What are the market segmentation levels

"From process evaluation to the SOA approach"

Transcript

1 »From process evaluation to the SOA approach« Financing process Uwe Bröker Innovation days »Bank & Future« 2007

2 Industrialization - Workshop How do we organize the 35 minute workshop? I tell 35 minutes and even override you collect questions for the end, the answers of which we will not get in the end ;-) Therefore the request to call immediately, ask. and reconsider who asks is a fool for a minute, who does not ask is a fool for a lifetime. Confucius, Chinese philosopher 2

3 »From process evaluation to the SOA approach« Agenda Who is S&N? Service-Oriented Architecture Definition of Terms Principle Layer Model The Project Financing Process Objective Requirements From IT to Process From Process to SOA Interaction Business / Technology Quick Check Process Manual Conclusion 3

4 The S&N company at a glance Founded in 1991 Headquarters in Paderborn AG, not listed since 1999 Share capital 1.035 million Branches: Berlin, Ffm / Eschborn, Munich S&N Group Management S&N AG Klaus Beverungen, Management Board Amadeus IT GmbH Josef Tillmann, Management Board ynes GmbH Uwe Bröker Supervisory Board About 150 employees Heinz-Dieter Wendorff, Chairman About 17 million sales in 2005 Prof. Dr. Gregor Engels, University of Paderborn Georg Mescheder, tax advisor 4

5 The Company Financial Industry Specialist Areas S&N Value Chain Guidance Competence Technology IT Areas Insurance Guidance in Business Leasing Integration Guidance in IT Migration Banks Concentration Innovation Technical Consulting Initialization Realization Operational Preparation Operation Business IT Development IT Operation 5

6 The company Research and innovation at S&N Fraunhofer Gesellschaft - IAO Innovationsforum B&Z EU research project 14 Universities from the EU, 4 companies University of Paderborn s-lab partner XBRL e.v. Germany Member of the Tools working group Research project Bank & Future SENSORIA Software Engineering for for service Oriented Overlay Computers Uni Paderborn & 6 Partner Software Quality Lab Exchange standard of balance sheet information 6

7 »From process evaluation to the SOA approach« Agenda Who is S&N? Service-Oriented Architecture A Definition of Terms Principle Layer Model The Project Financing Process Objective Requirements From IT to Process From Process to SOA Interaction Business / Technology Quick Check Process Manual Conclusion 7

8 Service Oriented Architecture Problems with uniqueness Interpretation from personal experience Petra put on Martin's T-shirt. Petra put Martin's t-shirt on. Petra put on the t-shirt that belongs to Martin. If there is no general agreement, there is no point in making plans with one another. Confucius, Chinese philosopher 8th century

9 Service Oriented Architecture Definitions What is SOA? SOA is a management concept. The aim is an infrastructure that is geared towards business processes and that is easy to adapt. Technical functions are provided in the form of loosely coupled, documented and reusable services. What is SOA not? SOA is not a technology. SOA web services. SOA is not a magic bullet. 9

10 Service-Oriented Architecture Governance Service Level Agreement S&N Value-Adding SOA Service-Oriented Architecture Existing IT Systems Sourcing Policy New Technologies Innovation Technical Consulting Initialization Implementation Operational Preparation Operation Business IT Development IT Operation 10

11 Service-oriented architecture SOA principle Service consumers are end customers Integrate services into processes Use the orchestrated services Find processes Service consumer Service providers register and aggregate internal and external providers Services are software modules that are large enough to handle complete business To map functions. [Gartner-Group, Hype-Cycle 2004] Service directory registered binds uses service provider 11

12 Service-Oriented Architecture SOA Layer Model Processes Modeling (BPM) Services Aggregation via ESB Components Objects Implementation / Encapsulation API Programming Data 12

13 »From process evaluation to the SOA approach« Agenda Who is S&N? Service-Oriented Architecture A Definition of Terms Principle Layer Model The Project Financing Process Objective Requirements From IT to Process From Process to SOA Interaction Business / Technology Quick Check Process Manual Conclusion 13

14 The "Financing Process" project Objectives Optimizing the financing process Accelerating processes through efficient modeling Reducing costs by improving the IT support workflow (no media breaks) Creating flexibility for extensions through new business models, legal requirements for additional products, additional partners Protecting investments Service-oriented architecture Use of future-oriented technologies and standards Open to sourcing 14

15 The "Financing Process" project Requirements Fast first successes Pilot project as proof of concept Maintaining the functions Measurability through defined measurement parameters (KPIs) No project of the century No island solution Focus on overall process / solution Generic basis with the possibility of individualization Reusability 15

16 The "Financing Process" Project Financing Process Sales Decision-making Processing Risk Management Processing Customer Acquisition Product Selection Data Collection First Rating Check Documents Creation of Internal Rating 18-Closing Second Voting Resolution Drafting Contract Documents Payout Current. Payment transactions Current data collection Portfolio management Resubmission of the loan Risk controlling Purchase financing Intensive care of loans at risk of default Dunning debt collection sales 16

17 The "Financing Process" Project From IT to Process - Purchasing Financing - Procedure Analysis of the application with regard to business cases and functional units Decomposition into smaller modules, so-called services Orchestration of the services in a flexible architecture Implementation of the coarse-grained and loosely coupled services Parallel to this, deriving the specific processes of the description of the services Mapping of the processes Technical description, plausibility abstracting of the processes Process manual Benchmark of the process landscape Quick check, maturity level Sales Check documents Creation of internal rating 18-Closure Second vote Resolution Processing of contract documents Disbursement Current. Payment transactions Risk controlling Purchasing financing Customer acquisition Product selection Data collection First vote Decision Processing risk management Current data collection Portfolio management Resubmission of the loan Intensive care of loans at risk of default Dunning Debt collection Sales 17

18 The "Financing Process" Project From Process to SOA Decision - Purchase Financing Approach Assessment of the process landscape Identifying the core processes Checking the degree of maturity (QC) Analyzing and optimizing individual processes Methods Process manual Creating a service-oriented architecture Technical concept (workflow, dialogs) Technology concept (partially new development, Encapsulate applications) Determination of services Implementation of the project IT-technical organizational Customer acquisition Product selection Data collection First vote Sales decision Decision Check documents Creation of internal rating 18-Closure second vote Resolution processing Contract documents Payout Current. Payment transactions Risk controlling Case processing Risk management Current data collection Portfolio management Resubmission of the loan Intensive care of loans at risk of default Dunning debt collection sales 18

19 The "Financing Process" Project Interaction of Business / Technology Analysis Existing Business Processes Process Landscape Optimization Optimized Business Processes Parallel Backflow Existing IT Systems Migration Services Adaptation Orchestration Optimized Service Infrastructure Implementation Operation 19

20 market segmentation levels ACTUAL value TARGET values ​​difference evaluation market segmentation evaluator between process definition a total of 15 points; Evaluation result Value (%) in points TARGET result Values ​​(%) in points Value result Evaluation result TARGET and ACTUAL levels 1 Business processes are identified and documented 100% per sub-point = 3.75 points ACTUAL 1.1 Business process is identified 66% 2 , 48 66% Difference 2.48 0% 1.2 Current process map is available Evaluation 10% 0.38 Evaluator 20% between 0.75 10% Process definition 1.3 Sub-processes are documented a total of 15 points; Evaluation result (%) in points 20% result 0.75 (%) in points 100% 3.75 value 80% result 25% evaluation- 0.94 result 45% TARGET- 1.69 and ACTUAL- 20% 1 business processes 1.4 input / Output / are identified process steps and documented the sub-processes are documented 100% per sub-item = 3.75 points 1.1 business process is identified 66% 2.48 66% 2.48 0% 1.2 current process map is available 10% 0.38 evaluation 20% 0.75 evaluator 10% 1.3 sub-processes process responsibility are documented a total of 15 points; 25% evaluation-0.9 result (%) 0.75 in points 100% result (%) 3.75 in points 80% 2.1 Process owner is determined 100% 3.75 100% 3.75 0% result 45% evaluation-1.69 Result 20% difference 1.4 Input / 2 Output / For process steps GP and their sub-processes of the sub-processes are process owners are documented appointed 100% per sub-item = 3.75 points 20% 2.2 Sub-process owners are specified Evaluation 100% 3.75 Evaluator 100% 3.75 0% process responsibility 2.3 The person responsible for the business process has sufficient powers and competencies (staff, total budget) 15 points; Evaluation result (%) in points 0% result 0.00 (%) in points 66% 2.48 66% result 0% Evaluation- 0.00 result 66% difference 2.48 66% 2 For GP 2.4 and those responsible for sub-processes are their sub-processes Process owner has appointed sufficient powers and competencies (staff, budget) 100% per sub-item = 3.75 points 2.1 Process owner is specified 100% 3.75 100% 3.75 0% 2.2 Sub-process owner is specified 100% 3.75 Evaluation 100% 3 , 75 evaluators 0% 2.3 person responsible for business processes process measurement has sufficient authority and competencies (staff, budget) a total of 20 points; 0% evaluation -0.0 result (%) 0.00 in points 66% result (%) 2.48 in points 66% 3.1 metrics are defined for business process 0% 0.00 0% 0.00 0% result 66% evaluation- 2 , 48 Result 66% difference 2.4 Sub-process owner 3 The performance of the GP is sufficient regularly Authorizations based on and from competencies Measured variables (staff, measured budget) 100% per sub-point = 4 points 0% 3.2 Measured variables are defined for all sub-processes Evaluation 0% 0, 00 Evaluator 0% 0.00 0% Process measurement 3.3 Measured variables are recorded regularly, a total of 20 points; Evaluation result (%) in points 0% Result 0.00 (%) in points 0% 0.00 0% result 0% Evaluation 0.00 result 0% Difference 0.00 0% 3 The performance 3.4 measurement results of the GP are regular are measured regularly on the basis of evaluated measured variables 100% per sub-item = 4 points 3.1 Measured variables 3.5 Improvement measures are defined for business processes (e.g. removal of barriers) are carried out 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 0% 0% 3.2 Measured variables are defined for all sub-processes 0% 0.00 0% 0.00 0% 3.3 Measured variables are recorded regularly 0% 0.00 Evaluation 0% 0.00 Evaluator 0% 3.4 Measurement results Definition, process goals are evaluated regularly, a total of 20 points ; 0% evaluation -0.0 result (%) 0.00 in points 0% result (%) 0.00 in points 0% 4.1 target values ​​are set for business processes 40% 1.60 40% 2.00 0% result 0% evaluation- 0 , 00 Result 0% difference 3.5 Improvement measures 4 Systematic (e.g. removal of barriers) Target values ​​for the GP are established 100% per sub-point = 4 points 0% 4.2 Improvement / optimization potentials are defined and budgeted for each business process Evaluation 50% 2.00 Evaluator 75% 3.75 25% Definition 4.3 Process objectives Bottlenecks are identified (and financially evaluated) a total of 20 points; Evaluation result (%) in points 50% result 2.00 (%) in points 65% 3.25 15% result 0% Evaluation 0.00 result 24% Difference 1.20 24% 4 Systematic 4.4 Current action plan target values ​​for for the realization GP is set before 100% per sub-point = 4 points 4.1 Target values ​​4.5 are 4.5 Efficiency potentials for business processes are set 40% 0% 1.60 0.00 40% 0% 2.00 0.00 0% 0% 4.2 Improvement / optimization potentials are defined and budgeted for each business process 50% 2.00 75% 3.75 25% Bottlenecks are determined (and financially assessed) 0% 0.00 Assessment 24% 1.20 Assessment 24% 4.4 Current action plan Control target achievement a total of 20 points are available for implementation; 50% evaluation-2.0 result (%) 0.00 in points 0% result (%) 0.00 in points 0% 5.1 Current (and complete) cockpit charts are available 25% 0.71 75% 3.00 50% result 65% evaluation - 3.25 result 15% difference in efficiency potential The achievement of targets is before the GP is regularly monitored and shown in process reports 100% per sub-point = 2.85 points 0% 5.2 Measures for target achievement are defined Evaluation 5% 0.14 Evaluator 25 % 1.00 20% control 5.3 Achievement of goals ... and implemented a total of 20 points; Evaluation result (%) in points 5% result 0.14 (%) in points 10% 0.40 5% result 5% Evaluation 0.14 result 10% Difference 0.40 5% The achievement of goals 5.4 more positive the trend GP becomes the Key figure regularly monitored in the direction of target achievement and is proven in process reports 100% per sub-point = 2.85 points 5.1 Current 5.5 (and complete causes) for negative cockpit charts Trends are known 25% 5% 0.71 0.14 75 % 15% 3.00 0.60 50% 10% 5.2 Measures 5.6 Measures to achieve the objectives to be eliminated are in implementation 5% 5% 0.14 0.14 25% 10% 1.00 0.40 20% 5% and implemented 5.7 current barrier list is available 5% 5% 0.14 0.14 10% 10% 0.40 0.40 5% 5% 5.4 positive trend of the key figure towards target achievement is proven 5% 0.14 10% 0, 40 5% 5.5 Causes of negative trends are known 5% 0.14 Evaluation 15% 0.60 Evaluator 10% 5.6 Measures Process improvement to eliminate them are being implemented a total of 20 points; 5% evaluation -0.1 result (%) 0.14 in points 10% result (%) 0.40 in points 5% 6.1 process team works regularly 0% 0.00 5% 0.20 5% result 10% evaluation-0 , 40 result 5% difference 5.7 current 6 barrier list The business processes are available are continuously improved 100% per sub-point = 4 points 5% 6.2 More than 30% of the employees in the process are integrated into the bottleneck removal team. Evaluation 0% 0.00 Evaluator 5% 0.20 5% process improvement 6.3 (Six Sigma) improvement teams are established and regularly work a total of 20 points; Evaluation result (%) in points 0% result 0.00 (%) in points 0% 0.00 0% result 0% Evaluation 0.00 result 5% Difference 0.20 5% The business processes 6.4 (Six Sigma) improvement Progress is continuously improved is tracked (visualization, review) 100% per sub-item = 4 points 6.1 Process team 6.5 Process improvements work regularly are demonstrably implemented 0% 0% 0.00 0.00 5% 0% 0.20 0.00 5% 0% 6.2 More than 30% of the process employees are integrated in bottleneck elimination teams 0% 0.00 5% 0.20 5% 6.3 (Six Sigma) management support Improvement teams are established and work regularly 0% 0.00 Evaluation 5% 0.20 Evaluator 5% 6.4 (Six Sigma) The improvement progress management evaluates regularly, follows the (visualization, process reports review) and actively supports a total of 30 points; 0% evaluation 0.0 result (%) 0.00 in points 0% result (%) 0.00 in points 0% 7.1 Management team meets regularly with all GP managers 20% 1.20 20% 1.20 0% result 0% evaluation - 0.00 result 0% difference 6.5 Process improvements 7 Process improvements have been demonstrably implemented 100% per sub-point = 6 points 0% management support 7.2 Cockpit charts are analyzed in the management team and measures are implemented Evaluation 25% 1.50 Evaluator 25 % 1.50 0% The management 7.3 Management regularly evaluates actively drives the process reports GP improvement from and supports (evidence) actively a total of 30 points; Evaluation result (%) in points 0% Result 0.00 (%) in points 0% 0.00 0% result 0% Evaluation 0.00 result 0% Difference 0.00 0% Process improvements 7.4 Management appears as a driver of process improvement to 100% per sub-point = 6 points 7.1 Management team 7.5. Changes are regularly initiated with a process-oriented organization for all those responsible for a GP 20% 0% 1.20 0.00 20% 0% 1.20 0.00 0% 0% 7.2 Cockpit charts are analyzed in the management team and measures are implemented 25% 1.50 25% 1.50 0% 7.3 Management actively drives the improvement of GP (evidence) 0% 0.00 0% 0.00 0% 7.4 Management evaluation model appears visibly as score values ​​for process improvement for drivers 0% ACTUAL values ​​0.00 0% target values ​​0.00 0% 7.

21 The "Financing Process" project Process manual S&N Process Manual Description of the business processes Processes and sub-processes (Level 1 to 3) Service pattern Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Initial phase EKF process landscape Finance object Collect object data Period.Security assessment Manage rollover Activate object block Edit object End object Delete object EKF basic process exhaustion Return object financing Create account Adjust conditions End customer relationship Calculate financing Change financing Undo cancellation General cancellation Final phase Process maturity level Maturity questions Key performance indicator (KPI) act Financing object Collect object data Financing Calculate Second processor Activate object Allocate subvention Allocate insurance [else] Carry out financing Transfer security [no release] Pay out loan amount Methods for improving the maturity level For further process optimization Quick Check Quick Check UML Activities UML Activities EFQM EFQM Balanced Balanced Scorecard Scorecard Value Added Analysis Value Added Analysis 21

22 The "Financing Process" project »From process evaluation to SOA approach« Conclusion Quick Success through a step-by-step, pragmatic approach Realistic SOA approach / use Holistic SOA strategy Brings strategy, processes and IT into context - vertical alignment clarifies the support service and the Value contribution of IT - horizontal alignment Value-adding business architecture 22

23 Thank you very much If you don't worry about your future, you will soon have to worry about your today. Confucius, Chinese philosopher S&N AG, 2007

24 Sensoria Sensoria project EU research project Software Engineering for Service-Oriented Overlay Computers 18 involved 14 universities (from D, I, GB, PL, DK, P and H) LMU Munich, Uni Trento, Uni Leicester, Uni Warsaw, TU Lyngby , Uni Pisa, Uni Florence, Uni Bologna, Research Institute A. Faedo, Uni Lisbon, Uni Edinburgh, Imperial College London, Uni Budapest, Uni London thereof 4 companies (from P, I and D) ATX Software SA, Telekom Italia SpA, FAST GmbH, S&N AG Duration: 4 years (until) 24

25 Sensoria Objectives Definition of an ontology for SOA Definition of language primitives for the service specification A mathematical model for the combination of services taking into account SLAs, as well as the dynamic reconfiguration Techniques and methods for the qualitative and quantitative analysis of services A tool suite and techniques for the development and deployment of SOA systems UML extensions for mapping SOA A model-driven approach to SOA developments that enables early design tests and a formal analysis of Quality of Service 25

26 Tools: Quick Check Quick Check on the subject of business processes Central question: How good are my business processes? Level 2 Processes Business process Area Process maturity level question Financing the object Weighting (points): 25 Difference between TARGET and ACTUAL value Evaluation result (%) Evaluation result in points Evaluation result (%) Evaluation result in points Process Is the standard process implemented correctly? 66% 5.28 66% 5.28 0% 8 patterns and variants Has the "four-eyes principle" pattern been implemented? 50% 2.50 50% 2.50 0% 5 Has the "bad credit rating" variant been implemented? 10% 0.20 20% 0.40 10% 2 Maturity level questions When carrying out the process, it is possible to differentiate between the 25% 0.50 45% 0.90 20% 2 application of the bad credit pattern and the general case ? Is there a clear regulation of what happens if property financing cannot be carried out due to a lack of available 80% 2.40 100% 3.00 20% 3 credit volume? KPI What is the average process lead time? 65% 1.30 70% 1.40 5% 2 How much employee time is used in the process? 20% 0.60 30% 0.90 10% 3 Difference between TARGET and periodic safety assessment Weighting (points): 25 Assessment Assessment Assessment result Result Assessment result (%) in points Result (%) in points ACTUAL value Process There is clearly defined measures for the periodic 55% 4.40 70% 5.60 15% 8 safety assessment? Are there any indications of the effectiveness of the measure? 35% 1.40 55% 2.20 20% 4 maturity level questions Are clear upper and lower limits defined for the implementation of periodic 60% 1.20 70% 1.40 10% 2 safety assessments? Is compliance with these limits checked? 35% 0.70 55% 1.10 20% 2 55% 1.65 55% 1.65 0% 3 Maturity level indicators Is there support for planning or reminding you of safety assessments to be carried out, e.g. B. IT-based? Has a process and person responsible been defined, according to which the specified time intervals are regularly checked with regard to their appropriateness and, if necessary, adjusted? Are on-site assessments carried out at random within the defined time intervals in order to minimize their predictability? Are the results of the safety assessment documented in a meaningful way in order to make decisions based thereon with regard to the conditions comprehensible? ACTUAL value ACTUAL value TARGET values ​​TARGET values ​​Weight points Weight points 40% 0.80 60% 1.20 20% 2 20% 0.40 20% 0.40 0% 2 25% 0.50 35% 0 , 70 10% 2 target / actual deviation Summary of the process score values ​​ACTUAL values ​​Target values ​​No. , 60 54% 8.10 3 Adjust conditions 54% 8.15 66% 9.95 4 Create account 46% 8.25 58% 10.50 5 Periodic security assessment 44% 11.05 57% 14.25 6 Manage prolongation 47 % 9.35 59% 11.70 7 Start property 50% 12.40 56% 13.90 8 Enter property data 44% 8.85 58% 11.65 9 Calculate financing 48% 9.55 53% 10.50 10 Customer relationship end 49% 7.40 58% 8.65 overall process maturity level total number of points business processes degree of fulfillment business processes 48% 57% 26

27 Documentation: Process Manual Structuring: Processes, Patterns, Variants Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Basic Process Object Financing EKF Basic Process Exhaustion of the Four-Eyes Principle Variant: Bad Credit Pattern act Finance the Object act Four-Eyes Principle Second Processor Assign Subvention «all »« All »« all »record object data plan action« after »« after »issue approval dual control principle« after »execution assign insurance« after »no approval second agent carry out financing transfer security variants calculate financing activate object [else] act Bad credit rating (received financing) [no approval] Pay out loan amount Transfer security "after" "all" Pay out loan amount 27