Culture elements in an iceberg model: Invisible values, visible actions and structures 

Context in source publication

Context 1

... BPM initiatives often fail for cultural reasons. Tremendous investments in business process analysis, modeling, and process-supporting IT still represent the core expenditures of many large scale BPM programs. This focus on methodological and technological aspects of BPM seems to be just as natural in BPM practice as the recognition that culture is often the reason for project failure (Attaran, 2004; Rosemann & vom Brocke, 2010). One of the major difficulties with the culture concept is the fact that it is hard to grasp. This blurriness of the concept may be the main cause for a lack of guidelines on how to manage the culture factor and which investments to make regarding the development of an organizational culture in a BPM context. In our research, we have aimed at going beyond the statement that culture is an important factor in BPM. We were motivated to study and analyze culture in depth to create a concise understanding and specific normative advice for organizations on how to deal with culture in BPM projects. To that end, we conducted multiple studies with national and international companies, involving experts from academia as well as end-user organizations. In this chapter, we revisit the findings of three specific studies that help gaining an overview on the topic of culture and the findings from our research. Particularly, we first report on a framework that explains the role of culture in BPM and that is grounded in a comprehensive literature review (vom Brocke & Sinnl, 2011). We then present which cultural values determine the notion of BPM culture based on a global Delphi study with renowned thought leaders and experts in BPM (Schmiedel, vom Brocke, & Recker, 2013). Finally, we introduce an instrument which we developed recently on the basis of several studies with BPM experts worldwide and which serves to measure the supportiveness of organizational cultures for BPM (Schmiedel, vom Brocke, & Recker, 2012). This chapter is structured as follows. First, we introduce the understanding of the two main concepts which are at the basis of our research, i.e., BPM and culture. Second, we present the findings of three core studies of our research, focus- ing on the results of the respective studies rather than a detailed presentation of the methodological procedure. Third, we discuss the implications of these findings for research and practice. Finally, we conclude the paper with an outlook on the research topic. BPM refers to a management approach that focuses on a horizontal understanding of organizations in terms of business processes rather than a vertical perception in terms of functions. Two major objectives of organizational BPM approaches are the efficiency and effectiveness of business processes (DeToro & McCabe, 1997; Hammer, 2010; Smith & Fingar, 2004). This means that organizations should both execute business processes right and execute the right business processes . Smith and Fingar (2004) argue that only mature business processes and mature BPM manifest themselves in highly efficient and effective business processes (see Figure 1). Originally, BPM research may have focused primarily on the efficiency objec- tive as a strong emphasis on the role of IT can be recognized in early research. Since BPM’s emergence as a new management approach, technical aspects, such as the technological support of business processes and their design, were central to BPM (Reijers, 2003; van der Aalst & Kumar, 2003). The focus on workflow modeling and process automation may have been substantiated through numerous IT solutions that emerged along with the concept of BPM (Jeston & Nelis, 2008). While it seems evident that IT is an essential driver of organizational change to- wards process-orientation (Davenport, 1993), a pure focus on IT systems does not account for the comprehensive meaning of BPM. We base our research on a holistic understanding of BPM as a management approach. That means we consider a comprehensive set of factors relevant to the success of BPM, e.g., strategic alignment, governance, people, and culture beyond methods and IT (Rosemann & vom Brocke, 2010). While a holistic understanding more and more represents a new consensus among academics and practitioners in the field, many research projects and organizational initiatives still reflect a one- sided understanding of BPM through a sole focus on methodological and technological aspects of the management approach. Before going into details on how we approach culture as a factor in BPM, we introduce our understanding of the concept in the following. Culture refers to the shared values of a group that become visible in actions and structures (Schein, 2004; vom Brocke & Sinnl, 2011). The defining elements of culture are commonly illustrated in an iceberg model (Selfridge & Sokolik, 1975). The point of this analogy is that the main part of culture, much like an iceberg, comprises largely invisible elements that lie underneath the surface (see Figure 2). While these elements are referred to in different ways, e.g. Schein (2004) refers to them as underlying assumptions, culture researchers commonly use the term values to describe the core part of culture (Hofstede, 2005; Parsons & Shils, 1951; Straub, Loch, Evaristo, Karahanna, & Srite, 2002), i.e. the subconsciously shared concepts of the desirable. These values manifest themselves in actions and structures above the surface (Giddens, 1984), i.e., observable artifacts such as behavioral (e.g. manners, rituals) and structural (e.g. physical environment, technology) patterns that are the visible representations of the underlying cultural values (Schein, 2004). It is important to notice that publicly expressed (espoused) values in the mission statement of organizations need to be distinguished from our understanding of invisible cultural values (Schein, 2004). While publicly articulated values represent observable structures of organizations, they are not necessarily in line with subconscious values that are actually lived in an organization. It is important to note that the concept of culture always refers to a specific group (Leidner & Kayworth, 2006). Depending on the context, this group can be a nation, an organization, a work group, a profession, a family or even a loosely coupled group of individuals, such as a social soccer team. Group cultures can be inhomogeneous in the sense that subgroups within a certain group can exist, which form overlapping cultural identities (Hofstede, 2005; Huntington, 1997). For this reason, culture is a very complex concept that often consists of various intertwined group cultures. To gain a better understanding of culture’s role in BPM, we conducted a comprehensive literature review (vom Brocke & Sinnl, 2011). Acknowledging the fact that an all-encompassing review of previous research cannot possibly be undertak- en, it is important to clearly define the scope of a review (vom Brocke, Simons, Niehaves, Riemer, Plattfaut, & Cleven, 2009). In this regard, the literature review we conducted followed established and comprehensive guidelines on this method (Creswell, 2009; vom Brocke et al., 2009; Webster & Watson, 2002). Accordingly, we set a clear focus on research that explicitly considers culture in the context of BPM. Based on a structured analysis of existing literature on the topic, we developed a framework which organizes the various notions of culture that play a role in BPM practice. This framework explains the interdependence between the two concepts BPM and culture that can be identified in contemporary literature in the field (vom Brocke & Sinnl, 2011). Figure 3 depicts this framework which we call BPM-Culture-Model. The BPM-Culture-Model consists of three main concepts. The understanding of these concepts which we derived from the literature review can be described as follows: BPM Culture : BPM culture refers to a culture that is supportive of achieving BPM objectives, i.e. efficient and effective business processes. It is understood as a set of specific values which are inherent in the management approach BPM and which become visible in specific actions and structures that represent these values in the organization. It can also be considered a to-be culture when a BPM approach is followed. This means that the culture of the organization should embrace BPM-facilitating values. However, this does not mean that the corporate culture should only incorporate those values. Rather it should include those values into the existing culture. • Cultural Context : Cultural context refers to the given cultural environment that a BPM initiative faces in an organization. It comprises several group cultures, such as national, organizational, or work group cultures. These group cultures are complexly intertwined, e.g. project teams from internationally work- ing organizations often include employees from different nations and also from various departments. The cultural identities of each employee shape the prevailing cultural context in an organization and determine the as-is cultural setting at the start of a BPM initiative. • Cultural Fit : Cultural fit refers to the basic congruence between BPM culture and cultural context. It represents the prerequisite for a successful BPM approach in organizations. In other words, the incorporation of BPM-supportive values, actions and structures in the cultural context of an organization is a necessary, yet not sufficient means to achieve efficient and effective business processes. The BPM-Culture-Model explains the interrelation between the concepts BPM and culture. It can be used to analyze BPM approaches in specific companies (vom Brocke, Petry, Sinnl, Kristensen, & Sonnenberg, 2010; vom Brocke & Sinnl, 2010). In this regard, the model helps explaining, for example, why BPM works better in one company than in another. Beyond, the model can also be used to for prediction purposes. That means, the analysis of a specific ...