I would suggest considering the alternative type of organisation (The procedure-oriented organisation) and compare the differences.

When ISO9001 changed to cease referring to 'procedures' and start referring to 'processes' this is when this question became important.

The core on training people is a culture of 'the big picture'

-A process-oriented organisation needs to consider the complete flow of sub-processes and how they fit together- where the weaknesses are and how the interact to give the customer their expected output. A procedure based organisation does not have that '10,000 foot view' of itself.

-A process-oriented organisation needs to ensure that it understands the effectiveness of itself over all (what are it's measures of success) and then describe the key measures of effectiveness of each process. Further: each local process area or department needs to ensure their measures of success aren't driving behaviours that are causing issues in other downstream processes or for the business as a whole. Those measures need to have clearly documented targets. A procedure based organisation does not have this clearly defined input to output approach.

-A process-oriented organisation needs to ensure each team member understands 'risk' in terms of how it relates to their local process and activity- that's 'risk' in terms of 'the steps we take to ensure we hit our targets'.

A procedure-based organisation simply dictates what team members do and 'risk' is managed at the board level.

-The organization's objectives need to be flowed down and linked clearly to each team member's personal objectives- that means each person can see how their daily work is supporting the long term purpose of the business. This sounds trivial but many organisations miss that people need to KNOW that what they are doing is the right thing- that means the right thing for the business. In absence of that top-down objective framework they will create their own local structure and you are back to a locally focused procedure-approach.

-The other key elements are:

- Creation of a fully involving improvement method. In 'procedure driven' organisations, most employees have little agency in changing or controlling their processes. Instead, the business needs to provide a legitimate framework of change request and guided improvement from improvement specialists to allow them to make improvements. This also leverages the 'broader view' I mention above: people have to think not just about 'their bit of the job' but how it interacts with downstream processes and how things coming in from upstream may change. Encourage thought and questioning "Is there a better way of doing it?" from the whole business- and reward (and be seen to reward!) good improvement ideas!

-This cultural approach HAS to be driven from the top. It has to be driven into every level of the management structure. There is a level of integration and broader vision needed for this culture to work that is the key difference.....If there are any pockets of 'them vs us' or ' we don't get listened to by the management' in the business then it can and will fail

The final key point is understand the organizational culture and approach NOW before starting to impose a process based thought concept.....What are the big challenges? Where does it work well now? What parts of the business approach cannot be changed due to external requirements (Legal or customer need)? How much time can we spend on this?

For multi-nationals this get harder- what can we change globally but what needs to be managed locally? How does local culture impact our top-level approach?

Hope that helps a little

I suggest, selecting a business improvement tools which aligns performance from the front line team leader to Executive VP. There are numerous alignment tools.

@ Leila Bashir - The primary difference between procedural Vs process based companies would be around performance, repeatability (quality) and so customer satisfaction. Processes are designed and fit for purpose (ie. have control plans) with defined performance measures to ensure customer needs are met. Procedures are written by an SME (usually separated from the work being done, and usually written to satisfy a third party or regulatory requirement rather than a customer requirement). Procedures rarely have measures defined within them and can lack stability and quality if their content is open to interpretation.