Page 85 - 35-1

NTU Management Review Vol. 35 No. 1 Apr. 2025

senior corporate advisor stated, “When comparing process efficiency in 2015 Q4 with 2016
Q4, the average process time of generating an offer letter had improved 85.3% to 1.25
working days.” Recruiter A also added, “No candidate rejected an offer due to lengthy
internal process since September 2016.”

Because the approval document is digitalized, there are no incidents of damaged
paper due to physical transportation; the TO-BE process also establishes clear
responsibilities among approvers and couriers. More specifically, recruiters assume

responsibility for the offer letter, rather than the C&B specialist, and couriers no longer
need to physically deliver the documents. Moreover, recruiters’ reports are now directly
delivered to the HR business partner instead of the resourcing manager. These changes
have led the case company to achieve improved performance, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Performance of TO-BE Compensation Approval Process
Measures 2015 Q4 2016 Q4 Improvement Rate (%)
Process Time (Working days) 9.5 1.25 85.3%
Damaged Report (number/quarter) 2 0 100%
Rejected Offer due to lengthy process (N/A)* 0 100%
Note: *not recorded in history but existed for certain.

4.3 BPM Life Cycle Analysis

The case study provides an opportunity to verify the application of ABPMP’s
PDCA life cycle in Taiwan. As argued by Association of Business Process Management
Professionals (2013), there are typical stages in different BPM projects, namely the

PDCA stages. They further identify how much information must be disclosed at each
stage. This information is revealed when the case company conducts the BPM project.
As the senior corporate advisor disclose, “There are common steps we always take in
each BPM project: to understand the current business process, to map the process to
FOCUS strategy, to collect internal and external regulations, to identify proper measures,

to redesign the business process, to build social connections with the target function, to
manage stakeholders, to hold training sessions, to generate user manuals, and to establish
a control mechanism.”

77