Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Developing a framework for innovating less-structured business processes: a Delphi study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Information Systems and e-Business Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In dynamic business environments, many organizations need to acquire a process innovation capability (PIC) that caters to less-structured business processes (LSBP) in order to remain relevant in the market. However, such organizations are still in need of appropriate frameworks that enable them to identify and evaluate their PIC in LSBP. To fill this gap, we have followed the Delphi method with three rounds of semi-structured interviews, including twelve practitioners and fifteen scholars across five continents. The findings reveal five major differences and barriers for PIC in LSBP, as compared to innovating structured business processes. In addition, we refine and empirically validate an innovation capability framework covering six main capabilities and 18 sub-areas, configured into three major pillars: (1) a people-process-technology pillar, (2) an organizational pillar, and (3) an ecosystem pillar. Besides being one of the first studies to offer a conceptual framework for PIC in LSBP, we provide practical brainstorming with reflective questions per capability, for practitioners to reflect on their organization’s current PIC in LSBP.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The author confirms that all data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

References

  • Adams R, Bessant J, Phelps R (2006) Innovation management measurement: a review. Int J Manage Reviews 8(1):21–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adner R, Levinthal D (2001) Demand heterogeneity and technology evolution: implications for product and process Innovation. Manage Sci 47(5):611–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal R, Raghuvanshi J, Ghosh P (2019) Taxonomy of innovation capability framework with future directions. Int J Bus Excellence 17(3):265–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alarabiat A, Ramos I (2019) The Delphi Method in Information Systems Research (2004–2017). Electron J Bus Res Methods 17(2):86–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandara W, Van Looy A, Rosemann M, Meyers L (2021) A call for holistic. Bus Process Manage 2938:6–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker J, vom Brocke J, Heddier M, Seidel S (2015) In search of Information Systems (Grand) challenges. Bus Inform Syst Eng 57(6):377–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benner MJ, Tushman ML (2003) Exploitation, Exploration, and process management: the Productivity Dilemma Revisited. Acad Manage Rev 28(2):238–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwer L (2016) Digital Platforms – The Embodiment of Innovation Management Theory?

  • Bruin Td, Rosemann M (2007a) Using the Delphi Technique to Identify BPM Capability Areas

  • Camisón C, Villar-López A (2014) Organizational innovation as an enabler of technological innovation capabilities and firm performance. J Bus Res 67(1):2891–2902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen IJ, Popovich K (2003) Understanding customer relationship management (CRM): people, process and technology. Bus Process Manage J 9(5):672–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commerce O-OoG (2007) ITIL service lifecycle publication suite PDF. Stationery Office

  • Cooper WW, Leavitt HJ, Shelly MW (1964) New perspectives in organization research. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossan MM, Apaydin M (2010) A multi-dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: a systematic review of the literature. J Manage Stud 47(6):1154–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Custer R, Scarcella J, Stewart B (1999) The modified Delphi technique - A rotational modification. J Vocat Tech Educ 15(2):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalkey N, Helmer O (1963) An experimental application of the DELPHI Method to the Use of experts. Manage Sci 9(3):458–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour F (2020) Organizational Innovation: Theory, Research, and Direction

  • Davenport TH (1993) Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology. Harvard Business Review

  • de Bruin T, Rosemann M (2007) Using the Delphi Technique to Identify BPM Capability Areas. ACIS 2007 Proceedings – 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems

  • Delbecq AL, Van de Ven AH, Gustafson DH (1975) Group techniques for program planning: a guide to nominal group and Delphi processes Glenview. Scott, Foresman, Ill

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Ciccio C, Marrella A, Russo A (2015) Knowledge-intensive processes: characteristics, requirements and analysis of contemporary approaches. J Data Semant 4:29–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond IR, Grant RC, Feldman BM, Pencharz PB, Ling SC, Moore AM, Wales PW (2014) Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. J Clin Epidemiol 67(4):401–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumas M, Van der Aalst WM, Ter Hofstede AH (2005) Process-aware information systems: bridging people and software through process technology. Wiley

  • Dumas M, La Rosa M, Mendling J, Reijers H (2018) Fundamentals of Business Process Management

  • Frishammar J, Kurkkio M, Abrahamsson L, Lichtenthaler U (2012) Antecedents and consequences of firms’ process Innovation Capability: A literature review and a conceptual Framework. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 59(4):519–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritsch M, Meschede M (2001) Product Innovation, process Innovation, and size. Rev Ind Organ 19(3):335–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golafshani N (2003) Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Rep 8(4):597–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Goni JIC, Van Looy A (2022) Process innovation capability in less-structured business processes: a systematic literature review. Bus Process Manage J 28(3):557–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman CM (1987) The Delphi technique: a critique. J Adv Nurs 12(6):729–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grisold T, vom Brocke J, Gross S, Mendling J, Röglinger M, Stelzl K (2021) Digital innovation and business process management: opportunities and challenges as perceived by practitioners. Commun Association Inform Syst 49(1):556–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson F, Keeney S (2011) Enhancing rigour in the Delphi technique research. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 78(9):1695–1704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirte R, Roth P (2018) Advanced Innovation Management: Best Practice of German and American Corporations in the Mobility Sector

  • Hsu C-C, Sandford BA (2007) The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Practical Assess Res Evaluation 12(10):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen JJP, Van Den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2006) Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and performance: effects of Organizational antecedents and Environmental moderators. Manage Sci 52(11):1661–1674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karande A, Kalbande D (2015) Business process analyzed factors affecting business model innovation

  • Kemsley S (2011) 2011//). The Changing Nature of Work: From Structured to Unstructured, from Controlled to Social Paper presented at the Business Process Management, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Kerpedzhiev GD, König UM, Röglinger M, Rosemann M (2021) An exploration into Future business process management capabilities in View of Digitalization. Bus Inform Syst Eng 63(2):83–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keupp M, Palmié M, Gassmann O (2012) The Strategic Management of Innovation: a systematic Review and paths for Future Research. Int J Manage Reviews 14(4):367–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirk J (1986) Reliability and validity in qualitative research / Jerome Kirk, Marc L. Miller. Sage, Beverly Hills

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • König UM, Linhart A, Röglinger M (2019) Why do business processes deviate? Results from a Delphi study. Bus Res 12(2):425–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowalkowski C, Gebauer H, Kamp B, Parry G (2017) Servitization and deservitization: overview, concepts, and definitions. Ind Mark Manage 60:4–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landeta J (2006) Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 73(5):467–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson B, Samson D (2001) Developing Innovation Capability in Organisations: a dynamic capabilities Approach. Int J Innov Manag 5:377–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilja K, Laakso K, Palomki J (2011) Using the Delphi method. Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology, Portland, OR

    Google Scholar 

  • Linstone HA, Turoff M (1975) The delphi method. Addison-Wesley Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Makadok R (2001) Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strateg Manag J 22(5):387–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza Silva A (2020) Innovation capability: a systematic literature review. Eur J Innov Manage

  • Mikalef P, Krogstie J (2020) Examining the interplay between big data analytics and contextual factors in driving process innovation capabilities. Eur J Inform Syst 29(3):260–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan J, Liker JK (2020) The Toyota product development system: integrating people, process, and technology. CRC

  • Mullen PM (2003) Delphi: myths and reality. J Health Organ Manag 17(1):37–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy E, Dingwall R, Greatbatch D, Parker S, Watson P (1998) Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature. Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2(16), iii-ix, 1-274

  • Okoli C, Pawlowski SD (2004) The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manag 42(1):15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paré G, Cameron A-F, Poba-Nzaou P, Templier M (2013) A systematic assessment of rigor in information systems ranking-type Delphi studies. Inf Manag 50(5):207–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prodan M, Prodan A, Purcarea A (2015) Three New dimensions to people, process, Technology Improvement Model. Adv Intell Syst Comput 353:481–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichert M, Weber B (2012) Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems: Challenges, Methods, Technologies

  • Richards JI, Curran CM (2002) Oracles on advertising: searching for a definition. J Advertising 31(2):63–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter-von Hagen C, Ratz D, Povalej R (2005) Toward Self-Organizing knowledge intensive process. J Univers Knowl Manage 0(2):148–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann M (2014) Proposals for future BPM research directions Paper presented at the Asia-Pacific conference on business process management

  • Schmiedel T, vom Brocke J, Recker J (2013) Which cultural values matter to business process management? Bus Process Manage J 19(2):292–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seale C (1999) Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inq 5(4):465–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skutsch M, Hall D (1973) Delphi: potential uses in Educational Planning. Chicago Component, Project Simu-School

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobaih AE, Ritchie C, Jones E (2012) Consulting the oracle? Applications of modified Delphi technique to qualitative research in the hospitality industry. Int J Contemp Hospitality Manage 24(6):886–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szelągowski M, Lupeikiene A (2020) Business process Management systems: Evolution and Development Trends. Informatica 31:579–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trkman P, Mertens W, Viaene S, Gemmel P (2015) From business process management to customer process management. Bus Process Manage J 21(2):250–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van De Ven AH, Delbecq A,L (1974) The effectiveness of nominal, Delphi, and Interacting Group decision making processes. Acad Manag J 17(4):605–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Looy A, Poels G, Snoeck M (2017) Evaluating business process maturity models. J Association Inform Syst 18(6):461–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • vom Brocke J, Zelt S, Schmiedel T (2015) On the role of context in business process management. Int J Inf Manag 36(3):486–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber B, Reijers HA, Zugal S, Wild W (2009) The Declarative Approach to Business Process Execution: An Empirical Test Paper presented at the Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Ziglio E, Adler M (1996) Gazing into the oracle: the Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health. Jessica Kingsley

  • Zimmermann R, Ferreira DF, L. M., Carrizo Moreira A (2016) The influence of supply chain on the innovation process: a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: Int J 21(3):289–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the expert panel for their continued support throughout the different Delphi rounds. Furthermore, we thank the Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP-Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan) for the financial support of this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Informatics and Operation Management, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Joklan Imelda Camelia Goni & Amy Van Looy

  2. School of Business and Economics, Universitas Prasetiya Mulya, Jakarta, Indonesia

    Joklan Imelda Camelia Goni

Authors
  1. Joklan Imelda Camelia Goni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy Van Looy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joklan Imelda Camelia Goni.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors have no financial or proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A: Expert profiles

Appendix A: Expert profiles

Table A1 Profile of practitioners
Full size table
Table A2 Profile of scholars
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goni, J.I.C., Van Looy, A. Developing a framework for innovating less-structured business processes: a Delphi study. Inf Syst E-Bus Manage 22, 385–413 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-024-00680-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-024-00680-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation