Search results

The purpose of this paper is to determine, first, the level to which ISO 9001 certified manufacturing companies adopt process management and improve quality, second, the latent factors of process management and quality improvement, and finally, the relationships between the latent factors extracted.

A research project was carried out in 196 ISO 9001 certified manufacturing companies operating in Greece. A structured questionnaire was designed and pilot tested and then addressed to management representatives of the companies. Descriptive statistics were used in order to determine the level of process management adoption and the level of quality improvement. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were also applied to extract the latent factors of process management and quality improvement and to assess their reliability and validity. The relationships between the latent factors were determined through structural equation modelling.

Two latent factors were extracted with respect to process management (the core process management practices and the supporting quality tools) and one latent factor with respect to quality improvement. The findings revealed that the ISO 9001 certified manufacturing companies implement to a high degree of the core process management practices, in contrast to the supporting quality tools. Notwithstanding, significant quality improvement is achieved. According to the structural model, the core process management practices have a strong, positive and direct effect on quality improvement. The supporting quality tools have an indirect effect on quality improvement through their significant correlation with the core process management practices.

This paper describes a reliable and valid model that analyzes process management in two latent factors (the core process management practices and the supporting quality tools). The model also depicts the effects of these latent factors on quality improvement of ISO 9001 certified manufacturing companies.

Business process management has received much attention in the industrial engineering and management literature, and its benefits are well known. Much less has been written in the public sector management literature, and what has been written has been very general. Hence, there is confusion among public managers about how business process management concepts should be implemented. How should public organizations reorganize to accommodate business process management? How are existing or new enterprise systems aligned with business process management methodologies? This paper addresses these issues, and concludes that public organizations will have to change their organizational structures radically as well as their enterprise systems in order to implement business process management concepts successfully. The paper also discusses the benefits of public sector process management, and focuses in some detail on two of the reasons that public organizations have incentive to implement business process management methodologies.

Many researchers and practitioners suggest a contingent instead of a “one size fits all” approach in business process management (BPM). The purpose of this paper is to offer a contingency theory of BPM, which proposes contingency factors relevant to the successful management of business processes and that explains how and why these contingencies impact the relationships between process management and performance.

The authors develop the theory by drawing on organizational information processing theory (OIPT) and applying an information processing (IP) perspective to the process level.

The premise of the model is that the process management mechanisms such as documentation, standardization or monitoring must compensate for the uncertainty and equivocality of the nature of the process that has to be managed. In turn, managing through successful adaptation is a prerequisite for process performance.

The theory provides a set of testable propositions that specify the relationship between process management mechanisms and process performance. The authors also discuss implications of the new theory for further theorizing and outline empirical research strategies that can be followed to enact, evaluate and extend the theory.

The theory developed in this paper allows an alternative way to describe organizational processes and supports the derivation of context-sensitive management approaches for process documentation, standardization, monitoring, execution and coordination.

The theoretical model is novel in that it provides a contextualized view on BPM that acknowledges different types of processes and suggests different mechanisms for managing these. The authors hope the paper serves as inspiration both for further theory development as well as to empirical studies that test, refute, support or otherwise augment the arguments.

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.

Process management has been around for a long time, but unlike that of many other management trends, the interest in process management has remained high. The starting point for the study was the idea that the lack of well‐established conceptual models and definitions of process management play a role in the challenge and difficulty facing organizations when trying to manage their processes on a strategic level. The purpose of the study was to explore whether there really are some existing widespread and common models and definitions for process management in the literature? The aim of this paper is to describe and explore the findings from the study.

A structured literature review is used to identify contemporary models and definitions for process management.

There are several descriptions and definitions of process management presented in the literature, but none that seems to be really widespread and well‐established. However, the analysis indicate two different movements: process management for single process improvement; and process management for system management. The results from the literature review are summarized in an aggregated model of existing descriptions of process management. The varying purposes of working with process management demonstrate a diverse need for both movements. Still, the focus of a majority of the identified tools and approaches for process management is to contribute to the more mechanistic movement, the first, of systematically improving single processes.

The paper provides a literature review, the identification of two different movements within process management and presents an aggregated model of existing descriptions of process management. Implications of the findings on process management in organizations are discussed and further research suggested.

This study empirically examines the effect of shop‐floor communication on implementation effectiveness of process management practices, and on the corresponding quality performance gained through process management implementation. It deals with four types of communication on the shop floor (small group problem solving, feedback, instructive communication, supervisory interaction facilitation) and three process management practices (process control, preventive maintenance, housekeeping).

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and regression techniques were used to test the hypothesized relationships. Data were collected from 238 manufacturing plants through a questionnaire survey conducted in eight countries to develop reliable and valid measurement scales for operations management.

The statistical results demonstrate the positive effect of shop‐floor communication on the implementation of process management practices and the resultant quality performance. The results also suggest that each type of shop‐floor communication differently affects the way in which process management practices are implemented to influence quality performance.

Although the existing literature of quality management highlights the importance of communication and information management for the successful implementation of quality management, little detailed study has been conducted on how specific types of communication support quality management practices to obtain quality performance. This study contributes to the literature by breaking down communication into four types and providing specific empirical evidence on the relationship between each type of communication, process management practices, and quality performance.

This study aims to probe into the influence of new product design and new product development process management on development performance. The research finding demonstrates that product design reveals positive and significant influence on new product development performance. Through statistical analysis, this study finds that companies in Taiwan value new product design. When companies value it more, they tend to have better new product development performance. With regard to the relation between new product development process management and new product development performance, the empirical results demonstrate that companies would pay more attention on new product development process management. With regard to new product idea and assessment, concept design and development, product function test and mass production in the market, through statistical analysis, this study finds that companies that value process management of new product development tend to have better new product development performance. As to the influence of new product design and new product process management on new product development performance, statistical analysis result demonstrates that the integration between new product design valued by companies in Taiwan and development process management would lead to significantly positive influence on new product development performance of the companies.

Process management is becoming an essential part of contemporary organizations in all industries. However, many organizations experience problems during the implementation of a process management approach. The purpose of this paper is to explore and describe the organizational implications when implementing process management, how to handle the relationship between the functional organization and a process perspective, and the roles of managers, teams, and individuals.

A multiple‐case study approach is used to get an extensive picture of and analyze how three Swedish organizations have worked with process management.

The studied organizations have introduced a process management structure into their functional organizational structure, including the introduction of new management positions such as process owners and process leaders. A discourse is identified in earlier research between those arguing for a full transformation from a functionally oriented to a fully process‐oriented organizational structure, and those promoting a more moderate transformation where a process management structure is “matrixed onto” the existing organization. The analysis could be interpreted as supporting the second line of reasoning, where the functional and process structures co‐exist in the organization, creating a constructive dynamic.

The paper provides two major contributions. First, the empirical descriptions and analysis of implementing process management contribute to the knowledge and understanding among both practitioners and researchers. The second major contribution is the identified need of co‐existence of a process and functional perspective, and the implication that complexity is created rather than reduced in organizations.

Much of the practitioner literature touts the universal benefits of process management and its impact on operational performance. However, in academic literature, empirical evidence is mixed. The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of the competitive intensity on the effectiveness of process management.

Survey data from manufacturing plants were collected from through a global research project. Regression analysis was used to test hypotheses.

The influence of process design on efficiency and innovation performance is not dependent on competitive intensity; however, the impact of process improvement and process control on efficiency and innovation performance is in some instances moderated by competitive intensity.

The inclusion of competitive intensity as a contingency variable helps to explain the contextual impact of process management on efficiency and innovation.

Process management can be an effective tool if the levels of process design, control, and improvement are customized to fit with the competitive environment.

This is one of the few studies to empirically examine process management as three core elements. Previous studies utilized a single construct of process management or multiple manufacturing practices such as customer/supplier involvement, statistical quality control, process focus, and cross-functional teams to measure process management. Using this measurement approach demonstrates how process management can influence both efficiency and innovation.

Managing business processes means establishing and maintaining their regulatory power, i.e., their capacity to guide and shape the practice of users and stakeholders. The purpose of this paper is to examine how the regulatory power of standardized business processes can be established and managed.

Building on a theory of standardization and on qualitative data, the authors suggest a “model of self-reinforcing business process management.”

Business process management consists of several phases (process design, process implementation, process application and process follow-up). A cyclical perspective on how these phases work together to create process legitimacy as presented in the model of self-reinforcing business process management can foster better understanding of the self-reinforcing dynamics of business process management.

The paper offers starting points for interdisciplinary research on business process management. The proposed model should be further examined with regard to its usefulness for overcoming tensions and dynamics associated with standardization.

The model of self-reinforcing business process management provides a guideline for managers involved in planning, implementing, applying, or improving business processes or further areas of change-related organizational governance.

By modeling a cyclical sequence of business process management and highlighting the role of different kinds of legitimacy, the authors integrate functionalist and social perspectives on business process management in one model.