Six Enablers Framework

Diagnostic framework for assessing what makes a business process perform well or poorly. Developed independently by Alec Sharp and Roger Burlton in the mid-1990s; Sharp's version is the one used in sources/2014-sharp-whats-wrong-with-this-process and the Workflow Modeling textbook (Artech House 2008).

The six enablers

An enabler is a factor that can be adjusted — positively or negatively — to impact process performance. Most real as-is processes were not engineered; the enablers "just happened, evolved, or mutated over time" (Sharp 2014).

Enabler	Sub-elements
Business Process Design (Workflow)	Roles · steps & decisions · flow-sequence and handoffs
Information Systems	Applications · data · information · integration · devices and platforms
Motivation & Measurement	Assessment and incentives · implicit and explicit · process KPIs vs function KPIs
Human Resources & Organization	Skills · matching roles to activities · recruitment, selection, placement · organisation design
Policies & Rules	Constraints · business rules the process enforces · external & internal
Facilities (or other, e.g. funding)	Workplace layout · equipment · fixtures and furnishings

Sharp labels Business Process Design and Information Systems as "the usual suspects" — they get most analysis attention but are rarely the whole story. The remaining three (Motivation & Measurement, HR & Organization, Policies & Rules) are usually the actual explanation for why a process under-performs.

Use in diagnostic interviews

After an as-is process map (swimlane) is produced, guide stakeholders through the map one enabler at a time with diagnostic questions:

Workflow: Is each step adding value, placed at the right point, sequential or parallel as appropriate?
Information Systems: Are the process, steps, and actors supported by the right technology?
Motivation & Measurement: How is performance measured, and is that appropriate?
Human Resources & Organization: Are roles appropriately defined, staffed with the right skills, deployed effectively?
Policies & Rules: What policies and rules constrain or are enforced by the process?
Facilities: Are layout, furnishings, and equipment optimal or impeding?

Sharp's observation: a blanket "what do you think of this process?" elicits uncritical thinking; focusing on one enabler at a time elicits entirely different conclusions. Worked example (Sharp 2014 Nov): a 19-actor sequential approval process "must be fine, it's worked for 30 years" → enabler-by-enabler exam reveals dysfunction in every dimension.

Typical as-is issues by enabler (Sharp Fig. 3)

Enabler	Common as-is issues
Workflow	Too many actors; non-value-added steps; duplicate steps; delays and bottlenecks; excessively sequential
Information Systems	Unavailable information; data re-keying; missing functionality; awkward interfaces; lack of workflow support
Motivation & Measurement	Inappropriate performer or process measures; internal rather than customer focus; measures of tasks vs outcomes
HR & Organization	Mismatches between task value and performer; inappropriate recruiting and placement; too little empowerment
Policies & Rules	Out-of-date policies or numerical limits; excessive review or approval steps; restrictive labor contracts; conflicting policies
Facilities	Mismatch of work needs and facility; no support for teamwork; layout that impedes flow

Relation to other frameworks

Process enablers vs context factors: Sharp's enablers are levers you can adjust; vom Brocke's context factors are conditions you cannot change easily. Complementary.
Hammer & Champy's "Case for Action": Sharp's initial assessment adapts H&C's 5-point case for action (business context, business problem, marketplace demands, diagnostics, cost of inaction) into three stakeholder-anchored questions.
Burlton's hexagon: equivalent structure, developed concurrently; Burlton labels differ slightly but the concept is the same.

sources/2014-sharp-whats-wrong-with-this-process — primary source for this framing.
sources/2014-sharp-using-scope-models — uses the six enablers as one of three assessment approaches.
syntheses/interview-structuring-for-process-models — Sharp's enabler-lens questions are a complement to Dumas's exception-taxonomy rainy-day questions.
syntheses/qualitative-discovery-method-selection-matrix