IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aae/journl/v16y2020i1p133-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dissimilarities between applied methods of project management impacting regression in business processes and technical architecture

Author

Listed:
  • Hubert BogumiÅ‚

    (University of Warsaw; extramural Ph.D. student at the University of Warsaw, Krakowskie Przedmieście 26/28, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to explore the drivers of keeping the consistency within business processes that are highly supported by system configuration, while the system architecture is impacted by a technical change in the organization that uses both traditional and agile methods of change management. Two research questions were raised related to the most frequent road blocks in managing system and business non-regression in hybrid management of change and the respective methods used to limit the system and business regression in the conflicting approaches of business operation models. In the research, a tailored method of multiple case study was used based on primary and secondary data from accessible documentation of projects, experience from tests and production cut-overs performed in the mix-method of project management, and change management circumstances. Overall findings wrap up the conclusion which is, that in order to keep control using the rules of BPM in transforming an organization, it is an indispensable necessity to use open cooperation that addresses cross-organization business objectives and overall business sensitivity for threads related to an agnostic approach of change realization chained by methodological rules. The advantages of collected knowledge may lead to formed ways of securing business objectives from unexpected regression driven by internal and independent organizational enforcements.

Suggested Citation

  • Hubert BogumiÅ‚, 2020. "Dissimilarities between applied methods of project management impacting regression in business processes and technical architecture," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 16(1), pages 133-168.
    • Handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:16:y:2020:i:1:p:133-168
    DOI: 10.7341/20201615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://jemi.edu.pl/uploadedFiles/file/all-issues/vol16/issue1/JEMI_Vol16_Issue1_2020_Article5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.7341/20201615?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pisano, Gary, 2006. "Profiting from innovation and the intellectual property revolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1122-1130, October.
    2. Alexandra MIHALACHE, 2017. "Project Management Tools for Agile Teams," Informatica Economica, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(4), pages 85-93.
    3. Jerry Luftman & Tal Ben-Zvi & Rajeev Dwivedi & Eduardo Henrique Rigoni, 2010. "IT Governance: An Alignment Maturity Perspective," International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG), IGI Global, vol. 1(2), pages 13-25, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. Morricone, Serena & Munari, Federico & Oriani, Raffaele & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan, 2017. "Commercialization Strategy and IPO Underpricing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1133-1141.
    3. Aschhoff, Birgit & Baier, Elisabeth & Crass, Dirk & Hud, Martin & Hünermund, Paul & Köhler, Christian & Peters, Bettina & Rammer, Christian & Schricke, Esther & Schubert, Torben & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Innovation in Germany - Results of the German CIS 2006 to 2010. Background report on the Innovation Surveys 2007, 2009 and 2011 of the Mannheim Innovation Panel," ZEW Dokumentationen 13-01, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Long, Vicky, 2019. "IPRs and Appropriability in the Digital Era: Evidence from the Swedish Video (Computer) Games Industry," Ratio Working Papers 329, The Ratio Institute.
    5. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    6. Verónica Sansabas-Villalpando & Iván Juan Carlos Pérez-Olguín & Luis Asunción Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Luis Carlos Mendez-González, 2019. "CODAS HFLTS Method to Appraise Organizational Culture of Innovation and Complex Technological Changes Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-28, December.
    7. Aziz Mouline, 2010. "Les industries créatives à l’heure de la numérisation : une approche par les alliances en R&D dans les industries du multimédia," Post-Print halshs-00586964, HAL.
    8. Hyeon Chang Kim & Woojin Yoon, 2019. "Study On Types Of Technology Cooperation Partner And Innovation Performance: Focusing On Incremental And Radical Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(01), pages 1-25, January.
    9. Karin Beukel & Minyuan Zhao, 2018. "IP litigation is local, but those who litigate are global," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 53-70, June.
    10. Desyllas, Panos & Sako, Mari, 2013. "Profiting from business model innovation: Evidence from Pay-As-You-Drive auto insurance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 101-116.
    11. Alexy, Oliver & Reitzig, Markus, 2013. "Private–collective innovation, competition, and firms’ counterintuitive appropriation strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 895-913.
    12. Francesco Campanella & Maria Rosaria Della Peruta & Stefano Bresciani & Luca Dezi, 2017. "Quadruple Helix and firms’ performance: an empirical verification in Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 267-284, April.
    13. Graciela Corral de Zubielqui & Janice Jones & David Audretsch, 2019. "The influence of trust and collaboration with external partners on appropriability in open service firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 540-558, April.
    14. Diestre, Luis & Lumineau, Fabrice & Durand, Rodolphe, 2023. "Litigate or let it go? Multi-market contact and IP infringement-litigation dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    15. Agarwal, Rajshree & Shah, Sonali K., 2014. "Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1109-1133.
    16. Arora, Ashish & Athreye, Suma & Huang, Can, 2016. "The paradox of openness revisited: Collaborative innovation and patenting by UK innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1352-1361.
    17. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Scannell, Jack & Versaevel, Bruno, 2021. "Biopharmaceutical R&D outsourcing: Short-term gain for long-term pain?," MPRA Paper 108233, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Eduard BUDACU & Paul POCATILU, 2018. "Real Time Agile Metrics for Measuring Team Performance," Informatica Economica, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(4), pages 70-79.
    19. Zhongfeng Su & En Xie & Hong Liu & Wei Sun, 2013. "Profiting from product innovation: The impact of legal, marketing, and technological capabilities in different environmental conditions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 261-276, September.
    20. Marin Alexandru & Boanță Laura, 2018. "Intangible assets as “nucleus” of process innovation," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 592-600, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:16:y:2020:i:1:p:133-168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna Ujwary-Gil (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://fundacjacognitione.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.