Redesigning Processes in Municipalities: A Case Study on Developing Process Architecture and Mapping Processes

Öz

Process oriented management approaches constitute the most important source of forming an effective management mechanism. This source assures that the institution is correctly understood by all its stakeholders, mutual work areas are defined, collaborative working culture towards certain goals are adopted. Within the framework of process management, defining the processes via reviewing the activities of the institution, modeling or mapping these processes with a standard language, determining the performance indicators to provide for traceability turns into a total reconstruction effort within the institution. Local administrations are those public institutions that need process oriented management the most due to their structure and their activities related to the regulations as well as due to their direct interaction with their citizens. In this study, the importance of process management within the framework of public administrations is emphasized and the structure of the process architecture is presented that came to light as a result of the project study that was carried out privately in a certain municipality; the processes defined within the proposed architectural structure are exemplified in accordance with work processes modeling and notation

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Business Process Management, Municipalities, BPMN

Belediyelerde Süreçlerin Yeniden Tasarlanması: Süreç Mimarisi Geliştirme ve Süreç Haritalama Üzerine Bir Örnek Olay Çalışması

Öz

Süreç odaklı yönetim modelleri, kurumun tüm paydaşları tarafından doğru anlaşılması, ortak çalışma alanlarının tanımlanması, belirli hedefler doğrultusunda birlikte çalışma kültürünün benimsenmesi ve etkin bir yönetim mekanizmasının oluşturulmasının en önemli girdisini oluşturmaktadır. Bu kapsamda, kurum faaliyetlerinin gözden geçirilerek süreçlerin tanımlanması, bu süreçlerin standart bir dil ile modellenmesi veya haritalandırılması, izlenebilirliği sağlamak için performans göstergelerinin belirlenmesi, kurum içinde tam bir yeniden yapılandırma çalışmasına dönüşmektedir. Yerel yönetimler, yapısı ve mevzuata bağlı faaliyetleri ve vatandaşlarıyla doğrudan etkileşimde bulunmaları nedeniyle, süreç odaklı yönetime en çok gereksinim duyan kamu kurumlarıdır. Bu çalışmada, yerel yönetimler kapsamında süreç yönetiminin önemi ve belirli bir belediye özelinde yapılan proje çalışması sonucunda ortaya çıkan süreç mimarisinin yapısı sunulmakta; önerilen mimari yapı bünyesinde tanımlanan süreçler, iş süreçleri modelleme ve notasyonuna uygun biçimiyle örneklendirilmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İş Süreçleri Yönetimi, Belediyeler,Süreç Yönetimi, BPMN

Kaynakça

1. Aggarwal, R., Sinha, A. P. (2003). “Object-oriented modeling with UML: a study of developers' perceptions” Communications of the ACM, 46(9): 248- 256.
2. Aguilar-Saven, R. S. (2004). “Business process modelling: Review and framework” International Journal of Production Economics, 90(2): 129-149.
3. Aysolmaz, B., Coşkunçay, A., Demirörs, O., Yıldız, A. (2011). “Kamuda iş süreçleri modelleme: gereği ve yararları” 5th National Symposium on Software Engineering, 26-28th of September, 2011, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
4. BPMI.org, (2006). OMG: Business Process Modeling Notation Specification. Final Adopted Specification. Object Management Group, http://www.bpmn.org, Access date: March 2015.
5. Christiansson, M-T. (2011). “A common process model to ımprove, e-service solutions: the municipality case” The Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on E-goverment, 16-17 June 2011, Ljubljana, Slovenia: 149-157.
6. Chu, P-Y,Wang, H-J. (2001). “Benefits, critical process factors, and optimum strategies of successful ISO 9000 ımplementation in the public sector” Public Performance & Management Review, 25(1): 105-121, DOI: 10.1080/15309576.2001.11643648.
7. Doyle, L.A. (2004). “Business Process Re-engineering (BPR): A tool for improved customer service in municipalities”, http://localgovernment.uwo.ca/ resources/docs/research_papers/2004/Doyle,%20 Lee%20Anne%20-%202004.pdf, access date: 01.03.2015
8. Dumas, M., LaRosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A. (2013). Fundamentals of Business Process Management, Springer-Verlag, 978-3-642-33142-8.

9. Giaglis, G. M. (2001). “A taxonomy of business process modeling and information systems modeling techniques” International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, 13(2): 209-228.
10. Gunasekaran, A., Kobu, B. (2002). “Modelling and analysis of business process reengineering” International Journal of Production Research, 40(11): 2521-2546, DOI: 10.1080/00207540210132733.
11. Hellein, R., Bowman, J. S. (2002). “The process of quality management implementation” Public Performance & Management Review, 26(1): 75-93, DOI: 10.1080/15309576.2002.11643688.
12. Hommes, B. J., Van Reijswoud, V. (2000). “Assessing the quality of business process modelling techniques”. In System Sciences, , January 2000. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 10). IEEE.
13. Jacobson, I., Booch, G. Rambaugh, J. (1999). The Unified Software Development Process, Addison Wesley. Jeston, J., Nelis, J. (2013). Business Process Management, 3rd Ed. Routledge.
14. Kettinger, W. J., Teng, J. T., Guha, S. (1997). “Business process change: a study of methodologies, techniques, and tools” MIS Quarterly: 55-80.
15. Kim, Y. G. (1995). “Process modeling for BPR: eventprocess chain approach” ICIS 1995 Proceedings, 11.
16. Kohlbacher, M., Reijers, H.A. (2013). “The effects of process-oriented organizational design on firm performance” Business Process Management Journal, 19: 245–262.
17. Mendling, J., Reijers, H. A., Recker, J. (2010b). “Activity labeling in process modeling: Empirical insights and recommendations” Information Systems, 35(4): 467- 482.
18. Mendling, J., Reijers, H. A., van der Aalst, W. M. (2010a). “Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG)” Information and Software Technology, 52(2): 127-136.
19. Menzel, C., Mayer, R. J. (1998). “The IDEF family of languages” In Handbook on architectures of information systems (pp. 209-241). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
20. Murata, T. (1989). “Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications” Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(4): 541-580.
21. OMG (2009). Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN). (dtc/1009-08-14), Object Management Group Inc., August 2009. http://www.omg.org/spec/ BPMN/2.0, Access date: 15th January, 2015.
22. Ongaro, E. (2004). “Process management in the public sector: The experience of one-stop shops in Italy” International Journal of Public Sector Management, Emerald Insight 17 (1): 81 – 107, DOI: 10.1108/09513550410515592.
23. Özdağoğlu, G., Kapucugil İkiz, A., Özler, C., Çağlıyangil, M., Addaoud, K. (2015). “Yükseköğretim kurumlarında akademik ve idari süreçlerin bologna süreci temelinde tanımlanması: pilot birim süreçlerinden örnekler” The Proceedings of the 1st Congress on Bologna Process Research: 17-18 September 2015, Hacettepe University, Ankara, 243-251.
24. Razavian, M., Khosravi, R. (2008). “Modeling variability in business process models using UML” In Information Technology: New Generations. ITNG April, 2008. Fifth International Conference on (pp. 82-87). IEEE.
25. Recker, J. C., Indulska, M., Rosemann, M., Green, P. (2005). “Do process modelling techniques get better? A comparative ontological analysis of BPMN” 16th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 29 Nov – 2 Dec 2005, Sydney.
26. Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., Green, P. (2009). “Business process modeling-a comparative analysis” Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(4): 1.
27. Sarshar, K., Loos, P. (2005). “Comparing the controlflow of epc and petri net from the end-user perspective” In International Conference on Business Process Management, September 2005 (pp. 434-439). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
28. Schunselaar, D.M.M., Verbeek, H. M.W., Reijers, H.A., Van der Aast, W.M.P. (2014). “YAWL in the cloud: supporting process sharing and variability” Business Process Management Workshops: BPM 2014 International Workshops, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, September 7-8, 2014, Revised Papers, Springer.
29. Torres, N.A. (2007). “Process integration using SOA: An implementation case in a municipality” Proceedings: Management of Converging Technologies, Pıcmet '07: Portland Internatıonal Center for Management of Engıneering and Technology, 1-6: 2807-2810.
30. Turetken, O., Van den Hurk,H., Karagöz, A., Ünal, A. (2011). “Plural yöntemi ile BPMN tabanlı özne yönelimli süreç modelleme: durum çalışması”: 5th National Symposium on Software Engineering, 26-28th of September, 2011, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
31. Van der Aalst, W. M. (1998). “The application of Petri nets to workflow management” Journal of circuits, systems, and computers, 8(01): 21-66.
32. Van Der Aalst, W. M., Ter Hofstede, A. H. (2005). “YAWL: yet another workflow language” Information systems, 30(4): 245-275.
33. Van der Aast, W.M.P. (2011). Process Mining: Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, e-ISBN 978-3-642- 19345-3.
34. Van der Aast, W.M.P. (2013). “Process cubes, slicing, dicing, rolling up and drilling down event data for process mining” Asia Pacific Business Process Management: First Asia Pacific Conference, AP-BPM 2013, Beijing, China, August 29-30, 2013, Selected Papers, Springer.
35. Waal, A. A. (2010). “Achieving high performance in the public sector”, Public Performance & Management Review, 34(1): 81-103.
36. Yıldırım, S. (2014). Dünya’da ve Türkiye’de Büyükkent Yönetimi Üstüne, Çankaya Belediyesi Press, March 2014.
37. Zur Muehlen, M., Recker, J. (2008). “How much language is enough? Theoretical and practical use of the business process modeling notation” In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, June, 2008 (pp. 465-479). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.