IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijodei/v3y2013i1p35-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative process architectures in two higher education institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Beeson
  • Stewart Green
  • Richard Kamm

Abstract

Enterprises are increasingly organising their activities and IT support around key business processes. These processes and their interrelationships may be identified in a process architecture. Ould (2005) claims that the Riva method identifies the process architecture that an organisation should have, and asserts that organisations in the same business have the same process architecture. This assertion is not self-evidently true, and it has not been corroborated by the literature. But it is an important claim: if true, then process architectures could be reused either for new process development, or for appraising an organisation's existing architecture. We assessed the assertion by comparing the process architectures produced by applying Riva to two higher education institutions. The results partially support the view that an essential process architecture underpins higher education institutions, and also that for regulated business domains the optimal process architecture may be one based upon designed as well as essential business entities. The conclusion is that process architecture reuse, with its attendant potential savings of time and money, is worth investigating further, even though the extent to which the invariant assertion is testable may not be clear yet.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Beeson & Stewart Green & Richard Kamm, 2013. "Comparative process architectures in two higher education institutions," International Journal of Organisational Design and Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(1), pages 35-66.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijodei:v:3:y:2013:i:1:p:35-66
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=53667
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marc Lankhorst, 2005. "Enterprise Architecture at Work," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-27505-3, September.
    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. Martin, Andrew & Dmitriev, Dmitry & Akeroyd, John, 2010. "A resurgence of interest in Information Architecture," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 6-12.
    2. Ma³gorzata Pankowska, 2012. "Corporate architecture evaluation methods (Metody oceny architektur korporacyjnych)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 10(38), pages 167-183.
    3. Stefan Strecker & David Heise & Ulrich Frank, 2011. "RiskM: A multi-perspective modeling method for IT risk assessment," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 595-611, September.
    4. Emmanouil Ntanos & Gerasimos Dimitriou & Vassilis Bekiaris & Charalampos Vassiliou & Kostas Kalaboukas & Dimitris Askounis, 2018. "A model-driven software engineering workflow and tool architecture for servitised manufacturing," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 683-720, August.
    5. Pinto Claudio Jose & Anunciacao Pedro Fernandes, 2020. "European Seaports Information Systems. The Impacts of Directive 2010/65/EU," Economics and Culture, Sciendo, vol. 17(2), pages 38-49, December.
    6. Christof Gellweiler, 2020. "Connecting Enterprise Architecture and Project Portfolio Management: A Review and a Model for IT Project Alignment," International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (IJITPM), IGI Global, vol. 11(1), pages 99-114, January.
    7. Ralph Foorthuis & Marlies Steenbergen & Sjaak Brinkkemper & Wiel A. G. Bruls, 2016. "A theory building study of enterprise architecture practices and benefits," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 541-564, June.
    8. Anat Goldstein & Ulrich Frank, 2016. "Components of a multi-perspective modeling method for designing and managing IT security systems," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 101-140, February.
    9. Stephan Aier & Tobias Bucher & Robert Winter, 2011. "Critical Success Factors of Service Orientation in Information Systems Engineering," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 3(2), pages 77-88, April.
    10. Kichan Nam & Seung Woon Oh & Sung Kun Kim & Jahyun Goo & M. Sajid Khan, 2016. "Dynamics of Enterprise Architecture in the Korean Public Sector: Transformational Change vs. Transactional Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-18, October.
    11. Mårten Simonsson & Pontus Johnson & Mathias Ekstedt & Waldo Rocha Flores, 2011. "It Governance Decision Support Using The It Organization Modeling And Assesment Tool," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(02), pages 167-189.
    12. Al Akbari, Salah, 2013. "Proposing Architecture and Process Governance for Risk Mitigation in Organizational Change : a Case Study of the Flight Test and Development Centre (FTC), A Division of the UAE Armed Forces," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/12334 edited by Poix, Michel.
    13. Nikos Macheridis & Johan Dergård, 2020. "Dealing With Accountability in Project Selection," International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (IJITPM), IGI Global, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    14. Ayed Alwadain, 2020. "Enterprise Architecture: A Business Value Realization Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.

    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:ids:ijodei:v:3:y:2013:i:1:p:35-66. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=344 .

    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.