A process, as a kind of system, derives its added value from the relationships among its elements (e.g., activities). For a group of activities to be truly integrated (versus merely aggregated), the flow of deliverables among them must be well defined, agreed to, and committed to. Engineering processes are especially complex because of the large number of interdependencies among the activities, as many types of information flow to many destinations. A process model of what actually flows must be extracted from the existing, implicit way work really gets done. Since this requires getting “close” to where work is actually done, it is beyond the ability of a single, centralized group to build the entire model. Instead, a number of process “puzzle pieces” must be integrated into a single process model that will have more holistic descriptive, analytical, and prescriptive value. (The systems engineering “V” model applies to processes as well as to products.) This paper applies a powerful technique for representing and analyzing complex processes, the design structure matrix (DSM). The paper shows how to use the DSM to display both internal and external inputs and outputs, thereby defining the “edges” of the process puzzle pieces so they can be assembled to form large, integrated processes where value can flow. Process definition and integration is akin to “mapping the genome” of how work is efficiently and effectively accomplished across disciplines and organizations. It is an important enabler of process understanding and improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tyson R. Browning (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: