Search results

Business process modelling (BPMo) projects are core to digital transformation projects as they provide the conceptual foundation to the orchestration of technologies along a process. Yet, success factors of BPMo projects have received little research attention to date. This study empirically validates a BPMo project success model, pointing to normative practice guidelines and important future research.

This research reports on the quantitative re-specification and validation of a business process modelling success model, employing survey responses from 261 process modellers worldwide.

The study distilled and validated a final set of success antecedents: Top Management Support, Project Management Capabilities, Stakeholder Input, Modeller Expertise and Modelling Tool Usage; and clearly evidences their relationships with each other and with two moderating variables – Importance and Complexity. The paper offers a nuanced explanation of the indirect role of top management support in building stakeholder involvement and explains how complex projects that are perceived as important being more likely to attract high levels of necessary stakeholder involvement. The authors conclude that top management needs to create an environment of co-ordinated excellence which spans both technical skills and resources, and a high level of committed engagement between stakeholders and technicians in order for BPMo projects to succeed.

This study is the first to operationalize and quantitatively test antecedents of BPMo project success and their interactions, presenting novel insights into how the success factors interact. Awareness of the more influential antecedents of successful process modelling projects offers valuable guidance for the planning, management and conduct of BPMo projects.

There is wide acknowledgment that training people from all levels of an organization in process management activities and “process thinking” is a major contributor to the success or failure, and sustainability of business process management (BPM). BPM training is provided in almost all BPM initiatives and involves the investment of valuable financial, human, information and other resources. However, little research has focused on this area. As a result, there is a lack of guidance for organizations in conducting value adding BPM training. The purpose of this paper is to consolidate the current published knowledge on BPM training in the form of a descriptive literature review to paint a picture of the existing work, identify gaps and propose a program of work for the future.

A structured descriptive literature review was conducted to understand the current status of literature on training in the domain of BPM. Of an initial search of 90 publications, 64 publications, published between 1994 and 2015, were filtered and reviewed based on their relevance to answer the research question: What has BPM literature mentioned of training people for BPM? This study proposes a research agenda based on this. A grounded theory coding approach was employed, where NVivo 10 was used as a tool to support the analysis.

A total of 234 codes (representing emerging themes) were inductively identified from the data. These codes were further analyzed, resulting in eight core themes pertaining to training in the BPM context.

The paper presents a vivid descriptive overview of the current status of research in BPM training identifying gaps in the literature and presents a research agenda which supports a call for action.

The paper is the first known of its kind to compile the status of literature focused on BPM training and recommend a research agenda based on such.

Business process modelling integrates and visualizes relevant information essential for managing day-to-day business operations. It plays a critical role in the design and execution of business transformations. Recognizing the role of process modelling, a large number of modelling languages, methods and techniques have been developed, each offering diverse advantages and having inherent limitations. Traditional and popular process modelling approaches focus on the exact specification of the control flow of business processes, whereas more recent approaches like Subject-oriented Business Process Management (S-BPM) are focused on the communication between process participants. This study aims to provide comparative insights about these two approaches through their experimental application. This study does so by comparing Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN); a control flow approach, with S-BPM; a communication approach, with a specific focus on their suitability for novice modellers.

This paper reports on an exploratory experiment that compares BPMN to S-BPM. Applying cognitive load theory, this study compares the experiences and outcomes of novice process modellers, assessing perceived ease of use, model quality (syntactic and semantic) and modelling efficiency (time to model) across the two approaches.

Study results show that S-BPM (a communication approach) led to significantly better user performances for process modelling than BPMN (a control flow approach). This study points to how a different modelling approach such as S-BPM could be either considered as an alternative or to complement the more popular control flow approach BPMN. This observation was especially relevant for modelling contexts where domain experts are novice process modellers.

This study provides the first empirical evidence that communication approaches like S-BPM could outperform modelling approaches which are control-flow based (i.e. BPMN), especially when being used by novice process modellers who hold the domain and process knowledge. This study uses this as a springboard to present important considerations for practice and guide future process modelling research.

Multidisciplinary business process management (BPM) research can reap significant impact. We can particularly benefit from incorporating accounting concepts to address some of the key BPM challenges, such as value-creation and return on investment of BPM activities. However, research which addresses a relationship between BPM and accounting is scarce. The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed synthesis of the current literature that has integrated accounting aspects with BPM. The authors profile and thematically describe existing research, and derive evidence-based directions to guide future research.

A multi-staged structured literature review approach to search for the two broad themes, accounting and BPM, supported by NVivo (to manage the papers and the coding and analysis processes) was designed and followed.

The paper confirms the dearth of work that ties the two disciplines, despite the synergetic multidisciplinary results that can be attained. Available literature is mostly from the management accounting perspective and relates to describing how performance management, in particular performance measurement, can be applicable to process improvement initiatives together with tools such as activity-based costing and the balanced scorecard. There is a lack of research that examines BPM in relation to any financial accounting perspectives (such as external reporting). Future research directions are proposed together with implications for practitioners with the findings of this structured literature review.

The paper provides a detailed synthesis of the existing literature on the nexus between accounting and BPM. It summarizes the implications for practitioners and provides directions for future research by identifying key gaps and opportunities with a sound contextual basis for extension and new work.

Effective literature reviews create strong foundations for future research and accumulate the otherwise scattered knowledge into a single place. This is the first structured literature review that provides a detailed synthesis of the research that ties together the accounting and BPM disciplines, providing a basis for future research directions together with implications for practitioners.

Understanding how organisations can institutionalise the outcomes of process improvement initiatives is limited. This paper explores how process changes resulting from improvement initiatives are adhered to, so that the changed processes become the new “norm” and people do not revert to old practices. This study proposes an institutionalisation process for process improvement initiatives.

Firstly, a literature review identified Tolbert and Zucker’s (1996) institutionalisation framework as a suitable conceptual framework on which to base the enquiry. The second phase (the focus of this paper) applied the findings from two case studies to adapt this framework (its stages and related factors) to fit process improvement contexts.

The paper presents an empirically and theoretically supported novel institutionalisation process for process improvement initiatives. The three stages of the institutionalisation process presented by Tolbert and Zucker (1996) have been respecified into four stages, explaining how process changes are institutionalised through “Planning”, “Implementation”, “Objectification” and “Sedimentation” (the original first stage, i.e. “Habitualisation” being divided into Planning and Implementation). Some newly identified Business Process Management (BPM) specific factors influencing the institutionalisation processes are also discussed and triangulated with the BPM literature.

The study contributes to the BPM literature by conceptualising and theorising the stages of institutionalisation of process improvement initiatives. In doing so, the study explicitly identifies and considers several key contextual factors that drive the stages of institutionalisation. Practitioners can use this to better manage process change and future researchers can use this framework to operationalise institutionalisation of process change.

This is the first research study that provides an empirically supported and clearly conceptualised understanding of the stages of institutionalising process improvement outcomes.

Process mining (PM) specialises in extracting insights from event logs to facilitate the improvement of an organisation's business processes. Industry trends show the proliferation and continued growth of PM techniques. To address the minimal attention given to developing empirically supported frameworks to assess the nature of impact in the PM domain, this study proposes a framework that identifies the key categories of PM impacts and their interrelationships.

The qualitatively derived framework is built, re-specified and validated from a diverse collection of 62 PM case reports. With multiple rounds of coding supported by coder corroborations, inductively extracted concepts relating to impact from a first set of 12 case reports were grouped into themes and sub-themes to derive an a-priori framework by adopting the balanced scorecard as a theoretical lens. Concepts from the remaining 50 case reports were deductively grouped to re-specify and validate the proposed PM impacts framework. Further analysis identified interrelationships between impacts, which extends our understanding of the identified PM impacts.

The proposed framework captures PM impacts in four main categories: (a) impact on the process, (b) customer impact, (c) financial impact, and (d) impact on innovation and learning. The authors extended this analysis to identify the interrelationships between these categories, which vividly demonstrates how impact on the process mediates the attainment of the other three impact types.

The need for a deeper understanding of PM impacts within the context of contemporary PM practice is addressed by this work. The PM impacts framework provides a classification of PM impacts into four categories with 19 subcategories. It also identifies direct, moderating and mediating relationships between categories and subcategories whilst highlighting the role of impact on the process as a precursor to the other types of PM impact.