If a mistake is made by a sales manager

[jarinislamfatema]

At some point, the process fails because the secretary makes a mistake when switching an incoming call, does not pick up the phone on time, or performs other incorrect actions. Logically, it is the business process owner who should restore order in this case.The head of the sales department, in accordance with the company hierarchy, can make some changes to the work, draw the employee's attention to shortcomings, or even choose some disciplinary action. But in case of violations on the part of the secretary, he does not have such powers.

The secretary has his own management and list of australia whatsapp phone numbers his own work, including that not related to this business process. If the secretary dealt only with incoming calls from clients, it would be logical to make him an employee of the sales department. And then there would be the usual linear subordination. In our case, only the secretary's immediate supervisor can determine whether the failure in the process was really the employee's fault or whether there were some other reasons for it. And only the secretary's immediate supervisor can make any decisions in connection with the failure identified.

It turns out that the appointment of a business process owner does not make sense. There is either a linear subordination described in the company hierarchy, or - just words in the diagram description that do not provide the "owner" with any authority and do not affect the work on the process implementation in any way. The fallacy of the concept of business process owner As you can see from the examples above, there is no point in calculating or assigning a business process owner. This is an unnecessary concept that only hinders work. Moreover, I believe that even in theory the concept of "owner" cannot apply to a business process.