ARIS Community - We Love BPM

Multi legal, multi BU, corp process modelling - top structures

Skaaningen's picture
by Lars Bratthall in BPMN posted on 2017-06-28

Dear all,

I am contemplating how to set up Structure Models and VACD etc for the purpose of the following context:

We are a multinational company, with multiple legal entities (=nation states), multiple BAs (spanning multiple nation states), where BAs are broken down into BUs (again traversing multiple legal entities). In addition, we have a corporate structure.

I see that we in practice in as-is have:

* Global processes - concerns every BU, or is of interest to every BU

* Nation state processes, typically related to HR or some local laws

* Per BA processes, typically BA management across BUs

* Per BU processes

In addition, there is a very large project upcoming, that will construct many global processes tied to a global system.

Furthermore, we wish to achieve more 'sameness', despite the current governance and P&L structures which can be drivers for driving per BU processes.

My thoughts so far are that

* Roles are always made visible across the enterprise, with naming conventions that help modellers/browsers understand where they come from.

However, I am not yet sure of how to set up the process architecture:

I can set up a structure diagram to point to 'global as is' VACD, 'BA as is (which then point to BU as is'). The same top structure diagram can point to 'the big project to be', which then becomes a hierarchy in its own right.

I am listening to any input for how you have made top level process architectures in similar contexts. Thank you in advance for any advice you may extend! :-)

Sorry there are no tags
There are no attachments
Paulo Lima posted on 2017-06-28

Hi Lars, let me share some thoughts - not advices at all.

I would not structure the processes that way ... maybe for the AS-IS it could be helpful but for the TO-BE - and assuming that iit will be on-going journey for the life (!) - you would be in trouble as soon as the organization changes.

In my view, you could create models for representing:

  • the organization: including organizational units, positions, locations, etc.
  • the Roles
  • eventually existing systems, new systems

Finally, or simultaneously, you build the process models - Value Added Chain is one possibility but you would need to explore other ARIS 's  processes modeling tools - where you could specify (associate) each process or task to:

  • the Organizational Unit where it is performed
  • the Role(s) - in a RACI approach - who run the process or task
  • the system or application that supports it
  • etc.

I believe that, in this way, you would create much more flexible and precise models, promoting the re-use, and you would also be able get rich reports.

I hope this helps anyway.

Regards, Paulo

Lars Bratthall posted on 2017-06-30

Thanks Paulo :-) My takeway is to focus on 'library assets', which then can be reused in newer, more control perspective models that tie them together.

Lars Bratthall posted on 2017-10-22


feedback on what we eventually did:

* One inventory for functional organization.

* One inventory for Nation organization

* We did not model the legal organization, as that did not match well with the security classifications we want.

For each of these levels, where we can find owners, we then have subgroups for persons, organizations, roles and positions, which we reuse in Organization Diagrams. Works well in practise for our organization :-)