Search results

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to defining the tasks necessary to process management, considering both conceptual and practical views.

Bibliographic review for tasks mentioned as typically necessary to process management, plus a field survey involving professionals working in process management.

The bibliographic review yielded a set of tasks that were grouped conceptually into “designing processes”, “managing processes from day to day” and “fostering process‐related learning”. These groups were then validated with practioners as valid constructs. The field survey produced two major findings: the first underlining the practical importance of the tasks identified as necessary to process management and the second demonstrating that most organizations where the study participants work are structured functionally, but have practices for managing cross‐functional processes or “end‐to‐end process”. The conceptual and practical comparison brings to light gaps between authors and professionals.

There is significant variation in the job positions and sectors occupied by the group studied and the sample is not random, given that all are enrolled in postgraduate process management programs and thus share an interest in the subject.

Organizations can identify tasks that are necessary and important to process management and have an instrument (the questionnaire) for deciding how best to manage processes. Where functional management of cross‐functional processes is found, this recommends developing organizational solutions to upgrade the capacity for coordination among activities without necessarily introducing changes in organizational structure.

The paper describes an unprecedented study and helps clarify what needs to be done to manage processes.

The data monetization market is valued at $1.5 billion, with an expected annual growth rate of 25%. This growth presents significant opportunities for companies to expand their revenue streams. However, many companies struggle to extract value from their data due to existing challenges and need for more knowledge. While existing studies describe and classify dimensions of the phenomenon, there is a need to explore causality relations that can help the structuring of data monetization processes. This study aimed to support the structuring of the data monetization process.

Proposing causality relations is important to explore the data monetization phenomenon. Therefore, empirical knowledge about data monetization was organized into design patterns using the context-intervention-mechanism-outcome (CIMO) logic. The effectiveness of these patterns was then assessed through an exploratory case study conducted at a leading Brazilian academic institution where data monetization is central to its business model.

The study yields six design patterns that address various aspects such as data pricing, data-driven business models and best practices for data monetization. Additionally, it presents a comprehensive understanding of the data monetization process through a value-added chain framework.

The findings contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field, the proposition of causality, and offer valuable insights into organizations that wish to structure their resources and capabilities and leverage data.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the key critical factors that affect the success of Business Process Management (BPM) implementations, considering the literature and experts practical experience.

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted, and 25 articles from 12 different countries were selected and analyzed. In addition, through a survey, 113 BPM experts were consulted in order to assist in the evaluation of critical success factors (CSFs) initially identified in the bibliography.

All CSFs identified in the literature were accepted as real critical factors according to the tacit knowledge of the experts. Thus, the factors identified in the literature and approved to a large extent by the experts can serve as a basis for organizations and professionals who want to implement BPM to know of their existence, to relate to them, to control them and thus to potentiate the success of the implementation.

The construction of the theoretical framework based on SLR on BPM is a contribution to the bibliographic database. Another contribution is the identification and synthesis of the CSFs most cited by different authors from 12 different countries and its analysis by professionals on BPM.

Research in business processes has been developed around a disciplinary approach toward the production of traditional knowledge, known as Mode 1. The problems studied with this approach are solved in a context in which academic knowledge prevails, with no major concerns regarding its practical applicability. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to propose a structure for knowledge production based on Mode 2 for business process researches.

A bibliometric research was conducted to define and conceptualize the classes of disciplinary problems, by assessing the years 2007-2012 of the Business Process Management Journal publications.

A framework for the Mode 2 knowledge production was proposed in the development of research in business process and conceptualized classes of problems related to this issue.

This work was carried out with specific focus on research in business process, so the defined classes of problems cannot be generalized.

The studies identified by this research are in the form of a disciplinary approach toward the production of traditional knowledge, known as Mode 1. This paper aims to fill the gap of a transdisciplinary production of knowledge and practical application, known as Mode 2 in the context of business process.

Despite its popularity, business process management (BPM) is not unequivocally defined, but obtains different forms with varying specifications. This paper presents a critical overview of BPM, as it appears within four dominant management paradigms: total quality management, standardized management systems, business process reengineering and Six Sigma. The purpose of this paper is to explore BPM specifications and compare the BPM implementation potential under each paradigm.

This is based on the analysis of a large number of highly cited scholarly publications. In order to identify the nature of BPM within each paradigm, a common framework for comparison is first established and then, for each paradigm, BPM is analyzed according to the main parameters of this framework.

Many differences among various BPM forms are paradigm driven. So, the approach adopted by each paradigm (i.e. individual-process or systemic approach) affects the scope and role of BPM. The principles of each paradigm directly affect the attributes assigned to BPM. Despite of important differences, the structure of BPM within all paradigms conforms to the stages of the classical BPM lifecycle. However, each paradigm assigns different weights to each stage and also displays different levels of BPM implementability.

The paper presents a first systematic comparison of BPM specifications for the dominant management paradigms primarily deployed. It thus explains why many attributes originating from the paradigms have crept into the general BPM specifications. This work can be considered as a step toward defining the core attributes of a paradigm-independent BPM model, thus enhancing its application scope as an invaluable management tool.