Content uploaded by Jan vom Brocke
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jan vom Brocke on Dec 08, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved www.bptrends.com | 1
Class Notes: BPM Research and Education Jan vom Brocke
Considering Context in Business Process
Management:
The BPM Context Framework
Abstract: In this note, we want to make the point that BPM needs to consider the
context of a BPM initiative much more than is currently being done. The
management of processes in organizations has moved from managing production
processes to managing administrative processes, and today there is a need (and a
chance) to move beyond incremental improvement of processes towards their
complete innovation, particularly through digital technology. The methods used for
process management, however, have not followed these developments, and they are
essentially the same ones that were developed twenty years ago to streamline
operational processes. We find that this causes two important problems: (1) the
failure of BPM projects, as methods are used that do not fit the relevant context, and
(2) the organizational renunciation of BPM in order to avoid such failure. However,
we also find that BPM could successfully meet a variety of contemporary challenges.
But in order to leverage this potential, BPM needs to be more sensitive towards the
relevant context of its application. For this purpose, we recently developed a
contextual framework to help identify and discuss relevant contextual factors and to
develop skills and methods that are context-sensitive. It is referred to as the BPM
Context Framework. We will introduce the BPM Context Framework in this note and
show how it can be applied in BPM practice. The context factors of the BPM Context
Framework can be enhanced through additional factors, and we invite everybody to
engage in this discussion to help BPM become more context-sensitive and to increase
the efficiency and effectiveness of BPM practices.
Introduction
While many methods of BPM have been developed, their application as general BPM
methods creates difficulties because BPM methods are typically designed for a
specific purpose only. Usually, BPM strives towards ensuring compliance, process
standardization, and automation. The processes that are improved are mainly
structured or semi-structured processes that are supported through information
systems. However, today, the application fields of BPM have been broadened to also
include unstructured, knowledge-intensive processes (Davenport, 2015; Isik,
Mertens, van den Bergh, 2013; Eppler, Seifried, & Röpnack, 2008) with the aim to
not only standardize and automate processes but also to innovate them (vom Brocke
& Schmiedel, 2015).
December 01, 2015
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 2
The extension of BPM to further business contexts leads to a variety of new
requirements regarding BPM methods and practices, which the current BPM body of
knowledge does not sufficiently cover. Today, there is still a high failure rate of BPM
projects, which stimulates research on the success factors of BPM (Trkman, 2010;
Ravesteyn & Batenburg, 2010). One of the principles that we recently identified as
critical for successful BPM is the principle of context awareness (vom Brocke et al.,
2014). It emphasizes that successful BPM requires considering the given
organizational setting of a BPM project. To do so, practitioners must be able to
identify relevant contextual factors in order to understand the context in which a
BPM initiative takes place.
Unfortunately, there is no common understanding of the contextual factors of BPM,
which makes it difficult for practitioners to identify and consider relevant contextual
factors in their BPM initiatives. Therefore, we recently started working on developing
such a framework that can help practitioners to understand the context of their BPM
case and to deploy a relevant BPM solution for the given situation (vom Brocke, Zelt,
& Schmiedel, 2015).
In this note, we would like to share our view of BPM context, which consists of
factors that differ both between organizations (such as size, industry, and market)
and within organizations (such as process type). Because context awareness enables
BPM initiatives to be adapted to the situation and to truly create value, the
effectiveness and efficiency of BPM initiatives in organizations can be increased by
developing a contextual perspective in BPM.
Towards a Framework of Context Factors in BPM:
Introducting the BPM Context Framework
The context factors of BPM, which we introduce next, have been derived based on a
literature review and based on our experience in the field of BPM (see original paper
by vom Brocke, et al., 2015). The framework that includes these factors is displayed
in table 1.
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 3
Table 1: The BPM Context Framework: A Morphological Box to Identify the Context of
a BPM Project
Contextual factors Example characteristics
Goal-dimension:
Focus
Process-dimension:
Value contribution
Variability
Interdependence
Repetitiveness
Knowledge-intensity
Creativity
Organization-dimension:
Scope
Resources
Industry
Size
Culture
Environment-dimension:
Uncertainty
Competetiveness
Exploitation
(Improvement, Compliance) Exploration
(Innovation)
Core process Management process Support process
Non-repetitive
Low knowledge-intensity Medium knowledge-
intensity High knowledge-intensity
Low creativity Medium creativity High creativity
Low variability Medium variability High variability
Low
interdependence Medium
interdependence High
interdependence
Intra-organizational process Inter-organizational process
Product industry Service industry Product & Service industry
Start-up Small and medium
enterprise Large organization
Low organizational
resources Medium organizational
resources High organizational
resources
Culture highly supportive of
BPM Culture medium
supportive of BPM Culture non-supportive of
BPM
Low environmental
uncertainty Medium environmental
uncertainty High environmental
uncertainty
Low competitive
environment Medium competitive
environment High competitive
environment
Repetitive
Goal-dimension
The first contextual factor in the BPM Context Framework is the goal an organization
pursues when implementing process management practices. Goals that are
frequently distinguished in BPM are exploitation and exploration (Rosemann, 2014;
Benner & Tushman, 2003; vom Brocke, Seidel, & Tumbas, 2015). While exploitation-
oriented BPM attempts to increase process efficiency and effectiveness through
established tools and management approaches of BPM, exploration-oriented BPM
focuses on innovating processes, services, products, and business models through
creative techniques (Rosemann, 2014).
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 4
As goals influence how BPM should be implemented or which tools and techniques
should be applied, we consider them as an important context factor. Appropriate
approaches in exploitation-oriented BPM focus on operational excellence and
incremental improvements, such as quality management approaches, reference
modelling, process integration, and compliance (Rosemann, 2014). These traditional
approaches are less likely to increase organizational effectiveness in situations where
innovation is pursued (Benner & Tushman, 2003). In such exploration-oriented BPM
situations, creative management approaches are more appropriate, such as design
thinking, open innovation, or product innovation (Rosemann, 2014).
BPM has to be able to support both exploitation and exploration, which is why
colleagues have also coined the term “ambidextrous BPM” (Rosemann, 2015). Apart
from the goal-dimension, further factors need to be taken into account to optimally
tailor a context-sensitive BPM approach. Such an approach can be called “multi-
dextrous BPM,” which has been described as an approach that first specifically
understands the context of BPM and then tailors a portfolio of BPM practices that
best fit this context (vom Brocke, 2016).
Process-dimension
BPM today is no longer applied only to structured, transactional processes (Feitzinger
& Lee, 1997) but has increased its scope to also include optimizing and innovating
human-centric or knowledge work processes (Davenport, 2013, 2015; Eppler et al.,
2008), artistic processes (Hall & Johnson, 2009), and creative processes (Seidel et
al., 2015).
The so-called knowledge-intensive business processes contain the transfer of
knowledge between process participants and require human judgment (Isik et al.,
2013; Gronau, Müller, & Korf, 2005). Due to their unpredictable decisions or tasks,
their iterative and often collaborative nature, knowledge-intensive business
processes can only partially be mapped by conventional process models (Gronau et
al., 2005), and traditional methods for process measurement and improvement seem
to be inappropriate (Davenport, 2013, 2015; Gronau et al., 2005; Dalmaris, Tsui,
Hall, & Smith, 2007).
Similarly, creative processes such as software development or the creation of
marketing campaigns demand more flexibility, autonomy, personal judgment, and
low levels of structure (Hall & Johnston, 2009; Seidel et al., 2015). Consequently,
the management of processes and their underlying supporting information
technology (e.g., ERP system) needs to be adapted to fit the specific process
characteristics (Wang, Lin, Jiang, & Klein, 2007).
Therefore, BPM approaches have to be tailored to the type of process under
investigation. Besides knowledge-intensity or creativity-intensity, there are many
other process characteristics that have an influence on the effectiveness of process
management practices, such as the degree of value contribution (Leymann & Roller,
2000; Ould, 1995; Gibb, Buchanan, & Shah, 2006), the repetitiveness of a process
(Leymann & Roller, 2000; Tenhiälä, 2011), the interdependence of process
participants (Davenport, 2015; Tenhiälä, 2011), and the process variability (Gebauer
& Lee, 2008; Daft & Lengel, 1986).
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 5
Organization-dimension
Another important context factor for BPM is the set of characteristics of the
organization in which BPM is applied (Morton & Hu, 2008; Roeser & Kern, 2015). Not
all BPM initiatives refer to intra-organizational processes but also to processes
crossing organizational boundaries. In some situations, it is important to also control
customer processes (Trkman, Mertens, Viaene, & Gemmel, 2015) or even whole
supply chains (Palma-Mendoza & Neailey, 2015; Palma-Mendoza, Neailey, & Roy,
2014). The increased complexity in inter-organizational processes needs to be
addressed through methodologies that focus on the sharing of information, the
coordination of physical goods flows, and the integration of business processes
(Palma-Mendoza & Neailey, 2015; Palma-Mendoza et al., 2014; Trkman et al.,
2015).
In addition, organizational size plays an important role for BPM. Bigger organizations
should be designed in a way that they include vertical and horizontal differentiation
(Donaldson, 2001). Large organizations should focus more on BPM practices for
formalized processes that cross vertical and horizontal functions than smaller firms.
Thus, the organizational size also influences business processes in terms of their
design and degree of formalization.
BPM has also been applied in various industries (Reijers, 2003; Benner & Tushman,
2003; Jayaram et al., 2010), but the same BPM practices might not be equally
effective in all industries (Skrinjar & Trkman, 2013; Roeser & Kern, 2015). This
industry differentiation can also be observed in BPM practice such as IBM® offering
Business Process Manager Industry Packs, or APQC offering industry specific
business benchmarking for process performance indicators, best practices, and
knowledge management research.
Also, cultural values of organizations determine the success of BPM approaches
(Schmiedel, vom Brocke, & Recker, 2013, 2014). When cultural values such as
customer orientation, excellence, teamwork, and responsibility are highly present in
organizations, BPM initiatives are likely to succeed (Schmiedel et al., 2013, 2014). If
they are hardly present, however, organizations should first attempt to increase their
presence before planning any BPM initiative. Similarly, in a culture that is open for
change, agile methodologies are appropriate means, while classical planning
approaches seem to be more appropriate for a culture that values continuity
(Thiemich & Puhlmann, 2013).
A last organizational factor, which we identified as an important context factor for
BPM, refers to organizational resources. In order to implement BPM, an organization
needs to free the necessary resources such as personnel and investments in
information technology. As an example, Niehaves (2010) found that resource
scarcity restricts the involvement of customers and, thus, BPM-related collaboration
and innovation.
Environment-dimension
Environmental context factors include characteristics of the market and higher socio-
cultural or political factors. Rapidly changing environments increase the need of an
organization to purposefully create, extend, or modify its resource base (Helfat et al.,
2009). In turbulent environments, traditional process management approaches are
not appropriate (Benner & Tushman, 2003; Borch & Batalden, 2015). Instead, it is
important to build additional capacities and competencies such as broader
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 6
cooperation and stakeholder management, to focus on improving change and risk
management, to strengthen analytical or research capabilities, and to foster open
innovation (Borch & Batalden, 2015). In BPM practice, more flexible, goal-oriented
approaches should be applied, and processes should be organized around “what is to
be achieved” rather than “what is to be done” (TIBCO, 2015; MACROnetics, 2015).
Organizations must also align their strategy and structure with the competitive
environment (Rogers, Miller, & Judge, 1999). In time-sensitive and competitive
industries, the implementation of information technology to support organizational
processes is particularly helpful to reduce cycle time, improve inventory
management, and increase customer satisfaction (Kraemer et al., 2000). Especially
for core processes, environmental factors should be considered as they often offer
differentiation opportunities in the market (Gibb et al., 2006).
Using the BPM Context Framework in Practice: Two Steps
Using the BPM Context Framework follows two steps: first, the context of a BPM
project is described; then, the most suitable BPM approach is derived. We illustrate
both steps next. For more details see vom Brocke et al. (2015).
Step 1: Describing the context of a BPM project
Before adapting BPM to the context in which an initiative takes place, it is crucial to
understand and describe the BPM context. In this step, the BPM Context Framework
can be used to structure the discussions between BPM project members, to identify
relevant context factors, and to develop a comprehensive perspective of the BPM
context.
As an example, we can think of a large, global corporation that provides technology
and services for the engineering industry. The company may aim at standardizing
their customer support process and related data structures supported by a global
ERP solution. By using the BPM Context Framework, project members can classify
the goal of the BPM initiative (exploitation) and specify the nature of the process that
the project focuses on (e.g., repetitive, support process, with low knowledge-
intensity, low creativity, low interdependence, and low variability). In addition, the
BPM Context Framework also helps project members to think about organizational
and environmental factors relevant to the BPM project. In this case, the organization
looks at an intra-organizational process in the product and service industry.
Additionally, the availability of resources for investment to globally standardize the
process is quite high. When discussing the culture, the project team found that the
organizational culture is non-supportive of BPM and requires special attention. In this
example, the environment is classified as medium competitive with a medium level
of uncertainty. The resulting description of the BPM context is displayed in table 2.
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 7
Table 2: Application of the BPM Context Framework: Describing the Context of a BPM Project
Contextual factors Example characteristics
Goal-dimension:
Focus
Process-dimension:
Value contribution
Variability
Interdependence
Repetitiveness
Knowledge-intensity
Creativity
Organization-dimension:
Scope
Resources
Industry
Size
Culture
Environment-dimension:
Uncertainty
Competetiveness
Exploitation
(Improvement, Compliance) Exploration
(Innovation)
Core process Management process Support process
Non-repetitive
Low knowledge-intensity Medium knowledge-
intensity High knowledge-intensity
Low creativity Medium creativity High creativity
Low variability Medium variability High variability
Low
interdependence Medium
interdependence High
interdependence
Intra-organizational process Inter-organizational process
Product industry Service industry Product & Service industry
Start-up Small and medium
enterprise Large organization
Low organizational
resources Medium organizational
resources High organizational
resources
Culture highly supportive of
BPM Culture medium
supportive of BPM Culture non-supportive of
BPM
Low environmental
uncertainty Medium environmental
uncertainty High environmental
uncertainty
Low competitive
environment Medium competitive
environment High competitive
environment
Repetitive
Results of the project team discussion
Step 2: Deriving a suitable BPM approach
Goal-dimension: After the project team identifies and understands the context of
the BPM project, it needs to derive an appropriate BPM approach. As the goal of the
BPM initiative in our example focuses primarily on exploitation, traditional BPM
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 8
methods such as process analysis, re-design, and the development of a standardized
data structure seem appropriate. If the goal were innovation and the implementation
of a new technology, BPM methods for the process re-design phase such as design
thinking would have been more appropriate than extensively measuring and
analyzing the as-is process performance.
Process-dimension: From the process characteristics, we can derive further
management recommendations. The BPM project in our example focuses on a
structured, repetitive support process. This type of process does not need to be
managed with high levels of flexibility. Instead, efficiency and standardization of the
process execution are more important. Therefore, a global process with low levels of
local deviation and with KPI’s that focus on efficiency measurements would suit the
given context well. If the process were a knowledge-intensive core process (e.g.
product development), the participation of many process stakeholders in the process
design would have been particularly crucial (Davenport, 2015). Additionally, in such
a case, we would have to ensure that process participants would have enough
flexibility in executing the process, and we would have to enhance the information
processing capabilities of process participants, e.g. through knowledge management
systems. In the given case, however, process execution should be standardized and
driven by KPIs focusing on customer satisfaction.
Organization-dimension: In the given example, the organization faces cultural
challenges at the start of their BPM initiative, which is why the project team ought to
focus on the development of the right corporate culture early in the project. Because
of the large size of the organization, there is a need to discuss and define the
segregation of duties and to create process documentations that can be sent out to
all relevant stakeholders. While documenting the process is also important for
smaller organizations, the amount of formalization and detail required in
documentation can be smaller in these cases because small organizations have less
organizational complexity and less resources.
Environment-dimension: In the exemplary BPM project, it is not critical to design
processes that are easily adaptable because the environment is characterized by only
medium uncertainty. In other cases, however, this might be more important and
could be reached through the definition of flexible roles and authorization concepts.
Higher flexibility would also be required if the environment were highly competitive.
Then, it would be especially important to involve customers as much as possible into
the process design to ensure process excellence and a process that is distinct from
competitors.
The example illustrates how critical the consideration of context factors is in deriving
an appropriate BPM approach. It also shows that prior contributions to the BPM body
of knowledge implicitly focused on a specific context that was predominant when
these methods were developed. We tend to struggle with the less conventional
contexts of BPM because in these contexts there is a lack of methods that can be
applied. In this regard, the BPM Context Framework can inform future research to
develop new methods (and extend existing ones) suitable for new contexts.
Potentially, more effective methods could be designed, for example, for exploration,
management processes, non-repetitive processes, knowledge intensive processes,
and creative processes of high variability and interdependence.
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 9
Summing Up – Lessons Learned
For BPM to be effective, context factors need be taken into consideration. A first step
in every BPM initiative should therefore be the identification of the context in which
BPM is to be applied. This analysis can be conducted with the help of the BPM
Context Framework that we have presented in this note. The framework introduces
contextual factors related to the goal of BPM, the characteristics of the process, the
organization, and the environment and can help to structure discussions and the
identification of critical contextual factors. Once the situation is understood, context-
sensitive BPM practices should be selected and applied. While we present some
examples for context-sensitive BPM practices, these examples should be enhanced
through the development of more context-sensitive BPM practices.
In general, ignoring contextual factors is considered as one of the major reasons why
many BPM initiatives today fail and why BPM is increasingly perceived as
inappropriate in a number of contemporary business challenges. By further
developing the BPM body of knowledge to account for a broader and more diverse
set of application areas, we are confident that BPM can retain its position as a highly
relevant field to help organizations leverage business value through information
technology. This core contribution of BPM is more relevant than ever in today’s era of
digital innovation and transformation. We hope that context-aware BPM can help
extend existing BPM knowledge and contribute to contemporary, pressing challenges
in business and society.
References
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management:
The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238-256.
Borch, O.J., & Batalden, B.-M. (2015). Business-process management in high-turbulence
environments: the case of the offshore service vessel industry, Maritime Policy and
Management, 42(5), 481-498.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness
and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.
Dalmaris, P., Tsui, E., Hall, B., & Smith, B. (2007). A framework for the improvement of
knowledge-intensive business processes. Business Process Management Journal, 13(2), 279-
305.
Davenport, T. H. (2013). Thinking for a living: how to get better performances and results
from knowledge workers. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Davenport, T. H. (2015). Process Management for Knowledge Work. In J. vom Brocke & M.
Rosemann (Eds), Handbook on Business Process Management 1: Introduction, Methods and
Information Systems (pp. 17-35). Berlin: Springer.
Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Eppler, M. J., Seifried, P., & Röpnack, A. (2008). Improving Knowledge Intensive Processes
through an Enterprise Knowledge Medium. In M. Meckel & B. Schmid (Eds),
Kommunikationsmanagement im Wandel (pp. 371-389). Gabler.
Feitzinger, E., & Lee, H. L. (1997). Mass Customization at Hewlett-Packard: The Power of
Postponement. Harvard Business Review, 75, 116-121.
Gebauer, J., & Lee, F. (2008). Enterprise system flexibility and implementation strategies:
aligning theory with evidence from a case study. Information Systems Management, 25(1),
71-82.
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 10
Gibb, F., Buchanan, S., & Shah, S. (2006). An integrated approach to process and service
management. International Journal of Information Management, 26(1), 44-58.
Gronau, N., Müller, C., & Korf, R. (2005). KMDL-Capturing, Analysing and Improving
Knowledge-Intensive Business Processes. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 11(4), 452-
472.
Hall, J. M., & Johnson, M. E. (2009). When should a process be art, not science? Harvard
Business Review, 87, 58-65.
Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J., & Winter, S.
G. (2009). Dynamic capabilities. Understanding strategic change in organizations. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Isik, Ö., Mertens, W., & Van den Bergh, J. (2013). Practices of knowledge intensive process
management: quantitative insights. Business Process Management Journal, 19(3), 515-534.
Jayaram, J., Ahire, S. L., & Dreyfus, P. (2010). Contingency relationships of firm size, TQM
duration, unionization, and industry context on TQM implementation - A focus on total effects.
Journal of Operations Management, 28(4), 345-356.
Kraemer, K. L., Dedrick, J., & Yamashiro, S. (2000). Refining and extending the business
model with information technology: Dell Computer Corporation. The Information Society,
16(1), 5-21.
Leymann, F., & Roller, D. (2000). Production workflow: concepts and techniques. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Macronetics (2015). Goal-Driven BPM: Handling Real-Life Business Processes. Retrieved on
June 22th from http://www.macronetics.com/docs/Goal-Driven%20BPM.pdf
Morton, N. A., & Hu, Q. (2008). Implications of the fit between organizational structure and
ERP: A structural contingency theory perspective. International Journal of Information
Management, 28(5), 391-402.
Niehaves, B. (2010). Open process innovation: The impact of personnel resource scarcity on
the involvement of customers and consultants in public sector BPM. Business Process
Management Journal, 16(3), 377-393.
Ould, M. A. (1995). Business Processes: Modelling and analysis for re-engineering and
improvement. Chichester: Wiley.
Palma-Mendoza, J. A., & Neailey, K. (2015). A business process re-design methodology to
support supply chain integration: Application in an Airline MRO supply chain. International
Journal of Information Management, 35(5), 620-631.
Palma-Mendoza, J. A., Neailey, K., & Roy, R. (2014). Business process re-design methodology
to support supply chain integration. International Journal of Information Management, 34(2),
167-176.Plattfaut, R., Niehaves, B., Pöppelbuß, J., & Becker, J. (2011). Development of BPM
capabilities - is maturity the right path? Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on
Information Systems, Helsinki, June 9-11.
Ravesteyn, P., & Batenburg, R. (2010). Surveying the critical success factors of BPM-systems
implementation. Business Process Management Journal, 16(3), 492-507.
Reijers, H. A. (2003). Design and control of workflow processes: business process
management for the service industry. Heidelberg: Springer.
Roeser, T., & Kern, E. M. (2015). Surveys in business process management–a literature
review. Business Process Management Journal, 21(3), 692-718.
Rogers, P. R., Miller, A., & Judge, W. Q. (1999). Using information‐processing theory to
understand planning/performance relationships in the context of strategy. Strategic
Management Journal, 20(6), 567-577.
Rosemann, M. (2014). Proposals for future BPM research directions. Proceedings of the 2nd
Asia Pacific Business Process Management Conference, 1-15.
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 11
Rosemann, M. (2015), Preface. In J. vom Brocke & T. Schmiedel (Eds.), BPM-Driving
Innovation in a Digital World. Springer International Publishing.
Schmiedel, T., vom Brocke, J., & Recker, J. (2013). Which cultural values matter to business
process management? Results from a global Delphi study. Business Process Management
Journal, 19(2), 292-317.
Schmiedel, T., Vom Brocke, J., & Recker, J. (2014). Development and validation of an
instrument to measure organizational cultures’ support of Business Process Management.
Information & Management, 51(1), 43-56.
Seidel, S., Shortland, K., Court, D., & Elzinga, D. (2015). Managing Creativity-intensive
Processes: Learning from Film and Visual Effects Production. In J. vom Brocke & M. Rosemann
(Eds), Handbook on Business Process Management 2: Strategic Alignment, Governance,
People and Culture (pp. 715-740). Berlin: Springer.
Škrinjar, R. and Trkman, P. (2013). Increasing process orientation with business process
management: critical practices. International Journal of Information Management, 33(1), 48-
60.
Tenhiälä, A. (2011). Contingency theory of capacity planning: The link between process types
and planning methods. Journal of Operations Management, 29(1), 65-77.
Thiemich, C., & Puhlmann, F. (2013). An Agile BPM Project Methodology. In F. Daniel, J.
Wang, & B. Weber (Eds.), Business Process Management (pp. 291–306). Heidelberg: Springer.
TIBCO (2015). Goal driven Business process management - Creating Agile Business Processes
for an Unpredictable Environment. Retrieved on June 22th from
http://www.bpminstitute.org/resources/white-papers/goal-oriented-bpm.
Trkman, P. (2010). The critical success factors of business process management. International
Journal of Information Management, 30(2), 125-134.
Trkman, P., Mertens, W., Viaene, S., & Gemmel, P. (2015). From business process
management to customer process management Business Process Management Journal, 21(2),
250-262.
vom Brocke, J., & Schmiedel, T. (2015). BPM-Driving Innovation in a Digital World. Springer
International Publishing.
vom Brocke, J., Schmiedel, T., Recker, J., Trkman, P., Mertens, W., & Viaene, S. (2014). Ten
Principles of Good Business Process Management. Business Process Management Journal,
20(4), 530-548.
vom Brocke, J., Seidel, S., & Tumbas, S. (2015). The BPM Curriculum Revisited. BPTrends
(April 2015).
vom Brocke, J., Zelt, S., & Schmiedel, S. (2015) On the Role of Context in Business Process
Management. International Journal of Information Management, in press.
vom Brocke, J. (2016), Question 2: Who Cares? Professor Jan vom Brocke. In: Harmon, P.
Tregear, R. (Eds.) Questioning BPM? 110 Answers from 33 Authors to 15 Questions about
Business Process Management, p. 96-100.
Wang, E. T., Lin, C. C. L., Jiang, J. J., & Klein, G. (2007). Improving enterprise resource
planning (ERP) fit to organizational process through knowledge transfer. International Journal
of Information Management, 27(3), 200-212.
Authors
Jan vom Brocke
Jan vom Brocke is head of the BPM group in Liechtenstein. He is Professor of
Information Systems, the Hilti Chair of Business Process Management, and Director
of the Institute of Information Systems. He is Founder and Co-Director of the
International Master Program in IT and Business Process Management and Director
of the PhD Program in Information and Process Management at the University of
BPTrends – Nov. 2013 Enterprise Content in BPM
Copyright © 2013 Jan vom Brocke. All Rights Reserved. www.bptrends.com | 12
Liechtenstein (see: www.bpm-eduction.org). Since 2012 he has been appointed Vice-
President of the University of Liechtenstein responsible for research and innovation.
Jan has over 15 years of experience in IT and BPM projects and he has published
more than 200 papers in reknowned outlets, including MIS Quarterly (MISQ), the
Journal of Management Information Systems (JMIS) and the Business Process
Management Journal (BPMJ). He has authored and edited 20 books, including
Business Process Management – Driving Innovation in a Digital World and Green BPM
– Towards the Sustainable Enterprise, and the International Handbook on Business
Process Management. Jan is an invited speaker and trusted advisor on BPM serving
many organizations around the world.
Theresa Schmiedel
Theresa Schmiedel is an Assistant Professor at the Hilti Chair of Business Process
Management at the University of Liechtenstein. She holds a PhD in business
economics from the University of Liechtenstein and a Diploma in economics from the
University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany, which she conducted partially at York
University, Toronto, Canada. She worked as a Research Assistant at the Department
for Sociology and Empirical Social Research, University of Hohenheim, and the
Center for Cultural and General Studies, University of Karlsruhe, Germany. Her
research focuses on social aspects in information systems research, particularly on
the interconnection of culture and business process management (www.bpm-
culture.org). Her work has been published in journals, including Information &
Management, Enterprise Information Systems, and Business Process Management
Journal, as well as in academic books and conference proceedings.
Sarah Zelt
Sarah Zelt is PhD student at the University of Liechtenstein. She studied Psychology
and Economics at the University of Mannheim, Germany, as well as at the San Diego
State University, CA, USA. Her research focuses on context-sensitive Business
Process Management which requires the consideration of contextual factors in the
analysis and management of business processes. In particular, she is investigating
the role that process characteristics play for business process management.
October
25,
2012
