Gluu

Gluu Academy

Designing process architectures

Process architecture frameworks

Learn how to use the most common process architecture frameworks—APQC, SOS, SCOR, Value Chain and ITIL—to design a coherent process landscape, understand their pros and cons, and know when to combine them.

Lesson references

Lesson resources

Key learnings

  • Use APQC for a cross-company naming baseline.
  • Use Value Chain for executive alignment at the landscape level.
  • Apply SCOR within supply chain; ITIL within IT/service.
  • Tag all processes with SOS to clarify purpose and ownership.
  • Pros/cons: adopt the language, tailor to reality; keep it light and layered.
  • Combine frameworks into one architecture: Landscape → L3 naming → Domain overlays → Pilot → Improve.

Video transcript

By the end of this session, you’ll know which process frameworks are most widely used, where each fits best, and the practical pros and cons so you can choose—and combine—them confidently in support of the process journey that you are about to embark on.

Frameworks save time and give us a shared language that has been tested by others. Instead of inventing labels and structures from scratch, we start from a proven map, tailor it to reality, and move faster from strategy to execution.

We’ll focus on five you’ll see again and again: APQC, the Strategic–Operational–Support classification, SCOR, Porter’s Value Chain, and ITIL. I’ll also flag a few industry-specific options.

APQC PCF is a cross-industry taxonomy—a ready-made catalog of processes and sub-processes available in Excel format.

It has a cross-industry version and a number of industry specific framework. Paying members get access to benchmark data.

Best for: medium sized and large companies that need a neutral starting list and consistent naming, especially across multiple sites or countries.

Pros: fast baseline, easy to benchmark, helps avoid duplicate names.

Cons: generic out-of-the-box; no roles involved; needs tailoring to your business; it’s a taxonomy, not an operating model.

Tip: Use APQC to name L1–L3 levels, then localize at the activity and instruction levels.

Strategic–Operational–Support is a simple process type lens.

Best for: any org that needs clarity of purpose and ownership without complexity.

Pros: dead simple; sharpens governance—strategic processes get executive owners, operational processes get value-stream owners, support processes live with shared services.

Cons: it’s a labeling scheme, not a full framework; too coarse to stand alone.

Tip: Tag every process with SOS to clarify who leads and how success is measured.

The SCOR model was developed in 1996 by the Supply Chain Council and is now part of the Association for Supply Chain Management (ASCM).

SCOR structures supply-chain work around classic pillars like Plan, Source, Make, Deliver, Return (and enabling elements).

Best for: manufacturing, distribution, e-commerce, and any org where supply chain is a major value driver; typically mid-to-large firms.

Pros: strong end-to-end view, mature metrics library, common language for Ops, Procurement, and Logistics.

Cons: supply-chain-specific; can feel heavy if your data maturity is low; don’t force it onto non-SC processes.

Tip: Use SCOR inside your Procure-to-Pay and Order-to-Cash areas, while the rest of the business uses APQC naming.

Porter’s Value Chain is a high-level map of primary and support activities.

Best for: executive alignment and the first page of your process landscape.

Pros: simple, familiar to leaders, great for focusing investment and ownership.

Cons: too abstract for day-to-day operations; lacks activity-level detail.

Tip: Use Value Chain at the landscape level, then hang APQC or domain frameworks underneath.

ITIL provides practices and flows for IT service management—incident, change, request, problem, and more.

Best for: IT organizations and service-heavy companies; any size, often mid-to-large.

Pros: widely adopted, improves reliability and service experience, plugs neatly into DevOps and platform ops.

Cons: can get ticket-centric and jargon-heavy; not ideal for non-IT processes; training overhead.

Tip: Use ITIL inside the Support domain while aligning names to your overall hierarchy.

Three honorable mentions:

eTOM for telecom (service/process catalog tailored to operators). You may want to look into this if you’re in the telecoms industry.

BIAN for banking “Banking Industry Architecture Network” (business capabilities and service domains). Could be interesting for financial companies.

ISO 9001 process approach to embed quality – Plan Do Check Act – and control thinking in your architecture. Consider these if your industry has strong regulatory or service norms.

PDCA and risk-based thinking a methods that can inform and underpin your process design in general.

Here’s a simple guide to dive deeper into the frameworks I mentioned:

  • Need a company-wide baseline fast? Start with APQC for naming and activity examples.
  • Need exec buy-in and focus? Use the Value Chain as your front page.
  • Heavy supply chain complexity? Overlay SCOR in that domain.
  • Big IT/service footprint? Apply ITIL in Support.

Always tag processes with SOS to clarify ownership and expectations.

I would advise you to layer and pick from frameworks – don’t choose between them. Put a Value Chain at the top as your landscape, use APQC for consistent names across L1–L3, tag each item with SOS, then apply SCOR within supply chain and ITIL within IT. This gives you a coherent architecture that still respects domain best practices and may be used for benchmarking later.

A final word of caution. Frameworks don’t deliver value by themselves—people do. Use them to align fast, keep them light, and iterate in the real world. Then scale what works.