Björn Vrooman Oct 25, 2015:

Neither agreed nor disagreed with Sarah because I do see your point about current in the sense of actuality. Not sure how it is confusing the issue, though. As I said before, I've never heard of "actual process" used like this (the DMTM source is German).

It's an analytical distinction that I only wanted to make aware of should you encounter the sequence current -> enhanced -> actual. "Ist-Ablauf" is part of business process analysis for "as-is" and "to-be" processes:
http://www.learningtree.com/courses/3505/introduction-to-bus...

"Business Process Analysis (BPA)[...]used to be considered as simply analyzing an organization’s current processes and designing a concept of it through a modeling tool. The goal of this concept was to deliver a working model of the necessary features for the benefit of IT personnel, since IT was where the proper system was created, tested and implemented to automate these processes."
http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/main/solutions/business-proce...

It's about improving current business processes - "improving actual processes" would sound odd in combination. But I don't know the source, so I asked. Best wishes

Anna Morvern (asker) Oct 25, 2015:

Actual / current Bjorn, you could propose "current" then as an alternative answer. I do think "actual" fits well here and, although I see what you are saying about looking back with hindsight and comparing the target X with the X that was actually achieved, I think that's very slightly confusing the issue, because, here, "actual" is being used as a synonym for "current" i.e. the X in actuality.

Björn Vrooman Oct 25, 2015:

Yes, I'd say that too. I simply think it's typically not called "actual processes," but current business processes (or process flow) since actual does not equal current.

target costs (planned costs) vs. actual costs (costs incurred)

current business processes (processes as they have been) vs. planned process enhancement (processes as they should be).

The first contrasts what was hoped to be achieved with what actually has been achieved.

The second contrasts what is done right now with what it could look like.

Do you see what I'm trying to hint at?

With the second one, you could still have the possibility of later comparing Soll-Ablauf with what has actually been achieved.

Hence, the first one is a reality check, the second one an outlook, which is why personally, I would not choose actual for IST here, whereas I would choose it for IST-Kosten without thinking twice about it.

Anna Morvern (asker) Oct 25, 2015:

Yes, I think we all agree. I think we are all in agreement, then, that the Ist-Abläufe refers to actual, current or existing processes or procedures and the Soll-Abläufe refers to target or intended processes or procedures. It's a shame but the moderator's editing of my original question has chopped off the Soll-Abläufe which I had included in my original question. I should have omitted "Kentnisse" from the question title as obviously I know what that means, then perhaps I could have been allowed to post as a query, "Ist-Abläufe / Soll-Abläufe". Thanks all for help; it's so logical really but was a phrase I was baffled by as I'd set off on the wrong track thinking it was a specialist IT term!

Björn Vrooman Oct 25, 2015:

PS Actually, it needs to be the other way around, IMO. It says: "Kenntnisse der Ist-Abläufe," i.e., knowledge of current business processes. It's the base for creating Soll-Abläufe, as in how it should work.

Still would appreciate some confirmation by what you've read in the source.

One example: https://books.google.de/books?id=MAtsHly3ygEC&pg=PA36&lpg=PA...

"In dieser Phase werden die Ist-Abläufe der Organisation erfasst und mögliche Lösungsansätze für offensichtliches Verbesserungspotenzial (Soll-Abläufe) erarbeitet."

Björn Vrooman Oct 25, 2015:

@Anna I advise caution. Just because there is target and actual costs doesn't mean the translation carries over to this one. Could you please tell me what works?

I know Ist-Ablauf as current business process(es):
http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/enterprise-solutions/studying-cu...
http://www.arborsys.com/Optimizing-Workflow-and-Cross-Platfo...
http://www.moray.gov.uk/moray_standard/page_98310.html
http://jobhopnow.co.uk/jobs/mi-analyst-d1618924079711e594370...
http://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-business-analysis-pr...

Contrary to the cost bit, it's the other way around here. You have an Ist-Ablauf, which means how something is currently handled, and you have a Soll-Ablauf, which means how it should be handled in the future.

Can you confirm that, Anna?

With costs, you first have target costs and then actual ones afterwards. So I think confusion may stem from the fact of alternating before and after approaches.