tracing dependencies and repercussions of change.
Traditional approaches seek to represent aspects of business operation as processes that can be streamlined and optimized through the exploitation of technology, most commonly technology deployed to automate a well defined business behavior. This view limits its focus to aspects of business behavior related to a particular process, and also tends to focus on how technology can be deployed to mechanize activity within that process. These approaches leverage a combination of at least six different concepts: 1-eliminate redundant steps, 2-automate manual steps, 3-do more things in parallel, 4-identify shared capabilities, 5-seek low cost sourcing approaches, and 6-eliminate variations in processing. These approaches are applied to established end to end processes, but do not deal with the cross process perspective.
What is needed is an alternative view that seeks to identify distinct and specialized aspects or ingredients of business that participate in different combinations and sequences in the execution of business activity, across any and all processes that rely upon any one of these operationally distinct capabilities.
It is therefore an object of the invention to incorporate cross process implications into component improvement tasks.
Another object of the invention is to use a Component Business Model to look at the upstream and downstream implications of change for selected processes and combinations of processes that might reference particular business components.
It is also an object of the invention to use a Component Business Model to identify radical transformations by changing the role of individual components (e.g. evolving from a processor role to a gatekeeper role, and by changing the role thereby exposing opportunities to transform the realization of the processes in which the component participates).
A further object of the invention is to use a Component Business Model to identify transformations that better handle key business assets by integration of consolidator/server components (e.g. through an analysis of the collective references to a key item of business information or business intelligence).
Yet another object of the invention is to use a Component Business Model to identify transformations that better handle key business events, for example, through the integration of gatekeeper components that support complex orchestration of parallel asynchronous execution paths.
It is another object of the invention to use the CBM repository to share effective component designs and collaborative patterns within and across industries.
A further object of the invention is to isolate the unique and non overlapping ingredients of the business for all relevant processes and examine the patterns of their collaboration for multiple process scenarios, thereby exposing new insights into business behavior that can drive operational design and carry through to the underlying technology and organizational support needs.
It is therefore also an object of the invention to use the foregoing specific business component operational roles and patterns to transform business behavior.
An aspect of the invention is a method for transforming a business by using a Component Business Model (CBM) to generate a display linking a specified capability to component features contributing to the capability, and enhancing performance of the specified capability by transforming the contributing components. In another aspect, using a Component Business Model further comprises using a CBM map to identify collaborating components for the specified capability, the CBM map being a display generated from a CBM repository; filtering a view of the identified components from the CBM repository, the view including linkages between services relied upon and services provided by the identified components; and identifying from said filtered view features of each component contributing to the specified capability.
In a further aspect of the invention, enhancing performance of the specified capability further comprises searching the CBM repository for exemplar applications of the contributing features, and adapting the exemplar applications for use by the respective identified components having the respective contributing features. Alternatively, enhancing performance of the specified capability further comprises identifying a collaborative pattern for the collaborating components, and adding a component to perform the identified collaborative pattern.
Another aspect of the invention comprises identifying additional features for the specified capability, and adding to the view at least one component providing the added features. In another aspect, the collaborative pattern is a predefined process and the added component is a gatekeeper component. In yet another aspect the collaborative pattern is independent interconnection and the added component is a consolidator/server component. In a further aspect of the invention a single component is identified and the contributing features are features of the single component. It is also an aspect of the invention to outsource at least one of the identified and adapted components. In another aspect of the invention at least one of the identified components is provided by an entity external to the business. A further aspect of the invention comprises integrating the external component into the business.
The foregoing and other objects, aspects and advantages will be better understood from the following detailed description of a preferred embodiment of the invention with reference to the drawings, in which:
A component view of an enterprise allows one to look at the full range of processes in place, and even map those which might evolve. This more complete ‘network’ view of business activity (where a process is one instance of traversing the network) allows two additional perspectives to be exposed and applied in seeking out and specifying transformation. One additional perspective is obtained by revealing nodes on the network where critical business information or resources touched by multiple processes can be exploited in a coordinated manner. For example, this kind of analysis can reveal potentially competing allocation of staff or capital to efforts; or this kind of analysis can provide a consolidated view of value to a business.
Another perspective provided by this kind of analysis is showing interrelationships between processes, where a business situation or event occurring in the flow of one process can be the trigger for spawning multiple additional processing in a manner potentially unrelated and asynchronous to the triggering processes. For example a customer may call in to check their balance, and this can trigger new processes that take the opportunity presented by the call to sell new services and deliver pending mail.
The business component view employed by the invention, in contrast to traditional approaches that represent the business as processes that can be streamlined, seeks to identify distinct and specialized aspects or ingredients of business that participate in different combinations and sequences in the execution of business activity for any and all relevant processes. By isolating these unique and non overlapping ingredients and examining the patterns of their collaboration for multiple process scenarios the invention exposes new insights into business behavior that can drive operational design and carry through to the underlying technology and organizational support needs.
The invention uses the Component Business Model (CBM) described in co-pending parent patent application Ser. No. 11/176,371 for “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ALIGNMENT OF AN ENTERPRISE TO A COMPONENT BUSINESS MODEL” (hereafter termed “the above referenced foundation patent application”). CBM provides a logical and comprehensive view of the enterprise, in terms that cut across commercial enterprises in general and industries in particular. The Component Business Model as described in the above referenced foundation patent application is based upon a logical partitioning of business activities into non-overlapping managing concepts, each managing concept being active at the three levels of management accountability: providing direction to the business, controlling how the business operates, and executing the operations of the business.
The term “managing concept” is specially defined as described in the above referenced foundation patent application, and is not literally a “managing concept” as that phrase would be understood in the art. For the purpose of the present invention, as for the related invention, “managing concept” is the term associated with the following aspects of the partitioning methodology. First, the methodology is a partitioning methodology. The idea is to begin with a whole and partition the whole into necessarily non-overlapping parts. Second, experience has shown that the partitioning process works best when addressed to an asset of the business. The asset can be further described by attributes, and the role of the asset can be used to identify how the asset can be leveraged commercially. This identification is termed an “asset type”. This terminology allows definition of a finite list of generic elements associated with an “asset” that a business might want to exploit. For example, an individual staff person might be realized as three asset types: a resource that can perform tasks; a resource that may have expertise; and a resource that may have business intelligence.
Third, the managing concept must include mechanisms for doing something commercially useful with the asset. For a sensibly defined managing concept these mechanisms must cover the full range of management accountability levels (i.e. direct, control and execute). Managing concepts are further partitioned into components, which are cohesive groups of activities. In combination, all the components within a managing concept support some structured mechanism for the exploitation of the asset type.
The boundaries of a component usually fall within a single management accountability level. It is important to emphasize that the boundaries between managing concepts (and between components within managing concepts) are logical rather than physical.
The Component Business Model (CBM) described in the above referenced foundation patent application presents a number of design considerations that enable the present invention. These may be summarized by reference to
The present application further develops the business transformation methodology outlined in the above reference foundation patent application. Of course, as noted in the above reference foundation patent application, the partitioning methodology for developing a CBM view of a business is difficult to accomplish in practice and therefore requires an iterative approach. At any one point in time the CBM view of a business may be described as a work in progress. Consequently, in practical application, the CBM based methodology for transformation of a business is dependent upon the extent to which a CBM view has been or is being developed for the business. Typically, development of a CBM view for a particular business is undertaken precisely for the purpose of achieving a transformation whose parameters are not well understood at the outset precisely because there is not yet a CBM view upon which can be overlaid the relevant business activities of interest.
For the purposes of this application, however, it will be assumed that a CBM view of the business is in place, that is, the business has been parsed into non-overlapping managing concepts and further parsed into non-overlapping components, as described in the above referenced foundation patent application. These components represent unique specialist operational capabilities that collectively constitute the overall business operation. The arrangement of non-overlapping components serves as an organizing framework for underlying combinations of systems, staffing organization, and procedures (see
Any current or desired business process can be realized by combinations of collaborating components. Typically, collaboration is accomplished through service interactions. A component may participate in an unrestricted number of possible processes, but its participation will always relate to its particular specialization, although different aspects of a component's detailed functionality and service make-up may be involved in different processes.
A business component view creates a unique representation of a process as a combination of specialist service centered interactions as defined in the above referenced foundation patent application, with the ability to overlay multiple process views on the collection of components. This allows modeling of the business operational contribution of any component with respect to its overall participation in any and all identified processes that invoke it. Furthermore, this collective view of a component's support of multiple processes allows the present invention to design transformations by evolving the role of a component.
For example, the legacy of a process orientation may be a component having a traditional processor role, where it supports a consistently defined step in a process design. The CBM view makes visible situations where a component—which is defined by logical rather than physical partition boundaries—plays a processor role in a plurality of business processes. This visibility enables exploitation of cross process synergies in terms of triggering or coordinating parallel business activity and sharing business informational insights. These latter collective or network views are the unique operational design insights that are the basis for identifying transformations enabled by CBM.
The value of this synergy enabling view may be readily appreciated. An operational behavior viewed as an isolated part of process A (and also present as an isolated part of process B, and similarly for a third process C) can be transformed into a decoupled capability serving processes A, B and C, and more readily leveraged to serve a new process D. Further, the leveraging potential may warrant extension of the component's role to serve as a gatekeeper for invocations of component services triggered by events elsewhere in the business. Another variant on this synergy from the CBM view would follow from the observation that service interactions among a group of components—made visible by an overlay upon a CBM map—could be simplified by creating a specialized component to serve as a common hub for these interactions.
The invention will now be explained with reference to
Another technique is transformation 155 of the collaborative pattern existing among the identified components. For example, a pattern of independent collaboration among the components could be transformed by development of a consolidator/server functionality, either by evolution of an existing component or creation of a specialized component for that purpose. A further technique for transforming an identified group of collaborating components is to add components 157, thereby refining or developing service capabilities not adequately exploited by existing relationships among the collaborating components. The design of the transformation is then completed and added 160 to the solution stack.
The foregoing method may be illustrated with reference to
In this example, there are four components selected: warehouse operations 230, distribution scheduling 240, transport operation 250, and client inventory 260. For each of these components an aspect is identified that will contribute to the performance of the “just in time distribution” capability desired for the transformation. These may be drawn from “best practices” aspects stored in the CBM repository 220, as shown in
Similar analysis is provided for the other components participating in the “just in time distribution” collaborative pattern. Stochastic modeling is added to the distribution scheduling component 230, based on the “Boston Coach” best practice 224 taken from repository 220. In the “Boston Coach” example, stochastic modeling was used to optimize taxi deployment to meet highly dynamic scheduling needs. This example is adapted to optimize use of the delivery vehicles available to distribution scheduling component 230. GPS tracking technology 225 is also identified in the repository 220 as able to provide in real time the exact location and status of transport units monitored by the transport operation component 250. By adding simple GPS units to the delivery vehicles, the monitoring function of the transport operation component 250 will be enhanced. The operations of the client inventory component 260 will be enhanced by application of bar code technology, based on an adaptation of an example 226 stored in repository 220, where retail outlets were able to use a bar code scan at checkout to track shelf inventory in near real time.
The transformation may be further refined by adding components having aspects important for operation of the “just in time distribution” capability, as shown in
The collaborative networks described by the above referenced foundation patent application provide an analytical basis for improving alignment of the business to a Component Business Model by reconfiguring the collaboration. By reconfiguring the collaboration between components, the components themselves, and their respective competencies, will become better aligned to the Component Business Model. In particular, by reconfiguring business activities in the form of components and simplified collaborative patterns, the result will be components that are more independent and less overlapping, with better defined means of working with each other. These reconfigurations in accordance with the invention include the following five types of collaborative patterns for the roles of components in the execution of processes, which will now be explained with reference to
Before the reconfiguration, as shown in 410, similar information and services are developed where they are needed and peer connectivity is used to coordinate changes. After the reconfiguration, as shown in 415, all users reference a specialist component, using common services to reference and update the information. Components may maintain local copies of information for performance purposes with a number of possible protocols used to update or reference the specialist component (e.g. access when required, broadcast changes, periodic update of local copies).
Consolidator/server components 417 may be developed from a legacy application or more typically are supported by new purpose built systems. Referencing components can retain their local data structures to limit internal change, but local maintenance logic is removed and replaced by service access routines that reference the specialist component. These may include local encapsulation or wrappers for isolated conversion. The result of the reconfiguration is reduced complexity (multiple links between peer components are eliminated), improved responsiveness (changes in one area are captured centrally and relayed to other subscribing components), improved quality (errors are reduced because central governance eliminates double updates and inconsistency), and enhanced capabilities (single specialist service component supports focused incremental development of enhancements).
While the value of such components is often understood in connection with computer systems for handling information, the present invention recognizes a more generic application of this principle to collaborations among components. Collaboration places concrete burdens upon a component for the allocation of staff and other resources and the development of suitable controls for the management of the collaboration activity as an operational behaviour. These resource allocations and controls for collaboration are made visible by the CBM view of the business and may be streamlined by use of a consolidator/server component.
The visibility of component collaborations in a CBM view may also support a reconfiguration of those collaborations to create a component having different characteristics than those described for the consolidator/server of
Before the reconfiguration business events are processed following a pre-defined approach, and optional tasks are not always identified and exploited. After the reconfiguration business events are ‘gang tackled’ leveraging all facilities and exercising all applicable tasks viewed across the enterprise. Gatekeeper components are triggered by an event, such as a customer contact, following a decision making logic that invokes as many responsive activities in parallel as possible and in an optimal sequence. In addition the gatekeeper component will determine whether the triggering event presents an opportunity to initiate other responses (such as cross-sell) or process pending tasks (such as deliver mail).
Gatekeeper components implemented in computer systems will more typically be purpose built but may consolidate decision making logic from legacy computer systems. Their development needs to be incremental as new services are enabled with the development of processor and consolidator/server components. Decision making logic may be migrated from legacy applications as they are re-purposed. One advantage of migrating to gatekeeper components is that each business event is fully leveraged to invoke all applicable components and pending processes. Another advantage is improved responsiveness, since business rules can be streamlined and optimised to provide optimal response. Further, additional flexibility is provided because tasks which are not inherently in a particular sequence are decoupled, allowing execution in parallel and allowing these tasks to be sequenced in an event driven or state driven manner.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the foregoing description directed toward implementation of the invention in computer implemented processes may readily be extended to generic business processes. Component collaborations made visible by the CBM view of a business process enable use of gatekeeper components to fully expose and leverage for the business as a whole operational behaviours embedded within a business process.
Before the reconfiguration the business process is encapsulated in a monolithic style, containing within itself all associated services and imposing a rigid workflow. After the reconfiguration, processing is streamlined, tasks are generalised and de-coupled, and specialized generic services are leveraged. Processor components configured as described above reduce processing of the component to a streamlined minimum, referencing consolidator/server components for common information and services and linking with other processor components, optionally through the oversight of gatekeeper components to execute a business transaction. By decomposing a business process into generalised tasks where possible, re-use is maximised. In practical terms, this provides ‘service-enabled’ implementation of the business process, thereby maximizing flexibility since constituent components can be ‘wired’ together in any working sequence or combination.
As applied to computer implemented business processes, processor components will frequently be re-purposed legacy applications. Re-purposing will be a combination of breaking the legacy application into component aligned modules, wrapping these modules in a supply or subscription service interface and extracting and remotely referencing any functionality that is better supported by a consolidator/server component. The advantages of this technique are reduced complexity and improved performance (a processing component is reduced to an optimised processing minimum), improved re-use (a streamlined component provides a generalized service), and improved flexibility (i.e. a streamlined processor component is enabled as a service).
While the benefits of this form of transformation are often understood with respect to computer implemented systems, the present invention provides a basis for a more generic appreciation of reconfiguring collaborations based upon a CBM view of the business. This is particularly evident in item 430 of
Controller components oversee the execution of business. They perform checks, classification or qualification activity, handle exceptions and detect and resolve issues arising in execution. Controller components will typically support the oversight functions of line managers and will leverage information and technology to support operational decision making. Before a configuration change creating a controller component, checks and exceptions requiring specialist or senior staff involvement are tightly bound into execution, or are poorly supported, causing uncertainty and delay. After a suitable controller component is added, checks and exceptions are isolated from execution and routed to a specialist or senior decision making resources for resolution using suitable facilities.
Controller components both monitor execution activities and can be triggered by business events and exceptions. Checks may be required at certain times, due to certain situations or when thresholds are breached. Most typically a controller component will execute independently (asynchronously) of execution tasks, taking pending actions off and returning results to work queues. Where they support complex decisions they may invoke other controller components in the resolution of an issue. Controller components will more typically be purpose built but may consolidate decision making logic from legacy systems. Their development needs to be incremental as new services are enabled with the development of processor and consolidator/server components. Decisioning logic may be migrated from legacy applications as they are re-purposed. Controller components provide a point of focus for future incremental development, supporting ever more sophisticated decision making capabilities.
Controller components provide improved productivity by decoupling checks and controls from execution, thereby streamlining production. They also improve the leverage available from specialist resources by directing issues to facilities and individuals best qualified to address them. Further, controller components provide improved flexibility, since incremental development and collaborations between Controller components are highly flexible and scalable.
Before the configuration 450 is changed, senior management decision making is constrained by the quality and timeliness of business information and the supporting analysis tools. Note that exemplar representation 451 of production information prior to reconfiguration is structured as a monolithic process similar to item 433 of
Analyzer components will more typically be purpose built but may consolidate existing reporting and analysis logic from legacy systems. Their development needs to be incremental as new activity information becomes available with the development of controller, processor gatekeeper and consolidator/server components. Improved business decisions flow from this configuration change, since improved quality and timeliness of business activity information supports better decisions. Also, analyzer components provide improved responsiveness because tighter feedback loops support more interactive policy development and business direction.
Turning now to
Before the role of the consolidator/server component is identified using the CBM design approach, key business insights/perspectives can be dispersed across the many processes that may reference and change the associated information, often maintaining their own local versions of that information. In order to assemble and maintain a consolidated perspective in this situation complex coordination is required between all interested parties. The consolidator/server role defines a single entity responsible for maintaining a single perspective on behalf of all interested parties, managing access to avoid business decision and change conflicts and often enabling the more effective management and exploitation of the associated business resource or insight referenced by the information it maintains.
A second use of a CBM description is identifying key business events that can be trigger points for multiple activities. By describing a business in terms of components, components that have been imbedded in a linear business process can be optimally exploited by a gatekeeper component that enables parallel invocation of the formerly imbedded components.
Before the role of the gatekeeper is identified using the CBM design approach, many business activities may be supported by their own isolated procedures, executing independently and unaware of any interdependencies that might exist between them in the broader context of the overall business operation. The Gatekeeper role supports a business capability that can be impacted by events associated with one or more of many discrete activities on which it has some collective dependency. The gatekeeper detects and responds to an event associated with one business activity and determines and initiates a timely and appropriate response in other activities as may be required. The gatekeeper role allows the detection and proactive response to business events that would otherwise be dealt with in a reactive and uncoordinated manner as their implications are arbitrarily discovered across many otherwise disconnected activities.
A third use of a CBM description is for evolving an existing component that portrays a processor role in the existing operation to becoming a gatekeeper or consolidator/server type role. The above described example of just-in-time distribution is such an example when the distribution component evolves from being an end of day batch process (taking end of day sales reports, working out the delivery requirements, scheduling the loading and distribution, etc.) to a gatekeeper, where the distribution component gathers all this information in real-time and handles the triggering of multiple streams of activity, such as ordering goods, directing transport, and determining delivery requirements. These activities are related, but their fulfillment can be asynchronous to some degree and the role of the gatekeeper is to juggle these activities for the optimal performance.
While the invention has been described in terms of preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art will recognize that the invention can be practiced with modification within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.
This invention is a continuation in part from commonly owned and co-pending patent application Ser. No. 11/176,371 for “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ALIGNMENT OF AN ENTERPRISE TO A COMPONENT BUSINESS MODEL”, which is a continuation in part of co-pending application Ser. No. 10/796,367 entitled “SERVICES COMPONENT BUSINESS OPERATION METHOD”, which applications are incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11176371 | Jul 2005 | US |
Child | 11684002 | Mar 2007 | US |
Parent | 10796367 | Mar 2004 | US |
Child | 11176371 | Jul 2005 | US |