## 4 Case Study- Business Process Innovation and Improvement
### Business Process Analysis and Re-engineered Business Process Modelling: BOOPM Steps 3 & 4  
In order to arrive at an improved business process, Step 3 in the proposed BPM framework was used in order perform a critical review of the \"as-is\" process model. The key artefacts obtained using the structural analysis (class diagram) and behavioural analysis (process value analysis) are given  
Figure 3: As-Is process model for the case study (BOOPM Step 2 key artefact).  
Figure 2: Business use case for the help desk process (BOOPM Step 1 key artefact).  
in Figure 4 and Table 2, respectively. By following the guidelines for value-added analysis given in Step 3, we classify all the activities in the help-desk process of the case study into three categories: VA, BVA and NVA as shown in Table 2. The time taken for each activity is taken as the average time as observed in reality.  
For the purpose of illustration, we have made certain assumptions on the processing time and waiting time for each activity, event and task given in Table 2, and these values are based on the data provided by a real-life petrol service station company. Normally, this data would comprise of average values based on the practical real-life observations of the business process over a certain time period. For instance, suppose it is observed that for 20% of the incidents reported by customers, the complaint does not get resolved. In this situation, the incident needs to be forwarded to Level-2 again and the previous assigned priority could be reinstated. Due to this quick assignment of priority, it would only take two minutes as an average time for the Level-1 staff to forward the request to the Level-2 staff.  
Figure 4: Class diagram for the case study (BOOPM Step 3 key artefact).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Activity** & **Classification** & **Time (in minutes)** \\ \hline Log the service request & VA & 5 \\ Waiting to be checked & NVA & 60 \\ Check the request & BVA & 10 \\ Send resolution to customer for simple jobs & VA & 5 \\ Waiting to be evaluated & NVA & 120 \\ Evaluate the request & NVA & 20 \\ Priorities the request & BVA & 5 \\ Find the resolution & VA & 120 \\ Write the resolution to the Level-1 staff & NVA & 20 \\ \hline Hire a contractor & VA & 5 \\ Waiting to be picked by Level-1 staff & NVA & 1200 \\ Resolution sent to customer & VA & 20 \\ Resolution verified & VA & 1200 \\ Forwarding unresolved problem & VA & 2 \\ Total cycle time = 2792 and Cycle time efficiency (CTE) = 39\% & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Value-added analysis of the help desk process (BOOPM Steps 3 key artefact).  
Such data are important for calculating the overall performance of the process. Based on the guideline given in Step 4, we can now calculate the cycle time efficiency (CTE) as follows:  
Cycle time efficiency (CTE) = [(VA cycle time) + (BVA cycle time)]/(Actual cycle time) = 39%.  
This indicates that only 39% of the activities of the existing process are considered as value-added to the customer. Such data can help the organisation to increase their value-added percent to the customer by eliminating NVA activities or reducing waiting time present in their process and re- designed business process (\"To-Be\" process) is developed.