research by teshome belachew

7/29/2019 Research by Teshome Belachew

1/35

1

Chapter one

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the study

In todays competitive market-led economy, the existence of an organization

depends on its ability to compete and win the market share. The reactionary

way of doing business is being replaced by a more pragmatic way of business

management. In order to effectively compete and win the market share,

organizations have two fundamental option to follow; one is capitalizing on

internal capabilities and strengths and the other one is capitalizing on

external opportunities (Michael porter,1998) . Of the two options, the first one

is reliable (since the external environment is filled with the uncertainties).

Even though these are different mechanisms of capitalizing on the internal, to

be a truly world class organization, the company needs to work as a team and

all the functional areas of the business needed to be properly integrated, with

each understanding the importance of cross functional process.

Customers, competition, and change have created a new world for business,

such that organization designed to operate in one environment are

inadequately equipped to operate well in another. Customers today arecharacterized by relentless demands in quality, service and price by their

disloyalty. Therefore, to meet their challenge, organizations are working

towards an era of process management and this is one of the reasons why BPR

implementation is considered as a decisive mechanism of enhancing business

performance. In this study, the needs for radical improvement and the use of

BPR in bringing about their change is not under question, but how BPR is

implemented and the role and considerations of human resources in the

process will be assessed

A recent study, considered by Hugh Wilmot, Judge institution of management,

university of Cambridge, found that the marginalization and trivialization of

human dimension from expositions of BPR is remarkable. Making the

transition from function centered to process oriented organizing practices


2/35

2

necessarily depends upon the human resources who act, and are needed by

BPR.

Therefore, in this study, the implementation of BPR in Gulele Sub City will be

assessed. The study will be conducted by taking fifty randomly selectedparticipants from Gulele sub city. The target populations for the study will be

all of

the permanent workers employed in Gulele sub city. The participants will be

selectd by a probabilistic sampling method

1.2. Statements of the problem

This study will fill the literature gap by critically assessing the practical BPR

implementation in Gulele sub city

In order to come up with the finding on the issue, the following specific question will be

answered throughout the research:

In Gulele sub city case, what effects did the BPR implementation program had on thehuman resource

If there were any resistance to change, what remedies the organization used toaddress the problem

How the BPR is related to human resource issues, such as employee motivation,turnover and succession planning

What was the role of the human resource department in the BPR implementationprogram

How was the BPR program is perceived by the employees of the organization Do you think BPR is important for your organization

1.3. Objective of the research

1.4.1. General objective

The study generally tries to see the BPR implementation in Gulele sub cit

1.4.2. Specific objectives

Assessing how BPR implementation is conducted in relation to thehuman resource

Assessing if there were any resistance to change, and if there were, theremedies used to address the problem


3/35

3

Assessing how the BPR address human resource issues Assessing what the role of human resource department was in the

BPR implementation program

Assessing the benefits of BPR implementation in the organization Assessing the problems of BPR in the organization Assessing what the employees attitude is towards BPR

implementation program

1.4. Significance of the study

Beyond its academic purpose, the study will help the sub city to understand its

implementation of BPR

It will also help the organization to see how the process implementing BPR is being

undertaken

Moreover it will help in providing the stepping stone for further study in BPR

1.5. The scope of the study

. The study focuses on the assessment of BPR in Gulele Sub city

1.7. Limitation of the study

The research will face the following limitations:

Shortage of time Shortage of money Lack of willingness of the respondents


4/35

4

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1. Defining BPRSeveral authors have provided their own interpretation of the changes beingapplied to organizations, for example Davenport and Short (1990) have described

BPR as the analysis and described BPR as the analysis and design of work flows and

process within and between organizations. Hammer and Champ (1993) have

promoted the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to

achieve dramatic improvements in radical, contemporary measures of performance,

such as cost, quality, service, and speed. Other authors such as Lawler (1993) have

focused on the rethinking, restructuring and streaming of the business structure,

processes, methods of working, management systems and external relationships

through which is created and delivered. Petrozzo and Stepper (1994) on the other

hand, believe that BPR involves concurrent redesign of processes, organizations,

and their supporting information systems to achieve radical improvement in time,

cost, quality, and customers regard for the companys products and service. While

Lowenthal (1994) describes the fundamental rethinking and redesign of operating

processes and organizational structure, the focus is on the organizations core

competencies, to achieve semantic improvements in the organizational

performance, as BPRs essential components. Although the definition by Davenport

and Short (1990) is much narrower, their description of the concept is as reaching.

In practice, both TQM and BPR have focused on the definition and operation of

business processes to produce products and services within a defined businessscope. However, neither TQM and BPR have focused on strategic business direction

setting or planning, but of course these may be necessary components in achieving

this vision. Also each methodology, in its own right, does not have the intention or

the capability of reinventing business or industry. More importantly only one of

these definitions refers to information system. It can thus be a said that BPR is not

necessarily dependent on IT solutions. There is general agreement that IT can be a

powerful enabler, with the radical improvements sought more a function of

organizational process redesign, rather than IT implementation where there in

solution, it is in both the interpretation and the scope of the organizational change

cocept. Hammer (1990) referred to business process reengineering, while

Davenport and Short (1990) to business process design. However, there are still

many other authors with variations on these terms, all referring to changes large

and small. Put into strategic context, BPR becomes a means of aligning work with

customer requirements in an interactive way, in order to achieve long-term

corporate activities achieve this. Senge (1990): Deming (1993) advocate a systems


5/35

5

outlook involving customers, suppliers and the future. Gulden and Reck (1991)

support this view by showing that the secrets to designing a process lie not so much

in intimately understanding the way it is performed today, but rather thinking about

how to reshape it for tomorrow.

1.2. Objectives of BPRDeming (1993); Senge (1990) have written about the importance of systems thinking in

understanding work flow, business processes, and the impact of feedback. In any system,

events will occur that have an effect elsewhere in the system, and possibly on the event

itself. In order to have a full understanding of the effects of what is being done, it is

necessary

1.3. Importance of BPR

Business process reengineering is a major innovation changing the way organizations

conduct their business. Such changes are often necessary for profitability or even survivalBPR is employed when major IT project such as ERP are undertaken. Reengineering

involves changes in structure organizational culture and process. Many concepts of BPR

changes organizational structure. Team based organization, mass customization:

empowerment and telecommuting are some of the examples. The support system in any

organization plays important role in BPR. ES, DSS allows business to be conducted in

different locations, provides flexibility in manufacturing permits quicker delivery to

customers and supports rapid paperless transactions among suppliers, manufacturers and

retailers. Expert systems can enable organizational changes by providing expertise to non

experts. It is difficult to carry out BPR calculations using ordinary programs like

spreadsheets etc. Experts make use of applications with simulations tools for BPR.

Reengineering is basically done to achieve cost reduction, increase in quality, and

improvement in speed and service. BPR enable a company to become more competitive in

the market. Employees work in team comprising of managers and engineers to develop a

product. This leads to the information of interdisciplinary teams which can better than

mere functional teams. The coordination becomes easier and faster results can be achieved.

The entire business process of developing a product gets a dimension. This has led to

reengineering of many old functional processes in organization.

2.5. Organization Theory and BPR

Manganelli and Klein(1994,78) defined reengineering as the rapid and radical redesign of

strategic value added business process and the system, policies and organizational

structure that support them to optimize the work flows and productivity in an

organization. Similarly, Hammer and champy (1993) define reengineering as the

fundamental rethinking and redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic

improvement in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost,


6/35

6

quality, service and speed. These definition highlight that BPR is, first, a tool for

restructuring organizations by redesigning the business processes by redesigning

the business process and second that BPR should serve the value adding purpose of

organizations by creating a structure that is effective, efficient, and flexible. In this

connection it is necessary to identify which school of management theory, BPR is

associated with, and as to explain the concepts of efficiency, effectiveness and

flexibility that are widely discussed in many literatures of organization theory.

2.6. Evolution of BPR in the Ethiopian Public sector

The feseral civil service agency, the former personnel agency was established in the

early 1960s to administer the staffing of the civil service. This bureaucratic system

was too archaic and non responsive to the technological and social changes that

took place for decades after its establishment. It had constrained by structural

problems, inefficiency, mission ineffectiveness, and corruption. Right after the

downfall of the military Government in1991, an agenda for the transformation of

the civil service was initiated by the transitional Government as part of the

economic reforms and structural adjustment programs. As an important first step to

reform the civil service, the government set up additional task force in 1994.

The task force identified the key problems of the civil service and recommended the

CSRP to build a fair responsible, ethical, and transparent civil service that promotes

accelerated and sustained economic development and good governance. The task

force identified five components (sub program) within CSRP. These are top

management system, human resource management, service delivery, expenditure

management and control and ethics.

During the implementation of the CSRP between 1996 and 2001, the reform was

constrained by absence of well developed organizational structure, lack of

competent personnel and public sector managers, lack of participation by key

stakeholders, attitudinal problems and absence of strong institutional framework

(Paulos, 2001). Congnizant of these problems, the Ethiopian government sponsored

different management tools such as customer service delivery, strategic planning

and management, and resulted-based performance management with the aim of

enhancing the human resource capacities of the public sector organizations. Eventhough the former MoCB redefined the objectives of the CSRP in June 2003

(Getachew and Common) and introduced such initiatives, the implementation of the

reform has been constrained by the red tape bureaucratic structures.

To address these problems, the Government began introducing BPR in 2004 as a strategic

tool to reinvigorate the reform by changing the systems and restructuring its policy

implementing agencies so that can be mission implementation in the Ethiopian


7/35

7

public sector passed through two phases. The first one was between 2004 and 2006

while the second was since July 2006.

In the first phase, BPR was carried out reengineer functions or departments of somepublic organizations. Success stories associated with the first attempt to reengineer

departments include that of the former MotI. This ministry managed to reduce the

cycle time for issuing a business license from an average of 8 days to 39 minutes and

the time to register a business from an average of 2 days to 34 minutes (Getachew

and Common, 2007).

Encouraged by such results and being cognizant of the limitations of the approach of

implementating BPR in the first phase, the government embarked upon the second

phase of BPR on a wider scale to reengineer the whole organization rather than its

departments and functions.

The current state of condition that exists in relation to BPR and HRM is that, BPR

implementation has continued in its trivialization and marginalization of the human

resources. BPR implementation involves five stages of organizational

transformation model (Venkatraman, N., 1994, Sloan management review,35), these

stages are; automation, horizontal integration, BPR, network redesign, and

organizational scope redefinition. There is no mention of HR involvement and

consideration with this regard.

2.7. BPR and HRM

In their model of HRM, beer et al. (1984) see job design broadening employee

responsibilities and resulting in substantial improvements in all four Cs,

commitment, competence, cost effectiveness, and congruence. Thus, the design of

organizational structures and the way work is performed are critical features of the

HRM model. As Guest (1990) points out, the HRM model is underpinned by the need

to reconfigure organizational structures as the rhetoric is essentially anti

bureaucratic. Guest further emphasizes the concomitant change in job design. HRM

takes as its starting point the view that organizations should be designed on the

basis of the assumptions inherent in McGregors (1960) theory Y As we mentionedpreviously in chapter 2, the new buzz word for the redesign of organizational

structures and work processes is re-engineering. Much of the rational for re-

engineering has been developed initially in a USA context, then generalized across

North America and European economies. Hammer and Champy (1993) form us that

re-engineering is necessary because the world is a different place. To respond more

rapidly to global changes, to make organizations compete more aggressively in


8/35

8

global markets, to have a workforce that is more flexible and attuned to the needs of

customers, senior managers have fundamentally to restructure business processes.

Reengineering should be understood in the context of the debate on postmodernist

thinking for organizations (Hassard and parker, 1993). In terms of organizational

design and analysis, postmodernism is linked to and underpinned by a portfolio of

theories including flexible specialization, disorganized capitalism and post-

Feudalism (Thompson, 1993). To this family of theories we can add re-engineering,

running parallel with debates on postmodernist organizational structure has been a

renaissance of interest among academics in the field of technological change and job

design. However, when academic observers refers to a degradation of work or the

enrichment of work. What theoretical perspectives are the authors employing?

Work can be studied from two broad academic perspectives; psychological and

sociological.

A sociological perspective of work is concerned with the broader contextual andstructural factors affecting people experience of work. An important theme for

sociologists is that of the division of labour, which refers to the way in which people

in society can specialize in doing particular types of workers. At the level of the

organization, the internal division of labor is a basis of efficiency and control of

workers. At society level, the division labor has produced the occupational structure

of professional, clerical, skilled and unskilled manual occupations. Another

important topic in the sociology work is that of work-based inequalitities and ,

within this, the social division of labor, which shows that contemporary society,

allocates particular work to men and women (Littler and Salaman, 1984; Thompson,

1989). The psychological study of people at work attempts to understand individual

behavior, and there is a large body of literature covering the academic field of

organizational behavior, concerned with managerial problem s of motivation, job

satisfaction, work stress, job design, and any other factor relevant to working

conditions that could impede efficient work performance. An early theory of

individual work behavior attempted to explain the nature of motivation in terms of

the types of needs that people experience (Maslow, 1954). Subsequent theoretical

contributions from behavioral scientists, such as McGregors Theory X and Y (1960).

Herzbergs motivation-hygiene theory (1966), and Vrooms expectancy motivation

theory (1964), have practical implications for the way organization controllersdesign work structures and rewards. More recently, a model has been put forward

that links core characteristics of work and the critical psychological processes acting

on individuals and their immediate work groups (Hackman and Oldham, 1980)

2.8. The Nature of work


9/35

9

Work refers to physical and mental activity that is carried out at a particular place and time.

According to instruction, in return for money. This definition draws attention to some central

features of work. First, the notion of physical and mental obviously suggests that the activities of a

construction worker or computer systems analyst are deemed to be work. Second, the tendency for

the activity to be away from our home and at set time periods of the day or night, place and time,

locates work within a social context. Third, the social context also includes the social relationsunder which the activity is performed. When a mother or father cooks the dinner for the family, the

actual content of the activity is similar to that performed by a cook employed by a hospital to

prepare meals for patients. But the social relations in which the activity occurs are quite distinct.

The hospital cook has more in common with factory or office workers because their activities are

governed by rules and regulation- instructions from the employer or the employers agent. Clearly

then, it is not the nature of the activity that determines whether it is considered work, but rather

the social relations in which the activity is embedded (Pahl,1988).

Fourth, in return for physical effort or mental application, figure, and loss of personal autonomy,

the worker receives a mix of rewards, including money, status, and intrinsic satisfaction. Watson

(1986) refers to this mix of inputs (physical and mental activities and so on) and outputs (rewards)

as the implicit contract between the employer and employee. Although this definition helps us to

identify key features of the employment relationship, it is too narrow and restrictive. First, there

are all the activities, both physical and mental, that do not bring in money. Such activities can be

exhilarating or exhausting: they may involve voluntary work for the citizens advice bureau or may

involve the most demanding work outside paid employment, child care. Again, the same activities-

advising people on their legal rights and being paid for it or being employed in a nursery- would all

count as work because of the social relations and the monetary reward. Second, it is clear that the

rewards, satisfaction and hazards of work are distributed highly unequally. Contemporary society

rewards employees according to the kind of people they are and the kind of work they do.

Historically, women receive less money than men in similar work. Work can also be dangerous andunhealthy, but the hazards are not distributed evenly. Despite the publicity surrounding managerial

stress, the realities of the distribution of work-related hazards show that they are most prevalent

among manual workers. Furthermore, it has been argued that this unequal distribution of work-

related accidents represents the systematic outcome of values and economic pressures (Littler and

Salaman, 1984).

There is no doubt that the nature and experience of work is changing. The 1998 WERS study, for

example, reported that in around 25 percent of workplaces surveyed, most employees in the

largest occupational group are trained to be adaptable (Culley et al.1998,p.9). As part of the

wider process of globalization and the implementation of new managerial strategies, there is an

ongoing shift of paid work into the service sector, an increase in information technology, and

increasing numbers of women being drawn into the waged labor force. Contemporary forms of

waged work, particularly in the less developed industrialized economies, are dependent on the

integration between work and family (Moore, 1995). The nature of work affects human resource

management activities. For example, the pay an employee receives is related to social attitudes and

traditions rather than the actual content of the activity; pay determination requires an

understanding of the social division of labor, and gender divisions of labor in particular (Pahl,


10/35

10

1988). Management decides how the tasks are divided into various jobs, and how they related to

other tasks and other jobs, contingent upon different modes of production And technology.

Decisions are also made about control systems, the ratio of supervised, the training of workers, and

the nature of the reward system. Thus HRM is both affected by and profoundly affects an

individuals experience of work. Clearly, the way work is designed impacts both on the effectiveness

of the organization and the experience and motivation of the individual and work group. It is theprocess of job design that we now consider.

2.9. Job Design

The need to harness human resources in innovatory way to give organizations a competitive

advantage has focused attention on the question of design. It is defined as: the process of combining

tasks and responsibilities to form complete jobs and the relationships of job in the organization.

2.9.1. Job design and the HRM cycle

Job design is related very closely to key elements of the HRM cycle, selection, development, and

rewards. Job design basic to the selection function. Clearly, a company that produces small-batch,

high value added products using skilled manual labor will have different recruitment and selection

priorities from an organization that specializes in large- batch production using dedicated machines

operated by unskilled operators. Job design also affects the HR development. Specifically, any

change to work patterns will require some form of systematic training. If an organization chooses

either to fragment or combine tasks, alternative reward system may have to be designed. For

example, a pay for-output system may be obstacle flexibility.

2.9.2. Human Resource and Organization Capacity

Human resource: since the important elements of organizations are people, it is important to assess

the effect of BPR on motivation of employees. Different scholars have reflected that motivation of

employees can be influenced by the type of incentives offered to employees in the form of salary,

promotion, training benefits (Terry and Franklin, 1991). In addition, the working conditions and

the design of a job affect the degree of interest that an employee has towards his job. We have

discussed that specialization of jobs increases horizontal differentiation. To alleviate the

disparaging effect of too much specialization and motivation, human resource experts have

introduced the following major techniques of job design:

I. Job rotation is rotating an employee between specialized tasks. This help to create ageneralist employee as proposed in BPR.

II. Job enlargement is increasing the scope or the varities of job. This is a means to do end-to-end work as claimed in BPR.III. Job enrichment is the process of combining vertical activities to provide the worker with

more autonomy, responsibility and accountability. This also addresses the issue of

empowering employees to make work related decisions.

There are many reason why people resist BPR program and changes that accompany

thereof. Hammer M. in his eminent book beyond reengineering, has determined four


11/35

11

questions that people ask when faced with organizational restructuring and radical

business process redesigns. The questions are;

Will I succeed in this new world of work? How and how much will I be paid? What title will have? What sort of future can I expect?

When we sum up this four questions, the bottom line is whats in it for me?. Its been said

that every great idea eventually degenerates into hard work. Similarly, every great

concept ultimately succeeds or tails in the arena of self interest. It is with such personal

questions, rather than abstract ones: that most people are intensely concerned.

2.9.3. Hammering The Human Resource

The marginalization and trivialization of the human dimension from exposition of BPR is

remarkable even by the standards of leading proponents of TQM.

Taking the transition from function centered to process oriented organizing practices

necessarily depends the human resources who enact, and are enacted by, BPR. Given the

focus upon business processes , it is incredible how little attention is given by BPR to the

human dimensions of organization shortcoming is symptomatic of the way BPRs c lams

and prescriptions for change are even more extracted from the practical realities of

organizing and managing people than earlier recipes for approving business performance,

such as Excellence and TQM. Little consideration is given to the issue of how BPRs

(universal) remedies are to be reconciled with ( particular) conditions in which its

prescriptions are to be applied. When example are given. These are presented as

unequivocal success stories.

Indeed , virtually the only comment made by Hammer on the human dimension of BPR is

that its demands upon employees are entirely congruent with an education (trans!

Disciplined) workforce that no longer requires close supervision. What methods are used

to produce this workforce remain a mystery the population in general is simply deemed to

be capable of assuming responsibility, cherish their Autonomy and expect to have a say in

how the business is run. Consider he situation of the case manager at MDL. Assuming that

the tasks which they performed were driven by menus, it is difficult to reconcile the lightly

reutilized design of their work with Assuming responsibility. If employees do indeed

cherish their autonomy, it would be interesting to discover how MBL retained these case

manager Finally, it would be instructive to know what say they had in running the


12/35

12

business For Exampled. What involvement can they expect to have in any future

reengineering process that might further intensify their work or eliminate their positions?

Champions of BPR, like Taylor again, are willing to acknowledge that the radical changes

envisaged by BPR may encounter some resistance. But they also assume that this

resistance can be dissolved by BPR may encounter some resistance. But they also assume

that this resistance can be dissolved by effective leadership and commitment from top

management . Hammer, for example, acknowledges that the disruption and confusion

generated by reengineering can make it unpopular, though he is equal confident that any

opposition can be effectively surmounted by top-level managers. The commitment of

managers as champions of BPR is deemed to be sufficient to enlist those who would prefer

the status so, despite and admission that the strain of implementing a reengineering plancan hardly be prserstimated Hammer is sure that employees can be convinced of its

virtues: or to put this more directly. Where major job losses are involved, he is confident

that strong leadership[can persuade deficient turkeys to vote for Christmas.

In a recent Harvard Business Review article that reviews the experienced of BPR in 100

companies, with detailed consideration to its application in 20 companies , a rather less

sanguine conclusion is reached once again, it assumed that strand leadership from

management is necessary if BPR projects are not be sabotaged by the psychological and

political disruptions that accompany such radical change However, there is greater

appreciation both of the depth of the this resistance and the scale of resources and length

of time required to accomplish radical organizational transformation; all the old support

systems will become obsolete- from IT systems to employee skills The new infrastructure

should include programs like comprehensive training and skill development plans that

require years, not merely months, for success; performance- measurement systems that

track how well the organization is meeting its targets and how employees should berewarded based on those objectives; communication programs that help employees,

understand how and why their behavior must change . here thee is some awareness of

how employees , not just processes, must be reengineered or debugged if they are to run

effectively in the systems. However, there remains the assumption that employees,

including managers , ate infinitely malleable: that the parallel development of HRM systems


13/35

13

and strong leadership will dissolve resistance and that the new systems will not themselves

generate new problem and resistances. What such assessments and proscriptions omit or

,at best marginalize is an appreciation of BPRs major implication for Job losses and further

intensification/ degradation of the quality of working life for employees at all levels which

does not further intensification/degradation of the quality of working life for employees at

all levels. Which does not mean that some features of the changes envisaged by process

reengineering will not be welcomed? For example, despite the increased reutilization and

depersonalization of their work, case managers at MBL / see above) may approve of the

removal of supervisors or prefer the reduced fragmentation of tasks. But even those who,

on balance, endorse such changes are also likely to have reservations about its implications

for their future job security. They may also recognize and resent the extent to which the

pace and accuracy of their work can now be continuously monitored. Albeit indirectly by

information systems. Hammer himself acknowledges that the reengineering of business

processes has numerous implications for how businesses are managed . For example, he

notes that the interdiction of the new process of handling applicants at MBL necessitated

some major changes; MBL had to develop a culture in which people doing work are

perceived as more important than those supervising work career paths, recruitment and

training programs, promotion policies these and many other management systems are

being revised to support the new process design However despite the realization that new

business processes an have knick- on effects up on the management of human resources

the implementation of changes necessary to support the new processes is presented as

wholly un problematical.

Indeed there seems to be an assumption of an elective affinity between so called

empowered employees, sophisticated systems of actual

Potential surveillance and strong and some might say demagogical, leadership impostentrepreneurial organizations, as exemplified by TJ Rogers, CEO at US chip producer

Cypress Semiconductor since 1983. Rogers has advocated the empowering techniques of

networking and team working But he also tunes an it based monitoring system that allows

him to peer down in to the bowels of the organization and target the performance of

individual employees. Even sympathetic commentators have described his managerial style


14/35

14

as idiosyncratic and military. Because employees are not infinitely malleable, passive

commodities who are indifferent to how they ate managed, accomplishing the full and

effective implementation of BPR is likely to prove more difficult than is contemplated by its

advocates faith in the persuasive powers of senior management. Where employee

cooperation with the implementation of BPR is achieved under duress, it is likely that its

impact will be sustained only by the same old coercive methods condemned by the new

prophets of business management Given the challenge BPR can present to established

orders. Processes and identities. Attentiveness to the insights of HRM would seem to be

pertinent However, this would require the prophets of BPR to acknowledged the

shortcomings of their town specialist training. Work cooperatively and openly with other

function, and there by re-assess the value as well as the plausibility of their prescriptions.

2.9.4 Considering Employees

How then should human friendly re-engineering proceed? Forest, everyone in the

organizing must understanding the imperative for change. Such enlightenment may require

the honest appraisal of unpalatable facts In ODIs recent work with a Scandinavian

manufacturing company, data compiled on its existing date of improvement in key product

variables repealed, when extrapolated forward, a future time when its competitors would

lead in terms of product quality, market share and financial performance.

That information was spread widely through the organization in a series of confidential

seminars. Meeting and one to on brie fingers. As a result employees throughout the

organization fully accepted the consequences of not changing . At that point they accepted

the need for change . Acceptance depends not only on information but on the employees

belief that their leaders are making rational, not ridiculous decisions.

Indeed, if the decision-making process is so transparent that given the same informationemployees would act similarly, there will be little resistance. It is the opaqueness of

decision making, particularly when act similarly. There will be little resistance it is the

opaqueness of decision making particularly when act similarly there will be little resistance

it is the opaqueness of decision making, particularly when redundancy is involved, which

leads people to distrust and then resist change. When Federals Express closed its European


15/35

15

operation, the transparency with the closures was conducted ensured very low levels of

worker sabotage during the final week.

In a 1993 Harvard Business Review study, of

The six re engineering projects that achieved significant success, top executives pent

between one fifth and three firths of their time on the project . But employee

participation at all levels in the organization is similarly vital. Employees must be invited to

participate in. and even challenge parts of the redesign process

For like redesigning an engine with the motor running and rebuilding it while the car

powers down the motorway, re engineering a working organization is trough.

Key Aspects

Maintaining an operations smooth running during the transition from one organizational

form to another depends on close attention to five key aspects of the human side of change

1. Make haste slowly. Careful planning of a BPR project and securing senior teamalignment to those plans is essential. Budget more time for planning than is

considered necessary. Japanese companies spend more time planning than their.

Western counterparts, and boast considerably less resistance to change initiatives

once implementation begins. In the West, failure to plan adequately and secure

commitment to change thwarts progress once re engineering has begun.

2. Over communicate. People must have the opportunity to become comfortable withwhat re engineering will mean to them Communication of the project must be a

two way process where employees have an opportunity to challenge and ask

questions. Channels must be devised whereby information and the opportunity to

question will cascade down through organizational levels. This may require a


16/35

16

sequence of large scale communication events. In addition to opportunities for one

to one discussion. Senior managers will be required to spend a major part of their of

their time talking directly to employees about the need for change , expected results

and the plan for change. This direct communication is often underdone because

managers are loathing undertaking what can be a boring and repetitive task. In the

privatization of the Italian bank Credito Italiano, 16,000 employees required

briefing to enable them to answer not only their own questions about the change

but also those of customers and potential shareholders. In addition to a series of

videos and workbooks which explained the privatization process, focus groups were

organized. Out of these, 120 key questions arose which both employees and

customers were most likely to ask. As a result, employees learned not only the

answers to their most pressing questions but were also prepared for those of the

public . A vital part of communication is that managers are prepared to talk openly

about all aspects of change.

Fundancy is often ignored due to fear of provoking resistance to the whole

programme However, all constant groups. Incliuding the unions are asked to

participate as partners in the change process then support for change. Which will

leave remaining jobs more secure, Can be gained

3. Establish a cadre of change matters. In any organization, there are people willing andable to pick up new ways of working quicker than their colleagues. They must be

enlisted and given a greater role in the change project. Their purpose is to ensure

the spread of the change ethos throughout the organization when heavy power

generation equipment makers ABB Zamech established a joint venture in Poland

massive change was necessary to turn the company from a command based to

customer focused system ABB identified a group of 15 to 20 committed employeeswho became quality champions and underwent two weeks of intensive training in

change management techniques. So successful has been this group of change

masters, that an ongoing program to train similarly high potential staff is currently

underway


17/35

17

4. Pilot change :- As no plan is ever executed perfectly, it is important to learn frompilot projects Scoring some quick wins also helps give people the courage and

incentive to follow the project through white it is vital that pilot project succeed.

Success should not be rigged. Theses projects should be viewed learning

opportunities when mistakes can be made early and on a small, manageable scale .

5. Create feedback loops: Implementation must be flexible enough to allow input fromthose massive redundancies.

2.9.5. Conceptual framework

Several empirical studies have been conducted in relation to BPR. Some of them focused

on the critical success factors in a particular sector or organization. Based on a study in two

lraninan companies. ( Abdolvand , Albadvi , and Ferdowsi, 2008 ) reveals that collaborative

working environment, top management. Commitment change management systems ( new

reward systeris. Performance measurement. Employee motivation, and training and

development) and use of 11 are the positive indicators for BPR success Resistances to

change that emanated from middle management fear of losing authority. Employees fear of

losing job, skepticism about project results, are found out to have negative role ( Ahmed

Francis and Zairi , 2007) have found similar results when they assessed BPR

implementation in the private higher education organizations in Malaysia

Business process reengineering is implemented to bring about a radical change and

improve processes and this will lead to the creation of a more flexible and responsive

business process which will finally yield a greater customer satisfaction

The desired process improvement can be attained by the combination of an integrated itand HR systems

The effects of BPR in the human sick of an organization can be seen from the HR

perspectives employee motivation employ turnover and succession planning . The

researcher believes that since HRM is a very broad discipline it is very difficult to see the


18/35

18

BPRs effect on and every function of this discipline therefore taking some of the functions

which are most vulnerable to BPR is considered as a wise choice

Therefore based on the reviewed literate the researcher has developed a conceptual

framework for assessing the effects of BPR implementation programs on the human side of

the organization ( fig . 1) Based on this framework . the research has identified assessment

issues that would guide the development of data collection instruments and tram the data

presentation discussions and analysis

BPR

Process

Improve

meat

Flexibility

Greater

Customer

Satisfaction

Responsiveness

Integrated

it s stems

Integrate HR

systems


19/35

19

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This section represents and discusses the methodological issues that are implemented in

undertaking this research.

3.1. Research Design

The main purpose of this study is to assess BPR in the case of Gulele sub city and come up with

some sort of conclusion and recommendation. And for this reason, a descriptive research design is

implemented because it is believe that it helps to fulfill the objectives of the work.

3.2. Population under study

The population of the study consist the managers and supervisors. The size of the target population

is 55 (thirty supervisors and one general managers) from randomly selected employees.

3.3. Data Source

Primary data: primary data is collected from the participants through questionnaire and

interview.

Employee

motivation

Turnover Succession

planning


20/35

20

3.4. Data Collection

Data for the study is collected through questionnaire and interview

Questionnaire is vital instrument to be used in the study. The researcher used to collect data from

five selected supervisors and managers. Totally the researcher selected 30 supervisors and the

middle and lower level managers from the sub city.

Interview is used as qualitative method of data collection. Basically, this instrument is used to get

information from Gulele HR manager.

Generally the above mentioned data collection instruments are appropriate to the topic understudy

and they are also important to conduct the research by using survey method.

After subjects are identified and informed, the next step will be distributing or using instruments to

get the appropriate information which helps to the final result of the research while this process

instruments may also important thing or reduce unwanted thing in the method of reconsidering,

shaping or reshaping as soon as possible.

After this, the collected data will be organized in a way that data will be organized in a way that

data analysis will be easier.

3.5. METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIs

This is the process next to data collection which comprises of two stages: Data organization and

method of statistical application. After collecting of data is finished, the step which follows will beorganizing of the already collected data

This stage is known as refinement. The stage holds activities like rejecting inappropriately filled

questionnaires and those which might not be full up by respondents. Then after, information

(which will be found through close ended and open ended questions) will be tanned so as to make it

comfortable to use tables and graphs, if there is a need.

After the information is well organized and results are put appropriately, the step discussion and

interpretation will follow. This, of course, through the method of data analysis called qualitative anddescriptive.


21/35

21

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS, PRESNTATION AND SUMMARY

This chapter analysis, present and summary the data obtained from primary sources. The primarydata were obtained from questionnaire to collect the necessary information in order to answer the

research questions. The questionnaires were distributed for 30 employees found in Gulele Sub city.

All questionnaires were filled out and returned.

This chapter is organized in two sections. The first section will discuss about data analysis and

presentation of the data from questionnaires and interview. The second section will discuss about

the final part of the research that is summary, conclusion and recommendation part. Therefore, the

chapter is organized in the same way the measurement questions in the questionnaire are

organized.

4.1. Data Analysis and presentation

4.1.1. Biographical detail of the respondents

Table 4.1. Gender of respondents

Sex No

Male 20


22/35

22

Female 10

Total 30

The above table depicts that the majority of the respondents, that is 20 (66.7%) are male and the

rest, 10 (33.3%) are female.

Table 4.2. Age category of the respondents

Age No

18-25 5

26-40 19

41-55 4

56&above 2

Total 30

The above table shows that the age distribution of the respondents. 63.3% of the respondents arewithin the age of 26-40, 16.7% are within the range of 18-25, 13.3% of the respondents are within

the range of 41-55, and 6.7% are within the age range of 56 & above.

Table 4.3. Educational qualification of the respondents

Educational level No

10th complete -12th complete -

Diploma 11

BA/BSC 17

Masters and above 2

Total 30

The preceding table shows that the majority of the respondents, that is 17 (56.7%) are first

degree holders, 11 (36.7%) Diploma holders, 2 (6.7%) have Masters and above.

4.1.2.Descriptive Statistics

3. All respondents answered 0-10 yearsTable 4.4. BPRs objective attainment

Question answer Count

Do you think that the BPR has met

its objective

yes 7

No 10


23/35

23

I dont know 13

Total 30

As it is shown in the table most of the respondents are not sure whether the BPR has met its

objective or not. Around 33.3 % said that it didnt meet the desired objectives, and 23.3%

think that BPR has met its objective. Therefore, this implies that there is lack of clarity

among the respondents about the desired objectives of BPR.

The other question forwarded to the respondents was regarding the considerations given

by the BPR to the human resources. And the result is shown below;

answer Count

Do you think that the BPRimplementation program gives

due consideration to the human

resources

Yes 10

No 15

I dont know 5

Total 30

Table 4.5. Considerations given by BPR to the HRs

The above table shows that, the majority of the respondents, that is 15(50%). Think that

BPR doesnt give due considerations to the HR. 10 (33.3%) think that it gives the

consideration and the rest are not sure. Therefore, it is possible to say that the majority of

the respondents think that the BPR doesnt give due considerations to the human resources.

With regards to the presentation during BPR implementation, the respondents answered as

follows;

answer count

Were you presented at the time of the

BPR implementation

Yes 28

No 2

Total 30

Table 4.6. Presentation during BPR implementation

The above table show that the majority of the respondents, around 93.3% were present

during BPR implemented, and the rest were not presented.

With regards to affected by the BPR implementation, the respondents answered as follows;

Answer Count

How were you affected by BPR

implementation

Positively 5

Negatively 23

Total 28


24/35

24

Table 4.7. Feeling about BPR implementation

The above table shows that the majority of the respondents, around 82.1% had negative

feeling. The rest accepted the implementation of BPR positively.

With regards to the managements commitment in creating awareness about the BPRprogram, the respondents answered as follows;

Answer count %

The management has

made employees aware of

the change process at each

stage of the study

Strongly Agree 0 0%

Agree 0 0%

Neutral 0 0%

Disagree 16 53.3%

StronglyDisagree

14 46.7%

Total 30 100%

Table 4.8. Managements commitment in creating awareness about BPR

The above table shows that, all of the respondents are not convinced that the management

has made employees aware of the change process at each stage of BPR study.

One of the reasons for resistance to change is considered to be employees fear of job

security.

With regard, the answers forwarded by the respondents are follows;

Count %

I was very frustrated

and suspicious of myjob security because

of BPR

Strongly Agree 0 0%

Agree 0 0%Neutral 3 10%

Disagree 5 16.7%

Strongly Disagree 22 73.3%

Total 30 100%

Table 4.9 BPR and Job Security

The above table shows that, most of the respondents, 73.3% were not suspicious about BPR

in fear of their job security, 16.7% also disagree with this statement, and 10% are neutral.

This shows that the majority of the respondents were not frustrated or suspicious of the

BPR in fear of their job security.

There were evident sign that the work environment was much better than the former

working environment. The answers forwarded by the respondents are as follows;

count %

The current Strongly Agree 2 6.7


25/35

25

improvement in the

working

environment is theresult of BPR

Agree 14 46.7

Neutral 3 10

Disagree 3 10

Strongly Disagree 8 26.6

30 100

Table 4.10 BPR and the working environment

The above shows that most of the respondents (46.7%) are convinced that the

improvements are the result of BPR, 6.7% of the respondents strongly agree with this

statements, 10% are neutral, 10% are disagree. Therefore, it can be said that the majority of

the respondents think that the improvements in the working environment are the result of

BPR.

With regard to employee motivation and its relationship with BPR the respondents

answered as follow;

Answer Count %

I have enough involvement in

decisions that affect my work

Strongly

Agree

9 30

Agree 14 46.7

Neutral 3 10

Disagree 3 10

Strongly

Disagree

1 3.3

Total 30 100

Table 4.11 involvement in decision making

The above table shows that most of the respondents believe that 46.7% are decision that

affects their job. And 30% strongly agree with the statement. Therefore, this implies that the

employees are involved in the decisions that affect their jobs.

With regard to the question concerning performance evaluations, the respondents

answered as follows;

Answer count %

Feel that my job performance isfairly evaluated

Strongly Agree 5 16.7

Agree 8 26.7

Neutral 9 30

Disagree 4 13.3

Strongly

Disagree

4 13.3

30 100

Table 4.12 Performance evaluation


26/35

26

As shown in the above table, most of the employees are not sure whether their job is

evaluated fairly or not. 26.7% feel that their job is evaluated fairly, and 16.7% strongly feel

that their job is evaluated fairly. Therefore, this implies that the employees perception

towards their job evaluation is good, because the majority 30% feel that their job

evaluatation is fair.With regard to the freedom given to the employees in order to come up with new and better

way of doing things, the respondents answered as follow;

Answer count %

I am encouraged and motivated to

come up with new and better way of

doing things

Strongly

agree

1 3.3

Agree 20 66.7

Neutral 8 26.7

Disagree 1 3.3

Strongly

Disagree

0 0

30 100

Table 4.13 freedom to come up with new and better way of doing things

As shown in the above table, most of the respondents 66.7% agree that they have adequate

agree of freedom to come up with new ways of doing things, 26.7% of the respondents are

neutral to this statement, and 3.3% of the respondents strongly agree with this statement.

Therefore, it is possible to say that the organization encourages and motivates its

employees to come up with new better way of doing things.

Generally the relationship between employee motivation and BPR has strong relationship.

BPR and succession planning

The findings related to this aspect are presented as follows;

Answer count %

Failure in succession planning is

caused by the neglect of employee

retention


Agree 3 10

Neutral 10 33.3

Disagree 8 26.7

StronglyDisagree 5 16.7

Total 30 100

Table 4.14 succession planning and HR retention

As shown in the above table, 26.7% of the respondents disagree with the statement failure

pn succession planning is caused by neglecting of employee retention,33.3% are neutral,


27/35

27

10% agree, 13.3% strongly agree, and 16.7% of the respondents think that failure in

succession planning is caused by neglect of employee retention.

With regard to labor supply and succession planning, the respondents answered as follows;

Answer Count %The organization gives emphasizes

on external labor supply for thesuccession planning

Strongly agree 5 16.7

Agree 6 20

Neutral 7 23.3

Disagree 9 30

Strongly Disagree 3 10

Total 30 100

Table 4.15 Labor supply and succession planning

As shown in the above table, the majority of respondents, 30% disagree that the organizationdepends on external labor for succession planning. Around 20% of the respondents agree with this

statement, and the rest are neutral.

With regard to the availability of information regarding the career ladder within the organization,

the respondents answered as follows;

Answer Count %

Employees are well aware of the

career ladder within theorganization

Strongly Agree 0 0

Agree 1 3.3

Neutral 3 10

Disagree 9 30

Strongly

Disagree

17 56.7

Total 30 100

Table 4.16 Awareness of the career ladder within the organization

As shown in the above table, most of the respondents 56.7% strongly disagree with the statement

employees are well aware of the career ladder within the organization, 30% of the respondents

also disagree , 10% are neutral and only 3.3% agree with the statement. Therefore, it is possible to

say that the majority of the respondents are not aware of their career ladder within the

organization.

Generally there is no significant relationship between succession planning and BPR.

BPR and Employee Turnover

In many cases, employee turnover is seen as a sign of some problem within the organization.

In order to assess this, the researcher asked the following questions


28/35

28

Answer Count %

Effective business

management that recognizesemployees as important

partners reduces employees

turnover

Strongly

agree

10 33.3

Agree 7 23.3

Neutral 7 23.3

Disagree 4 13.4

Strongly

Disagree

2 6.7

Total 30 100

Table 4.17 effective management and turnover

As illustrated in the above table, most of the respondents, 33.3% strongly agree that effective

business management that recognizes employees as important partners reduces employee

turnover, 23.3% of the respondents also agree with this statement, 23.3% are neutral, while the

rest disagree with this statement. Therefore, it is possible to say that the employees see recognition

as important factor for employee turnover.

Answer Count %

Absence of employee involvement

and considerations in the

organization leads to high

employee turnover, even ifemployees are highly paid


Agree 8 26.7

Neutral 4 13.2

Disagree 2 6.7Strongly Disagree 2 6.7

Total 30 100

Table 4.18 Employee involvement and turnover

As shown in the above table, most of the respondents 46.7%, strongly agree that absence of

employee involvement and consideration leads to high employee turnover, 26.7% also agree with

this statement, 13.2% are neutral, and the rest of the respondents disagree with this statement.

Therefore, it is possible to say that the employees consider lack of employee involvement as an

important factor that leads to turnover, and consider compensation as a secondary factor.

Answer count %

The current working environment

is one of the reasons for employee

turnover


Agree 6 20

Neutral 7 23.3

Disagree 5 16.7

Strongly 8 26.7


29/35

29

Disagree

Total 30 100

Table 4.19 Working environments and employee turnover

As it is illustrated in the above table, most of the respondents, 26.7% strongly disagree that the

current working environment is one of the reasons for employee turnover, 16.7% also disagree

with this statement, 23.3% are neutral, and the rest agree that the current working environment is

one of the reason for employee turnover. Therefore, it is possible to say that the majority of the

respondents think that the current working environment is conducive.

Generally the above results show that there is negative relationship between employee turnover

and BPR but the relationship is statistically insignificant.

4.3Analysis of qualitative dataIn order to strengthen the qualitative data gather from the employees and gain another perspective

on the matter at hand, an interview was also conducted with the sub city HRD expert about the

issues r related BPR and HRM. The finding are presented as follows;

The first question posed to the respondent was regarding the role that the HR department played in

BPR study and implementation. According to the respondent, the HR division played an important

role in the BPR implementation and design.

There were different/many meeting conducted by this division in order to create awareness, about

the BPR to the employees. The respondent also added that many literature gives emphasis that the

HR is neglected in BPR program. But Gulele sub city took this into account and prepared itself for

any resistance and took remedial action beforehand. HR is one wing of the BPR study and

implementation., the respondent concluded.

With regard to the question posed about the effects of BPR on the Human resources, the respondent

said that, as such there is no negative effect imposed by BPR on the human resources. According to

the respondent, the BPR raises a fundamental question as to how to effectively use the HRs.

The other question posed to the respondent was regarding the relationship between succession

planning and BPR. According to the respondent, even though there is failure in the organizations

succession planning system, BPR is not the cause of the failure. He also added that, in any change

management system be it BPR or not, there are things that need to be considered seriously and the

failure comes as a result of technical problems not the BPR.


30/35

30

With regard to employee turnover and BPR, the respondent said that, there is high rate of employee

turnover on those areas that require skill but this is not due to the BPR.

With regard to employee motivation, the respondent said that there is no direct link between

employee motivation and BPR. The employees are more motivated than before BPR implemented,

the respondent said.

Finally when asked about the overall relationship between BPR and HRM, the respondent said that,

it is known that will lead to commitment, and the lack of known how that was prevalent among the

employees during the initial phases of BPR somehow discouraged the employees and affected their

level of commitment to the organizations change process. The respondent also added that BPR

gives attention and consideration to the human resources but it focuses more on how to effectively

use the human resources in order to attain the overall objectives of the organization, after all when

the organization benefits the employee will also take his part, there is no one layed off because of

the BPR.

4.2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

4.2.1. Summary

The general aim of reengineering project is the attainment of flexibility and responsiveness and

thereby attracts and retains more customers than their rivals. But the ultimate goal of the

reengineering projects might be subject to failure due to many reasons. Of these reasons, the

attention and considerations given to the human resources is vital. A recent study conducted by

Hugh Willmott, found that the marginalization and trivialization of human dimensions from

expositions of BPR is remarkable. But making the transition from function-oriented to process

oriented organizing practices necessarily depends on the human resources who enact and are

enacted by BPR.

The general objective of this study is to assess BPR in the case of Gulele sub city. For this reason,

questionnaires were distributed to the organizations employees and structured interview was

conducted with the organization HRD. As a result, the data analysis revealed that:

Change resistance was relatively severe among middle-level management in theorganization.

According to the respondent, resistances emanated from the fear and belief that:

o BPR eliminates control and increaseo BPR replaces the old staff by young oneso Technology reduces the importance of laboro BPR will be unsuccessful

The organization used education/awareness creation/, as the main instrument tohandle change resistance.


31/35

31

Around 33.3% of the respondents said that the BPR didnt meet the desired objectivesand 23.3% think that the BPR has met its objective

Around 50% of the respondents think that the BPR doesnt give due considerations tothe HR. Around 33.3% think that it gives due consideration

All of the respondents are not convinced that the management has made employeesaware of the change at each stage of the BPR study

73.3% of the respondents were not suspicious about BPR in fear of their job security.16.7% also disagree with this statement.

46.7% of the respondents are convinced that the improvements are the result of theBPR

46.7% of the respondents said that they are involved in decision that affects their job Most of the employees are not sure whether their job is evaluated fairly or not. 26.7%

feel that their job is evaluated fairly, and 16.7% strongly feel that their job is evaluated

fairly

66.7% of the respondents agree that they have adequate degree of freedom to come upwith new ways of doing things

BPR is strongly related with employees motivation, and there is no significantrelationship between succession planning and BPR

26.7% of the respondents disagree with the statement failure in succession planningis caused by the neglect of employee retention.

Around 30% of the respondents disagree that the organization depends on externallabor for succession planning

56.7% of the respondents strongly disagree with the statement employees are wellaware of the career ladder within the organization.

There is no significant relationship between succession planning and BPR 33.3% of the respondents strongly agree that effective business management that

recognize employees as important partners reduce employee turnover

46.7% of the respondents strongly agree that absence of employee involvement andconsideration leads to high employee turnover

Around 26.7% of the respondents strongly disagree that the current workingenvironment is one of the reasons for employee turnover

There is a negative relationship between employee turnover and BPR but therelationship is statistically insignificant

4.2.2. Conclusion

This research attempted to assess the relationship between employee motivation, succession

planning, and employee turnover and BPR. The finding of this study revealed that the organization

employees are moderately satisfied with their job. These conditions tell us there is a strong and

positive relation between BPR and employee motivation. Therefore, we can conclude that the

motivation of employees is directly related to the improvement brought about the BPR.


32/35

32

In addition to this, in order to address the specific objectives of this study, assessment was made to

find out if BPR is related to succession planning. And the result revealed that, even though there is

failure in succession planning system of the organization, but according to the interview conducted

with the HRD and the responses gathered from employees regarding this matter, the failure in

succession planning did not come because of the BPR. The organization depends on internal labor

for succession planning. There is no significant relationship between BPR and succession planning.

With regards to employee turnover and BPR the study reveals that effective business management

that recognizes employees as important partners reduces employee turnover. It also shows that the

current working environment is not a reason for employee turnover. There is negative relationship

between BPR and employee turnover. This means the BPR implementation is the less will be

employee turnover.

To sum up, the study shows that there were resistances to change at the time of the BPR

implementation, and this resistance was relatively severe among middle level management. In

order to alleviate this problem the sub city gave different training for the concerned bodies.

4.2.3. Recommendation

Based on the finding of this study, the following possible recommendations are given:

The organization should implement its strategic HRD program promptly in order toincrease the motivation and belongingness of employees

Job evaluation and performance appraisal system should be transparent because there is adominant perception among the employees that there performance is not evaluated fairly

Since there is a strong and positive relationship between BPR and employee motivation theBPR should be properly implemented in order to enhance the motivation of employees

The organization should work based on its knowledge retention program becausedependence on the external labor supply for succession planning is caused by lack of

knowledge employees within the organization

The career ladder within the organization should be clearly put The organization should work towards lateral promotional schemes Building the existing employees should be given due consideration in order to minimize the

dependency of the external labor for the organization succession planning.


33/35


34/35

34

Part Two: Research related question

4. How many years has it been since the BPR implemented in your organization

0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41 and above

5. Do you think that the BPR has met its objective

Yes No I dont know

6. Do you think that the BPR implementation program gives due consideration to the human

Resources?

Yes No I dont know

7. Were you presented at the time of the BPR implementation?

Yes No

8. If your answer to the above question is yes, how were you affected by the BPR

implementation?

positively Negatively

Please answer or rate the following questions by circling your response

1 2 3 4 5Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Disagree

Business process Reengineering

The management has made employees aware of the change process at each

stage of the implementation

1 2 3 4 5

The current improvements in the working environment are the result of

BPR

1 2 3 4 5

I was frustrated, and suspicious of my job security because of BPR 1 2 3 4 5

Employee Motivation

My job performance is fairly evaluated 1 2 3 4 5

Have enough involvement in the decisions that affect my work 1 2 3 4 5

Encouraged and motivated to come up with new and better ways of doing

things

1 2 3 4 5


35/35

Succession Planning

Failure in succession planning is caused by the neglect of employeeattention

1 2 3 4 5

The organization emphasizes on external labor supply for the succession

planning

1 2 3 4 5

Are well aware of the career ladder within the 1 2 3 4 5

Turnover

Business management that recognizes employees as partners reduces

employees turnover

1 2 3 4 5

Of employee involvement and considerations in the leads to high employeeturnover, even if employees are

1 2 3 4 5

At working environment is one of the reason for employee turnover 1 2 3 4 5

Thank you!

research by teshome belachew

Documents