18 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Re-engineering Finds The Way, May 15, 2001
This review is from: The Reengineering Revolution: a handbook (Paperback)
After the magnificent marketing of Re-engineering as a radical tool to be used in organizations in order to increase contemporary performance measures such as efficiency, quality and speed, many organizations have started sweeping grand re-engineering projects in the hope that they would reach promised lands. But results of such high-risky re-engineering projects were not much motivating. Upon initial results and understood problems of re-engineering, Hammer wrote this book to close the conceptual and practical gaps of re - engineering. Human side of organizations had been neglected and organizations had been thought as mechanical systems in the first article and book. This book is an endeavor to offset first stage of re-engineering theory and practice.
As in other management models, strong leadership is seen as a critical factor for final success of re-engineering. I think, the reason of serious emphasis on leadership in this book is that some people who practiced re-engineering realized that organizations are also political arenas in which members fight for their privileges and long-term interests. From a humanistic perspective, it is normal to sabotage re-engineering projects which would change power structure in upper-levels of the organizations and would cause many people at lower-levels lose their jobs. It seems that leader is assumed as a man who would table political nature of organizations and lead people walk in dictated direction despite ominous results for them , namely leader is seen as an authority figure who is expected to overwhelm political conflicts between organization members. Ironically, leaders are also political figures, not neutral personalities exempt from corporate politics. I think, authors should think again on leadership and its role in re-engineering projects. Oversimplification is not able to solve most complex problems of organizations.
Although Hammer and his apostles strongly oppose to F.W. Taylor and his approach, there is an important similarity in the logic of their models. Taylor was trying to fully understand the each detail managing the work performed, namely inputs, outputs, and procedures, by conducting time-motion studies, and after he was trying to find the one-best way to do job. It was possible to find best way if you understand all parts of the work performed. Today, this is absolutely what Hammer does. The most outstanding example of re-engineering is order-taking process that is too simple, too mechanistic, accordingly very understandable. Will you please tell me, how can Re-engineering can deal with a decision process. Do people follow a pure-rational mechanistic approach, which is recounted in all management books, when they intend to make a decision. Can you apply re-engineering model to this process which is much complex ? I think, the answer is NO. In this case, Why is re-engineering presented as a radical anti-Taylorist model ? It is so blurred.
We have known for a long time that organizations are SOCIOTECHNICAL systems, but Hammer and his apostles place the emphasis on the technical dimension of the organizations, and other part is behaved as it is stepchild. Organization is consisted of two important structures, which are technical structure (hard structure) and social structure (soft structure). Social structure is also important and in most cases this part dominates and shapes the other part. Therefore there should be an equal emphasis on both of them. A pure-rational model which does not take social fabric of the organization into consideration is subject to failure in practical settings.
The other problem of re-engineering I understood when I read the book is that "Information Technology" is exaggerated to the extent that it is perceived as a panecea. Such a conviction does not hold truth completely. We are reading and witnessing corporations which invest in information technology (hardware and software) and incur big failure costs. Without understanding the problem within the right context, technology is beyond a solution. "Packet problem and packet solution approach" should be abandoned. An organization must understand its problem with its real roots (not assumed) so that it would be able to produce right solution alternatives. "Inquiry discipline" is a prerequisite for long-run solutions.
Overall, I think that should the conceptual and practical gaps are closed, re-engineering has a high potential to become a strong re-organization tool which would stamp on 21 century corporate history . This book is a good starting base in this long way. I recommend this book with three stars.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A valuable guide, but missing some questions, April 4, 2002
This review is from: The Reengineering Revolution: a handbook (Paperback)
If you're going to reengineer, this book is a valuable one to have-- in particular, I'd like to take the chapter about choosing a consultant and staple it to the doors of many a company (and I'm a consultant). The book covers elements of success, practical tips for making it work, and some case studies.
What I find missing is the question "Should I reengineer?". (The answer, I think, isn't always 'yes'.) It would be *most* useful if it first helped managers make sure that reengineering really is a Good and Necessary Thing, given the pain it inevitably causes a corporation. There's also a little bit of a sense that nay-sayers shouldn't be tolerated at all, and I find that a little bit short-sighted.
Nice to have for managers and consultants.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
