Modelling and analysis of business process reengineering

int. j. prod. res., 2002, vol. 40, no. 11, 2521±2546
Modelling and analysis of business process reengineering
A. GUNASEKARAN{* and B. KOBU{
Business process design and business process reengineering (BPR) depend
crucially on linking production procedures and organizational services to business
goals and objectives. There is currently very little formula support for this kind of
reasoning as analytical tasks are usually carried out informally and individual
design decisions are hard to relate to business objectives. If BPR is carried out
without understanding the way it is done, then the most likely outcome would be
continuing less-than-satisfactory current practice and automating outdated pro-
cesses. This kind of practice misses opportunities for innovation and rationaliza-
tion. The modelling and analysis of business processes along with business
strategies and organizational structures are essential to study the implications
of BPR. In this paper, an attempt has been made to study the modelling, analysis
and tools/techniques used for modelling of BPR with the help of a survey on the
recently (1993±2000) employed methods and tools used for BPR modelling and
analysis. A framework for modelling and analysis, and guidelines for the selection
of tools/techniques of business process reengineering are presented.
Acronyms
ABA
Activity Based Analysis
ABM
Activity Based Management
AHP
Analytical Hierarchical Process
AI
Arti®cial Intelligence
ARENA
Name of a Commercial Simulation Software System
ATM
Asynchronous Transfer Mode
BPR
Business Process Reengineering
CAD/CAM
Computer-Aided Design
CAE
Computer-Aided Engineering
CAM
Computer-Aided Manufacturin g
CASE
Computer-Aided Systems Engineering
CBR
Case Based Reengineering
CD-ROM
Compact Disc ± Read Only Memory
CE
Concurrent Engineering
CIM
Computer Integrated Manufacturing
ConGolog
A process speci®cation language
DEA
Data Envelopment Analysis
DM
Database Management
DSS
Decision Support Systems
Revision received November 2001.
{ Department of Management, Charlton College of Business, University of Massachusetts
Dartmouth, North Dartmouth, MA 02747, USA.
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. e-mail: agunasekaran@umassd.edu
International Journal of Production Research ISSN 0020±7543 print/ISSN 1366±588X online # 2002 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/00207540210132733

---

2522
A. Gunasekaran and B. Kobu
E-commerce
Electronic Commerce
EC
Electronic Commerce
ECS
Embedded Computer Systems
ES
Expert Systems
EDI
Electronic Data Interchange
EFQM
European Forum for Quality Management
EFT
Electronic Fund Transfer
ERP
Enterprise Resource Planning
GMI
General Motors Institute
HR
Human Resources
HPM
Hierarchical Process Modelling
IBRS
Intelligent Bank Reengineering System
IBPRS
Intelligent Business Process Reengineering System
IDEF0
Integration De®nition Modelling
IS
Information Systems
ISDN
International Switching Digital Networks
IT
Information Technology
LP
Lean Production
MEI
Minimum Essential Information
MRP
Material Requirements Planning
MRPII
Manufacturing Resource Planning
OTPM
Object Transformation Process Model
OTS
Order-To-Ship
PERT/CPM
Program Evaluation Review Technique/Critical Path Method
PFA
Process Flow Analysis
PM
Process Mapping
QFD
Quality Function Deployment
RCM
Reliability Centre Maintenance
SCM
Supply Chain Management
SFT
Sales Force Transformation
TASC
Information Management and Systems Engineering Solutions
Firm
TELOS
Knowledge based representation language
TBC
Time Based Competition
TPM
Total Productive Maintenance
TQM
Total Quality Management
TOC
Theory of Constraints
WWW
World Wide Web
1.
Introduction
Business Process Reengineering (BPR) concerns the fundamental rethinking and
radical redesign of a business process to obtain dramatic and sustained improve-
ments in quality, cost, service, lead time, ¯exibility and innovation. BPR focuses on
the whole processÐstarting from product conceptual stage to ®nal product design. It
provides the opportunity to reengineer the process or to reduce radically the number
of activities it takes to carry out a process with the help of advanced Information
Technology (IT), (Hammer 1990, Hammer and Champy 1993, Peppard and
Rowland 1995). New developments in IT, such as multimedia, image processing

---

Business process reengineering
2523
and expert systems, can be used to reduce the number of non-value added activities.
Organizational restructuring including job redesign can be used to improve the
delivery of goods and services.
A group of related tasks that together create value for a customer is called a
business process. Common corporate goals include: (a) customer satisfaction,
(b) return on investment, and (c) market share (Hales and Savoie 1994, Hewitt
1995). These goals require process inter-dependencies and system dependencies
that are established through the integration of various business processes. Another
de®nition of a business process is the type of commodity that ¯ows through the
system. For example, a product development and its transformation into a ®nal
product can be viewed as a process. Davenport and Short (1990) de®ne `process’
as a set of logically related tasks performed to achieve a de®ned business outcome
and suggest that processes can be divided into those that are operationally oriented
(those related to the product and customer) and management oriented (those that
deal with obtaining and coordinating resources). Love et al. (1998) consider the
technical and social dimension of a process and identify four enablers: quality man-
agement, technology, information and people.
Radical process change is the ®rst major step in BPR. Therefore, a process
improvement team should be established with the objectives of analysing the
whole process, identifying non-value-adde d activities such as storage and inspection,
and eliminating them. The delivery process emphasizes cross-functional performance
rather than encouraging departmental optimization and consequently system-wide
sub-optimization . Sage (1995) de®nes three levels of BPR: product, process and
system.
Business process and enterprise activity modelling play a central role in enterprise
representation in the context of Computer-Integrate d Manufacturin g (CIM) and
integration. Business processes determine enterprise behaviour while the activities
characterize functionality. Vernadat (1996) discussed a formalism to specify business
processes and enterprise activities. The formalism makes use of behavioural rules
derived from process algebra for structured processes and temporal logic for semi-
structured processes. The paradigm assumes that human or non-human agents
(functional entities), performing elementary actions (functional operations) execute
processes and their activities.
The role of IT in reengineering can be viewed from two perspectives: (i) the role
of the IT function (e.g. Internet, E-Commerce, Multimedia, EDI, CAD/CAM, and
ISDN), and (ii) the role of the technologies themselves (e.g. CD-ROM, ATM, and
®bre optics). IT has played a vital role in the success of the overall reengineering
initiative. Information management throughout the company should be encouraged
to develop skills in computer-aide d systems engineering (Davenport and Short 1990,
Hewitt 1995, Gunasekaran and Nath 1997). Soliman and Youssef (1998) claim that
the success of BPR relies on the use of IT and they also identify the characteristics of
successful BPR. In a more recent Australian survey, 75% of 535 ®rms identi®ed IT
as the most important enabler in BPR (O’Neill and Sohal 1998). There are many
articles available in the literature on IT in BPR (Hansen 1997, Davies 1994, Bradley
et al. 1995, Swami 1995, Giaglis and Paul 1996, Love et al. 1998). However, most of
the studies deal with conceptual frameworks and strategies and do not deal with
modelling and analysis of business processes, with the objective of improving the
performance of reengineering e orts.

---

2524
A. Gunasekaran and B. Kobu
Modelling of BPR is intended to represent the information and the information
¯ows in an organization with the idea of abstraction, through the use of tools such
as conceptual framework, mathematical models and simulation. The purpose of
modelling BPR is to understand the problems and to recognize the constraints
with the information and material ¯ows and to seek optimal solutions for improving
the overall performance of the system. Im et al. (1999) developed a model to explain
the relationship between BPR tools and the determinant of success. Analysis of 83
BPR practitioners’ responses from di erent industries indicated that (a) BPR tools’
competencies are linked to their e ectiveness rather than their e ciency, and (b)
BPR tools’ competencies are strongly related to the success of BPR project.
The main objectives of the paper are to: (a) understand the various de®nitions of
BPR; (b) study the roles of modelling and analysis as enablers of BPR; (c) review the
literature available on BPR; (d) classify the tools and techniques based on the nature
of the applications and characteristics of the tools/techniques of BPR; (e) develop a
framework for identifying and selecting the most appropriate tools/techniques for
reengineering business processes; and (f) suggest some future research directions to
improve the modelling and analysis of BPR in the wake of advanced IT.
Realizing the importance of modelling and analysis of BPR, an attempt has been
made in this paper to understand ®rst the role of modelling of BPR and then to study
the various tools used for modelling and analysis of reengineering e orts. Finally, a
framework has been presented for modelling and analysis of a BPR.
2.
Business process reengineering
The keywords for BPR are `fundamental’, `radical’, `dramatic’, `change’ and
`process’. A business process has to undergo fundamental changes to improve pro-
ductivity and quality. Radical changes, as opposed to incremental changes, are made
to create dramatic improvements. Reengineering is not about ®ne-tuning or
marginal changes. It is for ambitious companies that are willing to make substantial
changes to achieve signi®cant performance improvements.
Chan and Peel (1998) conducted a survey of 37 companies in 17 di erent indus-
tries to investigate the causes and the impact of BPR. They concluded that the
primary reasons for BPR are increasing e ciency (internal) and improving customer
service (external). Francis and McIntosh (1997) identi®ed causes for the emergence
of BPR such as consumers, competition (global), technological development, and IT.
Most companies are function- or department-oriented , and not process-oriented.
Often, many people are involved in order ful®lment, but no one tracks a product
and reports the status of an order directly. Reengineering makes one individual
responsible for the complete business process (Self 1995). In another study, the
success of BPR is related to the creativity of the people in the organization (Paper
1997). Some of the factors that will prevent reengineering and hence innovation and
growth are: (i) correcting the process instead of changing it; (ii) loss of nerve; (iii) the
barons; (iv) change of company champion; (v) settling for minor results; (vi) culture,
attitudes and skill base; (vii) skimping on resources; and (viii) pulling back when
people resist change.
BPR is a structured approach to analysing and continually improving funda-
mental activities such as manufacturing , marketing, communications and other
major elements of a company’s operation (Elzinga et al. 1995). Wright and Yu
(1998) de®ned the factors to be considered before actual BPR starts and developed
a model for identifying the tools for BPR. Childe et al. (1994) have presented frame-

---

Business process reengineering
2525
works for BPR that focus upon the sequence of activities that form business pro-
cesses. They attempted to develop a framework for understanding BPR and to
explain the relationship between BPR and TQM, TBC and IT. BPR should enable
®rms to model and analyse the processes that support products and services, high-
light opportunities for both radical and incremental business improvements through
the identi®cation and removal of waste and ine ciency, and implement improve-
ments through a combination of IT and good working practices.
A conceptual model explaining the major components of BPR is shown in ®gure
1. This model demonstrates the link between organizational restructuring and beha-
vioural changes with the help of Information Technology for reengineering business
processes, and hence e ective process delivery systems, with the objective of improv-
ing customer satisfaction.
BPR requires organizationa l restructuring (include the facility location, capacity,
types of products, technology, people) and changes in employees’ behaviour (train-
ing, education, job enrichment, job enlargement, and employee empowerment) with
a view to accommodating and facilitating radical changes for achieving dramatic
improvements in business performance. IT, such as the Internet, E-Commerce,
CAD/CAM, CIM, MRP, Multimedia, ERP and WWW, EDI and EFT, would
help to restructure an organization and promote changes with acceptance from
Organizational
Behavioral
Structuring
Changes
Information
Technology
BusinessBus
Pr in
o ess
cess
Reengineering
Process Delivery Systems
Improved Customer Service
Level
Figure 1.
A conceptual model for BPR.

---

2526
A. Gunasekaran and B. Kobu
employees on any radical changes in the company. The reengineering of a business
process will result in improved process delivery systems and hence an improved
customer service level.
Organizational restructuring by standardization and simpli®cation eliminates
barriers for a smooth ¯ow of information and materials along the supply chains.
The smooth ¯ow of information can be facilitated by the use of various ITs to
improve the integration of various functional areas. The basic aim of BPR is to
deliver quality goods at competitive prices in a timely fashion. Therefore, a manu-
facturing system as well as a business organization should be modi®ed emphasizing
coordination of the basic business processes in the chain, from suppliers to customers,
as opposed to the existing complex structures of the functional hierarchies. The
behavioural changes should precede the reengineering. Therefore, issues such as
training and education, employee empowerment, teamwork and incentive schemes
should be given priority in BPR.
In order to reengineer a business process, both internal and external process
capabilities, such as product development, production, distribution, suppliers and
markets, and inter-organizationa l relationships, especially in a global manufacturing
environment, need to be integrated. Reengineering helps to achieve lean production
through the integration of production activities into self-contained units along the
production ¯ow. IT is an important element in such integration. Wyatt and Kletke
(1997) presented a descriptive model to illustrate the impact of telecommunication
technology on BPR. The techniques, such as time-based analysis, systems reengineer-
ing tools and IT can be applied to supply chain management as well as to the
customer administration cycle (order taking to cash collection), product design
cycle (concept de®nition to product availability), human resource development
cycle (skills need identi®cation to training completion), and virtually every other
process within an organization, The appropriate handling of the human motivational
reactions to change is unquestionably as important in the successful introduction of
radically new methods as are the technical aspects of process design (Gunasekaran
and Nath 1997). Al-Essa et al. (1996) discuss the critical roles of IT in development
and operations stages in BPR. Mahapatr a and Lai (1996) explored the similarities
between IT-enabled BPR and the competitive use of IT, and argued that BPR
extends the competitive use of IT to all levels in an organization.
Collins and Reynolds (1995) presented the experience of Microsoft Ireland’s
reengineering programme and explained how to solve inventory problems e ectively.
The company has solved the inventory problems in supply-chain by using online
stock control with advanced IT. Kenlaw (1995) explained how IBM’s Sales Force
Transformation (SFT) unit provides provisional services to Fortune 2000 customers
seeking to automate sales and marketing functions. Increasingly, sales managers are
looking for an integrated system that links front-end departments to manufacturing
resource planning and enterprise resource planning systems. Through time-based
selling, IBM has developed a system to eliminate paper or and avoid duplication
of order-entry procedures with the objective of increasing the accuracy of those
orders and streamlining contract writing and signing. Altinkemer et al. (1998) dis-
cussed how BPR would help to improve productivity and hence organizational
excellence. In a survey of 37 companies in 17 di erent industries, it was concluded
that the primary reasons for BPR are increased e ciency (internal) and improved
customer service (external), (Chan and Peel 1998). All these examples imply that

---

Business process reengineering
2527
BPR has the scope for applications in manufacturing /service organizations and that
IT is an integral part of BPR.
According to Self (1995), there are three things a manufacturing company needs
to do to be able to compete e ectively: (i) o er an e cient and well automated
manufacturing system that is capable of giving the company an advantage over
competitors; (ii) provide a coordinated method of meeting the order-winning criteria;
and (iii) reengineer the company’s process in such a way that the product meets
order-winning criteria and maximizes pro®t. This area has the potential for future
research and applications. Many believe that technology transfer, in the form of
automation, is the sole answer to business problems. Nevertheless, automation
does get some jobs done faster, but no dramatic improvement in performance results
without fundamental or radical process changes. Therefore, radical improvements
through factory innovation have more to do with a company’s ability to change its
processes than simply automating (Hammer and Champy 1993, Veasey 1994). BPR
requires altering of company’s in-house procedures and practices, which is an essen-
tial prerequisite to e ective innovation and growth. More often, a change in the
industrial culture and infrastructure should be necessary before investment in new
plant can take e ect.
BPR is a top-down, process-driven approach managed by senior executives,
which aims to improve the performance by radical changes in the system over the
short term (Ardhaldjian and Fahner 1994). Companies usually have to meet three
important goals to achieve e ectiveness: (i) a process, not product perspective, (ii)
cross-functiona l coordination or integration, and (iii) consistency between goals and
improvement plans (Wickens 1995, Jones et al. 1997, Lockamy and Smith 1997). IT
is an enabler to the reengineered process, and any reengineering programme must
consider the tremendous advantag e o ered by technologies such as document image
processing and expert systems (Childe et al. 1994, Morris and Brandon 1993).
The successful implementation of BPR for a radical change in manufacturing
strategy requires a change in attitude and the serious involvement of dedicated indi-
viduals and teams (Roby 1995). Smith (1995) indicates that a major aspect of BPR is
the human element. Therefore, companies should ensure that their employees are
suitably motivated and the technology required for training is available, especially
for radical change for BPR. In earlier studies, Hall et al. (1994) de®ned three critical
determinants of successful BPR projects. Maull et al. (1995) conducted a survey of
25 UK companies in order to determine the critical success factors for BPR. Teng
(1996) developed a model for strategic perspectives on BPR to enable organizational
changes including process changes. Guimaraes et al. (1997) tested eight Expert
Systems (ES) success factors in terms of their importance to BPR. Paper (1997)
presented a case study conducted in Caterpillar where he adheres to a systematic
methodology and insists on creativity training, process simpli®cation and improve-
ment. Elahee and Gupta (1998) discussed six major success factors for BPR. Yoon et
al. (1998) presented eight success factors for expert systems used in BPR. Larsen and
Myers (1999) discussed a BPR project in a ®nancial service ®rm that involves the
implementation of ERP software and they de®ned the success of a BPR project as a
moving target, since initial success in the case turned into failure in the long term.
The concepts of time-based competition (TBC) and lean production (LP) are of
considerable signi®cance to BPR. TBC is process based and aims to reduce radically
the time required for the entire process. The corresponding bene®ts may include
increased productivity, price competitiveness , reduced risks and increased market

---

2528
A. Gunasekaran and B. Kobu
share. In the 1980s, Total Quality Management (TQM) helped incremental process
improvements in manufacturing/service organizations, but in the 1990s it was
replaced by BPR using advanced IT. This implies a role for IT and BPR in improv-
ing the e ectiveness of organizations (Childe et al. 1994, Steinberger 1994).
Jones (1995) explained how benchmarking helps to identify and eliminate non-
value-adde d work. Benchmarking is a popular technique that a company can use to
compare its performance with other best-in-class performing companies in similar
industries. Combining benchmarking and reengineering ensures that the best prac-
tices are in use and helps a ®rm seek out and eliminate steps that waste resources.
Soliman and Youssef (1998) discussed the implications of TQM and learning organ-
ization on BPR. Their study attempted to determine the minimum BPR costs by
seeking the optimal process mapping (PM). Radical changes required by BPR can be
achieved by an information system that has to be restructured to support process
reengineering. The restructuring of an information system should support functional
integration to improve supply chain management and hence improve productivity
and quality.
Crowe et al. (1997), after studying ®ve US electronics ®rms, argued that choosing
the right BPR project reduces the risk of failure. Two-thirds of BPR projects fail due
to lack of poor planning. Kallio et al. (1999) studied 32 BPR projects and found that
most projects were focused on streamlining current business processes, while only in
a few cases were business processes radically redesigned. Based on the results, they
developed a framework to help managers choose the most appropriate BPR strate-
gies. In the following section, some of the advanced models are described before their
application in BPR are studied. Hipkin and De Cock (2000) analysed four postulates
relating to the implementation of new maintenance systems in four organizations
and attempted to establish a set of critical success factors in Reliability Centre
Maintenance (RCM) and Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) implementation,
and to provide some guidelines for their adoption. Humphreys et al. (2000) applied
Maister’s Professional Service Firm Model in an operational manner with the objec-
tive of identifying the roles and responsibilities of the purchasing function within an
aerospace company and concluded that sta
development must be a central theme
for the success of BPR.
3.
Previous research on modelling and analysis of BPR
Modelling is an essential step in studying the current and proposed structure of
business processes from a systems perspective. One of the earlier studies evaluates
modelling tools for BPR and introduces modelling techniques and an evaluation
procedure for selecting appropriate tools (Tseng and Chen 1995, Kim 1997).
O’Neill and Sohal (1999) review the literature covering 1980-1998 . They classi®ed
the literature based on the nature of BPR tools that incorporate: process visualiza-
tion, process mapping, change management, benchmarking, and process and custo-
mer focus. An attempt has been made here to review the literature on modelling
techniques and analysis used in BPR. Table 1 presents the review of the most recent
(1993±2000) literature on BPR modelling tools and techniques. The classi®cation of
the literature on modelling and analysis of BPR is based on the major tools/tech-
niques used that include: (i) conceptual models, (ii) simulation models, (iii) object-
oriented models, (iv) integration de®nition (IDEF) models, (v) network models, and
(vi) knowledge-based models. Table 2 summarizes the tools used in BPR. It can be

---

Business process reengineering
2529
Field of application
Techniques/Tools used
Author(s)
Manufacturing systems design
Conceptual models and
Manley (1993)
object transformation
process model(OTPM)
Manufacturing systems design
Simulation
Mujtaba (1994)
Reengineering hospital
Conceptual models
Strasen (1994)
operations
Design of manufacturing
IDEF models
Kusiak et al. (1994)
systems
Accounting database systems
Object-based and
Chen et al. (1995)
knowledge-based models
Cooperative supported work
Conceptual models
Yu and Mylopoulos (1995)
(Strategic Actor
Relationships)
Enterprise applications
Simulation
Meinhardt (1995)
Enterprise applications
Simulation
Drury and Laughery (1995)
General business process
Conceptual models
Kelleher (1995)
Military community hospitals
Conceptual medical group
McGee and Hudak (1995)
practice models
Reengineering of software
Simulation models
Wilkening et al. (1995)
(US Air Force)
Aircraft manufacturing
Knowledge based systems
Xia (1995)
(DSS)
Decision support systems
IDEF and QFD
Sarkis and Liles (1995)
Automated query formulation
Logical schemas
Semmel and Winkler (1995)
capabilities
(Conceptual Constructs)
Redesigned human resources
Conceptual models
Kesler (1995)
HR function
Enterprise integration in a
Objected-oriented models
Rolstadas (1995)
competitive manufacturing
Car dealer credit operations
Computer simulation
Cvetkovski et el. (1996)
Senior management decision on
Object transformation
Manley (1996)
Product/Service portfolio
Process model (OTPM),
Embedded Computer
System (ECS)
Manufacturing database
Simulation
Pugh (1996)
Net product development in
Conceptual models
Malhotra et al. (1996)
semiconductor and
telecommunication industries
Manufacturing business
Conceptual organizational
Thomas and Davies (1996)
structure
and information ¯ow
models
General reengineering process
Petri-net-based approach
Van der Aalst and Vanhee
(1996)
Business reengineering
Generic model using
Jarzebek and Link (1996)
meta-case techniques
Claims processing
AI models and techniques
Yu and Mylopoulos (1996)
Reducing order processing time
ABC analysis
Huttner and Kernler (1996)
Radio infrastructure
European foundation for
Bowden (1996)
quality management
(EFQM model)
Organizational structure
Conceptual models
Teng et al. (1996)
(process recon®guration)
Manufacturing process and
Simulation
Lyu (1996)
labour productivity
(continued)

---

2530
A. Gunasekaran and B. Kobu
Field of application
Techniques/Tools used
Author(s)
Automation of information
Object ¯ow model and
Hsu and Kleissner (1996)
¯ow between people and groups
simulation
Intelligent bank reengineering
Knowledge-based system
Min et al. (1996)
system
using IDEF
Work ¯ow management
Work ¯ow reengineering
Sharon et al. (1997)
methodology
Cash register, utility, postal
Simulation
Hunt et al. (1997)
service
Selection of BPR strategies
Decision support system
Crowe et al. (1997)
and technologies
Manufacturing
Project management
Narasimhan and Jayaram
techniques
(1997)
Hospital ward ordering
Soft system methodology
Chan and Choi (1997)
(SSM)
General BPR
Information technology
Wyatt and Kletke (1997)
Business process modelling
Object-oriented models
Wang (1997)
Engineering design process
Object-oriented models
Wright and Yu (1998)
Supply chain
Simulation
Cho et al. (1998)
Financial services
Information technology
Larsen and Myers (1999)
(ERP)
Printing o ce
Object-oriented model
VoÈlkner and Werners (2000)
Empirical analysis
IS network models
Bhatt and Stump (2001)
Table 1Ðconcluded.
A review of BPR modelling techniques developed/applied in recent
years (1993±2000).
Percentage of
Techniques/Tools used
articles surveyed
Major characteristics of techniques/tools
Conceptual models
14=45 ˆ 31:1
Easy to understand by the `end-users’, total
systems modelling, aggregate models with
less accuracy
Simulation models
11=45 ˆ 24:4
More accurate modelling, restricted in its
modelling capability, di cult to model the
strategic implication of BPR
Object-oriented models
7=45 ˆ 15:6
Di cult to understand by the end-users,
restricted to a part of the total system,
possibility of self-modelling, di cult to
consider strategic implications
IDEF models
6=45 ˆ 13:3
Easy to understand, has the advantages of
modelling the whole system, does not
include the strategic implications
Network models
4=45 ˆ 8:88
More accurate modelling, taking
uncertainty in the system, limited in its
modelling capability, less user-friendly
Knowledge-based models
3=45 ˆ 6:66
Intelligence systems, user-friendly, limited
in its applications
Table 2.
Summary of tools/techniques used in modelling and analysis of BPR.

---