Business process reengineering: critical success factors in higher education

Abstract

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to examine the critical success factors of business process reengineering (BPR) in higher education (HE). Design/methodology/approach-Empirical case studies collected from three private higher education institutions in Malaysia, which have embarked on BPR successfully. Findings-Seven factors were found to be critical to BPR implementation success. The factors are teamwork and quality culture, quality management system and satisfactory rewards, effective change management, less bureaucratic and participative, information technology/information system, effective project management and adequate financial resources. Research limitations/implications-The paper provides a framework for future research to explore organisational development in making BPR happen successfully. Originality/value-This research contributes to studies of BPR in HE context, by considering the soft issues in its implementation.

Business Process Reengineering Implementation: Developing a Causal Model of Critical Success Factors

“…Therefore having a less bureaucratic and more participative structure is essential for successful BPR implementation. This is parallel with McAdam [51] statement that organizations should apply a more participative structure to avoid failure of BPR implementation [46].…”

“…BPR implementation is a costly process. Therefore, organizations should have adequate financial resources for implementing changes and facing with unpredictable situations [4], [8], [46].…”

“…Top management commitment and Support [4], [5], [8], [36], [37], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47].…”

Organisational Culture, Leadership Styles and Employee’s Affective Commitment to Change: A Case of Yemen Public Sector

“…While in the dynamic form, the leader actively monitors subordinates' performance and corrects any mistakes, in the passive form, the leader does not monitor but waits for mistakes to happen and then takes action. The employee can still be engaged with the change implementation not because they want to but because they have to, also supported by Ahmad et al (2007). In this situation, transactional leadership is expected to be associated with employee commitment to organisational change.…”

“…how this type of leader affects his followers by motivation and satisfaction), but are not necessarily concerned with leadership as they relate to change or specifically how leaders affect change in people (House, 1996). Ahmad, Francis, & Zairi (2007) found that the different styles of leadership lead to different results, and drastic change required more autocratic style. The following section elaborates the two dominant styles of leadership more, namely; the transformational and transactional leadership.…”