IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jsita0/v2y2011i2p44-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Representation Type Preferences in Operational Business Process Redesign: A Quasi-Experimental Field Investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Ned Kock

    (Texas A&M International University, USA)

Abstract

This paper reports on a quasi-experimental field study in which business process redesign groups in four different US organizations used two different business process representation types. One of the representation types emphasized an activity flow (or workflow) view of business processes, which appears to currently be the most prevalent in actual operational-level business process redesign projects; the other emphasized a communication flow view. The study suggests that, contrary to assumptions likely underlying most of the current business process redesign practice, communication flow-oriented representations of business processes are perceived by those involved in their redesign as significantly more useful in the following aspects than activity flow-oriented representations: identification of opportunities for process improvement, application of process redesign guidelines, visualization of process changes, and development of generic information technology solutions to implement new business processes. Important implications for managers and researchers stemming from these results are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ned Kock, 2011. "Representation Type Preferences in Operational Business Process Redesign: A Quasi-Experimental Field Investigation," International Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications (IJSITA), IGI Global, vol. 2(2), pages 44-66, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:igg:jsita0:v:2:y:2011:i:2:p:44-66
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/jsita.2011040104
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:igg:jsita0:v:2:y:2011:i:2:p:44-66. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    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.