Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factors and measures of business process modelling: model building through a multiple case study

  • Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Information Systems

Abstract

Business process modelling has gained widespread acceptance as a valuable design and management technique for a variety of purposes. While there has been much research on process modelling techniques and corresponding tools, there has been little empirical research into the success factors of effective process modelling, and the post hoc evaluation of process modelling success. This paper reports on the first attempt to identify process modelling success factors and measures, as empirically evidenced in case studies of nine process modelling projects in three leading Australian organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amoroso DL (1998) Developing a model to understand Reengineering project success. IEEE reference number 1060-3425/98.

  • Bailey JE and Pearson SW (1983) Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science 29(5), 530–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bancroft NH (1998) Implementing SAP R/3: How to Introduce Large Systems into Large Organizations, 2nd edn. Manning, Greenwich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barki H and Hartwick J (1989) Rethinking the concept of user involvement. MIS Quarterly 13(1), 52–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomew D (1999) Process is back. Industry week. Cleveland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batini C, Furlani L and Nardelli E (1985) What is a good diagram? A pragmatic approach. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Entity-Relationship Approach: The Use of ER Concept in Knowledge Representation (CHEN PP-S, Ed), pp 312–319, Elsevier, North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker J, Kugeler M and Rosemann M (2005) Process Management, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker J, Rosemann M and Schütte R (1997) Business to business process integration: functions and methods. In Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS'97) (GALLIERS R et al, Eds), Vol. 2, pp 816–827, June 19–21 Cork, Ireland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker J, Rosemann M and Von Uthmann C (2000) Guidelines of business process modelling. In Business Process Management: Models Techniques and Empirical Studies (VAN DERAALST W, SEDEL J and OBERWEIS A, Eds), pp 30–49, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat I, Goldstein DK and Mead M (1987) The case research strategy in studies of Information Systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly 11(3), 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingi P, Sharma MK and Godla JK (1999) Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation. Journal of Information Systems Management 7–14.

  • Brash D (1999) The contributions of participants to Enterprise Modeling. In Proceedings of the Tenth Australasian Conference of Information Systems (ACIS '99) (HOPE B and YOONG P, Eds), 1–3 December 1999, Wellington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard DL (1990) Examination of factors contributing to the success of the implementation of Computer-Aided-Software-Engineering Technology. IEEE reference number 0073-1129/90/0000/0418.

  • Carr DK and Johannson HJ (1995) Best Practices in Re-engineering – What Works and What Doesn't in the Re-engineering Process. McGrow Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chuang M and Shaw WH (2000) Distinguishing the critical success factors between E- commerce, Enterprise Resource Planning, and Supply Chain Management. IEEE, Reference number 0-7803-6442-2/00.

  • Clemons EK, Thatcher ME and Row MC (1995) Identifying sources of reengineering failures: a study of behavioural factors contributing to reengineering risks. Journal of Management Information Systems 12(2), 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis B, Keller MI and Over J (1992) Process modelling. Communications of ACM 35(9), 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport T (1993) Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly.

  • De Lone WH and Mclean ER (1992) Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Journal of Information Systems Research 3(1), 60–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans R (1994) The human side of Business Process Re-engineering. Management Development Review l7(6).

  • Fettke P and Loos P (2003) Classification of reference models – a methodology and its application. In Information Systems and e-Business Management (ISSN 1617–9846), Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 35–53.

  • Fisher J (2000) User satisfaction and system success: considering the development team. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Australasian Conference of Information Systems (ACIS '00). (GABLE G and VITALE M, Eds), 6–8 December, Brisbane.

  • Forsberg T, Rönne G and Vikström J (2000) Process Modelling in ERP projects – a discussion of potential benefits, available at: http://www.processworld.com/content/22.doc, last accessed date 25th, March 2001.

  • Gable GG (1996) A multidimensional model of client success when engaging external consultants. Management Science 42(8), 1175–1198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrity EJ and Sanders GL (1998) Dimensions of IS Success in Information Systems Success Measurement. Series in Information Technology Management, (GARRITY EJ and SANDERS GL, Eds), pp 13–45, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gatian AW (1994) Is user satisfaction a valid measure of system effectiveness. Information and Management 26(3), 119–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill PJ (1999) Application development: business snapshot – business modelling tools help companies align their business and technology goals. Information week, April 1999.

  • Ginzberg MJ (1981) Early diagnosis of misimplementation failure: promising results and unanswered questions. Management Science 27(4), 459–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue DL (1992) User evaluations of MIS success: what are we really measuring? In Proceedings of the 25th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, pp 303–314, IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 4–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green P and Rosemann M (2000) Ontological analysis of integrated process modeling: some initial insights. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Australasian Conference on Information Systems (GABLE G and VITALE M, Eds.), 6–8 December, Brisbane.

  • Grover V, Jeong SR, Kettinger WJ and Teng JTC (1995) The implementation of Business process reengineering. Journal of Management Information Systems 12(1), 109–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulla AJ and Brasethvik T (2000) On the challenges of business modelling in large-scale reengineering projects. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Requirements Engineering, (CHENG BHC and WEISS D, Eds), pp 17–26, 19–23 June, Schaumburg, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer M and Champy JM (1993) Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. Nicholas Brealey Publishing, Allen and Urwin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawk SR and Aldag RJ (1990) Measurement biases in user involvement research. Omega 18(6), 605–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland CP, Light B and Gibson N (1999) Critical success factors model for Enterprise Resource Planning implementations. In Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference of Information Systems (ECIS '99), Vol. 1, pp 273–297.

  • Inchusta SP, Pina A and Buldain G (1998) Economic feasibility and success factors in Information Technology Implementations: a case study. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering and Technology management, (IEMC '98), Pioneering New Technologies: Management Issues and Challenges in the Third Millennium, pp 88–93.

  • Ives BM and Olson MH (1984) User involvement and missuccess: a review of research. Management Science 30(5), 586–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanellis P, Lycett M and Paul RJ (1999) Evaluating business information systems fit: from concept to practical application. European Journal of Information Systems 8(1), 65–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesari M, Chang S and Seddon PB (2003) A content analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of process modelling. In Proceedings of the Australasian Conference of Information System (LETHBRIDGE N, Eds), pp 1–11, Web Centre, School of Management and Information Systems, Edith Cowen University, Perth, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettinger WJ, Teng JTT and Guha S (1997) Business process change: a study of methodologies, techniques and tools. MIS Quarterly.

  • Krogstie J, Lindland OI and Sindre G (1995a) Defining quality aspects for conceptual models. Proceeding of the International Conference on Information systems Concepts: Towards a Consolidated View, 28–30 March, Marburg.

  • Krogstie J, Lindland OI and Sindre G (1995b) Towards a deeper understanding of quality in requirements engineering. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Advance Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE '95), pp 82–95.

  • Larsen MA and Myers MD (1998) BPR success or failure? A business process reengineering project in the financial services industry. Communications of ACM 367–381.

  • Lee AS (1989) A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. Management Information Systems Quarterly 13(1), 32–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindland IO, Sindre G and Solvberg A (1994) Understanding quality in conceptual modeling. IEEE software 11(2), 42–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas CH (1981) Implementation of the Key to Successful Information Systems. New York, Colombia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas CH, Walton JE and Ginzberg JM (1998) Implementing package software. MIS quarterly, 537–549.

  • McClure CL (1979) Software development: failure and success. IEEE reference number CH1515–6/79/0000–0001.

  • Mcnurlin CB and Sprague HR (1989) Information Systems Management in Practice, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles MB and Huberman AM (1984) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Source Book of New Methods. Sage Publications, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moody D (1996) Seven habits of highly effective data modelers. Database Programming and Design 57–64.

  • Moody D and Shanks G (1994) What makes a good data model? Evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on the Entity Relationship approach (ER '94), Business Modeling and Reengineering (LOUCOPOULOS P, Ed), pp 94–111, Springer, Berlin.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy F and Staples S (1998) Reengineering in Australia: factors affecting success. Proceedings from the Ninth Australasian Conference of Information systems, 29 September – 02 October, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers BL, Kappelman LA and Prybutok VR (1998) A comprehensive model for assessing the quality and productivity of the information systems function: toward a theory for information systems assessment. In Information Systems Success Measurement, Series in Information Technology Management, (GARRITY EJ and SANDERS GL, Eds), pp 94–121, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nandhakumar J (1996) Design for success?: critical success factors in executive information systems. European Journal of Information Systems 5, 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr AN, Shanks G and Darke P (1999) Identification of necessary factors for successful implementation of ERP systems. In new information technologies and theoretical organizational processes: field studies and theoretical reflections on the future of work. IFIP Conference Proceedings, Vol 149, Kluwer B.V Deventer, Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peristeras V and Tarabanis K (2000) Towards an enterprise architecture for public administration using a top-down approach. European Journal of Information Systems 9, 252–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainer RK and Watson HJ (1995) The key to executive information system success. Journal of Management Information Systems 12(2).

  • Raymond EM, Coleman Jr HJ and Creed WED (1995) Key to success in cooperate redesign. California Management Review.

  • Rosemann M (1998) Managing the complexity of multi-perspective information models using the guidelines of modeling. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Requirements Engineering- ACRE, 26–27 October.

  • Rosemann M (2000) Using reference models within the enterprise resource planning life cycle. Australian Accounting Review 3(22), 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann M and Chan R (2000) Structuring and modelling knowledge in the context of ERP. Proceedings of the Fourth Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS 2000) (CD-ROM) (THONG JP, CHAU KY and TAM HK Eds), 1–3 June 2000.

  • Rosemann M and Zur Mühlen M (1997) Evaluation of workflow management systems – a meta model approach. Australian Journal of Information Systems 6(1), 103–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheer A-W (1998a) ARIS Business Process Modelling, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheer A-W (2000) ARIS – Business Process Frameworks, 3rd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scheer A-W, Abolhassan F, Jost W and Kirchmer M (2002) Business Process Excellence: ARIS in Practice. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scheer A-W, Abolhassan F, Jost W and Kirchmer M (Eds) (2003) Business Process Change Management: ARIS in Practice. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Seddon P (1997) A re-specification and extension of the De Lone and Mclean model of IS success. Information Systems Research 8(3).

  • Sedera W, Rosemann M and Gable GG (2001) Process modelling for Enterprise Systems: factors critical to success. In The Proceedings of the 12th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (FINNIE G, LO B and CECEZ-KEKMANOVIK D, Eds), pp 585–595, School of Multi Media and Information Technology, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sedera W, Rosemann M and Gable GG (2002) Measuring process modelling success. In Proceedings of the Tenth European Conference of Information Systems, (WRYCZA S, Ed), pp 331–341, Gdansk, Poland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith H and Fingar P (2003) Business Process Management. The Third Wave. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth RW (1999) Understanding CASE success: a basis for ongoing case adoption. In Proceedings of the Seventh European conference of Information Systems (ECIS '99), Vol. 2.

  • Srivihok A (1999) Understanding executive information systems implementations: an empirical study of EIS success factors. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences.

  • Stefanou CJ (1999) Supply Chain Management (SCM) and organizational key factors for successful implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems. In Proceedings from the Americas Conference of Information Systems.

  • Sumner M (1998) Critical success factors in enterprise wide information management systems projects. Proceedings from the 5th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS '98), August 13–15, Wisconsin, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warne L and Hart D (1996) The impact of organizational politics on Information Systems Project failure – A case study. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences.

  • Wreden N (1998) Model business processes. Information week, September, pp 1A–8A.

  • Yin RK (1994) Case Study Research Methods, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, California.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Wasana Bandara, Guy G Gable & Michael Rosemann

Authors
  1. Wasana Bandara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guy G Gable
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Rosemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wasana Bandara.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bandara, W., Gable, G. & Rosemann, M. Factors and measures of business process modelling: model building through a multiple case study. Eur J Inf Syst 14, 347–360 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000546

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000546

Keywords

Search

Navigation