Annotated bibliography – Business Process Performance Management

Gersch, M, Hewing, M & Schöler, B 2011, ‘Business Process Blueprinting – an enhanced view on process performance’, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 17, no. 5 pp. 732 – 747

(A) Gersch, Hewing and Schöler (2011) argue for the need for performance assessment approaches in business process management (BPM) to include both the company’s perspective (efficiency of the process) and the customer’s perspective (effectiveness). This follows their observations that current performance evaluations focus on the efficiency part neglecting the value of the process as perceived by the customer. Accordingly, the study proposes the integration of the company’s and customer process through business process blueprinting (BP2). BP2 uses the service blueprinting approach to integrate the customer perspective, while the company’s perspective is provided for by the Event-driven process chains (EPC).

(B) The article was chosen because it aligns with the view that organizations need to consider multiple perspectives, in evaluating business performance. (C) Such is for instance evident in performance measures such as the balanced scorecard which incorporate an holistic view of the organization. These performance measures have been discussed in the course week, with a case study on UPS reinforcing their use.

Carpinetti, LCR, Buosi, T & Gerolamo, MC 2003, ‘Quality management and improvement: a framework and a business-process reference model’, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 543-554.

  • This article discusses the need for reference model upon which to build quality management initiatives, and presents a model that could be used for evaluation of success in quality improvement processes. (B) The article was chosen due to its relevance to quality management systems discussed in the course. (C) using a reference model, the article provides evidence of how businesses can use such a reference model to evaluate the performance of its quality improvement service.

Glykas, MM 2011, ‘Effort based performance measurement in business process management’, Knowledge and Process Management, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 10-33.

  • This article is the need for a holistic approach in assessing business process performance. Although the balanced scorecard offers a means to incorporate multi-perspective metrics, the authors note of lack of adequate information of its application under periods of uncertainty. Thus, they present an alternative tool that can be used for assessing the performance of business processes. (B) The article was chosen due to its discussion of performance metrics necessary for evaluating performance of business processes (C) For instance, the article presents a tool that covers various key performance indices noted in the week’s work.

Kim, HM, Ramkaran R 2004, ‘Best practices in e-business process management: Extending a re-engineering framework”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 10 Iss: 1 pp. 27 – 43

  • This article discusses some of the best practices in evaluating business process performance. (B) It notes the necessary checks that correspond to those discussed during the week for evaluating business process performance. (C) For instance, it discusses the need to organize aspects based on results and outcomes rather than tasks to better the measurement of the processes effectiveness and efficiency.

Box, S & Platts, K 2005,”Business process management: establishing and maintaining project alignment”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11, no. 4 pp. 370 – 387

  • This article identifies the need for aligning business processes to business change initiatives. (B) the relevance of the article is discussion of performance indicators for change initiatives, some of which were discussed during the weeks courses. (c) for instance, the article identifies a model to evaluate the alignment of business process to the entity’s goals.

References

Box, S & Platts, K 2005,”Business process management: establishing and maintaining project alignment”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11, no. 4 pp. 370 – 387

Carpinetti, LCR, Buosi, T & Gerolamo, MC 2003, ‘Quality management and improvement: a framework and a business-process reference model’, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 543-554.

Gersch, M, Hewing, M & Scholer, B 2011, ‘Business process blueprinting – an enhanced view on process performance’, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 732-747.

Glykas, MM 2011, ‘Effort based performance measurement in business process management’, Knowledge and Process Management, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 10-33.

Kim, HM, Ramkaran R 2004, ‘Best practices in e-business process management: Extending a re-engineering framework”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 10 Iss: 1 pp. 27 – 43

find the cost of your paper