School of Social Sciences

Master in Business Administration

Postgraduate Dissertation

Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Anastasios Tsogkas

Supervisor: Giannis T. Tsoulfas

Athens, July 2018

© Hellenic Open University, 2017 The content of this thesis/dissertation along with its results is owned by the Hellenic Open University and his/her author, where each of them has the sole and exclusive right to use, reproduce, and publish it (totally or partially) for educational or research purposes, with the obligation to make reference to the thesis’s title, the author’s name and to the Hellenic Open University where the thesis / dissertation was written.

Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Anastasios Tsogkas

Supervising Committee

Supervisor: Co-Supervisor: Giannis T. Tsoulfas Panagiotis Chountalas Technological Education Institution of University of Piraeus Sterea Ellada Department of Business Administration Department of Logistics Management 80, M. Karaoli & A. Dimitriou Str. 1st km of Old National Road Thiva-Elefsis GR-18534 Piraeus GR-32200 Thiva Greece Greece

Athens, July 2018 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

I would like to express my deep gratitude to my academic adviser, Mr. Giannis Tsoulfas, who consistently gave me valuable advice and guided me in this process. I would also like to thank Ms. Evgenia Sarantidi for her unwavering support and encouragement along the way.

This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Aikaterini and Nikolaos Tsogkas.

Postgraduate Dissertation iv Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Abstract

Archaeological Resources Fund (ARF) is a public legal entity, founded in 1977, whose main objective is to secure, develop, collect and make available resources gained through managing national cultural heritage. The poorly devised strategy adopted by ARF, combined with an outdated organizational structure, lack of personnel equipped with the necessary skills, obsolete telecommunications infrastructure and negative organizational culture, have led to a degradation of provided services, and a corresponding loss of public revenue. Furthermore, due to the lack of documented operational procedures, ARF experiences several operational gaps, flaws, and lack of controls, resulting in an inability to produce valid financial statements, as well as increased vulnerabilities that could be exploited in cases of fraud.

Within this framework, the present dissertation discusses the application of a strategic methodological approach of Business Process Reengineering (BPR) led by the implementation of a unified Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, with a view to identifying and addressing existing operational gaps, flaws and lack of controls, by means of applying well-established industry standards to a public entity.

This case-study resulted from the fact that ARF is currently implementing a project entitled “Re-organization and modernization of Archaeological Resources Fund Services”, with an overall budget of 1,200,000€, sponsored by Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) and National Bank of Greece (NBG).

In the context of this project, equipment will be installed in 13 archaeological sites and museums across Greece and the necessary IT systems will be developed in order to enable:

 online ticket sales (E-Ticket);

 automated visitor access control (Access Control);

 product sales in shops using a retail application (Retail sales);

 computerization of all ARF business processes (ERP);

 development of a Business Intelligence module (BI).

Postgraduate Dissertation v Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Keywords

BPR, ERP, Public Sector, Archaeological Resources Fund, Ministry of Culture and Sports

Postgraduate Dissertation vi Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Περίληψη

Το Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (ΤΑΠ) είναι ένα Νομικό Πρόσωπο Δημοσίου Δικαίου το οποίο ιδρύθηκε το 1977 με σκοπό την συλλογή, διασφάλιση, αξιοποίηση και διάθεση των πόρων που παράγονται από την διαχείριση της εθνικής πολιτιστικής κληρονομιάς. Η ελλιπής χάραξη στρατηγικής σε συνδυασμό με την ξεπερασμένη οργανωτική διάρθρωση του ΤΑΠ, την έλλειψη προσωπικού με τις απαιτούμενες δεξιότητες, την απαρχαιωμένη τηλεπικοινωνιακή υποδομή και την αρνητική επιχειρησιακή κουλτούρα έχει οδηγήσει σε υποβάθμιση των παρεχόμενων από το ΤΑΠ υπηρεσιών και αντίστοιχη απώλεια δημοσίων εσόδων. Επιπλέον, λόγω της απουσίας τεκμηριωμένων επιχειρησιακών διαδικασιών, το ΤΑΠ παρουσιάζει αρκετά επιχειρησιακά κενά, σφάλματα και έλλειψη σημείων ελέγχου με αποτέλεσμα την αδυναμία έκδοσης έγκυρων οικονομικών καταστάσεων καθώς και σημαντικές ευπάθειες οι οποίες ενέχουν τον κίνδυνο απάτης.

Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, η παρούσα εργασία πραγματεύεται την εφαρμογή της στρατηγικής μεθοδολογικής προσέγγισης του ανασχεδιασμού επιχειρησιακών διεργασιών (BPR) καθοδηγούμενης από την εφαρμογή ενός ενιαίου συστήματος διαχείρισης επιχειρησιακών πόρων (ERP) με σκοπό τον εντοπισμό και την αντιμετώπιση υφιστάμενων επιχειρησιακών κενών, δυσλειτουργιών και έλλειψης σημείων ελέγχου μέσω της εφαρμογής διαδεδομένων επιχειρησιακών πρακτικών (industry standards) σε έναν δημόσιο οργανισμό.

Η συγκεκριμένη περίπτωση μελέτης προέκυψε από το γεγονός ότι αυτό το διάστημα υλοποιείται από ΤΑΠ το έργο «Αναδιοργάνωση και εκσυγχρονισμός των υπηρεσιών του Ταμείου Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων» συνολικού προϋπολογισμού 1,200,000€ με την χορηγία του Ιδρύματος Σταύρος Νιάρχος και της Εθνικής Τράπεζας της Ελλάδας.

Στα πλαίσια αυτού του έργου θα εγκατασταθεί ο απαιτούμενος εξοπλισμός σε 13 αρχαιολογικούς χώρους και μουσεία της χώρας και θα αναπτυχθούν τα απαιτούμενα πληροφοριακά συστήματα ώστε να είναι εφικτή:

 η πώληση εισιτηρίων μέσω διαδικτύου (E-Ticket),

Postgraduate Dissertation vii Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

 ο έλεγχος πρόσβασης επισκεπτών με αυτοματοποιημένο τρόπο (Access Control),

 η πώληση προϊόντων στα πωλητήρια με χρήση αντίστοιχης εφαρμογής (Retail sales),

 η μηχ/ση όλων των επιχειρησιακών διεργασιών του ΤΑΠ (ERP) και

 η ανάπτυξη συστήματος διοικητικής πληροφόρησης (BI).

Λέξεις – Κλειδιά

Ανασχεδιασμός επιχειρησιακών διαδικασιών, Διαχείριση επιχειρησιακών πόρων, Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και απαλλοτριώσεων, Υπουργείο Πολιτισμού και Αθλητισμού.

Postgraduate Dissertation viii Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... v Περίληψη...... vii Table of Contents ...... ix List of Figures ...... xi List of Tables ...... xii List of Graphs ...... xiii List of Abbreviations & Acronyms ...... xiv 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Definition of the problem ...... 1 1.2 Purpose of the dissertation ...... 1 1.3 Methodological approach ...... 2 1.4 Structure of the dissertation ...... 2 2. Operations Management and Business Process Reengineering ...... 4 2.1 Introduction ...... 4 2.2 BPR Methodology - Stages ...... 8 2.3 BPR in public sector ...... 12 2.4 BPR led by ERP ...... 14 2.5 Critical success and failure factors ...... 15 3. The Greek Archaeological Resources Fund (ARF) ...... 17 3.1 Introduction ...... 17 3.2 Organizational Structure ...... 20 3.3 Human Resources Management ...... 23 3.4 ICT Infrastructure ...... 27 3.5 ERP – led BPR Project in ARF ...... 30 3.6 A critical review of the ARF organizational structure and operations ...... 33 4. Risk Management for BPR led by ERP in ARF ...... 36 4.1 Risk categorization ...... 36 4.2 Risk Assessment ...... 38 4.3 Risk evaluation and treatment plan ...... 47 4.4 Remarks ...... 52 5. Business Process Reengineering in ARF ...... 53 5.1 Planning Stage ...... 53 5.2 Map and analyze “As Is” situation ...... 54 5.2.1 Ticket Management and Access Control Process ...... 55 5.2.2 Product sales in museum shops process ...... 65 5.3 Design “To Be” situation ...... 74 5.3.1 Ticket Management System and Access Control Process ...... 75 5.3.2 Product Sales Process ...... 84 5.4 Implement and test ...... 95 5.5 Monitor, review and improve ...... 95 6. Conclusions ...... 97 6.1 General conclusions derived from ARF’s ERP-led BPR implementation ...... 97

Postgraduate Dissertation ix Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

6.2 Identification and mitigation of ARF’s operational gaps, flaws and lack of controls through BPR implementation ...... 98 6.3 Risks not successfully mitigated in ARF’s BPR implementation ...... 100 Bibliography ...... 102 Appendix A: Archaeological sites and museums visitors and revenues (2017) ...... 104 Appendix B: Archaeological museum shops product sales (2017)...... 115

Postgraduate Dissertation x Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

List of Figures

Figure 2-1 : Customer request process flow ...... 7 Figure 3-1: ARF’s Organizational Structure ...... 20 Figure 3-2 : ARF’s Accounting Department organizational structure ...... 22 Figure 5-1 :Tickets shipping document by ARF’s Central Warehouse ...... 55 Figure 5-2 : Tickets receipt document by chief teller on site ...... 55 Figure 5-3 : Aggregate monthly ticket sales report ...... 56 Figure 5-4 : Monthly cash deposit by chief teller to ARF’s bank account ...... 57 Figure 5-5 : B2B customer’s web banking printout received by chief teller ...... 58 Figure 5-6 : B2B customer’s voucher received by chief teller ...... 58 Figure 5-7 : ARF’s Ticket Office Sales Software Application ...... 59 Figure 5-8 : ARF’s bank account daily extrait ...... 59 Figure 5-9 : Approval stamps order by third party product supplier to ARF ...... 66 Figure 5-10 : Approval stamps for products sold on consignment ...... 66 Figure 5-11 : Museum shop’s handwritten sales receipt ...... 67 Figure 5-12 : Monthly sales report for ARF products ...... 68 Figure 5-13 : ARF’s Products Office sales software application ...... 69 Figure 5-14 : Product Aging ...... 71 Figure 5-15 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 1 ...... 76 Figure 5-16 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 2 ...... 77 Figure 5-17 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 3 ...... 77 Figure 5-18 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 4 ...... 78 Figure 5-19 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 5 ...... 78 Figure 5-20 : Booking office ticket selling application – Step 1,2 ...... 80 Figure 5-21 : Ticket printed on site ...... 80 Figure 5-22 : Cash flow report per cashier ...... 81 Figure 5-23 : Ticket analysis per type ...... 81 Figure 5-24 : Visitors’ entrance log file ...... 83 Figure 5-25 : Online product sales – Step 1 ...... 85 Figure 5-26 : Online product sales – Step 2 ...... 86 Figure 5-27 : Online product sales – Customer registration form ...... 87 Figure 5-28 : Museum shop product selling application (Table 5.8, Steps 1,2) ...... 89 Figure 5-29 : Museum shop Sales Receipt (Table 5.8, Step 2) ...... 89 Figure 5-30 : Sales Report (Table 5.8, Step 5) ...... 90 Figure 5-31 : Cash Flow report per cashier (Table 5.8, Step 5) ...... 90 Figure 5-32 : Product Import / Export to / from central warehouse (Table 5.9, Step 1) ..... 92 Figure 5-33 : Shipping Document (Table 5.9, Step 4) ...... 92 Figure 5-34 : Products in transit (Table 5.9, Step 5) ...... 93 Figure 5-35 : Product delivery verification (Table 5.9, Step 5) ...... 94 Figure 5-36 : Warehouse stock inventory (Table 5.9, Step 5) ...... 94

Postgraduate Dissertation xi Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

List of Tables

Table 2-1 : Illustration of the identified differences between public and private organizations ...... 14 Table 3-1 : ARF’s 2017 revenue distribution table ...... 18 Table 3-2 :ARF’s E-Ticket and Access Control System Timetable ...... 31 Table 3-3 : ARF’s Retail, Warehouse and Distribution System Timetable ...... 31 Table 3-4 : ARF’s ERP and BI System Timetable ...... 31 Table 3-5 : E-Ticket & Access Control System Application Sites ...... 32 Table 3-6 : Museum / Archaeological sites Shops Retail System Application ...... 33 Table 3-7 : ARF’s E-Ticket / Warehouse / Distribution / Sales BPR Timetable ...... 33 Table 3-8 : ARF’s internal processes BPR Timetable ...... 33 Table 4-1 : Degrees of execution-related risks ...... 37 Table 4-2 : Risk Evaluation Heat Map ...... 38 Table 4-3 : Identification of ARF’s BPR/ERP broad risk areas ...... 39 Table 4-4 : Top Management risk area analysis ...... 40 Table 4-5 : Personnel risk area analysis ...... 41 Table 4-6 : Organizational Culture risk area analysis ...... 42 Table 4-7 : Organizational Structure risk area analysis ...... 43 Table 4-8 : ICT Infrastructure risk area analysis ...... 44 Table 4-9 : External Consultant risk area analysis ...... 45 Table 4-10 : ERP implementation contractor risk area analysis ...... 46 Table 4-11 : ARF’s ERP-led BPR Risk Evaluation Heat Map ...... 47 Table 4-12 : Risk Treatment Plan ...... 50 Table 4-13 : Revised ARF’s ERP-led BPR Risk Evaluation Heat Map ...... 51 Table 5-1 : Ticket Management and Access Control Process ...... 60 Table 5-2 : ARF’s (Third party) product sales process ...... 70 Table 5-3 : TMS process for B2C customers through internet and mobile devices ...... 76 Table 5-4 : TMS process for B2C customers buying tickets on site ...... 79 Table 5-5 : TMS process for B2B customers through internet and mobile devices ...... 82 Table 5-6 : Ticket Validation and Access Control ...... 83 Table 5-7 : Online sale process ...... 84 Table 5-8 : Museum shop sales ...... 88 Table 5-9 : Product Distribution Process ...... 91 Table 6-1 : Ticket Management System gaps, flaws and lack of controls ...... 99 Table 6-2 : Access Control gaps, flaws and lack of controls ...... 99 Table 6-3 :Product distribution and sales gaps, flaws and lack of controls ...... 100

Postgraduate Dissertation xii Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

List of Graphs

Graph 3-1 : Visitors in museums and archaeological sites 2010 – 2017 ...... 18 Graph 3-2 : Ticket Revenues 2010 – 2017 ...... 19 Graph 3-3 : ARF’s Product Sales 2014-2017 ...... 20 Graph 3-4 : Employees’ Age Distribution ...... 23 Graph 3-5 : Employees’ Education Level Distribution ...... 24 Graph 3-6 : ARF’s Hiring Procedures ...... 24 Graph 3-7 : New employees per decade ...... 25 Graph 3- 8 : Last 5 years’ hiring by education level ...... 25 Graph 3- 9 : ARF Employees’ Discipline Fields ...... 26 Graph 3- 10 : ARF Employees’ Location Distribution ...... 26 Graph 3- 11 : ARF Employees’ Procces Distribution ...... 27 Graph 3- 12 : Internet Connection availability in Museum Shops ...... 28 Graph 3- 13 : Personal Computer availability in Museum Shops ...... 29 Graph 3- 14 : Museum Shops with both Personal Computer and Internet Connection availability ...... 29 Graph 3- 15 : Ticket Booking Offices with both Personal Computer and Internet Connection availability ...... 30

Postgraduate Dissertation xiii Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

List of Abbreviations & Acronyms

SN ACRONYM EXPLANATION 1 ARF Archaeological Resources Fund 2 ASEP Supreme Council for Civil Personnel Selection 3 BI Business Intelligence 4 BPR Business Process Reengineering 5 B2B Business to business 6 B2C Business to customer 7 EFT Electronic Funds Transfer 8 ERP Enterprise Resource Planning 9 ISO International Organization for Standardization 10 NBG National Bank of Greece 11 OTE Hellenic Telecommunication Organization 12 PDA Personal Digital Assistant 13 POS Point of Sale 14 SNF Stavros Niarchos Foundation 15 VPN Virtual Private Network

Postgraduate Dissertation xiv Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

1. Introduction

1.1 Definition of the problem

The current economic crisis has highlighted the intrinsic weaknesses of the Greek public sector, which is sometimes ineffective, with outdated structures and production processes.

The Archaeological Receipts Fund (ARF) is a public legal entity whose main objective is to secure, develop, collect and make available resources gained through managing national cultural heritage. ARF’s poorly designed organizational structure and processes have led to low quality services provided to the visitors of archaeological sites and museums, and significantly lower revenues in comparison with other countries offering similar services. Furthermore, due to the lack of documented operational procedures and poor use of modern ICT tools, ARF experiences several operational gaps, flaws, and lack of controls, resulting in:

• Vulnerabilities that could be exploited in cases of fraud;

• Incorrect or lack of essential information regarding revenues and product stock;

• Failure to comply with established accounting principles (accrual principle, cost principle, matching principle, revenue recognition principle, time period principle etc.), resulting in an inability to produce valid financial statements (balance sheet, income statement, cash flow statement).

ARF is in the process of acquiring a new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, which will cover all its business activities. However, the application of a new ERP system without first radically rethinking ARF’s main operational procedures runs the risk of failure, as IT would be used to automate processes

1.2 Purpose of the dissertation

The purpose of the proposed work is the application of business process reengineering strategic management methodology to key operational processes of ARF, in order to “achieve dramatic improvements in critical measures of performance such as cost, quality, service and speed” (Hammer & Champy, 1993, p. 32) and to mitigate risks from current operational gaps, flaws and lack of control points.

Postgraduate Dissertation 1 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Designing, implementing and supporting a radical organizational transformation project in an environment of relatively low organizational, technological and managerial capacities, and under strict human resource and time constraints, will make the implementation of Business Process Reengineering (BPR) both challenging and unique.

In this dissertation it is illustrated that in cases where public sector operational activities share a high degree of similarity with commercial activities implemented in private sector, ERP-led BPR is the most appropriate methodology, since it can enforce industry standards with no need to envision and design new processes, as long as compliance is ensured with laws, legal acts and ministerial decisions governing public sector entities’ operational procedures.

1.3 Methodological approach

The methodological approach adopted in this dissertation is the case study research methodology, whereby ARF’s BPR project is studied with a twofold purpose: on the one hand, to examine the effectiveness of BPR’s theoretical implementation methodologies suggested in literature on a Greek public entity, and, on the other hand, to verify the importance of critical success and failure factors in an environment characterized by bureaucratic organizational structure, negative corporate culture, lack of human resources and obsolete ICT infrastructure.

1.4 Structure of the dissertation

This dissertation is divided into six chapters. In the first chapter the research topic is introduced, followed by the research problem, the purpose of the dissertation, the methodological approach and a brief description of the dissertation structure. In the second chapter a theoretical background of operations management and business process reengineering is presented based on literature review and international experience, as well as common BPR implementation steps. Taking into consideration ARF’s specific case study, key differences between BPR implementation in public and private sector are discussed and the case of ERP-led BPR implementation is outlined. The second chapter ends with a categorization of Critical Success (CSF) and Failure Factors (CFF). The third chapter provides an overview of ARF’s main operational objectives, organizational

Postgraduate Dissertation 2 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

structure, human capital and ICT infrastructure, focusing on problematic areas and sources of substantial weaknesses. In addition, a brief description of ARF’s ERP-led BPR project is provided, including relevant budgeting information, project management scheme definition, timetables and application sites. In the fourth chapter, ARF’s BPR project risk management process is thoroughly presented based on ISO 31000 standard suggested methodology of risk identification, assessment and treatment plan implementation. The fifth chapter focuses on ARF’s BPR case study in accordance with the theoretical approach and suggested BPR implementation methodology presented in chapter two. Finally, in the last chapter the key conclusions of ARF’s BPR project are drawn and main research questions are addressed.

Postgraduate Dissertation 3 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

2. Operations Management and Business Process Reengineering

2.1 Introduction

During the 1980s and as a result of the recession that the American and global economy suffered, companies tried to find new ways to reduce costs in order to survive in an increasingly competitive environment. Reactive measures were taken such as downsizing, restructuring, automation (using IT technology to improve business performance), Total Quality Management (including Kaizen or continuous improvement), in order to improve performance in factors like cost, quality, service level and speed.

An important enabler in those early stages was the use of emerging IT technology, which offered new possibilities and opportunities for improvement in the way business operated on a daily basis. Companies invested large sums of money in IT technology; however, the corresponding increase in productivity growth was significantly lower than expected. Before IT investments, the expected return on investment in terms of productivity was 3% - 4%. With IT the normal return on investment was only 1% from the 1970s until the early 1990s. This became known as the Productivity Paradox, referring to the observation that as IT investments rise, worker productivity may decrease instead of increase (Dreyfous, Gadson, Riding & Wang, 1999).

M. Hammer, one of the pioneers of BPR in the mid-1980s, directed studies in firms like Mutual Benefit Life and Ford Co that used many of the components of IT-enabled reengineering to make radical changes in cross-functional processes like the order- fulfillment process.

The theoretical background of BPR was documented in two early seminal articles on the topic (Davenport & Short, 1990; Hammer, 1990), followed by two very successful books entitled Reengineering the Corporation (Hammer & Champy, 1993) and Process Innovation (Davenport, 1993) in which basic definitions and principles of BPR were defined.

According to its two most popular definitions, BPR:

Postgraduate Dissertation 4 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

“…..is the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business process to achieve dramatic improvements in critical contemporary modern measures of performance such as cost, quality, service and speed” (Hammer & Champy, 1993, p. 32) and

“…encompasses the envisioning of new work strategies, the actual process design activity, and the implementation of the change in all its complex technological, human and organizational dimensions” (Davenport, 1993, p. 2)

Alternative definitions proposed by different practitioners (Grover, 1993) include:

 the analysis and design of workflows within and between organizations

 a methodological process that issues information technology to radically overhaul business process and thereby attain major business goals

 overhauling business processes and organization structure that limit the competitiveness, effectiveness and efficiency of the organization

 the reconfiguration of business using IT as central lever.

All of the above alternative definitions of BPR share some common elements that constitute the fundamental core of BPR:

1. Radical changes / Dramatic performance improvement

2. Business process as the main unit of analysis

3. IT as a major enabling factor

Radical changes / Dramatic performance improvement takes the opposite approach to methodologies like TQM, Kaizen and ISO continual improvement, where all business processes are monitored and analyzed, and strict guidelines and standards are followed in order to identify non compliances or opportunities for improvement in a continuously repeated process. BPM is not about automation or making the existing processes more efficient by using IT capabilities. Instead, BPM is a one-off action that questions not only “the way we do things” but also “why we do the things we do” and attacks the always present comfort and safety that derives from “the way we have always done things”.

Business process is the main concept for BPR implementations. Similarly with BPR there are also many alternative definitions for the concept of process:

Postgraduate Dissertation 5 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

 According to ISO, process is a “set of interrelated or interacting activities that use inputs to deliver an intended result. Inputs and outputs can be tangible (e.g. materials, components or equipment) or intangible (e.g. data, information or knowledge)” (“The Process Approach in ISO 9001:2015”, 2015, p. 1)

 According to Davenport (1993, p. 5), process is “a structured, measured set of activities designed to produce a specified output for a particular customer or market”.

 According to Hickman (1993, p. 12) “Process is a logical series of dependent activities which use the resources of the organization to create or result in, an observable or measurable outcome, such as a product or a service”.

Business process is an end-to-end activity where in both ends there is a customer (either external or internal to the organization) as opposed to the traditional functional / departmental structural view that prevailed as the mainstream organizational model mainly after WWII.

The functional / departmental organizational view owes its origins to the famous Adam Smith example of the pin manufacturer (Smith, 1776), where a certain number of specialized workers, each performing a single step in the pin manufacturing process, is more productive than the same number of generalist workers each making whole pins. “With time, functions, positions and specialists proliferated, as did bureaucracy and the rules to handle increasing contingencies” (Grover & Malhotra, 1997, p. 199). Each function completed a portion of the task needed and delivered the task to the next function. This involved decisions going up and down the organization’s pyramid hierarchy and led to choices that could be best for the function but not necessarily for the organization. Conflicts of interest between vertical functions / departments could arise increasing the amount of resources needed to put all the pieces together. As a result, in many cases the companies were “paying more for the glue than for the real work” (Grover & Malhotra, 1997, p. 199).

It is worth considering, for example, a typical service-provision process initiated by a customer request in an organization’s pyramid hierarchical structure (see Fig. 2.1):

Postgraduate Dissertation 6 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 2-1 : Customer request process flow

IT plays a central role as enabler in BPR, mainly through the ability to use common databases in order to break down communication barriers between organizational functions (Attaran, 2004). By simply applying automation in existing cross-functional fragmented processes, some improvement was indeed made in terms of efficiency; however, in reality this was just a reproduction of obsolete sequential procedures that were designed decades ago (before the IT era), focused on functional hierarchies rather than end-to-end complete business processes.

In accordance with the above analysis, the three main principles of BPR as described by M. Hammer and J. Champy (1993) are:

1. Organize around outcomes, not tasks, as business process model dictates

2. Focus on the value, as all processes must be prioritized based on their added value

3. Organize cross-functional processes, to minimize the disadvantages of the traditional pyramid hierarchical organizational structure

Taking into consideration the focus of BPR in creating radical changes in all basic organizational aspects (strategy formation, operational processes, technology usage, human resource management) it has been observed that about 70% of BPR projects implementations failed, according to Mir-Ghaderi and Isakhani (2011), as cited in Alireza and Behnaz (2015). This observation has led to various scientific research articles were critical success and failure factors where identified (Nauman, 2013) and the importance of

Postgraduate Dissertation 7 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

factors like organizational culture was highlighted (Alireza & Behnaz, 2015). Furthermore, mixed results in BPR implementations resulted in academic and research community severe critics of BPR (Weerakkody & Dhillon, 2008). In addition BPR was used as an excuse for downsizing and mass employee’s layoff during the 90’s contributing in increasing suspicion and negative criticism.

2.2 BPR Methodology - Stages

There is no manual for applying BPR. The appropriate methodology depends on the specific organizational, cultural, technological and social parameters of the environment in which BPR is to be applied. Relevant bibliography suggests several approaches, all of which share some common fundamental stages:

Stage 1: BPR Planning

Also described as Preparation (Grover & Malhotra, 1997), Set Direction (Pratt & Harrison, 1993), Envision (Kettinger, Teng, & Guha, 1997) or Motivating Reengineering (Mayer & De Witte, 1999).

In this initial stage, core elements of BPR must be defined. Vision and mission of the company must be clearly defined and well communicated, strategic objectives of the BPR project must be aligned with them, top management commitment must be ensured and cross-functional collaboration must be established. During this stage, a steering committee is established that determines the scope of the project, the strategic goals in alignment with organization vision and mission, identifies training needs and decides the communication plan and a restrictive timetable. Leader and members of the reengineering team are selected, taking into consideration not only the required skills and knowledge but also the need to build a cross-functional collaboration that can overcome the strict departmental / functional operational model that exists in the current situation.

Basic questions that need to be addressed during this stage are:

 How can BPR contribute to achieving business goals?

 What are the required skills that team members have to acquire?

Postgraduate Dissertation 8 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

 How can BPR project necessity be effectively communicated to employees in order to increase engagement and reduce resistance to change?

Stage 2: Map and analyze “As Is” situation

Also known in relevant bibliography as Identify Process (Smart, Childe, & Weaver, 1997), Baseline and Benchmark (Furey, 1993), Identification (Manganelli & Klein, 1994), Initiate (Kettinger, Teng & Guha, 1997) or Justifying (Mayer & De Witte, 1999) Reengineering.

Common methodology consists of mapping (graphically) existing processes using a flow charting technique, evaluating them in accordance with their added value to customers, and identifying responsibilities, resources used (human resources, information systems etc.), interdependencies and problematic areas that cause operational disruptions, poor quality of service, increased cycle times and cost-increasing factors. It is important to precisely define cross-functional borders, as well as interactions with customers (internal and external) and suppliers. Benchmarking techniques can be applied in order to identify deviations from well- established standards of operation laid down either by competitors or by relevant industry sectors. Cycle time analysis, value chain analysis and activity- based cost accounting techniques can also be performed at this stage.

Basic questions that need to be addressed during this stage are:

 Who are our customers?

 Who are our suppliers (internal or external)?

 What are our main business processes?

 What are our main deviations from well-established operational standards causing poor performance (benchmarking)?

Stage 3: Design “To Be” situation

Also referred as Technical/Social Design (Manganelli & Klein, 1994), Design Improvements (Furey, 1993), Setting up for Reengineering (Mayer & De Witte, 1999) or Redesign (Kettinger et al., 1997) stage.

Postgraduate Dissertation 9 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

This is the most challenging stage, since it signals the change factor that will affect and alter the existing operation model. There are no specific guidelines for implementing this phase; usually this is the time for creativity, out-of-the-box thinking and questioning “why we do the things we do the way we do”. It is a very demanding task to not be influenced by the preceding stage of mapping the “as-is” situation and to avoid reproducing the same functionality by applying IT automation techniques in order to gradually improve efficiency and productivity. This can be done by distilling only the essence of existing processes, brainstorming alternative implementation solutions, building upon the proposals generated during the mapping stage of the “As-Is” situation and benchmarking the organization’s processes with those of relevant peer organizations. Alternative implementations must be proposed and evaluated against predefined criteria (Process Value Analysis, Cycle time analysis, benchmarking, activity-based costing etc.) in order to identify and select the most appropriate solution.

At this stage, several questions related to the technical and social implementation feasibility of each proposed implementation solution must be addressed:

 Are all the required technical resources needed available or is it possible to acquire them on time?

 Are all the required human resources available in order to operate in the redesigned operation process environment?

 Are there any necessary changes in the organizational structure that need to be addressed before BPR implementation?

 Who is most likely to resist to change and why?

 Is it necessary to conduct a complete risk assessment for BPR project in order to mitigate corresponding risks of failure?

Stage 4: Implement and test BPR

Also described by various authors as Implementation (Mayer & De Witte, 1999), Implement Change (Furey, 1993), Transformation (Manganelli & Klein, 1994) or Reconstruct (Kettinger et al., 1997).

Postgraduate Dissertation 10 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

This stage consists of the reengineering team plan realization and usually results in a pilot program, a transition plan and finally a full production version. Training courses for the employees also take place at this time. A pilot program is necessary, where all malfunctions / deviations / disruptions must be monitored and addressed, and feedback from all interested parties (employees, customers, suppliers, shareholders, top management) must be collected, evaluated and adopted, resulting in some cases in alterations from the original design, if deemed appropriate. A full transition and roll-out program must be documented, taking into account all issues (technological, organizational, and cultural) that affect successful implementation of BPR in full production scale.

Questions that need to be addressed during this stage include:

 Is there a mechanism in place for monitoring, evaluating and addressing unanticipated problems?

 Is there a fully documented transition plan that describes all necessary actions for a successful transition from the present situation to the newly designed process environment?

 Are there predefined controls and acceptance levels concerning the pilot stage in order to ensure that all risks of failure are addressed satisfactorily before the transition takes place?

Stage 5: Monitor, review and improve

Also known as Embed Continuous Improvement (Furey, 1993) or Evaluation (Kettinger et al., 1997).

This stage includes On-Going measurements on predefined criteria (cost factors, cycle time analysis, quality of service etc.) that are compared with previously established target values in order to assess the successful implementation of the BPR and address any unanticipated problems that will arise in the day-to-day operation. This is the point when boundaries between BPR and quality management techniques such as TQM fade out, as the new process environment is embedded in the daily operation and the need for continuous monitoring, evaluating performance and treatment of non-conformities and deviations arises in a permanent feedback loop.

Postgraduate Dissertation 11 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

2.3 BPR in public sector

Although BPR was initially applied in private sector, the same reasoning and benefits (lower costs, increased service quality and speed) underlie efforts to implement similar techniques in public sector also. The public sector’s organizational structure usually remains virtually unchanged for decades, services offered are highly bureaucratic and, in contrast with the private sector, usually the public (customers) has no choice of service provider. The need to radically redesign public sector core processes is similar to the need that the private sector faced in the early 1990s for a radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements (Hammer & Champy, 1993).

The first step in the direction of using IT to improve quality of service in the public sector was E-Government. With E-Government, public sector tried to establish customer-facing services, usually through the development of (national) web portals, offering a subset of functionality that is available in the traditional manned customer service offices. The public sector’s web presence through E-Government does not imply that back-office core processes were redesigned, or that information processed was reorganized; it mainly represents an automation technique, where IT was used to improve performance by eliminating some of the sequential steps required to provide a public service which were previously executed by human actors. The next step in the process of successfully transforming public sector through the use of IT is to radically redesign core processes across organization boundaries, with a view to reducing cost, eliminating waste, and improving efficiency, accountability, and quality of service (Weerakkody, Janssen & Dwivedi, 2011). Western European countries are in the process of developing a one-stop E-Government or, as UK branded it, T-Government (Chief Information Officer Council, 2006 as cited in Weerakkody et al., 2011).

The related difficulties arise from the major structural, political, cultural and social differences between private and public sector, thus making the use of classical BPR methodologies in public sector extremely complex and challenging. The main differentiating factors between private and public sector in applying BPR methodologies were thoroughly presented in Jurisch, Ikas and Palka (2012), as cited in Pavlaki (2014, p. 41) and are listed below:

Postgraduate Dissertation 12 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Situation in the Situation in the public Consequences for public BPR private sector sector initiatives

Dimensions Pursuit of profit and Execution of laws and Radical changes frequently business growth policies unfeasible

Aligned IT and Stability and risk BPR must be verified for legal business strategy aversion compliance Controlling of Part of a mostly compliance with laws vertical supply chain Concept of legalism

Part of a mostly horizontal supply chain

Functions and Interactions Process initiated by Processes based on BPR as a top-down process Customer legal regulations, laws and policies Radical changes frequently Customer-supplier unfeasible relationship Little control over process structure BPR must be verified for legal

Profit-driven compliance processes

Full control over own

Processes process Structure Company sizes and Mandatory tasks and Formal decision-making structures highly responsibilities variable Top-down support as a prerequisite Management under Affinity to recruiting political observation Need for approval by all stakeholders involved Different authority Rigid hierarchies and autonomy levels Involvement of internal experts across departments is Challenging

Insufficient exchange of experiences regarding past BPR

Organizational Structure projects between administrations

Postgraduate Dissertation 13 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Situation in the Situation in the public Consequences for public BPR private sector sector initiatives

Dimensions Freedom in allocating Fiscal limitations Inflexible financial budgets funds and controlling investments Pre-defined resources Resources (know-how, IT etc.) tend to be limited and Accountable to Governmental may cause failure during early

shareholders authorization stages of the project

Motivation to Actions are subject to Acceptance of BPR efforts minimize costs public scrutiny (public questionable once budgets are met accountability) and cost pressures Decrease Motivation to keep costs within budget (budget functions as a threshold

Economic Feasibility value) Table 2-1 : Illustration of the identified differences between public and private organizations

2.4 BPR led by ERP

ERP or Enterprise Resource Planning is a set of business software applications (or ERP modules) that integrates all major business components like finance, HR, manufacturing, supply chain, services, procurement etc. into a single information system. Those modules communicate with each other and share a common database (Raidl, 2016).

ERP-led BPR implementations’ main advantage is that they require the organization to align its operation mode with software’s functionality rather than envisioning and redesigning core processes and then trying to support the new design on existing ICT solutions. There is always a need for software customization, but this needs to be used sparingly, since it may signal deviations from industry standards. SAP, for example, offers around 1000 pre-configured processes that encompass functionality for the majority of vital business processes. Many ERP implementers find themselves in a position to re- engineer existing processes in order to achieve alignment with the ERP program they implement. Another advantage of ERP-led BPR implementations is that they “do not have to deal with the process of negotiation and coalition building with the employees” (Huq, Huq & Cutright, 2007, p. 67), since acquiring a new ERP system is a top management

Postgraduate Dissertation 14 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

decision that inevitably leads to fundamental changes within an organization structure, culture and management process.

2.5 Critical success and failure factors

BPR implementations are characterized by high failure rates, since on the one hand they need to deal with many different factors (organizational, human, technological), and on the other hand they result in fundamental changes that alter the way an organization operates. According to Remenyi and Heafield (1996) risks in implementing BPR projects can be expressed as a function of specific parameters:

Risk = f {B; F; C; S; T; H} where

B = Business Risk, F = Financial Risk, C = Culture Risk, S = Structure Risk, T = Technology Risk and H = Human Risk

In line with the above definition, it is crucial to address several Critical Success (CSF) and Failure Factors (CFF), including, as presented in Habib (2013):

 Business related CSF / CFF – Not all business sectors present the same flexibility in adoption of BPR projects. In cases like the public sector, where operational procedures and/or strategic objectives result mostly from relevant legislation, redesigned processes must be thoroughly checked for legal compliance. Furthermore, top management commitment can be undermined by frequent top management replacements or politics.

 Financial CSF / CFF – An initial budgeting must be approved and adequate finance must be secured, since BPR projects usually require investments in Information Technology software and hardware, and / or in acquiring new skills and expertise, either by training the existing personnel or by hiring new employees. Insufficient budgeting can lead to BPR project failure.

 Culture CSF / CFF – Organizational culture is an important factor in BPR implementations. A negative organizational culture, where the majority of employees are not fully committed to a common set of corporate goals and do not share the same set of well-defined business values, in conjunction with the lack of

Postgraduate Dissertation 15 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

a shared vision and a risk-aversion environment, may severely limit the possibility of successful implementation.

 Structure CSF / CFF – Organizational structure can be a major obstacle to successful BPR implementations. A bureaucratic structure with many layers of hierarchy can burden the process-oriented BPR. Furthermore, after BPR implementation is completed the need may arise for new roles and/or organization departments that do not exist in the present situation.

 Technological CSF/CFF – IT is a basic enabler in BPR projects. Technical inability or lack of IT solutions to support redesigned processes can lead to failure.

 Human CSF/CFF – This is the most critical factor affecting BPR success or failure. A lack of engagement by employees in BPR implementation can lead to poor results. A well-established communication plan that dictates the need for change can reduce resistance to it. It is important that the reengineering team includes employees who can effectively contribute to cross-functional collaboration. Training is also an important factor because it can contribute to the understanding of the project scope and help employees acquire new skills and expertise required in order to increase their feeling of job security and mitigate their resistance to change.

All the above factors should be included in a detailed risk assessment that will identify risks and implement actions to mitigate them.

Postgraduate Dissertation 16 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

3. The Greek Archaeological Resources Fund (ARF)

3.1 Introduction

ARF was founded in 1977 (Law 736/1977) as a public legal entity whose main objective is to secure, develop, collect and make available resources gained through managing national cultural heritage. ARF’s headquarters are located in 57, Panepistimiou Ave., 10564, Athens, Greece and its central casting workshop and warehouse facilities are located in 10, Athinas str., 18233, Rentis, Athens, Greece. There are two more casting workshops in the regions of Pella and Kavala but they operate below capacity due to lack of skilled personnel.

Collecting revenues gained through management of national cultural heritage includes:

 Issuing and selling tickets for over 250 museums and archaeological sites across the country, as presented in Appendix A;

 Selling culture-related commercial products in 130 points of sale located in museums and archaeological sites across the country, as presented in Appendix B;

 Collecting fees from taking photographs and videotaping for commercial purposes in all museums and archaeological sites across the country;

 Collecting fees from licensing the organization of events in archaeological sites and museums;

 Managing real estate, including coffee-shops operating inside museums and archaeological sites, residences, commercial stores, plots etc.

Resources gained from the above activities are available for:

 Building and repairing auxiliary facilities operating inside archaeological sites;

 Compensating property owners for the expropriation of real estate of archaeological interest (land, plots, buildings etc.);

 Covering operational costs for archaeological sites and services across the country.

According to ARF’s 2017 annual revenue report (see Table 3.1), total operation revenues were 101,848,652.05€:

Postgraduate Dissertation 17 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

% Total SN Revenue Amount revenues

1 Ticket revenues 95,846,349.01€ 94.37%

2 Product Sales revenues 3,458,513.19€ 3.41%

3 Photograph/video fees 385,659.85€ 0.38%

4 Real Estate revenues 1,878,320€ 1.85%

Total 101,848,652.05€ 100%

Table 3-1 : ARF’s 2017 revenue distribution table

In contrast with other European public entities similar to ARF, such as English Heritage and National Trust in UK and RMN in France, the vast majority of ARF’s revenues correspond to ticket sales (~95% for ARF, 5% for National Trust, 26% for English Heritage, 27% for RMN) and there are no alternative sources of income, such as membership subscriptions, donations and sponsorships. Average product sales revenue per visitor has been steadily under 0.30€ (for 2017 it was 0.24€), whereas in France for example the index is over 6.5€ / visitor (McKinsey & Company, 2012).

In recent years visitors of archaeological sites and museums have been steadily increasing (see Graph 3.1):

Graph 3-1 : Visitors in museums and archaeological sites 2010 – 2017

Postgraduate Dissertation 18 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

In 2016 there was a significant increase in ticket revenues due to a pricing policy reform (the ticket price for Archaeological site of Acropolis, for example, increased by 66% from 12€ tο 20€). Ticket pricing policy was formulated by a committee constituted exclusively by archaeologists and was put into effect with a ministerial decision of Greek Minister of Culture and Sports:

Graph 3-2 : Ticket Revenues 2010 – 2017

Despite the significant increase in ticket prices in 2016, the average ticket price for museums and archaeological sites in Greece is 10.7€, whereas in France the average ticket price is 13€ (McKinsey & Company, 2012).

Sales revenues from commercial products (casts, books, souvenirs etc.) have declined during 2014-1016. In 2017 there was an increase by 9,6%, but average revenues per visitor are still significantly lower than industry standards, due to operational inefficiency, lack of products and lack of personnel in museum shops.

Postgraduate Dissertation 19 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Graph 3-3 : ARF’s Product Sales 2014-2017

ARF’s responsibilities, obligations operational procedures and pricing policies are widely dispersed in various laws, legislation acts and ministerial circulars, leading to duplications and ambiguities that make legal harmonization a very demanding task.

3.2 Organizational Structure

ARF’s organizational structure (see Fig. 3.1) was specified in Law 736/1977:

Figure 3-1: ARF’s Organizational Structure

Postgraduate Dissertation 20 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Responsibilities of ARF’s main organizational units:

 Administrative Board

Supervises the operation of ARF’s organizational units, manages ARF’s assets and resources, decides and authorizes the collection of resources and the incurring of expenditures, according to applicable legislation, approves the annual budget, submits the annual balance sheet and approves the annual review of activities, draws up the internal rules of procedure.

In particular, the president of the Administrative Board supervises all ARF organizational units, approves the agenda of Administrative Board meetings, signs contracts and agreements with third parties, taking on commitments for ARF upon decision by the Administrative Board and approves employees’ business trips.

 Administration Division

It is responsible for collecting all kinds of resources, performing all accounting services, and drawing up the draft budget, balance sheet and review of each fiscal year, promoting sales and managing all matters related to ARF’s employees.

In particular, the Head of the Administration Division has under his/her authority all ARF organizational units and personnel, implements the Administrative Board’s decisions, develops and submits proposals to the Administrative Board on all ARF-related matters, administers annual leave and sick leave to all ARF personnel.

 Publications Division

It is responsible for collecting and drawing up all materials to be published, for the printing and general editing of all ARF publications, archaeology-related doctoral theses, scientific journals, archaeological analects and other publications of the General Division of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage of the Ministry of Culture and Sports. In addition, it makes recommendations to the Administrative Board on the publishing program and the free exchange of publications.

 Technical Division

Postgraduate Dissertation 21 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

It is responsible for surveying archaeological sites, monuments and property expropriated for archaeological purposes, as well as for the design, supervision and execution of works for the preservation of buildings that are under the authority of the General Division for Restoration, Museums and Technical Works of the Ministry of Culture and Sports.

 Accounting Department

It is responsible for performing all ARF accounting operations, bookkeeping and maintaining accounting records, the timely drawing up and submission to the Administrative Board of ARF’s draft budget, drawing up the balance sheet and review of each fiscal year, incurring expenditures, collecting all kinds of ARF resources, arranging displays for selling ARF's available products, regularly supplying museums with tickets, publications and other items produced by ARF, and safekeeping and managing all materials belonging to ARF, including products available to be sold on consignment.

Over time, a third layer of hierarchy was introduced under the Accounting Department (see Fig. 3.2), by Administrative Board decisions, in an effort to improve organizational efficiency:

Figure 3-2 : ARF’s Accounting Department organizational structure

Postgraduate Dissertation 22 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

The above Offices have the following core responsibilities:

 Revenue Office: Revenue monitoring and management.

 Cultural Goods Office: Proposals for new products.

 Third Party Products Office: Data entry of third-party-product monthly sales and calculation of monthly pay for third party suppliers’ commission.

 ARF Products Office: Data entry of ARF products’ monthly sales.

 Ticket Office: Data entry of monthly ticket sales.

3.3 Human Resources Management

ARF currently has 198 employees, the vast majority of which are over 50 years old (78.28%) and have completed either primary or secondary education (76.79%), with none or limited computer knowledge (see Graph 3.4 and Graph 3.5):

Graph 3-4 : Employees’ Age Distribution

Postgraduate Dissertation 23 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Graph 3-5 : Employees’ Education Level Distribution

Since 1994, when the Supreme Council for Civil Personnel Selection (ASEP) was established, employee selection for the Public Sector was intended to be a central process, controlled by ASEP; however, only 3.54% of ARF’s personnel have been selected through ASEP hiring procedures (see Graph 3.6). Over the last decade, the only method used to acquire new employees was through the transfer of current employees from other public sector bodies that either ceased to operate or were privatized, such as the Hellenic Horse Racing Organization, Olympic Airlines, Piraeus Port Authority etc.

Graph 3-6 : ARF’s Hiring Procedures

Postgraduate Dissertation 24 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Due to massive retirements of ARF employees and fiscal limitations in hiring new personnel (see Graph 3.7) during the period of financial crisis, in the last 5 years total ARF personnel has decreased by one third.

Graph 3-7 : New employees per decade

When acquiring new employees through transfer from other public organizations, ARF has no option or right of selection; as a result, most employees transferring to ARF are of primary or secondary education level (see Graph 3.8):

Graph 3- 8 : Last 5 years’ hiring by education level

Postgraduate Dissertation 25 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Another peculiarity of ARF’s human resources is that two thirds of employees have not been trained in business-related fields (see Graph 3.9) and are employed in different services of the Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports across the country (see Graph 3.10). Their only interaction with ARF is that they belong to ARF’s payroll and are members of ARF’s labor union:

Graph 3- 9 : ARF Employees’ Discipline Fields

Graph 3- 10 : ARF Employees’ Location Distribution

As per ARF employees’ process distribution displayed in Graph 3.11 other processes include ARF’s supportive operations like human resource office, protocol office, payroll

Postgraduate Dissertation 26 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

office, supplies office, legal office and operations implemented by Ephorates of Antiquities Divisions across country (e.g. security) that don’t belong to ARF’s official operational objectives:

Graph 3- 11 : ARF Employees’ Process Distribution

3.4 ICT Infrastructure

ARF’s central ICT infrastructure consists of obsolete hardware and software applications that were mostly obtained in 2003 - 2004 for the 2004 Athens Olympic Games. In 2017, ARF bought 60 personal computers to be used by employees in central services; however, 25 personal computers are still in use whose operating system is no longer supported by the manufacturer (namely Operating System Windows XP, end-of-life cycle was announced by Microsoft in 2014); these computers are mainly used periodically by seasonal employees (usually seasonal employees are hired in the spring and they sign an eight-month contract).The major issue with ARF’s ICT infrastructure is the lack thereof in service provision locations (i.e. museum shops and ticket booking offices in archaeological sites and museums):

Postgraduate Dissertation 27 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Due to the ambiguous ownership scheme of Museum Shops (a museum shop as a building belongs either to an Ephorates of Antiquities if it is located inside an archaeological site or to a museum administration if it is located inside a museum or to ARF in all other cases), it is not clear who is responsible for providing internet connectivity and usually it is obligatory to obtain approval by two or three different Departments within the Ministry of Culture and Sports and ARF. Furthermore, new cabling or antenna installation inside an archaeological site must be approved by an archaeological council prior to implementation; also existing power and communication network infrastructure are obsolete and in many cases cannot support realization of digital services (see Graph 3.12):

Graph 3- 12 : Internet Connection availability in Museum Shops

ARF over the last decade acquired only 8 computers for use in the largest Museum Shops (see Graph 3.13):

Postgraduate Dissertation 28 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Graph 3- 13 : Personal Computer availability in Museum Shops

As a result only a small fraction of Museum Shops can operate using available ICT infrastructure (see Graph 3.14). An application acquired in 2003 for Museum Shops operation, is obsolete and cannot operate with current telecommunication technologies. The use of personal computer and internet is limited to sending an email with monthly sales data to ARF Headquarters.

Graph 3- 14 : Museum Shops with both Personal Computer and Internet Connection availability

In ticket booking offices the lack of required ICT infrastructure is even more severe (see Graph 3.15). The same problem with complex approval procedures mentioned earlier for museum shops also applies for ticket booking offices.

Postgraduate Dissertation 29 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Graph 3- 15 : Ticket Booking Offices with both Personal Computer and Internet Connection availability

3.5 ERP – led BPR Project in ARF

After an 18-month negotiation period, in the summer of 2016, Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) and National Bank of Greece (NBG) announced their intention to sponsor the project “Re-organization and modernization of Archaeological Resources Fund Services” with an initial budget of 1.200.000€, consisting of the following modules:

1. Ticket Management System Module (TMS);

2. Access Control System Module (ACS) for visitors of archaeological sites and museums;

3. Implementation of an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System that consists of all the necessary modules to support ARF’s operations (Intensive retail module for Museum Shops, Warehousing and distribution module, Real estate management module, production control module, accounting module etc.);

4. Business Intelligence (BI) Module.

A national tender was conducted from January 2017 to July 2017 by NBG’s Procurement Division and the Project was assigned to a consortium of contractors with main contractor the Hellenic Telecommunications Organization (OTE) and subcontractors companies with a major presence in their respective business fields, namely ForthCRS for the Ticket Management System, IBM for hardware and central databases software, Singular Logic for ERP, and DigiSec for the Access Control System. The two sponsors (SNF and NBG)

Postgraduate Dissertation 30 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

assigned the provision of consulting services to KPMG and Planet SA. A monitoring and acceptance committee was established by Minister of Culture and Sports decision on 29/11/2017, whereas on 1/2/2018 the contract was signed and a project management scheme was defined by ARF’s Administrative Board decision.

According to the project timetable (see Tables 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4), E-Ticket, Access Control System Management, Museum Shops Retail System and warehousing and distribution module are scheduled to launch on 1/6/2018, while ERP and BI are planned for 1/9/2018:

SN Description Due Date

1 Definition of operational requirements 1/3/2018

2 Software Implementation / customization 30/4/2018

3 Hardware Installation 30/4/2018

4 Pilot operation / training 1/5/2018

5 Production Operation 1/6/2018

Table 3-2 : ARF’s E-Ticket and Access Control System Timetable

SN Description Due Date

1 Definition of operational requirements 14/3/2018

2 Software Implementation / customization 30/4/2018

3 Hardware Installation 30/4/2018

4 Pilot operation / training 1/5/2018

5 Production Operation 1/6/2018

Table 3-3 : ARF’s Retail, Warehouse and Distribution System Timetable

SN Description Due Date

1 Definition of operational requirements 1/5/2018

2 Software Implementation / customization 30/7/2018

3 Hardware Installation 30/7/2018

4 Pilot operation / training 1/8/2018

5 Production Operation 1/9/2018

Table 3-4 : ARF’s ERP and BI System Timetable

Postgraduate Dissertation 31 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

A selection of archaeological sites and museums was made (see Tables 3.5 and 3.6) based on number of visitors, total revenues, geographical dispersion and combined ticket policies. Archaeological site and museum of ancient Messene were included due to the involvement of Society of Messenian Archaeological Studies as an intermediate partner between Stavros Niarchos Foundation and National Bank of Greece with Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports:

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Revenues 2017 % Revenues 2017

1 Acropolis archaeological site 37,666,780 € 39.29%

2 Olympeion archaeological site 2,488,581 € 2.60%

2 Aristotle’s Lyceum archaeological site 33,522 € 0.03%

3 Ancient Agora archaeological site 1,729,320 € 1.80%

4 Roman Agora archaeological site 357,581 € 0.37%

5 Hadrian's Library archaeological site 485,508 € 0.51%

6 Kerameikos archaeological site 136,541 € 0.14%

7 Ancient Messene archaeological site 280,260 € 0.29%

8 Knossos archaeological site 7,935,924 € 8.28%

9 Heraklion Archaeological Museum 1,514,602 € 1.58%

Total 52,628,619 € 54.90%

Table 3-5 : E-Ticket & Access Control System Application Sites

SN Museum / Archaeological Site Shop Sales 2017 % Revenues 2017

1 Acropolis archaeological site 125,140.49 € 5.44%

2 Olympeion archaeological site 39,405.15 € 1.71%

3 Ancient Agora archaeological site 20,436.88 € 0.89%

4 Byzantine & Christian Museum 65,973.50 € 2.87%

5 National Archaeological Museum 349,121.20 € 15.18%

6 Knossos archaeological site 319,795.74 € 13.91%

7 Heraklion Archaeological Museum 171,590.18 € 7.46%

8 Central Warehouse shop 19,449.00 € 0.85%

Postgraduate Dissertation 32 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Museum / Archaeological Site Shop Sales 2017 % Revenues 2017

Total 1,110,912.14 € 48.31%

Table 3-6 : Museum / Archaeological sites Shops Retail System Application

After successful completion of the project in the initially selected application sites, a roll- out will be planned to expand it to the rest of archaeological sites and museums.

In addition to the project implementation, ARF is running a BPR led by ERP internal project in order to align its operational model with TMS, ACS, Retail (see Table 3.7) and ERP and BI (see Table 3.8) functional capabilities:

SN Description Due Date

1 BPR Planning 1/2/2018

2 Map and Analyze “As Is” Situation 14/3/2018

3 Design “To Be” situation 14/3/2018

4 Implement and test BPR 31/5/2018

5 Monitor, Review and Improve BPR 1/6/2018 continuously

Table 3-7 : ARF’s E-Ticket / Warehouse / Distribution / Sales BPR Timetable

SN Description Due Date

1 BPR Planning 1/2/2018

2 Map and Analyze “As Is” Situation 1/5/2018

3 Design “To Be” situation 1/5/2018

4 Implement and test BPR 31/8/2018

5 Monitor, Review and Improve BPR 1/9/2018  continuously

Table 3-8 : ARF’s internal processes BPR Timetable

3.6 A critical review of the ARF organizational structure and operations

ARF is a typical example of a Greek public sector organization suffering from substantial weaknesses that are more or less common in the majority of Greek public entities. ARF’s operation is governed by a huge volume of complex and in many cases obsolete legislation

Postgraduate Dissertation 33 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

leading to duplication and ambiguities that hinder operational functions and undermine effective administration and management (Pavlaki, 2014).

ARF’s organizational structure, as specified in Law 736/1977 has three large operational divisions (Administration, Publication and Technical division) and is a typical Greek public entity structure reflecting obsolete management schemes not suitable for realizing commercial activities such as retail sales or ticket issuance on large geographical dispersion (over 380 products/ tickets points of sale across the country). ARF’s service provision front desk personnel is not under ARF’s authority (usually front desk personnel constitutes of security guards belonging to relevant Ephorates of Antiquities) and all necessary infrastructure (buildings, power and communication networks, computers) belongs to Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports. ARF’s structure is characterized by bureaucracy, lack of business orientation and cross-functional collaboration, and vital organizational units such as marketing, sales, IT, warehouse, supplies and point of sales are missing. Furthermore, the lack of well-defined roles and responsibilities creates ambiguities and confusion, resulting in decreased responsibility and accountability. In addition, the lack of collaboration and established institutional bridges between ARF and Ephorates of antiquities generates a lack of responsibility for increasing the numbers of visitors as well as income. Consequently strategic goals in those fields cannot be established and an accountable authority for such issues has not been defined (Petrou, 2015).

ARF’s employees do not share a common vision, nor are they committed to achieving strategic goals, since neither of them are defined and communicated effectively. This has an adverse impact on organizational culture since the majority of employees are not committed to common goals and do not share well-defined business values that promote accountability and responsibility (Remenyi & Heafield, 1996). Available human capital in ARF is considered to be inadequate since most employees are over-aged, underqualified, with basic skill deficiencies and the vast majority of them are assigned with duties that are not related to ARF’s operations, leaving vital organizational units understaffed. The Revenue Office, for example, which is responsible for revenues annually reaching over 100.000.000€, generated by 250 archaeological sites and museums, 130 museum shops, and over 2000 B2B customers, has only one employee in comparison with protocol office that has four employees.

Postgraduate Dissertation 34 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

ICT infrastructure is obsolete and inadequate, resulting in operation processes based on handwritten repots, duplicate data entries and unavailability of up-to-date information required for business decisions and implementation of control mechanisms.

In the past years there have been some unsuccessful efforts to re-organize ARF’s operations, but they were undermined by frequent replacements of top management (over the last 7 years, average tenure of ARF’s Administrative Boards has been approximately 6-8 months) and a strong resistance to change manifested by Greek public sector employees and labor unions focused on safeguarding acquired labor rights.

Over time all the above weaknesses resulted in major operational gaps, flaws, and lack of controls, failure to comply with established accounting principles, inability to produce valid financial statements and degradation of quality of services available in archaeological sites and museums. The radical redesign of ARF’s operational model is an undeniable necessity for improving competitiveness with foreign countries (Turkey, Spain, Italy etc.) offering similar products and services to visitors of archaeological sites and museums.

To increase the chances of success for ARF’s business process reengineering project, a thorough risk assessment, risk evaluation and risk treatment process must be established and implemented, taking into consideration critical success and failure factors concerning implementation of similar projects in the specified environment.

Postgraduate Dissertation 35 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

4. Risk Management for BPR led by ERP in ARF

BPR is the radical transformation of an organization’s structure, culture and business processes aiming at the improvement of factors such as cost, quality, service and speed, which questions the core of an organization’s way to do everyday business. ERP implementation is also a process that causes turbulences even on a well-structured and effectively organized corporation. Business history is full of examples of failure in BPR projects and in ERP implementation. According to Mir-Ghaderi and Isakhani (2011), as cited in Alireza and Behnaz (2015), over 70% of BPR projects failed during the implementation stage. Indicative examples include:

 Vodafone’s Siebel migration led to a fine of 4.6m pounds from telecom regulator (Chapman, 2016);

 Woolworth’s Australia SAP implementation resulted in an inability to create profit-loss-reports for a period of almost 18 months (Teo, 2017);

 Nike’s ERP implementation in 2000 led to $100 million in lost sales (Fruhlinger & Wailgum, 2017).

Therefore, the combination of two high-risk processes applied simultaneously on an organization like ARF, which is characterized by lack of human resources, absence of documented work flows and obsolete ICT infrastructure, makes the adoption of a risk management approach from the initial stages of the project indispensable.

4.1 Risk categorization

Risks in implementing a BPR/ERP project can be expressed as a function of specific parameters:

Risk = f {B; F; C; S; T; H} where

B = Business Risk, F = Financial Risk, C = Culture Risk, S = Structure Risk, T = Technology Risk and H = Human Risk (Remenyi & Heafield, 1996).

All risks identified in BPR/ERP implementation project in ARF will be marked in accordance with this categorization and appropriate mitigating actions will be proposed.

Postgraduate Dissertation 36 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

There are also general risks associated with failures of execution of BPR/ERP projects. These are risks related to the structuredness of a project and the use of new or company- specific new technology. The term “structuredness of a project” refers to the completeness of the definition of the end outputs of the project (Remenyi & Heafield, 1996). Automation of existing processes is an example of high structuredness project with low risk since end outputs are already defined by the existing processes. BPR is not about applying automation on existing processes but rather a radical redesign / creation of new / elimination / replacement of obsolete processes, so typically it presents a high risk due to low stucturedness.

For example, in ARF’s BPR/ERP project the decision to sell tickets for archaeological sites and museums on the Internet is a completely new process that creates a new product subcategory with a different production method, distribution channels, methods of payment, control mechanisms etc. so the risk in execution is considered to be high. This is also the case for the application of new technological solutions. For example the decision to use barcode labels in all ARF’s products available in museum shops differentiates the sale method in retail shops, the relationship with suppliers and the logistics process. The risk of applying new technological solutions is also considered to be high.

It is possible to use a 2 X 2 matrix (see Table 4.1) to position the level of risk using as dimensions (axes) the structuredness of the project and the novelty of the technology (McFarlan, McKenney & Pyburn, 1983):

High Technical Q1: Very high Risk Q2: Medium Risk

Inexperience

Low technical Q3: Lowish Risk Q4: Low Risk

Inexperience

Low Structuredness High Structuredness

Table 4-1 : Degrees of execution-related risks

Postgraduate Dissertation 37 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

BPR/ERP projects are typically expected to fit in Q1 Quadrant. The same holds for ARF’s implementation project due to the low level of structuredness (implementation environment characterized by a lack of strictly defined processes) and the extensive use of technology which is new to the organization.

4.2 Risk Assessment

According to ISO Standard 31000 (2018), risk is defined as “the effect of uncertainty on objectives” and risk management refers to “a coordinated set of activities and methods that is used to direct an organization and to control the many risks that can affect its ability to achieve objectives”. In line with the above-mentioned standard’s proposed methodology for risk management, an organization must first conduct a risk assessment (identify related assets or broad risk areas, risks, probability of occurrence and impact), establish and implement a risk treatment plan in order to mitigate risks and finally compare the residual risk to a predefined level. If the residual risk is not acceptable, the process starts over again.

In terms of probability of risk occurrence and impact assessment, the following predefined values will be used to form a two-dimensional heat map (see Table 4.2) for risk evaluation / prioritization:

Probability: unlikely, likely, and very likely

Impact: low, medium, and high

Probability / Low Medium High Impact

Very likely

Likely

Unlikely

Table 4-2 : Risk Evaluation Heat Map

Postgraduate Dissertation 38 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Risks categorized in green cells are considered to be low, in yellow cells medium and in red cells high.

No Broad Risk Area

1 Top management

2 Personnel

3 Organizational Culture

4 Organizational Structure

5 ICT Infrastructure (Hardware, Software, Telecommunications)

6 External Consultants

7 ERP implementation contractor

Table 4-3 : Identification of ARF’s BPR/ERP broad risk areas

For every risk area in the Inventory (see Table 4.3), corresponding risks, probability of occurrence and impact were assigned (see Tables 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, and 4.10) based on a combination of interviews and analysis of Greek public sector operational standards:

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

1.1 Top management Very likely: Average tenure of Medium: A B replaced by the Minister ARF’s Administrative Boards top of Culture during project has been approximately 6-8 management implementation months over the last 7 years replacement during project implementation will create delays

1.2 Top management unable Unlikely: Current ARF High: Inability H to define the scope and Chairwoman was involved in to align the align the project with BPR/ERP Projects as Project project with strategic objectives Manager in the private sector ARF’s strategic and has the required objectives will experience undermine the feasibility of

Postgraduate Dissertation 39 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

implementation

1.3 Top management unable Likely: Current ARF High: H to communicate a new Chairwoman’s work Resistance to vision and the necessity experience was mainly in the change will be for change private sector and may overwhelming, underestimate the difficulties undermining in communication due to weak the feasibility organizational culture in public of sector implementation

Table 4-4 : Top Management risk area analysis

No Risk Probability Impact Severity Category

2.1 Lack of engagement Very likely: High: Resistance to H & C in project change will be Employees may present a implementation overwhelming, significant change undermining the resistance since they feel feasibility of that their authority is implementation questioned, bad practices from the past may be revealed and the need for personnel with additional expertise may arise

2.2 Lack of required Very likely: The majority High: Required fields H competences to of ARF’s personnel is of expertise such as support ERP / BPR underqualified, over-aged financing / accounting implementation and and are facing difficulties / marketing / operation in using personal distribution networks / computers. supplies are missing completely, undermining the feasibility of implementation

2.3 Inability to Unlikely: Medium: Resistance H understand project’s to change may be Working groups are

Postgraduate Dissertation 40 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

No Risk Probability Impact Severity Category

scope exclusively composed of increased employees actually “doing the job” who have knowledge of errors/gaps/flaws in the “As-Is” situation

2.4 Inability to express Likely: High: Insufficient H operational information to ERP It is very difficult for requirements with implementers, people “doing the job” the clarity resulting in same way for many years reproducing to “think outside the box” operational flaws from and question the reasoning “As Is” situation of their work. Instead it is easier to think that reproducing current functionality with minor improvements will be sufficient. This does not constitute BPR

2.5 Time unavailability Very likely: Due to High: Delays in H insufficient organization, implementation, employees working in core insufficient feedback business processes to ERP implementers, experience heavy lack of required workloads and are engaged resources to evaluate in menial tasks deliverables

Table 4-5 : Personnel risk area analysis

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

3.1 Negativity Very likely: The majority of High: C & H employees are not fully Resistance to committed to a common set of change will be corporate goals and do not overwhelming, share the same set of well- undermining defined business values. These the feasibility of

Postgraduate Dissertation 41 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

values are not consistent and implementation known to all levels of organization

3.2 Lack of a shared Very likely: Concept of vision Medium: C vision is not developed and Resistance to understood in the Greek public change will be sector overwhelming, questioning the feasibility of implementation

3.3 Risk aversion Very likely: The Greek public Medium: C & H orientation sector is characterized by high Changes in risk aversion. It is very difficult operational to change the way business is procedures will done even in the cases where be difficult to current organization is implement ineffective

Table 4-6 : Organizational Culture risk area analysis

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

4.1 Bureaucratic structure Very likely: ARF’s Medium: S with many layers of organizational structure was Difficulties in hierarchy defined in 1977 and is successful characterized by many levels segregation of of hierarchy and lack of duties customer focus

4.2 Lack of business- Very likely: ARF’s Medium: S oriented structure organizational structure is Difficulties in department-oriented and many aligning necessary organizational units business are missing, such as customer processes with care, marketing, IT, sales, and operational distribution units

Postgraduate Dissertation 42 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

4.3 Lack of cross-functional Very likely: Heads of High: S collaboration business-oriented operational Department processes are not described in division current ARF’s organizational orientation structure makes cross- functional

collaboration difficult and there is no specific person that has the responsibility and the comprehensive knowledge for a business process as a whole)

4.4 Lack of job Very likely: High: In many S requirements and job cases the Only job requirements for descriptions required skills managers are defined, no job are not descriptions exist available

Table 4-7 : Organizational Structure risk area analysis

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

5.1 Inadequate main Unlikely: High: T processing and storage Operational All main processing and storage facilities for supporting disruptions facilities necessary will be ERP provided by the project contractor and stress and utilization tests will be conducted

Postgraduate Dissertation 43 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

5.2 Lack of communication Likely: High: Inability T lines / network to operate Communication lines and connections with point network connections for the of sales point of sales will be provided by ARF. Due to specific restrictions in archaeological sites, cabling is usually challenging and requires permissions from different government agencies

5.3 Time delays in acquiring Likely: Medium: B necessary network Delays in Telecommunication network equipment project equipment will be provided by implementation ARF. Supply procedures in the public sector are very time- consuming

5.4 Lack of personnel with Very likely: High: Inability H required expertise to to operate and ARF’s human resources with operate and maintain monitor in a the required expertise in ICT ICT infrastructure satisfactory technology are insufficient. manner Acquiring new personnel is a time-consuming procedure that needs to be authorized by the Greek Ministry of Finance

5.5 Operational disruptions Unlikely: High: T due to software errors / Operational All software modules are bugs disruptions commercial products used in similar operational environments with low probability of software errors and bugs. No custom software will be developed

Table 4-8 : ICT Infrastructure risk area analysis

Postgraduate Dissertation 44 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

No Risk Probability Impact Impact Severity

6.1 Inability to understand Unlikely: Medium: H project’s scope Consulting KPMG and Planer are the two is a firms that ARF is using as supportive external consultant in service with BPR/ERP implementation no decisive project. They have contributed role in the project’s early stage of design, i.e. the Request for Proposal and public tender procedure for the selection of the contractor

6.2 Lack of competencies Unlikely: Medium: H and knowledge required Consulting Both companies employ highly to contribute to a is a skilled personnel with BPR/ERP project supportive experience in similar projects service with no decisive role

6.3 Lack of knowledge on Unlikely: Medium: H public sector Consulting Both companies have organizational culture is a experience in public sector and climate supportive projects service with no decisive role

Table 4-9 : External Consultant risk area analysis

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

7.1 Contractor’s failure Unlikely: High: F to complete the Operational Main contractor is OTE, project due to disruption whose subcontractors are bankruptcy or in case large-scale, well-

Postgraduate Dissertation 45 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

No Risk Probability Impact Category Severity

of force majeure established commercial firms like IBM Hellas, Singular Logic etc.

7.2 Contractor’s failure Unlikely: High: H to successfully Operational Main subcontractors are complete the disruption large-scale, well- implementation of the established commercial project due to lack of firms like IBM Hellas, experience Singular Logic etc., all of which have the necessary experience in implementing complex information technology projects

7.3 Contractor’s inability Likely: Medium: B to complete the Delays in Mainly because some project according to project stages require the contractual implementation prerequisite actions to be timetable implemented by ARF

Table 4-10 : ERP implementation contractor risk area analysis

Postgraduate Dissertation 46 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

4.3 Risk evaluation and treatment plan

From the previous analysis the following illustrative risk heat map (see Table 4.11) can be drawn:

Probability / Low Medium High Impact

Very likely 1.1 2.2 3.2 2.1

2.5 3.1 3.3 4.3

4.1

4.2 4.4 5.4 Likely 1.3

5.2 5.3 2.4

Unlikely 5.2 2.3 6.1 1.2

6.2 6.3 5.5

7.3

7.1 7.2

Table 4-11 : ARF’s ERP-led BPR Risk Evaluation Heat Map

For risks fitted in red cells (high risks) immediate actions to mitigate risk are required, whereas for risks fitted in yellow cells (medium risks) actions to mitigate risk should be planned. Finally, for risks fitted in green cells (low risks) no immediate actions need to be planned (see Table 4.12):

Postgraduate Dissertation 47 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Risk Area ID Risk Action New New Probability Impact

Top management 1.1 Top management No actions can be Very likely Medium replaced by the implemented Minister of Culture during project implementation

1.3 Top management Implement a Likely Medium unable to communication communicate a plan new vision and the necessity for change

Personnel 2.1 Lack of Communicating Likely Medium engagement in shared vision and project necessity for implementation change through meetings between top management and personnel

2.2 Lack of required Implementation of Likely High competences to training courses support ERP / can reduce but not BPR eliminate the risk. implementation There is still need and operation for acquiring new employees with skills required for ERP operation

2.4 Inability to Contribution of Likely Medium express external consultant operational requirements with clarity

2.5 Time Contribution of Very likely Medium

Postgraduate Dissertation 48 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Risk Area ID Risk Action New New Probability Impact

unavailability external consultant

Culture 3.1 Negativity Training courses Likely High and meetings with top management

3.2 Lack of a shared Establish and Likely Medium vision effectively communicate a shared vision

3.3 Risk aversion Training courses Likely High orientation and meetings with top management

Structure 4.1 Bureaucratic New Likely Medium structure with organizational many layers of chart is expected hierarchy to be approved

4.2 Lack of business- Training courses, Likely Medium oriented structure meetings and contribution of external consultant

4.3 Lack of cross- New Likely Medium functional organizational collaboration chart is expected to be approved

4.4 Lack of job New Likely Medium requirements and organizational job descriptions chart is expected to be approved

ICT 5.2 Lack of Collaboration with Unlikely High communication Ministry of lines / network Culture connections with (Information point of sales Technology Division)

Postgraduate Dissertation 49 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Risk Area ID Risk Action New New Probability Impact

5.3 Time delays in Top management Unlikely Medium acquiring commitment to necessary network apply actions equipment reducing all unnecessary delays

5.4 Lack of personnel Acquiring new Very Likely High with required employees with expertise to necessary operate and expertise through maintain ICT the Government’s infrastructure employee mobility program

5.5 Operational Extended period of Unlikely Medium disruptions due to pilot operation software errors / bugs

Contractor 7.1 Contractor’s No actions can be Unlikely High failure to implemented complete the project due to bankruptcy or in case of force majeure

7.2 Contractor’s No actions can be Unlikely High failure to implemented successfully complete the implementation of the project due to lack of experience

Table 4-12 : Risk Treatment Plan

The revised risk heat map after risk treatment plan follows (see Table 4.13):

Postgraduate Dissertation 50 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Probability / Low Medium High Impact

Very likely

1.1

2.5 5.4

Likely 1.3 2.1

2.4 3.2 2.2

3.3 4.1

4.3

4.2 4.4 3.1

Unlikely 2.3 6.1 1.2

5.3

5.2 5.5 6.2

6.3 7.3 7.1

7.2

Table 4-13 : Revised ARF’s ERP-led BPR Risk Evaluation Heat Map

As illustrated in Table 4.13, the following risks are not successfully addressed and are still categorized as High:

1.1 Top management replaced by the Minister of Culture during project implementation (Category Business);

Postgraduate Dissertation 51 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

2.2 Lack of required competences to support ERP / BPR implementation and operation (Category Human);

2.5 Personnel time unavailability (Category Human);

3.1 Negativity (Category Culture), and

5.4 Lack of personnel with required expertise to operate and maintain ICT infrastructure (Category Human).

4.4 Remarks

From the above analysis and available case studies such as, indicatively, Transformational change and BPR British and Dutch Public Sector (Weerakkody et al., 2011) Transformational change and BPR British and Dutch Public Sector ) on implementing BPR/ERP projects in the Public and Private Sector, major Critical Success Factors (CSFs) and Critical Failure Factors (CFFs) can be documented: Organizational Culture, Top Management Commitment, Use of Information Technology, Organizational Structure, HR and their ability to incorporate change management. The above are fundamental factors that can contribute to successful BPR/ERP implementation.

The most important Critical Failure Factor is usually the resistance to change due to weak or inappropriate business culture, middle managers’ fear of losing authority and employees’ fear of losing their job. Proper communication of shared vision and necessity to change by top management, combined with education and training of all personnel, can decrease the resistance to change. However, the lack of required skills to operate in a new environment, in conjunction with the restrictions in hiring new personnel in the Greek Public Sector makes the successful implementation of BPR/ERP projects in order to improve measures such as cost, quality, service and speed a very demanding and high risk task.

Postgraduate Dissertation 52 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

5. Business Process Reengineering in ARF

In the context of the present dissertation two main ARF operational processes are presented:

 Archaeological sites and museums Ticket Management and Access Control

 Product sales in museum shops

The above two processes generate close to 98% of ARF’s total revenues and are applied to serve over 14 million customers annually.

5.1 Planning Stage

ARF’s strategic mission, as outlined in Law 736/1977, is to “..secure, develop, collect and make available resources gained through managing national cultural heritage”, The Fund’s newly established strategic vision is to improve visitor experience in archaeological sites and museums through the adoption of available ICT technology and tools. The strategic objective of ARF’s BPR project is to align its internal operational procedures with the newly acquired Ticket Management, Access Control and ERP Systems’ functionalities in order to improve the quality of service provision and ensure public revenues. An ARF Administrative Board decision (1/2/2018) established two separate project managers and working groups for the two main process components of the project (E-Ticket / Access Control & ERP).

Members of the E-Ticket / Access Control working group include employees of ARF’s relevant organizational units (Ticket Office, Revenue Office, Technical Division, Central Warehouse), as well as ARF’s IT officer and employees working in Athens Ephorate of Antiquities, since ticket issuing and visitor access control in archaeological sites and museums are performed by employees of the local Ephorates of Antiquities. Members of the ERP working group include employees of ARF’s relevant organizational units (Products Office, Third Party Products Office, Cultural Goods Office, Revenue Office, Central Warehouse), as well as ARF’s IT officer and employees of the Athens Ephorate of Antiquities working in museum shops in Acropolis archaeological site and the National Archaeological Museum. The lack of required skills and knowledge of the two project teams’ members was compensated for by the active participation of external consultants

Postgraduate Dissertation 53 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

(i.e. KPMG SA, Planet Consultants SA, Information Society SA, Athens University of Economics and Business) in project meetings.

With the same Administrative Board decision a Steering Committee was established, consisting of two Administrative Board members, the E-Ticket and ERP project managers, and the Heads of the Administrative Division, Publications Division, Technical Division, Accounting Department and Audit & Control Department. Members of the Steering Committee and reengineering working groups were selected taking into consideration not only their knowledge and involvement in the current operational process but also the need to build a strong cross-functional collaboration in order to increase engagement and reduce resistance to change.

One particularity of ARF’s operational process model, which is a threat to successful cross-functional collaboration, is the fact that although ARF is the process owner of Ticket Management and Museum shop sales, neither the installation sites nor the front office employees who realize the service provision are under its jurisdiction. In this context, a critical success factor in ARF’s BPR project is the active engagement of employees and organizational units that belong in different legal entities, such as the Ephorates of Antiquities, Museum Administrations and the Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Sports. In this context a communication plan was developed and implemented in order to increase engagement and reduce resistance to change among ARF’s employees through multiple meetings with the participation of all personnel and emails from project managers communicating the successful completion of project milestones. An official presentation of the newly acquired systems took place in the Ministry of Culture and Sports with the participation of the Greek Minister and the Heads of all relevant Ministry Divisions (Athens, Heraklion and Messenian ephorates of antiquities, archaeological museum of Heraklion, byzantine and Christian museum of Athens, general directorate of antiquities and cultural heritage and directorate of museums).

5.2 Map and analyze “As Is” situation

The two main ARF operational processes will be analyzed and mapped separately, and flaws, operational gaps, lack of controls and vulnerabilities of each process will be identified in the following subsections.

Postgraduate Dissertation 54 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

5.2.1 Ticket Management and Access Control Process ARF conducts on an annual basis a public tender for the provision of pre-printed numbered tickets for archaeological sites and museums, taking into consideration current ticket stock and last year’s ticket sales reports. Tickets are delivered by the contractor to ARF’s Central Warehouse and from there they are distributed to archaeological sites and museums as needed. Import / export actions to and from the Central Warehouse are entered into a software application, which generates all relevant shipping (see Fig. 5.1) and receiving (see Fig. 5.2) documents:

Figure 5-1: Tickets shipping document by ARF’s Central Warehouse

Figure 5-2 : Tickets receipt document by chief teller on site

Postgraduate Dissertation 55 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Tickets are sold only in archaeological site and museum booking offices. The teller keeps a ticket stub and collects the relative amount. During visitor entrance on site a guard keeps the ticket counterfoil and permits entrance. All revenues are collected by a chief teller (the same person that receives the pre-printed tickets from ARF’s Central Warehouse) who is responsible for monthly deposits of revenues to ARF’s bank account. Chief teller per site is also responsible for sending reports (handwritten) with the monthly sales to ARF’s Ticket Office (see Fig. 5.3). The reports are sent to ARF through the local Ephorates of Antiquities, which implement the first level of control.

Figure 5-3 : Aggregate monthly ticket sales report

Postgraduate Dissertation 56 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

ARF’s Ticket Office personnel enters monthly sales data in a software application and exports statistical reports with the monthly visits per archaeological site / museum; these reports are used by ARF’s administration and organizational units, as well as by the Hellenic Statistical Authority.

Current valid payment methods for acquiring archaeological site and museum tickets include cash, EFT-POS with the use of credit / debit card if there is an EFT-POS terminal available on site, voucher or bank deposit to ARF’s bank account (B2B customers only). The chief teller is also responsible for sending to ARF’s Ticket Office the receipts from his/her cash deposits to ARF’s bank account (see Fig. 5.4), EFT-POS daily transaction logs, a printout of any bank deposits made by customers (usually travel agencies) to buy tickets (see Fig. 5.5) and vouchers (see Fig. 5.6)

Figure 5-4 : Monthly cash deposit by chief teller to ARF’s bank account

Postgraduate Dissertation 57 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-5 : B2B customer’s web banking printout received by chief teller

Figure 5-6 : B2B customer’s voucher received by chief teller

Postgraduate Dissertation 58 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

ARF’s Ticket Office personnel enters into the corresponding software application only the number of tickets sold per visitor category and the amount deposited by archaeological sites chief teller in cash (see Fig. 5.7). Revenues collected by other payment methods (debit/credit cards, vouchers, web banking) are not entered into the application.

Figure 5-7 : ARF’s Ticket Office Sales Software Application

ARF’s Revenue Office receives on a daily basis the transactions of ARF’s bank accounts in electronic form (see Fig. 5.8) and makes the necessary accounting actions (debit / credit accounts) to realize income in a separate software application. Revenues from credit/debit cards are arbitrarily distributed by an 80% to 20% to ticket revenues and product sales revenues respectively.

Figure 5-8 : ARF’s bank account daily extrait

ARF’s Revenue Office does not have any information about the actual sales. If a chief teller in an archaeological site did not deposit monthly revenues, or if a travel agency did

Postgraduate Dissertation 59 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

not actually pay for the tickets received in the archaeological site, the Revenue Office would not be informed. It simply enters all the transactions visible in ARF’s bank accounts. Ticket Management and Access Control process is displayed in Table 5.1:

1 Public tender for provision of pre-printed numbered tickets

2 Import of pre-printed numbered tickets to ARF’s Warehouse

3 Distribution of tickets to archaeological sites and museums

Ticket selling and revenue collection in archaeological site and 4 museum booking offices

5 Ticket stub retaining during visitors’ entrance

6 Cash deposits from chief teller to ARF’s bank account

7 Monthly sales reports to ARF’s Ticket Office

Revenue recognition by ARF’s Revenue Office based on daily bank 8 deposits (extrait)

Table 5-1 : Ticket Management and Access Control Process

Operational flaws, lack of controls, gaps and vulnerabilities in ticket management and access control process

Provision & Distribution of pre-printed tickets

Public tender for the provision of pre-printed numbered tickets may take many months to complete. In addition, the cost borne by ARF for pre-printed tickets is as much as €150.000 annually, extra cost and time is required for physical distribution from the

Postgraduate Dissertation 60 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Central Warehouse to archaeological sites and museums across the country (distribution cost €60.000 for 2017), and there are additional administrative costs like warehousing etc. In cases of price changing, all pre-printed tickets must be withdrawn and a new public tender must be conducted. In cases where the quantities of pre-printed tickets ordered are not enough to accommodate visiting needs, an archaeological site may use pre-printed tickets from other sites where a ticket surplus exists, as long as the two tickets have the same nominal price. For the present year (2018) ARF did not order enough pre-printed tickets for free entrance, resulting in not recording free entrance visits in archaeological sites and museums across the country (see Table 5.1, Steps 1, 2, 3).

Ticket selling & Revenue Collection

Tickets are sold only in archaeological site and museum booking offices. It is not possible for visitors to buy their tickets online in order to avoid long queues. It is also not possible to buy a digital ticket and download it on an electronic device (smartphone, tablet, etc.). Over 90% of ARF’s total revenues are collected in cash in archaeological site and museum booking offices, resulting in security threats for employees and an extra administrative cost for cash management (secure transfer of large amounts of cash from booking offices to bank branches, banking commissions for money counting services etc.). As an indication, cash management cost for 2017 was over €100.000. Furthermore, it is not possible for tellers in a booking office to check the validity of a web banking deposit printout, since they have no access to ARF’s web banking platform (see Table 5.1, Step 4).

Visitor Access Control

During visitor entrance in an archaeological site or museum, an employee keeps a stub from visitors’ tickets and prevents them from entering without a valid ticket. As with any human-based access control procedure, no one can verify that the employee responsible for checking ticket validity does indeed perform the task assigned to him/her. ARF has an Audit & Control Department but due to lack of personnel (only two ARF employees conduct on-site audits) the sample of tickets checked on site annually by ARF is insignificant. Another vulnerability of the current access control process is that ticket stubs retained by employees at archaeological site entrances are not counted, registered or kept in a secure location. The same employees who are responsible for retaining ticket stubs at entrances are also in charge of destroying them to prevent reuse (see Table 5.1, Step 5).

Postgraduate Dissertation 61 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Cash deposits from chief teller to ARF’s bank account

In the first 10 days of each month, the chief teller of every archaeological site and museum deposits revenues from sale tickets of the previous month, either by personally visiting the nearest bank branch, or by making arrangements with companies providing secure money transfer services to ARF (depending on the amount of cash to be deposited). In cases of high cash revenues, it is possible for the chief teller to arrange for multiple money transfers or deposits per month. In every booking office an amount of cash (not officially determined or documented) is retained each month as cash-in amount in order to make change for customers. When chief tellers need to deposit revenues from the previous month, they use revenues from the current month to cover cash-in amount. This circular deficit is not documented anywhere resulting in an inability for ARF to know the exact amount of money that is present in archaeological site / museum safe boxes and cash drawers. Moreover, there is no specific procedure available for managing surpluses or deficits resulting from daily transactions (see Table 5.1, Step 6).

Monthly sales reports to ARF’s Ticket Office

In the first 10 days of each month, the chief teller of every archaeological site and museum draws up a handwritten report with previous month ticket sales per price category (full price, reduced, free entrance). For every price category, serial numbers of pre-printed tickets sold are also noted. The same report also contains cash deposits, revenues from EFT-POS, web banking printouts and vouchers received from customers, constituting ticket sales revenues for the previous month. The monthly sales report is accompanied by bank deposit receipts from chief teller, EFT-POS daily transactions report, vouchers and web banking printouts received from customers in exchange for tickets. The report is sent to the local Ephorate of Antiquities and then it is sent by post to ARFs’ Ticket Office, for data entry in a software application. The delay until a monthly ticket sales report from an archaeological site or museum reaches ARF’s Ticket Office may exceed a month. Due to insufficient human resources (ARF’s Ticket Office currently has only one employee) there is a further delay until monthly sales data from over 280 archaeological sites and museums are entered into the application. In the same application only revenues from chief tellers’ cash deposits are entered. Revenues from EFT-POS, vouchers and web transfers are not recorded, resulting in a discrepancy between sales amount and revenues recorded. ARF’s Ticket Office does not perform any kind of verification on revenues reported in a monthly

Postgraduate Dissertation 62 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

ticket sales report. It is assumed that all revenues are credited to ARF’s bank account without checking actual evidence to verify chief tellers’ statements. Another operational gap in this process is that ARF’s Ticket Office only has data regarding ticket sales and not entrances of visitors in archaeological sites. If, for example, a travel agency buys 3.000 tickets for Acropolis archaeological site on May, 31st for visits that will be made during June, these 3.000 tickets are falsely assumed to be May’s visiting statistics by ARF and the Hellenic Statistical Authority (see Table 5.1, Step 7).

Revenue recognition by ARF’s Revenue Office

ARF’s Revenue Office sole employee receives a daily transactions log (extrait) from Alpha Bank, National Bank of Greece and Bank of Greece. If the employee is not present (sick leave or vacation leave), all revenue recognition process halts until her return.

For every account deposit (based on the deposit description) two counter-balancing records are entered into the accounting software application:

 Revenue record

 Revenue receipt record via bank

Revenue record is realized only after the chief teller of an archaeological site or a B2B customer (e.g. travel agency) deposits an amount on ARF’s bank account. If for example a chief teller deposits on January 4th the amount corresponding to December’s ticket revenues, this amount will be recorded by ARF’s Revenue Office as revenues of January. Namely the accounting principle of revenue recognition is not followed, whereby company revenue is recognized when a product is sold or a service is rendered, regardless of when the money is actually received. Furthermore, the accrual principle is not followed, whereby in order for the results of an individual accounting period to be accurate, each accounting period must include only the business activity results that took place during that period.

Another operational gap is that in many cases the deposit description in the bank’s extrait is insufficient to determine either the depositor or the reason for the deposit. In cases when the depositor cannot be identified, a temporary intermediate account is credited with the amount. For 2015 the amount credited in this account was approximately €4.3 million. In cases when the reason for a deposit cannot be identified, ARF’s Revenue Office employee

Postgraduate Dissertation 63 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

applies some empirical rules in order to debit / credit specific accounts. If, for example, the deposited amount has no decimal digits, it is assumed to correspond to ticket sales; otherwise it is assumed to correspond to product sales from museum shops. For the amounts received through EFT-POS terminals (over €7 million in 2017) an empirical rule is applied, dividing revenues by a factor of 0.8 for ticket sales and 0.2 to museum shop sales.

It is clear that separating revenues based on the aforementioned empirical rules can lead to unfounded conclusions as to the nature of revenues, and thus it cannot be confirmed that revenue is correctly distributed to the corresponding general accounts. The volume of records entered into the accounting software application is a good way for one to grasp the time needed to correctly enter them, as well as the number of personnel needed to record each transaction. The total revenue collected from tickets annually, roughly translates into 25 thousand revenue records and revenue receipt records via bank.

The main operational gap in revenue management is the fact that there is no cross-check between the amounts corresponding to sales and those received through deposits to ARF’s accounts. It is possible (either for a chief teller or a B2B customer) to claim that the correct amount has been deposited (adducing a deposit document that could be fake) without ARF verifying that the corresponding bank account has indeed been credited.

Customers of the Ticket Management System (TMS) and Access Control Process

Customers of this process are visitors of archaeological sites and museums across the country.

TMS and Access Control Process Suppliers

External suppliers include:

 Companies supplying pre-printed tickets;

 Transport companies transferring pre-printed tickets from ARF’s Central Warehouse to archaeological sites and museums across the country;

 Secure money transport service companies;

 Administrations of Ephorates of Antiquities and museums offering the personnel required for booking offices operation in archaeological sites and museums.

Postgraduate Dissertation 64 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Internal suppliers include:

 ARF’s Central Warehouse (pre-printed tickets’ section);

 ARF’s Ticket Office;

 ARF’s Revenue Office.

Process owner of Ticket Management and Access Control Process according to Law 736/1977 is the Head of ARF’s Administration Division.

TMS and Access Control Process deviations from well-established operational standards

An established operational standard in industries similar to ARF’s is to make ticket sales available through other channels besides manned booking offices, such as the internet, mobile applications and call centers. Furthermore, as mentioned previously, ARF’s operational procedures suffer from departures from established accounting principles, making production of valid financial statements impossible.

As for Access Control process, a well-established industry standard is to verify ticket validity using hardware devices like turnstiles, tablets, and smartphones, equipped with software capable of querying an online database in order to decide whether a visitor can enter an archaeological site / museum or not.

5.2.2 Product sales in museum shops process Products available for sale in museum shops consist of two main categories:

 ARF products: these products are either manufactured in ARF’s casting workshops or provided by external suppliers through public tenders.

 Third party products: these products are not ARF’s property but they are sold on consignment; ARF is providing the required space for selling them in museum shops and collects a percentage of relevant sale revenues, usually 60%.

ARF products are delivered to ARF’s Central Warehouse and from there they are distributed to archaeological sites and museum shops as needed. Import / export actions to and from the Central Warehouse for ARF products are entered into a software application and all relevant distribution documents are generated by that application. In cases where a museum shop manager, based on his / her experience, considers that ARF product stock is

Postgraduate Dissertation 65 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

below a subjective critical level (or when stock is exhausted) he / she places an order either by phone, fax or email to ARF’s Products Office. Its sole employee is responsible for communicating the order to ARF’s Central Warehouse, which checks if there is available stock and arranges for product delivery by an external transport company.

Third party products are delivered directly by third party suppliers to museum shops without the mediation of ARF’s Central Warehouse. When a museum shop manager considers that product stock is below critical level, he / she places an order directly to third party supplier. Third party supplier communicates with ARF’s Third Party Products Office in order to inform them that product delivery is planned to a specific museum shop (see Fig. 5.9) and to receive the appropriate approval stamps, indicating that this product is approved for sale in museum shops (one stamp per item – see Fig. 5.10).

Figure 5-9: Approval stamps order by third party product supplier to ARF

Figure 5-10 : Approval stamps for products sold on consignment

Postgraduate Dissertation 66 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

In both cases (ARF and third party products) museum shop manager receives products by signing the relevant shipping documents and makes them available for sale.

Selling products in museum shops is not an automated procedure. Customer can pay either by cash or by credit / debit card, if there is an available EFT-POS terminal in museum shop, and receives a handwritten sales receipt (see Fig. 5.11) by the museum shop employee. In cases where a B2B customer (e.g. a bookstore) buys products from a museum shop, the employee fills out an invoice.

Figure 5-11 : Museum shop’s handwritten sales receipt

Daily sales are written on an unofficial piece of paper and employees are trying to keep track of product stock by manually subtracting items sold from previous day stock. In cases like the National Archaeological Museum Shop, which has more than 30,000 product items available for sale, manual control of stock is not feasible. Separate transaction receipts are filled out based on whether the sale concerns ARF products or third party products.

All sale revenues are collected by the museum shop manager (the same person that receives the products from ARF’s Central Warehouse or third party suppliers), who is

Postgraduate Dissertation 67 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

responsible for monthly deposits of revenues to ARF’s bank accounts. ARF product sales’ and third-party-product sales’ deposits are made in separate ARF bank accounts. Museum shop manager is also responsible for sending two separate reports (handwritten) with the monthly sales of ARF (see Fig. 5.12) and third party products to ARF’s Products Office and Third Party Products Office respectively. The reports are sent to ARF through the local Ephorates of Antiquities, which implement the first level of control.

Figure 5-12 : Monthly sales report for ARF products

The above two ARF Offices’ personnel enters monthly sales data into two different software applications (one for each product category) in order to get a snapshot of the month-end product stock (see Fig. 5.13). ARF personnel also exports statistical reports with the monthly sales per museum shop. ARF’s Third Party Products Office further uses the respective monthly sales report to pay third-party-product suppliers their commission (usually 40% of sale revenue).

Postgraduate Dissertation 68 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-13 : ARF’s Products Office sales software application

Museum shop managers are also responsible for sending separately to ARF’s Products Office and Third Party Products Office the receipts from their cash deposits to ARF’s bank accounts, EFT-POS daily transaction logs and a printout copy of any bank deposits made by B2B customers (usually bookstores) to purchase products. ARF’s Revenue Office receives on a daily basis the transactions of ARF’s bank accounts in electronic form and makes the necessary accounting actions (debit / credit accounts) to realize revenue in a separate software application. Revenue from credit/debit cards is arbitrarily distributed by an 80% to 20% to ticket revenue and product sales revenue respectively.

As is the case with ticket management, ARF’s Revenue Office does not have any information about actual sales. If a museum shop manager did not deposit monthly revenues or if a bookstore did not actually pay for products, the Revenue Office would not be informed. It simply enters all deposit transactions visible in ARF’s bank accounts. Value added tax is not calculated automatically under the present process. All third party products and sales to resellers (usually bookstores) are entered into a spreadsheet by ARF Revenue Office’s sole employee and value added tax is calculated based on product category and museum shop’s region. According to Greek legislation, ARF’s products available for sale in museum shops that are not intended for resale are VAT free.

Special customer categories like archaeologists, employees of the Ministry of Culture and Sports, ARF employees, authors of scientific papers published by ARF, bookstores etc. are

Postgraduate Dissertation 69 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

entitled to discounts that may be as much as 100% for specific product categories and quantities. For bookstores that buy products for resale, invoices are handwritten by museum shop employees. These sales are documented separately in museum shop managers’ monthly sales reports.

Many museum shops are closed due to lack of personnel, even in highly visited sites, resulting in loss of public revenue. As an example, it is noted that the Byzantine and Christian Museum in Athens (3rd highest in sales for 2017) and Heraklion Archaeological Museum (4th highest in sales for 2017) are expected to be closed until mid-July 2018.

Casting workshop production or public tender for provision of ARF 1 products (approval for third party products)

Import of products to ARF’s Central Warehouse (virtual import in case of 2 third party products – production of approval stamps)

Distribution of products to museum shops by Central Warehouse (directly 3 by third party suppliers for respective products)

4 Product selling and revenue collection in museum shops

Cash deposits from museum shop managers to ARF’s bank accounts 5

6 Monthly sales reports to ARF’s (or Third Party) Products Office

Revenue recognition by ARF’s Revenue Office based on daily bank 7 deposits (extrait)

Table 5-2 : ARF’s (Third party) product sales process

Operational flaws, lack of controls, gaps and vulnerabilities in product sales process

Provision & Distribution of products

Public tender for product supplies may take many months to complete. Furthermore, ARF’s casting workshop production is very limited, due to lack of skilled personnel (four employees only at Athens central casting workshop), resulting in an almost permanent

Postgraduate Dissertation 70 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

lack of ARF products in museum shops. The large number of product items (over 6.000 products with active stock in Central Warehouse and museum shop warehouses across the country), in conjunction with the lack of personnel and required ICT infrastructure to monitor product stock online, makes the task of planning new product supplies very demanding. It is not uncommon to have products that have not been sold for over a decade (See Fig. 5.14) in one museum shop while at the same time the same product may be in high demand and in shortage in another museum shop (for example site-specific products).

Figure 5-14 : Product Aging

Another common problem arising in the distribution stage comes from ineffective treatment of products in transit. Products delivered by the Central Warehouse to a transport company to be shipped to museum shops are assumed to be instantly present at their destination, resulting in false stock information, since products may arrive weeks later, there may be discrepancies in quantities delivered or they may be sent to a different museum shop than the one intended. In the case of third party products, the museum shop manager places his/her order directly to the supplier and, depending on their personal relationship, it is not uncommon for third party products to occupy almost all available space in a museum shop, whereas similar ARF products may end up hidden at the bottom shelves or even in storage. (See Table 5.2, Steps 1, 2, 3).

Selling products & Revenue Collection

Postgraduate Dissertation 71 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

ARF products are not available online. Museum shop manager does not have a clear picture of the museum’s current stock, and when a product is not available, he/she is not in a position to inform the customer where to find it. In addition, museum shop managers are forced to prepare double monthly sales reports and make double bank deposits, separately for each product category (i.e. ARF and third party products). Handwritten receipts pose a significantly greater risk of error. It should also be noted that there is no standard procedure for handling any surpluses/ deficits arising during transactions (See Table 5.2, Step 4).

Cash deposits from museum shop’s manager to ARF’s bank account

Similarly with ticket revenues from booking offices, in the first 10 days of each month, museum shop manager deposits revenues from product sales of the previous month. The same operational flaws and lack of controls as in ticket revenues exist (See Table 5.2, Step 5).

Monthly sales reports to ARF’s Offices

In the first 10 days of each month, museum shop managers draw up two handwritten reports (ARF products and third party products) with the previous month’s sales per product item (sold full price or at discount). The same report also contains product imports, previous month’s stock, new stock, cash deposits, revenue from EFT-POS, web banking printouts and vouchers received from customers (see Fig/. 5.12). The two monthly sales reports are accompanied by bank deposit receipts, EFT-POS daily transactions report, vouchers and web banking printouts. The reports are sent to the local Ephorate of Antiquities and then they are sent by post to ARFs’ Products Office & Third Party Products Office respectively, for data entry into two different software applications. The delay until a monthly sales report reaches ARF’s Offices may exceed a month. Due to insufficient human resources (Products Office currently has only one employee and Third Party Products Office has two employees) there is a further delay until monthly sales data from over 180 museum shops are entered into the application. Same as with ticket sales, only revenues from museum shop managers’ cash deposits are entered into the application. Revenues from EFT-POS, vouchers and web transfers are not recorded, resulting in a discrepancy between sales amount and revenue recorded. Both ARF Offices do not perform any kind of verification on revenue reported in a monthly sales report. It is

Postgraduate Dissertation 72 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

assumed that all revenues are credited to ARF’s bank accounts without checking actual evidence to verify museum shop managers’ statements (See Table 5.2, Step 6).

Revenue recognition by ARF’s Revenue Office

The process followed by ARF’s Revenue Office is the same as for ticket revenues and therefore the same operational flaws and lack of controls apply (See Table 5.2, Step 7).

Sales Process Customers

Customers of this process are visitors of archaeological sites and museums across the country.

Sales Process Suppliers

External suppliers include:

 Companies supplying products;

 Transport companies shipping products from ARF’s Central Warehouse to museum shops across the country;

 Secure money transfer service companies;

 Ephorates of Antiquities and museum administrations offering the personnel required for museum shops’ operation.

Internal suppliers include:

 ARF’s Central Warehouse;

 ARF’s casting workshops;

 ARF’s Products Office;

 ARF’s Third Party Products Office;

 ARF’s Revenue Office.

Process owner of sales process according to Law 736/1977 is the Head of ARF’s Administration Division.

Sales Process deviations from well-established operational standards

 Museum shops’ product stock is not known at any given time by central management. Only previous snapshots are available.

Postgraduate Dissertation 73 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

 Due to handwritten sales report errors, products can have negative stock values (it usually happens in cases of books available in more than one language).

 Products in transit are not monitored.

 Products are not marked with barcode labels.

 Products are only available for sale in physical stores and not online.

 Museum shops’ annual inventory is not verified by central management.

 For the book section of the central warehouse, an annual inventory has not been conducted for over a decade.

 Museum shops in heavily-visited archaeological sites are closed due to lack of personnel.

 Complete sales information is not available. Stakeholders seeking information about museum shop sales have to submit separate reporting requests to ARF’s Products Office and Third Party Products Office and then combine the two reports.

 As mentioned previously, ARF’s operational procedures suffer from departures from established accounting principles, making production of valid financial statements impossible.

5.3 Design “To Be” situation

In both processes presented in the context of the present dissertation, the methodology of BPR led by ERP is applied. A commercial software module was selected through a public tender to implement ARF’s operational processes, based on a Request for Proposal that was prepared in the summer of 2016, following meetings with ARF’s employees and external consultants assigned with the task of preparing a RFP.

In order to align ARF’s current operational processes with software’s functionality (as per industry standards), ARF’s processes needed to be reengineered. There was also a need for software customization but this was done sparingly, since excessive customization may signal deviations from well-established industry standards. In order to identify specific requirements for software customization and process reengineering, multiple meetings took place over a period of two months (February and March 2018) between ARF’s working groups, external consultants and software vendors. Furthermore, an extra level of

Postgraduate Dissertation 74 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

control was added in order to check the designed “To Be” situation for legal compliance, since ARF’s operational processes are mandated by a multitude of laws, legal instruments and ministerial decisions. Minutes of meetings were kept, forwarded to the participants, commented and finalized.

The biggest challenge in these meetings was not to be influenced by the way ARF was operating until now. Usually the meetings started with a description of “As Is” situation from ARF’s employees, followed by the main meeting question: How is the rest of the world dealing with the same situations (industry standards)? The software vendor then presented software’s functionalities and customization, and current ARF processes’ reengineering needs were identified. The required technical and human resources were also identified and procedures were launched for acquiring technical resources and planning employee training.

All information documented during these meetings (Definition of operational requirements stage) was reflected in the deliverable Application Study, which was produced on March 1st 2018 by the main project contractor, OTE SA. The Application Study was submitted for comments to ARF’s working groups, and all comments and remarks were gathered and forwarded to the software vendor, who produced the final version of the Application Study on 26/3/2018.

5.3.1 Ticket Management System and Access Control Process For reengineered TMS and Access Control Process (see Table 5.3) operation support , required technical resources consist of a web application for selling tickets online, a mobile application for selling tickets through mobile devices, booking offices’ equipment for selling tickets on site (point of sales workstation, thermal ticket printer, EFT-POS, retail software application), central infrastructure (web servers, application servers, database servers), offered as a service by the main contractor, OTE SA, turnstiles and portable devices (PDA) for checking ticket validity, central administration and monitoring software modules and a virtual private network (VPN) used to connect all peripheral devices with central infrastructure hosted in OTE’s Data Center in a closed circuit.

Postgraduate Dissertation 75 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Customer registration through a web portal or mobile application 1 available for Android and IOS (Fig. 5.15, 5.16, 5.17)

2 Customers pay online for tickets by credit/debit card. Tickets are delivered to customer by email after transaction has been successfully completed (Fig.5.18, 5.19)

Revenue is automatically transferred to ARF’s bank account under a general retail customer account per archaeological site / museum 3 (considered as ARF’s branches) in order to keep records for ticket sales and revenues per site

Customers can print or digitally store their ticket and proceed to an 4 archaeological site / museum entrance for ticket validation check

Table 5-3 : TMS process for B2C customers through internet and mobile devices

Figure 5-15 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 1

As seen above (see Fig. 5.15), customers select the archaeological site / museum they want to visit, as well as the desired visit date and time zone. Next, customer selects number and type of tickets (see Fig. 5.16):

Postgraduate Dissertation 76 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-16 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 2

Customer accepts sale’s terms and conditions and enters a valid email account to receive tickets (see Fig. 5.17):

Figure 5-17 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 3

Customer is redirected to a commercial banking environment to complete payment (see Fig. 5.18). Revenues are automatically transferred to back office ERP in a general ticket retail account, in this case for Olympieion archaeological site.

Postgraduate Dissertation 77 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-18 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 4

After successful transaction completion, customer receives the purchased ticket in an email attachment (see Fig. 5.19):

Figure 5-19 : B2C online ticket sale – Step 5

Customer does not enter any personal data except for an email used to receive tickets. Tickets are valid only on the date selected by customer online. If customers want to acquire free or reduced-price tickets, they do not receive valid tickets by email but only a reservation number. With this number they must visit the relevant archaeological site / museum booking office and after displaying evidence that they are entitled to free /

Postgraduate Dissertation 78 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

reduced price tickets, they receive their tickets from the cashier. If an archaeological site / museum is not accessible (for example because of renovation works), it is not possible for a customer to buy tickets until the site / museum reopens. If a visitor has purchased a ticket for a specific date and the archaeological site / museum is closed, in case of force majeure or exceptional circumstances, the customer will be informed by email not to visit the archaeological site on the specific date and validity of his / her ticket will be extended (see Table 5.4):

2 Teller completes the transaction and prints tickets on the thermal printer using the retail application installed in the POS workstation (see Fig. 5.20)

Customer receives the ticket and the receipt from EFT-POS (if he / she has paid 3 with a credit / debit card through EFT-POS) and proceeds to archaeological site / museum entrance for access control (see Fig. 5.21)

Revenues from ticket selling in cases of debit/credit card payment are automatically transferred to ARF’s bank account under a general retail customer 4 account per archaeological site / museum similar to sales through internet and mobile devices. In cases of cash transactions, retail application communicates online with back office ERP and credits sales account per archaeological site / museum and debits accounts receivable

When chief teller deposits cash collected from ticket sales on site to ARF’s bank account, accounts receivable for the specific archaeological site / museum is debited by the amount of the deposit, and cash account is credited by the same 5 amount. At any given time, accounts receivable for an archaeological site / museum indicates the amount of cash the chief teller has not yet transferred to ARF’s bank account and is available in archaeological site / museum cash drawers and safe boxes

TableTable 5 -5.44 : TMSTMS processprocess forfor B2CB2C customerscustomers buyingbuying ticketstickets onon sitesite

Postgraduate Dissertation 79 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Booking office employee selects ticket type, date and time of visit, payment method (cash or credit / debit card) and after receiving payment, prints ticket on thermal printer installed in booking offices (see Fig. 5.20):

Figure 5-20 : Booking office ticket selling application – Step 1, 2

After receiving ticket (see Fig. 5.21), visitor proceeds to archaeological site / museum entrance for ticket validation check.

Figure 5-21 : Ticket printed on site

Postgraduate Dissertation 80 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Chief teller has a variety of reports available to control daily cash flow and ticket sales (see Fig. 5.22, 5.23). The same information is available online in ARF’s Ticket Office:

Figure 5-22 : Cash flow report per cashier

Figure 5-23 : Ticket analysis per type

Postgraduate Dissertation 81 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

TMS process for B2B customers through internet and mobile devices

The process is similar to B2C customers with three additional steps: B2B customer registration has to be approved by an ARF employee, in order to ensure that all required fields for creating a new ERP customer have been correctly completed, a new customer is created in ERP and in cases where web banking is selected as payment method from B2B client, an ARF employee has to verify that the payment has been successfully completed before B2B customer receives the tickets (see Table 5.5):

Table 5-5 : TMS process for B2B customers through internet and mobile devices

For free / reduced price tickets the same process as with B2C customers is followed. B2B customer only receives a reservation number and is obligated to visit a manned booking office in order to provide all necessary evidence for reduced / free ticket admission. A B2B customer can buy tickets on site but only after successful registration through Web / Mobile application has been completed. Cashier registers the sale to a specific B2B client

Postgraduate Dissertation 82 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

using B2B registration code. Tickets for B2B clients are valid for a period of two months, in contrast with tickets for B2C clients that are valid only for a specific date.

Access Control Process

For ticket validation purposes, tripod turnstiles have been installed in entrances of Acropolis archaeological site (central and south entrance), Olympieion, Knossos and Heraklion Archaeological Museum. With regard to the rest of the locations (Aristotle’s Lyceum, Ancient Agora, Roman Agora, Hadrian's Library, Kerameikos, archaeological museum and site of Ancient Messene), portable devices (PDAs) will be used for the same purpose (see Table 5.6). A log file with visitor entrances is generated (see Fig. 5.24)

Customer either holding a printed ticket or with a ticket digitally stored in a portable device (smartphone, PDA, tablet etc) proceeds to 1 archaeological site / museum entrance and places ticket’s QR-code on turnstile reader

If QR-code is valid for entrance (depending on ticket validation rules entered in TMS application by an administrator) the tripod rotates allowing visitor to enter archaeological site / museum. In cases where 2 a portable device is used for ticket validation check, a sound notification and a message in PDA’s monitor will inform the employee responsible for access control either that the ticket is valid or that visitor’s entrance cannot be permitted (e.g. if the ticket has already been used or has expired)

All visitor entries are recorded in an access control database, stored in 3 central infrastructure hosted in OTE’s datacenter. From there visiting statistics can be exported per site, date or time of visit (see Fig. 5.24).

Table 5-6 : Ticket Validation and Access Control

Figure 5-24 : Visitors’ entrance log file

Postgraduate Dissertation 83 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

5.3.2 Product Sales Process For reengineered product sales process (see Table 5.7) operation, required technical resources consist of a web application for selling products online, ERP Software (retail sales module and warehouse management module), museum shop sales equipment (point of sales workstation, thermal ticket printer, EFT-POS, barcode scanner, electronic fiscal device), central infrastructure (web servers, application servers, database servers), offered as a service by the main contractor, OTE SA, and a virtual private network (VPN) used to connect all peripheral devices with central infrastructure hosted in OTE’s Data Center in a closed circuit.

1 Customer registers through a web portal (see Fig. 5.25)

Customer browses ARF products available online, selects desired 2 products and pays by credit/debit card (see Fig. 5.26, 5.27)

Revenue is automatically transferred to ARF’s bank account under a 3 general retail customer account in order to keep records of online product sales and revenues

4 After transaction has been completed an email is sent to ARF’s Warehouse manager notifying him/her of order placement

5 Warehouse personnel prepare product packaging and communicate with transport company to plan product delivery

Once product is loaded for transport it is considered in transit until 6 delivered to customer

7 An invoice is sent to customer and the order is considered fulfilled

TableTable 5 -5.77 : Online sale process

Postgraduate Dissertation 84 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Customer enters all necessary information for product delivery. Upon transaction completion, the customer is informed about shipping cost, day and time of product delivery depending on his / her location. Revenues from online sales are treated similarly with online ticket sales revenues. Not all ARF products are available online. For every product available online a stock quantity is reserved for online sales only. “In transit” product treatment is similar to product distribution from central warehouse to museum shops across the country.

Figure 5-25 : Online product sales – Step 1

Postgraduate Dissertation 85 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

As seen in the above figure, customer browses through products available online.

Figure 5-26 : Online product sales – Step 2

Customer selects a product and adds it to the basket.

If already registered, the customer is prompted to login using valid credentials. If not registered yet, the customer is prompted to enter all necessary information in order to create an ARF’s E-shop account and proceed with the order. The final step is for the

Postgraduate Dissertation 86 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

customer to be redirected to a commercial banking environment to complete payment by debit / credit card. Product sales revenues from online transactions are automatically registered in ERP’s back office as revenues from online product sales.

Figure 5-27 : Online product sales – Customer registration form

Postgraduate Dissertation 87 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

1 Customer visits a museum shop and selects products for purchase

Museum shop employee uses barcode scanner to identify product 2 items and quantities, selects payment method (see Fig. 5.28), receives payment and prints sales receipt (see Fig. 5.29)

3 Product stock information is updated online

Revenues are treated similarly with ticket selling in booking offices’ 4 process (either debit / credit card or cash payments)

At close of business the museum shop manager can print out a daily 5 sales report (see Fig. 5.30, 5.31) Product stock information for all museum shops is available on demand

Table 5-8 : Museum shop sales Table 5.8 Museum shop sales

If it is not feasible for the customer to physically carry the purchased product (e.g. too big or too heavy), his / her order is treated in the same way as in the online sales’ process by the museum shop employee, and product delivery is handled by ARF’s central warehouse. If a product is not available on site, employee can search for the nearest museum shop where the product is available and inform the customer (Step 1).

Alternatively to barcode scanner, the museum shop employee can identify the product by typing product code or part of its description in a retail sales application installed in his / her POS workstation. If a customer wishes to receive an invoice, the museum shop employee will have to create new customer in back office ERP (Step 2).

Product stock information is stored in a main database hosted in OTE’s data center. Every 10 minutes data are transferred from museum shop POS workstations to main database. Every museum shop POS workstation keeps a local database with stock information (Step 3).

Sales data are available in near-real-time (synchronization takes place every 10 minutes) in ARF’s central offices. There is no need for museum shop manager to manually send sales reports (Step 5).

Postgraduate Dissertation 88 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-28 : Museum shop product selling application (Table 5.8, Steps 1, 2)

Figure 5-29 : Museum shop Sales Receipt (Table 5.8, Step 2)

Postgraduate Dissertation 89 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-30 : Sales Report (Table 5.8, Step 5)

Figure 5-31 : Cash Flow report per cashier (Table 5.8, Step 5)

Postgraduate Dissertation 90 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

All products available in museum shops are imported in 1 ARF’s central warehouse (see Fig. 5.32)

Barcode labels are placed in every product 2

3 ARF’s warehouse employees are informed by ERP- produced automated messages for product needs in museum shops across the country, based on predefined critical stock levels per product and museum shop

4 Product shipment is prepared and transport company receives products from central warehouse for delivery to museum shops. All shipping documents are produced by ERP module (see Fig. 5.33)

Products are considered in transit (see Fig. 5.34) until 5 museum shop manager verifies delivery through retail application installed in POS workstation at museum shop (see Fig. 5.35). At that time the museum shop stock is updated with new product quantities (Fig.5.36)

TableTable 5 5.9-9 : Product Product Distribution Distribution Process Process

Postgraduate Dissertation 91 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-32 : Product Import / Export to / from central warehouse (Table 5.9, Step 1)

Figure 5-33 : Shipping Document (Table 5.9, Step 4)

Postgraduate Dissertation 92 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

With regard to third party products, there is a major differentiation from the “as is” situation, intended to control distribution and prevent malicious synergies between third party suppliers and museum shop managers (Table 5.9, Step 1).

ARF has not been using barcodes until now. In order to ease the transition period, it was decided to use current product codes as barcodes with two more digits added, so as to code additional product characteristics, like language for books and material for casts (Table 5.9, Step 2).

The same process is also applied for central warehouse stock. If stock is below a predefined critical level, new product production or a new public tender is planned, or a new order is placed with third-party-product suppliers (Table 5.9, Step 3).

Figure 5-34 : Products in transit (Table 5.9, Step 5)

Postgraduate Dissertation 93 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Figure 5-35 : Product delivery verification (Table 5.9, Step 5)

Figure 5-36 : Warehouse stock inventory (Table 5.9, Step 5)

Postgraduate Dissertation 94 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

5.4 Implement and test

All reengineered ARF processes concerning ticket management, access control and product sales were described in the final version of the Application study. All technical resources needed to support new processes were provided. Necessary hardware has been installed in ARF’s central office, warehouse and archaeological sites and museums according to approved timetable. Human resources needs were identified but only partially covered. Training courses for ARF and Ephorates of Antiquities’ personnel took place in ARF’s central offices. Training courses for employees of Heraklion Ephorate of Antiquities took place in Heraklion, Crete. Comments, suggestions for improvement and feedback gained from training courses were documented and taken into consideration for finalizing software optimization. Prior actions needed were identified and planned, such as the need for inventory in ARF’s central warehouse and museum shops, and marking all products with barcode labels.

Olympieion archaeological site was selected as pilot case in order for potential malfunctions / deviations / disruptions to be identified, monitored and addressed, and for feedback from all stakeholders (employees, customers, suppliers, shareholders, top management) to be collected and evaluated. A helpdesk software application was used to document problems occurred during pilot operation. A series of user acceptance tests were conducted in order to confirm new operations process compliance with business requirements. A detailed transition plan was decided and communicated to stakeholders in order to prevent operation disruptions and visitor nuisance.

5.5 Monitor, review and improve

During production operation, all ARF reengineered business processes will be monitored by ARF central offices’ employees using monitoring tools provided by TMS, Access Control and ERP software. In cases of deviations from desired operational standards, remedial actions will be implemented by business process owners.

KPIs such as monthly sales growth, sales by distribution channel (web, mobile, POS), carrying cost of inventory, inventory to sales ratio, units per transaction etc. will be monitored in order to guide top management’s business decision model. An online customer satisfaction survey is planned after a six month production period and ARF’s

Postgraduate Dissertation 95 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

digital presence will give rise to new opportunities for ARF’s improvements and quality of service upgrade.

Postgraduate Dissertation 96 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

6. Conclusions

6.1 General conclusions derived from ARF’s ERP-led BPR implementation

One of the main disadvantages of ARF’s current operational model is the lack of business process orientation. ARF’s operation is based on a traditional functional / departmental structure with problematic cross-functional interfaces and a lack of overall perspective. For example, the two organizational units responsible for product sales (namely the ARF Products Office and the Third Party Products Office) are managing product distribution and museum shop sales separately for each of the two respective product categories, virtually creating two different shops in the same location and making it impossible for ARF’s administration to acquire information regarding a museum shop as a whole. If, for example, a stakeholder needs to acquire information about sales, cash inflows or product stock for a specific museum shop, they need to separately address the two distinct Offices and then combine received information into a final report. An even more extreme example of the functional / departmental structural approach creating financial risk and leading to an inability to produce valid financial statements, is the fact that ARF’s Ticket Office enters monthly ticket sales into a software application, ARF’s Revenue Office enters bank deposits into a different software application and no one is crosschecking to verify whether bank deposits monitored by the Revenue Office correspond to ticket sales monitored by the Ticket Office. Applying industry standards through the use of commercial ERP software modules successfully treats both operational malfunctions described above, by means of treating museum shops as ARF’s branches (regardless of product ownership), and entering sales (revenue recognition record) and cash inflows (revenue collection record) into a common database.

In cases like ARF, where operational activities undertaken by a public sector entity are identical to a private sector entity’s commercial activities, applying BPR through the use of ERP commercial modules is the most appropriate BPR methodology approach; the reason is that industry standards are enforced (following a necessary software customization stage) in daily operations and the need “to deal with the process of negotiation and coalition building with employees” (Huq et al., 2007, p. 67) is limited, since acquiring a new ERP is a decision made by top management. In the software

Postgraduate Dissertation 97 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

customization stage an additional level of control has been implemented in order to ensure that reengineered business processes remain compliant with applicable legislation, legal instruments and ministerial decisions governing ARF’s operational procedures. A side benefit to applying a process-based business model in ARF was that during the BPR stage of mapping and analyzing the “as is” situation, operational gaps, flaws and lack of controls were identified, giving rise to the opportunity to treat relevant risks, as described below.

6.2 Identification and mitigation of ARF’s operational gaps, flaws and lack of controls through BPR implementation

During the stage of mapping and analyzing the “as is” situation, the following operational gaps, flaws and lack of controls were identified and remedial actions were undertaken (see Tables 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3):

SN Description Importance Treatment Action Time-consuming public tenders for preprinted tickets, extra storage and Tickets are produced on site; no 1 distribution costs. Withdrawal of Medium need for public tenders, central preprinted tickets in cases of price storage and ticket distribution changes Tickets only available on site (i.e. Tickets are now available for sale 2 archaeological site and museum booking High online offices) A significant amount of ticket revenues is expected to be generated from online sales (debit / 3 High cash management cost Medium credit cards and web banking), thus reducing the amount of cash collected on site Booking office tellers are unable to All web banking payments will be visually verify the validity of a web 4 High automatically verified prior to ticket banking printout provided by a B2B sale completion customer in exchange for tickets ARF’s Ticket Office receives ticket sale information on a monthly basis with Ticket sale information per delays that may exceed 30 days. A time- archaeological site / museum is 5 High consuming data entry process is required instantly available online for use by using as input handwritten monthly ticket ARF’s Ticket Office sales reports An amount of cash (not officially determined or documented) is retained The amount of cash retained on site each month as cash-in amount in order to 6 High is recorded as “cash-in” amount at make change for customers in the start of each teller’s shift archaeological site / museum booking offices There is no specific procedure available All surpluses and deficits are 7 for managing surpluses or deficits High recorded at the end of each teller’s resulting from daily transactions shift

Postgraduate Dissertation 98 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Revenues from EFT-POS, vouchers and Ticket revenues per payment web transfers are not recorded by ARF’s method (cash, debit/credit cards, personnel, resulting in a discrepancy 8 High web banking) are instantly available between sales amount and revenues online for use by ARF’s Ticket recorded, due to insufficient human Office resources ARF’s Ticket Office has data regarding not only ticket sales but ARF’s Ticket Office only has data also numbers of visitors to 9 regarding ticket sales and not numbers of Low archaeological sites / museums visitors to archaeological sites / museums through access control software reports Accounting principle of revenue Revenue recognition takes place at recognition is not followed, whereby the moment tickets are sold, company revenue is recognized when a 10 High through automatic revenue product is sold or a service is rendered, recognition records in ARF’s regardless of when the money is actually accounting ERP module received Accrual accounting principle is not All business activity results are followed, whereby in order for the results included in the accounting period of an individual accounting period to be on which they took place, through 11 High accurate, each accounting period must automatic revenue recognition include only the business activity results records in ARF’s accounting ERP that took place during that period module Dividing revenues into ticket or product All banking deposits to ARF’s sales based on empirical rules can lead to accounts corresponding to ticket unfounded conclusions as to the nature of 12 High sales are automatically transformed revenues, and thus it cannot be confirmed to revenue recognition records in that revenue is correctly distributed to the ARF’s accounting ERP module corresponding general accounts All revenue receipt records via There is no cross-check between the ARF’s bank accounts are correlated amounts corresponding to ticket sales and 13 High with the relevant revenue those received through deposits to ARF’s recognition records in ARF’s accounts accounting ERP module Table 6-1 : Ticket Management System gaps, flaws and lack of controls

SN Description Importance Treatment Action All visitor entrances in Ticket stubs retained by employees at archaeological sites / museums archaeological site / museum entrances are recorded in a ticket access are not counted, registered or kept in a control management software 1 secure location. The same employees High and for every ticket issued via who are responsible for retaining ticket any sales channel a full record stubs are also in charge of destroying can be retrieved by ARF’s them to prevent reuse Ticket Office personnel ARF’s Audit & Control Department is unable to verify that employees In every archaeological site / responsible for checking ticket validity at museum entrance a CCTV 2 High archaeological site / museum entrances system is installed to monitor do indeed perform the task assigned to visitor entrances them Table 6-2 : Access Control gaps, flaws and lack of controls

SN Description Importance Treatment Action Shortage in ARF’s products available for Addition of new product 1 High sale in museum shops due to time- categories available on

Postgraduate Dissertation 99 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

consuming public tender procedures and consignment (currently only understaffed casting workshops books are available as third party products) Setting up of low stock notification threshold per Failure to effectively plan product supply product. Relevant information 2 due to lack of valid product stock Medium is available online in ARF’s information warehouse in order to launch product supply procedures in time A distinct virtual warehouse corresponding to products in Ineffective treatment of products in transit has been established. 3 transit between ARF’s warehouse and Medium Product deliveries are verified museum shops online by museum shop managers All third party products are Lack of central control in third-party distributed to museum shops products’ order, delivery and display by ARF’s Central Warehouse. 4 process due to personal relations between Medium Ordering is implemented as a third party suppliers and museum shop “push” procedure based on low managers inventory alerts ARF’s products are only available in ARF’s products are also 5 High museum shops available online Museum shop manager has Museum shop manager does not have a 6 Medium product stock information clear picture of current product stock available online Handwritten sales reports pose a All information regarding sales significantly greater risk of error and is available online to ARF 7 require time-consuming data entry by High Products and Third Party ARF Products and Third Party Products Products Offices Offices personnel Surpluses / deficits resulting There is no standard procedure for from transactions are 8 handling any surpluses/ deficits arising High documented and handled by during transactions means of cash - in / cash - out records Table 6-3: Product distribution and sales gaps, flaws and lack of controls

6.3 Risks not successfully mitigated in ARF’s BPR implementation

With reference to risks regarding ARF’s BPR implementation, as identified in Chapter 4 of the present dissertation, it should be noted that certain risks were not successfully treated, resulting in predictable difficulties in BPR implementation and obstacles during testing and operating in the new environment. The Steering Committee, composed of ARF’s middle and top managers, was not actively engaged in BPR implementation. Participant lists included in the relevant minutes of meetings show that engagement of Steering Committee members in BPR implementation was minimal (i.e. less than 1%). Organizational and human resource availability issues were also not successfully

Postgraduate Dissertation 100 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

addressed. As described in Chapter 3 of the present dissertation, ARF’s critical organizational units still remain severely understaffed (i.e. one employee in ARF’s Ticket Office, one employee in ARF’s Revenue Office, one employee in ARF’s Products Office, two employees in ARF’s Third Party Products Office, three warehouse storekeepers and one IT manager, namely 9 out of 198 ARF’s total employees). E-Ticket / Access Control & ERP working group members often carried excessive workloads, as on several occasions employees had to be present in three or four different locations simultaneously (e.g. the same employee had to be present in a classroom for training, in a group business requirement review meeting, in a user acceptance test team and at his desk issuing tickets in an archaeological site booking office at the same time). Overall, there is still a gap between human resources needed and human resources available for testing and operating in the new environment. The situation seems to have worsened since in addition to the previously identified lack of personnel, after BPR implementation new needs for operational positions have arisen, such as third party and E-Shop warehouse storekeeper, E-shop order administrator and operators, E-Ticket business administrator and operators, Access Control System business administrator and operators, System and database technical administrator and operators, chief tellers for booking offices etc. In this context, the newly designed operational model is –at least for the time being– as unsustainable as the present one.

In this context, the main research questions of the present dissertation were answered affirmatively, namely:

1. BPR methodologies can be applied to a Greek public sector organization in order to achieve drastic improvements in critical performance measures such as cost, quality, service and speed, and

2. BPR methodologies can be applied to a Greek public sector organization in order to identify and address operational gaps, flaws, and lack of controls, and to mitigate the corresponding risks, as long as implementation risks presented in the present dissertation are successfully mitigated in time.

Postgraduate Dissertation 101 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Bibliography

Alireza , O., & Behnaz, K. (2015). Factors affecting the implementation of business process reengineering: taking into account the moderating role of organizational culture. 1st International Conference on Applied Economics and Business, ICAEB 2015. New York: Elsevier. Attaran, M. (2004). Nurturing the Supply Chain. Industrial Management, 46 (5). Chapman, B. (2016, October 26). Vodafone fined £4.6m by Ofcom for ‘serious and sustained’ customer failings. The Independent. Retrieved July 7, 2018, from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ofcom-fines-vodafone- 46m-for-customer-failings-a7380471.html Davenport, T. H. (1993). Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through Information Technology. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Davenport, T. H., & Short, J. E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information Technology and Business Proccess Redesign. Sloan Management Review. 31 (4). Dreyfous, E., Gadson, A., Riding, T., & Wang, A. (1999, January 1). The IT Productivity Paradox. Retrieved July 1, 2018, from https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2007-08/productivity- paradox/index.html Fruhlinger, J., & Wailgum, T. (2017, July 10). 15 famous ERP disasters, dustups and disappointments. Retrieved July 1, 2018, from https://www.cio.com/article/2429865/enterprise-resource-planning/enterprise- resource-planning-10-famous-erp-disasters-dustups-and-disappointments.html Furey, T. R. (1993). A Six‐step Guide to Process Reengineering. London: MCB UP Ltd. Grover, V., & Malhotra, M. K. (1997). Business process reengineering: A tutorial on the concept, evolution, method, technology and application. Journal of operations management, 15 (3), pp. 193-213. Habib, N. M. (2013). Understanding Critical Success and Failure Factors of Business Process Reengineering. International Review of Management and Business Research. 2 (1). Hammer, M. (1990, July). Reengineering work: Don't automate, obligerate. Harvard Business Review. 68 (4), pp. 104-112. Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York: Harper Business. Hickman, L. J. (1993). Technology and BPR: Identifying Opportunities for Competitive Advantage. London: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Huq, Z., Huq, F., & Cutright, K. (2007). BPR through ERP: Avoiding change management. Journal of Change Management. 6 (1), pp. 67-85. International Organization for Standardization. (2018). Risk Management (Standard No 31000). International Organization for Standardization. (2015). The Process Approach in ISO 9001:2015. Retrieved July 1, 2018, from https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/iso9001-2015- process-appr.pdf

Postgraduate Dissertation 102 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Jurisch, M. C., Ikas, C., & Palka, W. (2012). A Review of Success Factors and Challenges of Public Sector BPR Implementations. 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, (pp. 2603-2612). Maui: IEEE. Kettinger, W. J., Teng, J. T., & Guha, S. (1997). Business Process Change: A Study of Methodologies, Techniques and Tools. MIS Quarterly, March 1, 1997 (pp. 55-80). Minnesota: MISRC. Manganelli, R. L., & Klein, M. M. (1994). A Framework for Reengineering. Management Review. 83 (6), p. 10. Mayer, R. S., & De Witte, P. S. (1999). Delivering results: Evolving BPR from art to engineering. Business process engineering (pp. 83-129). Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers. McFarlan, W. F., McKenney, J. L., & Pyburn, P. (1983). The Information Archipelago— Plotting a Course. Harvard Buisiness Review. 61 (1), pp. 145-156. McKinsey & Company. (2012). ARF's Strategic Planning focusing on promoting Greek Cultural Heritage. Pavlaki, E. (2014). Business Process Reengineering Strategy Issues: The Case of the Greek Public Sector. Hellenic Open University, Patra. Petrou, A. (2015). Balancing reservation and utilization in Greek museum policy: The case of EU regional policy investments in state regional archaeological museums. National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS), Athens. Pratt, M. D., & Harrison, B. D. (1993). A Methodology for reengineering businesses. Planning Review. 21 (2), pp. 6-11. Raidl, U. (2016, December 19). What is ERP – and what can it do for your business? Retrieved July 1, 2018, from https://blogs.sap.com/2016/12/19/what-is-erp-and- what-can-it-do-for-your-business/ Remenyi, D., & Heafield, A. (1996). Business process re-engineering: some aspects of how to evaluate and manage the risk exposure. International Journal of Project Management, 14 (6), pp. 349-357. Smart, P. A., Childe, S. J., & Weaver, A. M. (1997). The use of generic process models for process transformation. Modelling techniques for business process re-engineering and benchmarking, pp. 51-60. Boston: Springer. Smith, A. (1776). The wealth of Nations. London: W. Strahan & T. Cadell. Teo, L. (2017). A Multiple Case Study of ERP Implementations in Australia. RMIT University, Singapore. Weerakkody, V., & Dhillon, G. (2008). Moving from e-Government to t-Government: A study of process re-engineering challenges in a UK local authority perspective. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 4 (4), pp. 1-16. Weerakkody, V., Janssen, M., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2011). Transformational change and business process reengineering (BPR): Lessons from the British and Dutch public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 28 (3), pp. 320-328.

Postgraduate Dissertation 103 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Appendix A: Archaeological sites and museums visitors and revenues (2017)

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

1 Acropolis of Athens 2,660,709 36,100,250.00 €

2 Knossos 612,119 7,935,924.00 €

3 Ancient Agora of Athens 529,352 1,729,320.00 €

4 National Archaeological Museum 520,756 2,407,379.00 €

5 Ancient Olympia 471,848 3,789,276.00 €

6 Olympieion 461,355 2,488,581.00 €

7 Epidavros 459,598 2,702,136.00 €

8 Lindos 437,343 4,544,004.00 €

9 Heracleion Archaeological museum 417,103 1,514,602.00 €

10 Spinaloga 393,696 2,527,432.00 €

11 Mycenae and treasure of Atreas 389,111 2,466,984.00 €

12 Delfoi, archaeological site 333,988 2,276,376.00 €

13 Lefkos Pirgos, Thessaloniki 251,002 443,610.00 €

14 Sounio 249,715 1,348,628.00 €

15 Akrotiri Thiras 241,417 2,292,032.00 €

16 Palace of Grand Master, Rhodes 227,579 1,208,991.00 €

17 Delfoi, archaeological museum 204,560 1,346,652.00 €

18 Palamidi castle 201,512 763,072.00 €

19 Ancient Corinthos 188,282 816,256.00 €

20 Vergina 187,480 887,569.00 €

21 Roman Agora of Athens 185,018 328,533.00 €

22 Dikatio antro 167,026 933,744.00 €

23 Heracleion Koule castle 155,148 242,600.00 €

24 Corfu’s old castle 153,780 709,061.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 104 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

25 Theater of Dionysus 145,354 1,566,530.00 €

26 Adrians Library 144,659 485,508.00 €

27 Museum of Olympia 142,137 703,506.00 €

28 Delos 135,392 1,245,084.00 €

29 The sanctuary of Asklepios, Kos 134,659 828,399.00 €

30 Mistras 123,554 812,784.00 €

31 Kamiros 119,964 606,870.00 €

32 Rotonda, Thessaloniki 117,539 140,357.00 €

33 Archaeological museum of Thessaloniki 109,474 285,851.00 €

34 Kerameikos 104,474 136,541.00 €

35 Ialissos 82,550 426,900.00 €

36 Byzantine & Christianic museum of Athens 81,983 272,605.00 €

37 Byzantine museum of Thessaloniki 74,995 129,510.00 €

38 Archaeological museum oh Rodes 72,575 414,096.00 €

39 Temple of Aphaia 69,115 240,483.00 €

40 Faistos 68,744 425,084.00 €

41 Petralona cave and museum 63,871 262,112.00 €

42 Matala 58,797 104,294.00 €

43 Ancient Messene 57,317 280,260.00 €

44 Methonis castle 56,392 79,484.00 €

45 Malia 48,318 207,792.00 €

46 Archaeological museum of Chania 47,738 123,923.00 €

47 Ancient Philippoi 47,562 158,772.00 €

48 Gortina 46,856 190,557.00 €

49 Prehistoric museum of Thira 43,874 213,376.00 €

50 Monastery of Osios Loukas 43,527 101,348.00 €

51 Vravrona 42,041 36,249.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 105 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

52 Aristoteles Lyceion 41,273 33,522.00 €

53 Kos castle 40,063 150,236.00 €

54 Ancient Thira 39,901 137,933.00 €

55 Dion 39,368 201,528.00 €

56 Aptera 35,730 47,129.00 €

57 Elefsina 35,681 43,239.00 €

58 Dodoni 35,573 78,784.00 €

59 Pylos castle 33,660 104,211.00 €

60 Platamonas castle 32,043 54,629.00 €

61 Thebes 31,597 51,594.00 €

62 Nekromanteion of Acheron 29,658 113,456.00 €

63 Eleftherna 29,602 72,250.00 €

64 Palace of Nestor 29,264 83,784.00 €

65 Museum of Asian art 28,567 110,676.00 €

66 Catacombs of Milos 28,507 84,234.00 €

67 Volos museum 27,978 13,294.00 €

68 Naxos museum 27,605 41,195.00 €

69 Pellas museum 27,000 87,080.00 €

70 Temple of Apollo Epikourios 26,088 88,725.00 €

71 Keras lasithiou temple 25,714 41,756.00 €

72 Zakinthos castle 24,670 58,420.00 €

73 Byzantine museum of Ioannina 23,685 29,130.00 €

74 Nafplion museum 23,021 47,526.00 €

75 Roman agora, Thessaloniki 22,268 21,069.00 €

76 Patras museum 21,746 19,428.00 €

77 Thassos museum 21,630 27,062.00 €

78 Ancient Nemea 21,381 49,002.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 106 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

79 Nomismatic museum 19,574 26,987.00 €

80 Rethimnon museum 18,758 25,707.00 €

81 Castle of Rhodes 18,135 30,223.00 €

82 Temple of Kesariani 17,824 10,499.00 €

83 Tirintha 16,960 41,840.00 €

84 Apollo’s temple, Aigina 16,645 35,154.00 €

85 Mon Repos, Corfu 16,268 47,111.00 €

86 History of Olympic games museum 15,977 80,928.00 €

87 Armenon 15,821 24,589.00 €

88 Tunnel of Efpalinos 15,700 66,145.00 €

89 Dion museum 15,447 64,024.00 €

90 Amfiaraeion 15,373 2,218.00 €

91 Chlemoutsi castle 14,986 29,334.00 €

92 Mykonos museum 14,649 37,920.00 €

93 Ancient Pella 14,625 30,340.00 €

94 Nafpaktos castle 14,042 16,034.00 €

95 Mithimnas castle 14,016 20,728.00 €

96 Larissas museum 13,937 5,054.00 €

97 Amfipolis museum 13,639 35,325.00 €

98 Kos museum 13,548 56,482.00 €

99 Paros museum 12,311 13,784.00 €

100 Nemeas stadion 12,262 29,826.00 €

101 Greek folk art museum 11,968 6,920.00 €

102 Lato 11,885 16,849.00 €

103 CASA ROMANA, Kos 11,529 56,127.00 €

104 Gournia 11,340 16,365.00 €

105 Thiras old museum 11,310 26,199.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 107 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

106 Koutouki cave, Paiania 10,796 5,845.00 €

107 Samothraki 10,744 42,105.00 €

108 Peraius museum 10,624 17,930.00 €

109 Panagias temple, Rhodes 10,365 1,157.00 €

110 Kalamatas museum 10,214 13,043.00 €

111 Chora trifilias museum 10,200 8,600.00 €

112 Zakinthos museum 10,085 18,750.00 €

113 Agia triada 10,054 28,892.00 €

114 Zakros 10,002 41,955.00 €

115 Marathonas 9,930 24,957.00 €

116 Caveiros, Lemnos 9,885 10,832.00 €

117 Olinthos 9,805 24,040.00 €

118 Eretrias museum 9,559 7,368.00 €

119 Cosmetic collection Rhodes 9,402 227.00 €

120 Iraio samou 9,332 45,407.00 €

121 Ramnounta 9,268 6,518.00 €

122 Antivouniotissas temple, Corfu 9,252 18,341.00 €

123 Museum of Ioannina 8,974 7,014.00 €

124 Spartis museum 8,874 8,975.00 €

125 Vatheos Samou museum 8,761 24,549.00 €

126 Dimini 8,703 690.00 €

127 Mourtzinou castle 8,447 12,551.00 €

128 Epigraphic museum 8,113 5,143.00 €

129 Arhontiko Svarts 8,106 5,342.00 €

130 Melos museum 8,019 10,166.00 €

131 Parigoritras temple, Arta 7,925 6,587.00 €

132 Kazarma castle 7,751 13,598.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 108 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

133 Agios Andreas, Sifnos 7,581 11,206.00 €

134 Kissamos museum 7,531 9,205.00 €

135 Avdira museum 7,474 6,144.00 €

136 Nikopolis 7,360 24,120.00 €

137 Pithagoreion museum 7,125 29,048.00 €

138 Poliohni 6,717 8,002.00 €

139 Byzantine museum of Chania 6,635 9,239.00 €

140 Agias Mavras castle 6,630 8,361.00 €

141 Monemvasia 6,408 6,053.00 €

142 Ifaistia Lemnos 6,357 6,606.00 €

143 Veroias Byzantine museum 5,991 5,932.00 €

144 Nikopolis museum 5,895 15,060.00 €

145 Lefkada 5,878 4,699.00 €

146 Kavalas museum 5,776 5,608.00 €

147 Kalamatas castle 5,762 9,078.00 €

148 Thermos museum 5,700 4,296.00 €

149 Tegeas museum 5,678 7,176.00 €

150 Siros museum 5,623 5,725.00 €

151 Andros museum 5,205 8,816.00 €

152 Castle of Mitilines 5,033 5,598.00 €

153 Ierapetras museum 4,918 2,800.00 €

154 Isthmias museum 4,854 3,386.00 €

155 Archaeological site of Eleftherna 4,814 14,347.00 €

156 Ancient Messene – Mavromati 4,744 22,346.00 €

157 Tzami, Chania 4,731 6,108.00 €

158 Spetses museum 4,656 7,218.00 €

159 Lamia museum 4,589 1,522.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 109 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

160 Kanelopoulou museum 4,504 5,916.00 €

161 New monastery, Chios 4,500 7,674.00 €

162 Komotinis museum 4,495 677.00 €

163 Sitias museum 4,457 6,188.00 €

164 Keas museum 4,382 4,206.00 €

165 Limnos museum 4,206 3,692.00 €

166 Mytilene museum 4,189 5,840.00 €

167 Argolidas byzantine museum 4,186 3,072.00 €

168 Aianis musem 4,171 2,060.00 €

169 Igoumenitsas museum 4,150 1,770.00 €

170 Poros 3,925 3,480.00 €

171 Skyrow museum 3,754 4,897.00 €

172 Archaeological site of Vountenis 3,651 1,531.00 €

173 Kastoria byzantine museum 3,595 4,966.00 €

174 Sesklo 3,471 1,079.00 €

175 Karditsa museum 3,461 964.00 €

176 Archaeological museum of Chios 3,459 2,602.00 €

177 Archaeological museum of Kythera 3,435 9,154.00 €

178 Veria museum 3,336 2,569.00 €

179 Tinos museum 3,268 3,039.00 €

180 Agios Nikolaos 3,233 0.00 €

181 Kassopi, Preveza 3,211 3,047.00 €

182 Kalimnos museum 3,110 5,782.00 €

183 Distomon 3,091 710.00 €

184 Minios tomb 3,081 1,500.00 €

185 Ilidas museum 3,050 1,666.00 €

186 Palataki Ioustiniani 2,799 2,290.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 110 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

187 Proerna 2,704 5.00 €

188 Fanari castle 2,668 691.00 €

189 Didimoteixo byzantine museum 2,387 1,412.00 €

190 Salaminas museum 2,373 1,659.00 €

191 Rio castle 2,232 2,633.00 €

192 Lerna 2,199 1,937.00 €

193 Archaeological museum of Cheronia 2,181 1,750.00 €

194 Tilissos 2,106 3,193.00 €

195 Ierou messou Lesvou 2,080 1,523.00 €

196 Megaron 2,033 301.00 €

197 Lavriou 2,015 2,043.00 €

198 Kimolos museum 1,976 2,681.00 €

199 Archaeological site of Nea Aghialos 1,954 594.00 €

200 Artas museum 1,951 2,564.00 €

201 Archaeological site Peristerias 1,938 1,957.00 €

202 Mesimvria Zoni 1,889 1,184.00 €

203 Sifnos museum 1,834 2,560.00 €

204 Archaeological site of Skarkos 1,829 5,184.00 €

205 Arhontiko Vareltzidainas 1,817 2,282.00 €

206 Temple Aleas Athinas 1,789 1,067.00 €

207 Simis museum 1,760 0.00 €

208 Byzantine museum of Ipatis 1,678 492.00 €

209 Karistos museum 1,645 2,313.00 €

210 Archaeological site of Plevronas 1,568 699.00 €

211 Archaeological site of Maronias 1,546 298.00 €

212 Othomaniko temenos, Kastelorizo 1,524 2,803.00 €

213 Apiranthos Naxou 1,523 1,847.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 111 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

214 Ios museum 1,513 1,777.00 €

215 Florinas museum 1,438 729.00 €

216 Temple Zigou Ouranoupolis 1,381 3,326.00 €

217 Drams museum 1,377 1,262.00 €

218 Amphissas 1,374 438.00 €

219 Agrinion museum 1,372 321.00 €

220 Kionia Tinou 1,356 1,561.00 €

221 Kythera castle 1,303 1,891.00 €

222 Tsiklitiras building 1,250 1,471.00 €

223 Filakopi milou 1,234 1,563.00 €

224 Almiros 1,229 50.00 €

225 Neapolis museum 1,223 662.00 €

226 Scheematari museum 1,223 131.00 €

227 Thermi, Lesvos 1,191 358.00 €

228 Antirio castle 1,159 1,018.00 €

229 Arhontiko Poulkos 1,150 1,008.00 €

230 Chalkidas museum 1,140 1,167.00 €

231 Tripolis museum 1,130 551.00 €

232 Arhontiko Nikolaidi 1,124 1,083.00 €

233 Pikoulaki tower 1,123 1,684.00 €

234 Petra lasithiou 981 1,003.00 €

235 Archaeological site of Paliokastro 976 1,044.00 €

236 Arhontiko Tavanioti 975 240.00 €

237 Thira 946 2,318.00 €

238 Philippoi museum 930 4,374.00 €

239 Atalanti 904 246.00 €

240 Pirgos museum 895 940.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 112 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

241 Iniades 876 1,031.00 €

242 Aigio museum 813 686.00 €

243 Emporio 759 793.00 €

244 Karpathos museum 681 810.00 €

245 Mirina Limnos 661 278.00 €

246 Romaikes thermes Agiou Thoma 644 182.00 €

247 Serifos 624 870.00 €

248 Eressos 596 575.00 €

249 Konaki Kastelorizzo 589 1,021.00 €

250 Argos Orestiko 546 112.00 €

251 Kilkis museum 491 321.00 €

252 Archaeological site Eleas 461 0.00 €

253 Nisiros museum 458 532.00 €

254 Arhontiko Tsiatsiapa 449 525.00 €

255 Agios Panteleimonas 432 43.00 €

256 Ragiou Pirgos 432 0.00 €

257 Vonitsas castle 422 451.00 €

258 Amorgos 420 729.00 €

259 Gitanes 406 28.00 €

260 Monastiraki Rethimnou 399 520.00 €

261 Kythera byzantine museum 358 450.00 €

262 Pereviki Tripolis 349 0.00 €

263 Agia Irini Keas 315 0.00 €

264 Kalidonas 313 198.00 €

265 Ipsili Androu 307 179.00 €

266 Archaeological site of Palairos 223 386.00 €

267 Apollo temple, Karditsa 223 207.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 113 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological Site / Museum Visitors 2017 Revenues 2017

268 Archaeological site petron 202 24.00 €

269 Torniki 180 224.00 €

270 Thirion museum 177 52.00 €

271 Palatiano 161 50.00 €

272 Arhontiki Psarron 158 80.00 €

273 Elatia 119 67.00 €

274 Episkopiko Sisaniou 99 34.00 €

275 Arhontiko Maliogka 17 11.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 114 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Appendix B: Archaeological museum shops product sales (2017)

SN Archaeological site / museum shop Product sales 2017 1 National Archaeological Museum 349,121.20 € 2 Knossos 180,922.84 € 3 Heracleion museum 171,590.18 € 4 Archaeological site Olimpias 170,853.55 € 5 Knossos 138,872.90 € 6 Archaeological site of Delfi 101,361.60 € 7 Archaeological museum of Thessaloniki 82,378.96 € 8 Acropolis 73,633.00 €

9 Byzantine and Christianic museum of Athens 65,973.50 € 10 Sounio 57,342.30 € 11 Byzantine museum of Thessaloniki 55,469.85 € 12 Archaeological site of Epidavrus 54,674.30 € 13 Mistras 52,111.16 €

14 Acropolis 51,417.89 € 15 Mycenae 46,895.84 € 16 Olimpieion 39,405.15 € 17 Delos 34,030.60 € 18 Vergina 33,911.00 € 19 Akrotiri Thiras 32,161.50 € 20 Loutra Thessalonikis 30,929.40 € 21 Palace of Grand Master 30,747.60 € 22 Rethimno 30,497.80 € 23 Philippoi 27,979.10 € 24 Ancient Agora 20,436.88 € 25 Central warehouse 19,399.00 € 26 Rhodes 18,547.25 € 27 Patra 17,974.04 € 28 Thebes 17,544.90 € 29 Chania 17,225.70 € 30 Corfu 16,697.30 € 31 Gortina 16,041.38 € 32 Elefsina 13,579.00 € 33 Dodoni 12,938.65 € 34 Phaistos 12,766.84 € 35 Nomismatic museum 12,760.50 € 36 Monemvasia 11,673.90 € 37 Byzantine and Christianic museum of Athens 11,032.88 € 38 Nafplio 10,906.40 € 39 Spinaloga 10,632.70 € 40 Kerameikos 9,317.14 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 115 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological site / museum shop Product sales 2017 41 Osios Loukas 8,650.00 € 42 Pellas 8,190.90 €

43 Byzantine museum of Ioannina 8,182.70 € 44 Kavala 7,633.40 € 45 Dion 7,376.00 € 46 Zakros 5,642.50 € 47 Naxos 5,555.00 € 48 Thassos 4,548.20 €

49 Pylos 4,047.50 € 50 Temple of Epikourion Apollon 3,499.30 € 51 Pithagorion Samou 3,401.00 € 52 Kanellopoulou museum 3,181.50 € 53 Peraius museum 2,674.00 € 54 Volos 2,630.30 €

55 MON REPOS 2,585.60 € 56 Paros 2,583.20 € 57 Larissa 2,301.56 € 58 Pilos castle 2,221.60 € 59 Antivouniotissa Corfu 2,121.20 € 60 Byzantine museum of Thessaloniki 2,115.72 € 61 Tirintha 1,953.00 € 62 Sparti 1,833.50 € 63 Aiani 1,745.90 € 64 Prehistoric museum oh Thira 1,680.00 € 65 Monemvasia 1,625.00 € 66 Apollo temple, Kolona 1,584.90 €

67 Pilos 1,582.00 € 68 Tegeas 1,517.50 € 69 Eretria 1,454.00 € 70 Dikation antro 1,420.00 € 71 Chios 1,399.00 € 72 Lefkada 1,258.50 € 73 Nekromanteio Acheronta 1,254.00 € 74 Chania 1,251.60 € 75 Kea 1,227.00 €

76 Mesimvria zoni 1,206.60 € 77 Komotini 1,196.90 € 78 Platamonas 1,145.60 € 79 Skiros 1,046.00 € 80 Epigraphic museum 1,038.00 € 81 New monastery Chios 1,021.90 € 82 Lavrio 1,010.40 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 116 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological site / museum shop Product sales 2017 83 Lemnos 939.50 € 84 Chlemoutsi 929.00 € 85 Byzantine collection of Chania 915.00 € 86 Kissamos 909.50 € 87 Byzantine museum of Chios 859.00 € 88 Pikoulakis pirgos 816.00 € 89 Asklipieion Ko 802.50 € 90 Parigoritissas temple, Arta 757.60 € 91 Ilida 741.80 € 92 Igoumenitsa 712.20 € 93 Arhontiko Svartz 610.60 € 94 Veroia 559.60 € 95 Ipati 541.90 € 96 RENE PUAUX –Pilos 540.00 € 97 Arta 518.80 € 98 Kavala 510.10 € 99 Byzantine museum of Ioannina 484.12 € 100 Efpalinion origma 460.00 € 101 Milos 435.20 € 102 Mideas 380.00 € 103 Milos catacombs 355.00 € 104 Pella 351.00 € 105 Florina 350.00 € 106 Thermos museum 340.80 € 107 Lamias castle 316.00 € 108 Egion museum 292.00 € 109 Karditsa 249.00 € 110 Agias Mavras castle 237.00 € 111 Arhontiko Vareltzidainas 217.80 € 112 Loutra Paradeisou 215.80 € 113 Tripolis museum 215.80 € 114 Kaisarianis temple 203.10 € 115 Temple of Afaias 183.00 € 116 Mytilenes museum 180.00 € 117 Patras castle 176.50 € 118 Chalkidas museum 174.00 € 119 Nomismatic museum 108.00 € 120 Ialissos 99.50 € 121 Iraio Samou 91.00 € 122 Emporio Chios 91.00 € 123 South slopes of Acropolis 89.60 € 124 Atalanti 72.00 € 125 MON REPOS 68.00 € 126 Nemeas museum 58.80 € 127 Books central warehouse 50.00 € 128 Palati Ioustiniani 27.20 € 129 Vathi Samou 16.40 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 117 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

SN Archaeological site / museum shop Product sales 2017 130 Mikonos museum 7.00 €

Postgraduate Dissertation 118 Anastasios Tsogkas, Business Process Reengineering in Greek Public Sector: The case of Archaeological Resources Fund

Author’s Statement: I hereby declare that, in accordance with article 8 of Law 1599/1986 and article 2.4.6 par. 3 of Law 1256/1982, this thesis/dissertation is solely a product of personal work and does not infringe any intellectual property rights of third parties and is not the product of a partial or total plagiarism, and the sources used are strictly limited to the bibliographic references.

Postgraduate Dissertation 119