BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT

Understanding a Case Based Scenario to Enable Situational Method Engineering for Business Practices Management

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I3

Introduction3

Research Questions5

Purpose7

Design/methodology/approach7

Findings7

Research limitations/implications8

Practical implications8

Originality/value8

CHAPTER II9

Literature Review9

The industrial cases9

Project A9

Project B10

The Project Alignment Model12

Environment12

Business environment12

Company strategy13

Company-wide alignment13

Culture of change13

Leadership14

Create shared vision and purpose14

Establish project identity16

Share responsibility16

Demonstrate commitment17

Adopt engaging style18

Management19

Establish alignment.19

Align project goals with strategy19

Understand stakeholder expectations20

Create a business model of the changes20

CHAPTER III22

Situational method engineering22

Realization approaches of business process management25

Derivation and characterization of project types30

CHAPTER IV34

Discussion of research results34

CHAPTER V37

Conclusion and outlook37

List of Tables41

References48

CHAPTER I

Introduction

“The article of the functional use of [b]usiness [p]rocess [m]anagement in distinct associations is one of diversity and of productive outcomes” (Armistead et al., 1999). This quotation best features the detail there is no “one-size-fits-all” set about to enterprise method administration (BPM). Many authors contend that the advancement in the direction of organizational excellence through process-oriented administration takes location in distinct phases, that distinct advances or facets thereof are predominant at distinct grades of organizational development, and that nearly each and every association has evolved its own set about to BPM (Ho and Fung, 1994; Armistead et al., 1999; Balzarova et al., 2004).

The finding that generic answers to functional difficulties (such as procedures, forms, or software) habitually require to be acclimatized in alignment to fit the characteristics of the difficulty position at hand is not new. In detail, this finding has been contended for numerous years, particularly in the area of situational procedure technology (SME, Kumar and Welke, 1992; van Slooten and Brinkkemper, 1993; Harmsen et al., 1994). Similar reasoning was made with esteem to the submission of quotation forms (Fettke and Loos, 2003; vom Brocke, 2007) and the assortment and customization of Enterprise asset designing modules/systems (Kumar et al., 2003; McGaughey and Gunasekaran, 2007; Parthasarathy and Anbazhagan, 2007; Muscatello and Chen, 2008). Irrespective of the kind of answer, there is one widespread and absolutely crucial precondition for the thriving adaptation of the generic answer to a exact problem: the identification of attributes/qualities that may be utilised to distinuish the details of the difficulty position at hand. In this paper, we will aim on the identification of task kinds (PTs) that may - simultaneously with a complementary taxonomy of context kinds (CTs) - be utilised to differentiate multiple scenarios of BPM development. These outcome assist as a base for the technology of situational procedures to support the implementation and advancement of BPM.

Based on the BPM body of publications (Davenport, 1993; Hammer and Champy, 1993; Harrington, 1995; Armistead and Machin, 1997; Zairi, 1997; Kueng and Krahn, 1999; Smith and Fingar, 2003; Melenovsky et al., 2005; Hill et al., 2006; Wang and Wang, 2006), four generic stages of BPM can be differentiated (Bucher and Winter, 2006):

Process identification, conceive, and modeling. This stage encompasses the identification and methodical investigation of all undertakings and jobs inside an organization. On this cornerstone, methods (in periods of organised sequences of activities) have to be characterised, conceived, and modeled. If likely, all method stakeholders should take part in this ...