【正文】 tructuring the entire organisation. Business process reengineering for local improvements have led to the development of analytical models for optimisation of existing processes through simpler procedures and incorporation of Information technology. Activity based accounting, an American invention, is also used in conjunction with process reengineering projects efforts. The drive towards BAR in American industries has spawned an industry of consultants and process mapping and simulation tools. A brief review of the stateofthe art in analytical methods and tools such as IDEFO, SAT, BPMAT and Design Process Matrix is also provided in this report. At the other end, there are examples of well established organisational structures and processes being totally replaced by new structures and flexible processes. Such total re structuring efforts may well include use of cross functional teams, retraining and activities related to the management of innovation as integral parts of the business processes, well beyond the conventional activities of design, manufacture, and service of products. The difference between successful and unsuccessful firms that use BAR appears to lie more on the scope and coverage of the BAR efforts than on the mere application of tools and methods. We illustrate the above inferences by discussing the various models used by some US firms and the experience of a few select industries in adopting BAR. There are examples of a laboratory reengineering itself and others from defence industries reengineering themselves to acmodate ending of the Cold War and declining defence budgets. Reengineering depends on people: the way they learn their jobs, work and collaborate with their colleagues. Often, this involves learning new trades and work practices, and embracing a new work ethic that transcends the narrow specialization that the workers find themselves in. Past industrial innovations, successful as they had been, practiced division of labor on the work force to a degree that almost eclipsed the need for human ingenuity and innovation. BPR has brought changes in the way the work force is perceived for effecting organizational changes. Most successful examples of BPR are therefore from the corporations that practice retraining programs. While bigger corporations have the resources to reengineer their processes and retrain their work force, their successes also depend on how effective their suppliers in the value chain are in practicing BPR. The problem of implementing BPR and the training of the work force in supporting firms is generally believed to be the responsibility of the individual firms. Contrary to general belief, the US government is not a passive observer of the restructuring of business processes that are now underway in the country. It is intervening actively by providing initiatives and inducements to all firms for continuing education and retraining programs. The US govemment is also intervening actively in an innovative fashion to fill the gaps seen in US panies, specially in processing and manufacturing stages. These are considered essential to keep American products globally petitive. The US federal and university laboratories, large and successful as they are, have been singularly ineffective in transferring these technologies to US industries. Existing laws in place and concerns about patent rights and public knowledge have discouraged close collaboration between the laboratories and industries. The US government has introduced multiagency (Defense, Commerce, NASA, NSF and ARPA, and Transportation) programs in defense, dualuse and civilian sectors supporting short term programs of research in high risk, high value manufacturing process technologies. The major condition of support of such programs is that the program should be mercially relevant to industry and jointly pursued by laboratories and industries, with leadership and matching financial contributions from industry. In this report, we discusses these initiatives, known as ATP (Advanced Technology Program) and TRP (Technology Reinvestment Program) and their performance to date. The success of Japanese firms in capturing a significant part of the US automobile market in the 7039。s reengineering program is the billion dollar Technology Center at Dearborn, Michigan. Chrysler used this center to perform its first cross functional team experiment for the sports car Viper, with a goal to reduce the designtoproduction time to 36 months. With this experience, Chrysler Technology Center (CTC} became the hub of Chrysler39。 servicing contributes a major ponent to the GDP and to employment generation. In 1991, 76 percent of output came from services, and the value it added to the economy is about 70 percent. It also contributes some key elements to manufacturing: vendors and customers are served by this industry. We shall therefore include some examples of reengineering efforts in this area that have turned out to be successful. Because of the very scope and size of the efforts demanded by reengineering, the examples are still very few, though there are numerous instances of panies reengineering a process or two, no doubt hoping that the visible success of the efforts would make reengineering more palatable. The Role of Technology Reengineering does not claim to substitute for either a sound business strategy, product or technology. It is only a mechanism for radically improving the performance of the business processes for the vendors, customers and products. But by centering the whole concept on processes, reengineering is inextricably linked to technologies。D organizations, National Institute of standards and technology (NIST) and Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA, formerly DARPA) contracting research and development programs on manufacturing technologies. A major condition for this support is that these programs be jointly pursued by research organizations and US panies with the