臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is considered to be the fastest methodology to be used in order to improve business process in a current fast-changing environment. BPR attempts to achieve dramatic improvements in critical measures of performance by using the power of modern information technology (IT) fundamentally to rethink and radically to redesign the business process. However, many construction industries proposed BPR to evaluate the business process, not to redesign the business process. This study focuses on the idea of “Business Process Reengineering (BPR)” in applying benchmarking philosophy to redesign the business process.
The construction industry has been slow to adopt competitive benchmarking as a tool for continuous improvement. Identifying, and adapting the best-practice process are the important factors of benchmarking. In order to determine the most suitable process from best practice companies’ to be adapted in the benchmarking company, an accurate analysis of the gaps between best-practice processes and benchmarking company’s process is essential for the redesign of business processes.
This research integrates BPR philosophy, semantic similarities concept and trend model concept to develop a benchmarking-oriented process reengineering (BOPR) that enables a project team to determine the most suitable process from the best practice company. A four-phased process analysis including business process modeling, process similarities analysis, process communication index analysis and process adaptability calculation was developed. An approach of applying the concepts of semantic similarities analysis to find the semantic-related objects between best-practice processes and benchmarking process was also proposed. In addition, trend model concept was applied to evaluate the degree of communication ease of best-practice processes when it is adapted in a benchmarking company.
Summarily, by referring the proposed BOPR method, project team will have better understanding in determining the most suitable process from best-practice companies to be adapted in benchmarking company.

Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is considered to be the fastest methodology to be used in order to improve business process in a current fast-changing environment. BPR attempts to achieve dramatic improvements in critical measures of performance by using the power of modern information technology (IT) fundamentally to rethink and radically to redesign the business process. However, many construction industries proposed BPR to evaluate the business process, not to redesign the business process. This study focuses on the idea of “Business Process Reengineering (BPR)” in applying benchmarking philosophy to redesign the business process.
The construction industry has been slow to adopt competitive benchmarking as a tool for continuous improvement. Identifying, and adapting the best-practice process are the important factors of benchmarking. In order to determine the most suitable process from best practice companies’ to be adapted in the benchmarking company, an accurate analysis of the gaps between best-practice processes and benchmarking company’s process is essential for the redesign of business processes.
This research integrates BPR philosophy, semantic similarities concept and trend model concept to develop a benchmarking-oriented process reengineering (BOPR) that enables a project team to determine the most suitable process from the best practice company. A four-phased process analysis including business process modeling, process similarities analysis, process communication index analysis and process adaptability calculation was developed. An approach of applying the concepts of semantic similarities analysis to find the semantic-related objects between best-practice processes and benchmarking process was also proposed. In addition, trend model concept was applied to evaluate the degree of communication ease of best-practice processes when it is adapted in a benchmarking company.
Summarily, by referring the proposed BOPR method, project team will have better understanding in determining the most suitable process from best-practice companies to be adapted in benchmarking company.

Table 4.1 Definitions of Activity Functions (De Antonellis and Zonta, 1990) 57
Table 4.2 Name Set Affinity (Nsa) of Input Data Set of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 1 60
Table 4.3 Name Set Affinity (Nsa) of Output Data Set of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 1 60
Table 4.4 Name Set Affinity (Nsa) of Input Data Set of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 2 61
Table 4.5 Name Set Affinity (Nsa) of Output Data Set of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 2 61
Table 4.6 Name Set Affinity (Nsa) of Input Data Set of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 3 62
Table 4.7 Name Set Affinity (Nsa) of Output Data Set of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 3 62
Table 4.8 Process Function Similarities (PFSim) of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 1 64
Table 4.9 Process Function Similarities (PFSim) of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 2 64
Table 4.10 Process Function Similarities (PFSim) of Procurement Process
between Benchmarking Company and Best practice Company 3 65
Table 4.11 Activity Relationship Matrix (ARM) Benchmarking Company
Referring to Best practice Company 1 Procurement Process 72
Table 4.12 Activity Relationship Matrix (ARM) Benchmarking Company
Referring to Best practice Company 2 Procurement Process 72
Table 4.13 Activity Relationship Matrix (ARM) Benchmarking Company
referring to Best practice Company 3 Procurement Process .72
Table 4.14 Pairwise Comparison 76
Table 4.15 Inconsistent Matrix of Pairwise Comparison 77
Table 4.16 Normalized Matrix, Row Sums 77
Table 4.17 Totaling the Entries 78
Table 4.18 Overall priorities of Ki 79
Table 4.19 Communication Resistance Matrix (CRM) Benchmarking Company
referring to Best practice Company 1 Procurement Process 80
Table 4.20 Communication Resistance Matrix (CRM) Benchmarking Company
referring to Best practice Company 2 Procurement Process 80
Table 4.21 Communication Resistance Matrix (CRM) Benchmarking Company
referring to Best practice Company 3 Procurement Process 80
Table 4.22 Total Resistance Calculation of Benchmarking Company referring to
Best practice Company 1 Procurement Process 82
Table 4.23 Total Resistance Calculation of Benchmarking Company referring to
Best practice Company 2 Procurement Process…………………………………..82
Table 4.24 Total Resistance Calculation of Benchmarking Company referring to
Best practice Company 3 Procurement Process 82
Table 4.25 Total Resistance Index of Benchmarking Company 82
Table 4.26 Total Communication Index of Benchmarking Company 83
Table 4.27 Adaptability Index (AI) Pairwise Comparison between
Process Similarity and Process Communication Index 85
Table 4.28 Adaptability Index (AI) Pairwise Comparison between PI Sim and PF Sim .85
Table 4.29 Inconsistent Matrix of Process Similarity and Process Communication Index 86
Table 4.30 Relative Weight of Process Similarity and Process Communication Index 86
Table 4.31 Inconsistent Matrix of PI Sim and PF Sim 86
Table 4.32 Relative Weight of PI Sim and PF Sim 86
Table 4.33 Process Information Similarity (PI SIM) Normalization 87
Table 4.34 Process Functional Similarity (PF SIM) Normalization 87
Table 4.35 Adaptability Index (AI) of Procurement Process 88

Andrea, M., Egenhofer Max J. (2003). “Determining Semantic Similarity among Entity Classes from Different Ontologies.” IEEE Transactions onn Knowledge and Data Engineering, 15(2), 442-456.
Bennigson, L. A. ~1971!. ‘‘TREND: New management information from networks.’’ Proc., 3rd Int. Congress on Project Planning by Network Techniques, 44–60.
Camp, Robert C. “Benchmarking”. ASQ.1989. New York
Castano, S. and De Antonellis, V. (1995a). “Reengineering processes in public administrations”. In Proc. of OO-ERJ95- Int. Conf. on the Object-Oriented and Entity-Relationship Modelling,. 282-295, Gold Coast, Australia.
Castano, S. and De Antonellis, V. (1995b). “Reference conceptual architectures for re-engineering information systems.” International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 49(2&3):213-235.
Castano, S. and De Antonellis, V. (1997) “A multi-perspective framework for the analysis of legacy information systems.” In Proc. of CAiSE'97 - Int. Conf. on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 117-130, Barcelona, Spain.
Castano, S., De Antonellis,V. (1998). “A framework for expressing semantic relationships between multiple information systems for cooperation”, Information Systems 23(3/4), pp.253-277.
De Antonellis, V. and Zonta, B. (1990). “A Disciplined Approach to Offine Analysis. “ IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 16(8), 822-828.
Furnas, G.W., Landauer, I.K., Gomez, L.M., and Dumais, S.T. (1987). “The vocabulary problem in human-system communication.” Communications of the ACM, 30(11), 964-971
Galbraith, J.R.(1973). “Designing Complex Organizations”. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
James T. O’Connor and Steven J. Miller, “Constructability Programs: Method for Assessment and Benchmarking.” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities. 8(1), 1994, pp.46-64.
Li, Y., Bandar, Z.A., Mclean, D. (2003). “An approach for measuring semantic similarity between words using multiple information sources,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 15(4), 871 - 882.
M. Hammer, Reengineering work: Don’t automate, obliterate, Harvard Business Review, (1990) 104-112.
M. Hammer, J. Champy, Reengineering the corporation-A manifesto for business revolution, Harper Collins, New York, 1993.
Min-Yuan, Cheng., Cheng-Wei., Su. and Horng-Yuh, You, “Optimal Project Organizational Structure for Construction Management”. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 129(1), 2003, pp.70-79.
Min-Yuan. Cheng, M.H. Tsai, “Reengineering of Construction Management Process.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 129(1), 2003, pp.105-114.
M.H. Tsai, (2007). Reengineering of Cross-organization Process for Design-Build Projects. Ph.D. Dissertation, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
Planning, organizing and managing Benchmarking activities: User’s guide.” (1992). Am. Productivity and Quality Ctr., Houston, Tex.
Poulson, B., 1996, Process benchmarking in retail financial services. Management Services, June, 12–14.
Ricardo R. Ramirez, Luis Fernando C. Alarcon and Peter Knights, “Benchmarking System for Evaluating Management Practice in the Construction Industry.” Journal of Management in Construction. 20(3), 2004, pp.110-117.
Sang-Hoon Lee, Stephen R. Thomas, and Richard L. Tucker. “Web-Based Benchmarking System for the Construction Industry.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 131(7), 2005, pp.790-798.
Scheer, A. W., (2000), ARIS: Business Process Modeling, (Berlin: Springer).
Sciore, E., Siege, M., and Rosenthal, A. (1994). “Using semantic values to facilitate interoperability among heterogeneous information systems”. ACM Tbnsactions on Database Systems, 19(2), 254-290.
Sheth, A. and Kashyap, V. (1992). “So Far (Schematically) Yet So Near (Semantically).” Proc. IFIP WG2.6 Database Semantic Conf. Interoperable Database Systems. DS-5, 283-312.
Spendolini, Michael J. ”The Benchmarking Book”. Amacom. 1992. New York.
Taiichi, O. (1990). Toyota production System: Beyond large scale production. Productivity Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Thamhain, H. J. (1991). “Benchmarking of project management systems: How to measure yourself against the best.” Seminar Proc., Project Management Institute, Dallas, Tex., 471-476.
Tenner, A. R. and Detoro, I.J., 1997, Process Redesign: The Implementation Guide for Managers (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley)
Watson, G. H. (1993). Strategic benchmarking: How to rate your company’s performance against the world’s best. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,, London, England.
Y, C. Juan and C. Ou-Yang., 2004, Systematic approach for the gap analysis of business process. International Journal of Production Research Vol.42, No. 7, 1325-1364.
Zairi, M. (1992). “Competitive Benchmarking: An executive guide,” Technical Communications Ltd., Letchworth, U.K.