The systematic approach to organizational processes, usually defined by five fundamental components: input, resources, constraints, activities, and output, seems to be the norm until one encounters a unique scenario requiring a special approach. The five components of a process are vital factors of success, much as they may not apply in all situations. Mackenzie (2000) asserts that organizational science has reached a critical point where the “traditional methods of positioning variables, gathering data and linking the variables by linear models using standards statistical methods is breaking down” (p. 123). This observation is consistent with the view that contemporary process frameworks call for greater levels of flexibility and the ability to alter decisions, which explains why the five process components are crucial, although they might not all be necessary for every scenario.
Processes are a critical part of day-to-day life for both individuals and groups. According to Davenport (1993), a process is a broad concept manifested in different ways at personal and organizational levels. Examples of processes include establishing group structures, developing new products or services, logistical management, creation of business strategies, and the performance of tasks within teams, among many other activities. The uniqueness of these examples is a clear pointer that there might not be any perfect universal process approach, much as it is necessary to be systematic in all endeavors (Van de Ven & Delbecq, 1974). Nevertheless, organizational processes involve five fundamental components, which are the entries or people performing the process, elements constituting involved stages, relationships between various components, links to external processes, and resources at disposal (Mackenzie, 2000). A critical review of these components shows that a complete process must feature the interaction of various variables to yield particular outcomes.
Personal and organizational processes are characteristically diverse, mainly because of differences in contextual circumstances and focus goals. Kim and Jang (2002) assert that the approach used in strategic management processes may not necessarily suit operational or tactical levels. Each of these three managerial levels has a unique focus, although they operate interdependently. Processes at the various levels vary significantly depending on the nature of relationships between involved entities, links to external processes, and overall focus (Davenport & Short, 1990; Wijnberg et al., 2002). However, all processes involve three fundamental stages: inputting, processing, and outputting. A process cannot commence without input, as it is the starting point of every project. The inputs or entries are then processed to give particular outputs, which refer to goals and objectives being pursued. Therefore, a complete process cycle features the input stage, processing, and outputs.
The processes approach calls for the direct involvement of the variables defining the phenomena of interest. Essentially, systems seldom operate in a linear pattern, as has been presumed to be the case all along. Mackenzie (2000) posits that the linear pattern is a misconception that could be a culmination of flawed studies. As such, an effective process should be designed with a focus on how the particular system of interest operates, rather than the usual linear models centered on the five fundamental components. Dickson (2003) asserts that it is necessary to incorporate context and specificity in the objects of inquiry; a strategy calls for a shift from the traditional variable methodology to a result-oriented approach. Ostensibly, the shift must be such as to augment the process output by enhancing efficiency in internal processes. The overall impact should be manifested in the process output.
In overview, it is apparent that processes must feature the input, processing, and output components. The processing element may vary significantly depending on the characteristics and demands of a particular scenario. In essence, the processing stage constituents may vary considerably depending on the relationships between involved variables, meaning that the resources, constraints, and activities are subject to variations. However, a process cannot be devoid of the input and output components.
References
Davenport, T. H. (1993). Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. Harvard Business School Press.
Davenport, T. H., & Short, J. E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information technology and business process redesign. Sloan Management Review, 31(4).
Dickson, P. R. (2003). The pigeon breeders’ cup: A selection on selection theory of economic evolution. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 13(3), 259–280.
Kim, S.-H., & Jang, K.-J. (2002). Designing performance analysis and IDEF0 for enterprise modeling in BPR. International Journal of Production Economics, 76(2), 121–133. Web.
Mackenzie, K. D. (2000). Processes and their frameworks. Management Science, 46(1), 110–125.
Van de Ven, A. H., & Delbecq, A. L. (1974). A task contingent model of a work-unit structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19(2), 183–197.
Wijnberg, N. M., van den Ende, J., & de Wit, O. (2002). Decision making at different levels of the organization and the impact of new information technology: Two cases from the financial sector. Group and Organization Management, 27(3). 408–429. Web.