IT Leadership Behavior and Business Process Reengineering (BPR) Outcomes

1. IT Leadership Behavior andBusiness Process Reengineering (BPR) Outcomes An Empirical Analysis of 30 BPR ProjectsNorma Sutcliffe April 28, 2000

2. Definition“Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is a fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical contemporary measures of performance such as cost, quality, service and speed. “ Hammer and Champy (1993) April 28, 2000

3. The Risk in BPRWhile BPR results can be startling, the risk of failure runs high. Some estimates of failure run as high as 50% to 70%. Many have sighted a failure in committed leadership as the underlying cause. April 28, 2000

4. The Leadership of BPR Students of the BPR phenomena assert that BPR is a top-down phenomena where a directed, committed leadership is critical for success. April 28, 2000

5. The Leadership TheoristsThere is a substantial leadership literature that states that when the task is highly non-programmable requiring people who are highly motivated and independent thinkers, such as BPR, then a non-directed leadership is indicated. April 28, 2000

6. The Dilemma Therefore, is the success of BPR dependent on top-down, directed leadership or is it dependent on non-directed leadership or is it a combination of the two? April 28, 2000

7. The Agenda • Review of Leadership Literature • The Framework Used Here • The Method Used • The Findings • The Contributions • Questions April 28, 2000

8. Traits VersusBehavior in Leadership Studies • Trait theories had no predictive power • Contingency approach found effective in behavior studies • No leadership behavior works in all situations • Contingency approach never covered change April 28, 2000

9. Change Focus Versus Leadership Behavior Focus April 28, 2000

10. Transactional/TransformationalLeadership Framework Transactional leadership covers incremental change: • Works within an existing organizational culture • Uses contingent reward for negotiation • Uses management by exception for feedback April 28, 2000

11. Transactional/TransformationalLeadership Framework Transformational leadership covers radical change: • Uses charisma • Uses intellectual stimulation • Uses individualized consideration April 28, 2000

12. Transactional/TransformationalLeadership Framework Some leadership issues the framework never covers: • How needed resources are acquired • How goals are established and monitored • How teamwork is accomplished April 28, 2000

13. Transactional/TransformationalLeadership Framework Shortcomings • Transformational highly correlated to transactional • Assumes a line management relationship exists • Transformational -- only in the eye of the beholder • Could find no characteristics predictive for transformational leadership April 28, 2000

14. The Flamholtz Leadership Effectiveness Framework April 28, 2000

15. DefinitionLeadership is a process whereby an individual influences the behavior of people in a way that increases the probability the they will achieve organizational goals. April 28, 2000

16. The Leadership EffectivenessFramework • A synthesis of several tested theories • Does not assume personal traits are prerequisite • Does not assume a line management relationship exists April 28, 2000

17. The Leadership Effectiveness Framework Overview April 28, 2000

18. The Frameworks Compared April 28, 2000

19. Some Additional Insights from the Literature • Evidence from previous studies suggest that the Flamholtz framework is useful for examining BPR phenomena. • Consistency of leadership behavior seems important April 28, 2000

20. The Hypotheses • There is significant difference in the style-situation fit of successful and unsuccessful BPR leaders. • There is significant difference in the emphasis successful BPR leaders place on the task and people dimensions (orientations) and the emphasis unsuccessful BPR leaders place on the dimensions.. • There is significant difference in the consistency of leadership task performance between successful and unsuccessful leaders. April 28, 2000

21. The Research Method • Data collected from 30 BPR projects using a two-step survey questionnaire • Respondents from completed BPR projects sought from: • Subscribers to an IT-oriented magazine (snail) • Two Internet Listservers (electronic) April 28, 2000

22. Measurement of Variables • BPR Outcome Variable -- target attainment overall project goalprimary project goal • H1 -- Style-Situation Fit • The Job Autonomy Profile • The Project’s Task Programmability • The Leader’s Style Profile • H2 -- Task/People Orientation Balance • Task Orientation • People Orientation • H3 -- Consistency of Behavior Using Factor Analysis • The Level of Effort April 28, 2000

23. Validation Content and construct validity claimed Steps: • The pretest on all questionnaires • Colleagues • Interviews with IS executives • Leadership Effectiveness Questionnaire • Likert scale versus paired-comparison • Pilot study to fine tune instruments • Non-response Bias Test April 28, 2000

24. Results Multiple Regression Analysis April 28, 2000

25. Results Hypothesis I The Style-Situation Fit Dependent Variable Overall Project Attainmentwith b = .39 at a£ .05 Dependent Variable Primary Goal Attainmentwith b = .36 at a £.10 April 28, 2000

26. Results Hypothesis !I The Work-People Tasks Balance Dependent Variable Overall Project Attainmentwith b = .37 at a£ .05 Dependent Variable Primary Goal Attainmentwith b = .46 at a£ .01 April 28, 2000

27. Results Hypothesis III The Leadership Task Consistency Dependent Variable Overall Project Attainmentnonsignificant Dependent Variable Primary Goal Attainmentnonsignificant April 28, 2000

28. Research Project’s Contributions Research • Empirical results on previously developed framework • Extension into change management Practice • Behavior based guidelines can be developed • Not based on line-management April 28, 2000

29. Questions and Comments April 28, 2000