Search results

Business process redesign (BPR) is still a big issue in improving organizations and a lot of methods and techniques exist to support this undertaking. Referring to this, the purpose of this paper is to derive a framework for identifying patterns in BPR that help in discovering new mechanisms which are indispensable to redesign and improve business processes.

The first part of this research process follows the principles of design science research by deriving the framework as an artifact. The second part focuses on the justification (“Justify/Evaluate”) of the framework using a literature review and a laboratory experiment.

A framework for identifying BPR pattern is derived and in parts validated by literature that helps to support the act of improving business processes. The advantages of this approach lie in the integrity of deriving possible patterns and the fact that it is not limited (as attempts in related work suffered from). The practical implications and added value of the (selected) patterns could be validated by conducting a laboratory experiment.

The justification of the framework is based on a narrow literature review, just to show that this framework is applicable. For a more detailed evaluation a broader literature review is needed. The laboratory experiment was conducted for four patterns only. This also needs to be expanded in further research.

The paper is valuable for academics and practitioners because the impact of BPR on organizational performance is high. Using the identified BPR pattern facilitates the redesign of business processes, as shown in the experiment.

The originality of the paper lies in the possibility to easily identify BPR pattern to support the redesign of existing business processes.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a structured overview of so‐called business process improvement (BPI) approaches and their contribution to the actual act of improving. Even though a lot is said about BPI, there is still a lack of supporting the act of improving the process. Most approaches concentrate on what needs to be done before and after the improvement act, but the act of improving itself still seems to be a black box.

This paper is mainly based on a review of literature that deals with the term “Business Process Improvement”. The analysis of the literature is supported by qualitative content analysis. The structure of the evaluation follows the mandatory elements of a method (MEM).

A lot of literature and consulting approaches deal with the restructuring and improvement of business processes. The author finds that even so‐called BPI approaches do not describe the act of improvement itself. And if they do, they lack a methodological structure that can be reused.

To constrain the complexity of this research at this first stage of investigation only the search criterion “business process improvement” was used in the database search (EBSCO and Emerald).

The paper is valuable for academics and practitioners because the impact of BPI on organizational performance is high. Its originality is in the structured evaluation of so‐called BPI approaches according to the MEM, which so far no one has investigated.

Despite an obvious connection, business process improvement and business process management (BPM) capability development have been studied intensely, but in isolation. The authors thus aim to make the case for the research located at the intersection of both streams. The authors thereby focus on the integrated planning of business process improvement and BPM capability development as this is where, in the authors’ opinion, both streams have the closest interaction. The authors refer to the research field located at the intersection of business process improvement and BPM capability development as process project portfolio management. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors structure the field of process project portfolio management drawing from extant knowledge related to BPM, project portfolio management, and performance management. The authors also propose a research agenda in terms of exemplary research questions and research methods.

The proposed structure shows which business objects and interactions should be considered when engaging in process project portfolio management. The research agenda contains exemplary questions structured along the intersections of BPM, project portfolio management, and performance management.

This paper’s main limitation is that it reflects the authors’ individual viewpoints based on experiences of several industry projects and prior research.

This paper addresses a neglected research field, opens up new avenues for interdisciplinary BPM research, and contributes a novel perspective to the ongoing discussion about the future of BPM.

Current business challenges force companies to exchange critical and sensitive data. The data provider pays great attention to the usage of their data and wants to control it by policies. The purpose of this paper is to develop usage control architecture options to enable data sovereignty in business ecosystems.

The architecture options are developed following the design science research process. Based on requirements from an automotive use case, the authors develop architecture options. The different architecture options are demonstrated and evaluated based on the case study with practitioners from the automotive industry.

This paper introduces different architecture options for implementing usage control (UC). The proposed architecture options represent solutions for UC in business ecosystems. The comparison of the architecture options shows the respective advantages and disadvantages for data provider and data consumer.

In this work, the authors address only one case stemming from the German automotive sector.

Technical enforcement of data providers policies instead of relying on trust to support collaborative data exchange between companies.

This research is among the first to introduce architecture options that provide a technical concept for the implementation of data sovereignty in business ecosystems using UC. Consequently, it supports the decision process for the technical implementation of data sovereignty.

The purpose of this paper is to present an integrated modelling framework that links management action to supply chain processes and then to competitive advantage.

Using survey responses about supply chain management in the Australian beef processing industry, regression analysis was used to develop a model simultaneously explaining the links from management action to supply chain processes and on to competitive advantage.

A relatively simple regression model was established that should be widely applicable in agri‐food processing industries. In the context of our example industry, the results suggest that there is a strong link from some supply chain practices to competitive advantage, with trust and information quality being important drivers of the process.

Being based on a survey approach, a limitation is that that the results show managers' perceived influences on supply chain performance, not the influences observed by the researchers.

The regression method provides an easy way of summarising the links between supply chain practices and competitive advantage. This method may be generally applicable across agri‐food industries, particularly those with many small and medium‐size food enterprises.

This research provides a new method of integrating various aspects of supply chain management and competitive advantage. The method has the great advantage of parsimony.

Maturity models are a prospering approach to improving a company's processes and business process management (BPM) capabilities. In fact, the number of corresponding maturity models is so high that practitioners and scholars run the risk of losing track. This paper therefore aims to provide a systematic in‐depth review of BPM maturity models.

The paper follows the accepted research process for literature reviews. It analyzes a sample of ten BPM maturity models according to a framework of general design principles. The framework particularly focuses on the applicability and usefulness of maturity models.

The analyzed maturity models sufficiently address basic design principles as well as principles for a descriptive purpose of use. The design principles for a prescriptive use, however, are hardly met. Thus, BPM maturity models provide limited guidance for identifying desirable maturity levels and for implementing improvement measures.

The authors are confident that this review covers the majority of publicly available BPM maturity models. As the number of corresponding maturity models seems to be constantly growing, exhaustiveness can hardly be guaranteed. The study's results stimulate future research. Inter alia, adopters from industry require more elaborate support by means of ready‐to‐use and adaptable instruments for maturity assessment and improvement. The paper also reaffirms the need for maturity model consolidation in the field of BPM.

As existing literature reviews focus on process improvement or BPM in general, the paper's findings extend current knowledge. They also increase transparency. Its results provide guidance for scholars and practitioners involved in the design, enhancement, or application of BPM maturity models.