Business Process Management (BPM) as a management discipline has roots that traces back to Labor Specialization on late XVIII century (Adam Smith), then the Toyota Production System (TPS) on 70's and Total Quality Movement (TQM) on late 80’s, as well as the Re-engineering wave undergone on earlier 90’s. Most fundamental principles emerged from prior movements and more and more aspects have been incorporated as the community learns from past experiences — worth it to mention the so advertised 90’s re-engineering wave.

BPM is not a radical novelty. There is no disruption with previous movements; hence a consolidation of theories and new technologies. Moreover, BPM nowadays can count on a new generation of IT systems to automate and manage business process. In the book Business Process Management: The third wave, the authors, Peter and Fingar, provide a remarkable outlook of BPM at this point in time.

Even with all buzz surrounding BPM last years, there is no single comprehensive methodology encompassing all BPM facets. There are multiple approaches and methods for different aims sharing the agenda, with focus on areas such as management, improvement, modelling, automation, as well as BPM maturity assessment. Just to name a few brands: ABPMP CBOK, BPTrends, BizBoK, OMG’s BMM, Poter’s Value Chain, Lean Six Sigma, Kaizen, Rosemann’s BPMM, and so forth.

The goal here is to frame BPM related methods in the organization, from most strategic level down to tactical and operational layers. The framing approach applied here is similar to the well accepted BPTrends pyramid, however using a model composed of Strategic, Tactical and Operational (STO) layers.

At the strategic level there are known methods and tools as Balanced Scorecard (BSC), Porter’s five competitive forces, as well as Capability Mapping and OMG`s Motivation Model (BMM) typically brought up in the BPM context.

As moving to the tactical level, BPM provides a lifecycle to manage ongoing business process. The BPM lifecycle uphold steps to Document, Assess, Improve and Manage business process in a structured manner. The key is to grasp the BPM lifecycle as a structured approach to manage Business Process, therefore, to steer the organization when seen as a chain of business process. Once the processes and their contribution in the broader value chain are known (Document phase), the current business performance can be assessed and gauged against strategic goals (Assess phase). Hence, the priority areas for further improvement can be identified considering the strategic drivers, as well as the current processes performance.

At the operational level sits methods to deliver changes and improve business process, which range from radical end-to-end process re-engineering endeavors to department-wide local process improvements. Lean Six Sigma (LSS) has the well-accepted DMAIC life cycle, which stands for Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control. Additionally, LSS comes with an extensive set of statistical tools, techniques and lean principles to support each phase.

One approach to integrate BPM and LSS is to combine both lifecycles in a way that BPM leverage a well-thought-out routine to continuously improve business process though LSS projects. BPM undertake ongoing business management, and LSS is bent to improve business process as per tactical direction.

Continuous Improvement is a very strong Lean principle. Moreover, the control phase aim to build up controls (statistic process controls) that cares about the ongoing performance. Even though, LSS well-match a project lifecycle to deliver a defined process improvement in a scope-time-bound initiative.

Note that the BPM Improve could count on any other “non-LSS” project method to deliver the required change. LSS is framed along BPM here to keep the discussion around the BP disciplines.

By having BPM supporting the organization’s management cycle; and also embracing the improvement initiatives, the organization is able to effectively prioritize LSS efforts based upon the strategic drivers and ongoing business performance. This union avoids encouraging a myriad of LSS projects not certainly well aligned with the strategy, or not focused on most problematic areas. The continuous improvement mantra has to be understood as continuously monitor/assess and improve when worth it/needed. When comes to LSS projects, It’s not about continuously improving anything and everything all the time.

In the other end, the DMAIC Control phase builds up a measurement system to monitor process performance. To embed the controls on the long run, at the end of a LSS project, the measurement mechanisms should be handed-over to a team responsible for the ongoing process; hence, transitioned back into the process management field. The established controls might be segregated to target different audiences in the organization, ranging from operational support needs, to business financial performance purposes.

The disciplines and methods have to well-align to leverage strategic directions through the layers in an efficient manner. Would not be enough to have the best in class strategy without an efficient way to turn it operational and sustainable. In the same way, a strong method to deliver improvement changes would not make the organization succeed without a consistent ongoing process management or consistent strategic plan.

That is all about balance and alignment of the gears to maximize the overall organization performance.