Causes and Consequences of Fragmented Process Information: Insights from a Case Study

Having access to the right information is vital to the effective and efficient execution of an organization’s business processes. A major challenge in this regard is that information on a single process is often spread out over numerous models, documents, and systems. Despite the potential consequences of this situation, there is a lack of insights on how to mitigate its impact. Against this background, we conducted an explorative case study to analyze the causes and consequences of the fragmentation of process information. We found that the widespread fragmentation of information had a considerable impact on the investigated organization. In particular, fragmentation led to severe maintenance issues, reduced process execution efficiency, and had a negative effect on the quality of process results. Our findings provide useful insights for both practice and research on how to mitigate the negative aspects associated with the fragmentation of process information.

[1]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  A Survey of Activity Network‐Based Process Models for Managing Product Development Projects , 2007 .

[2]  Mathias Weske,et al.  Propagating changes between aligned process models , 2012, J. Syst. Softw..

[3]  Stefan Krumnow,et al.  A Concept for Spreadsheet-Based Process Modeling , 2010, BPMN.

[4]  Mathias Weske,et al.  Vertical Alignment of Process Models - How Can We Get There? , 2009, BMMDS/EMMSAD.

[5]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  On the alignment of the purposes and views of process models in project management , 2010 .

[6]  Steven L. Alter.  Beneficial Noncompliance and Detrimental Compliance: Expected Paths to Unintended Consequences , 2015, AMCIS.

[7]  Hajo A. Reijers,et al.  On the Fragmentation of Process Information: Challenges, Solutions, and Outlook , 2015, BMMDS/EMMSAD.

[8]  Hajo A. Reijers,et al.  Comparing textual descriptions to process models - The automatic detection of inconsistencies , 2017, Inf. Syst..

[9]  Erhard Rahm,et al.  A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching , 2001, The VLDB Journal.

[10]  Shazia Wasim Sadiq,et al.  Modeling Control Objectives for Business Process Compliance , 2007, BPM.

[11]  Jan Recker,et al.  How novices design business processes , 2012, Inf. Syst..

[12]  Saonee Sarker,et al.  An Exploration into the Process of Requirements Elicitation: A Grounded Approach , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[13]  Marta Indulska,et al.  How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice? , 2006, Data Knowl. Eng..

[14]  Anne Beaudry,et al.  Impacts of IT Acceptance and Resistance Behaviors: A Novel Framework , 2013, ICIS.

[15]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Compliance aware business process design , 2008 .

[16]  Hajo A. Reijers,et al.  Factors Leading to Business Process Noncompliance and its Positive and Negative Effects: Empirical Insights from a Case Study , 2016, AMCIS.

[17]  Minseok Song,et al.  An integration architecture for knowledge management systems and business process management systems , 2007, Comput. Ind..

[18]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Integrating Textual and Model-Based Process Descriptions for Comprehensive Process Search , 2016, BMMDS/EMMSAD.

[19]  William J. Kettinger,et al.  Business Process Change: A Study of Methodologies, Techniques, and Tools , 1997, MIS Q..

[20]  Surajit Chaudhuri,et al.  An overview of data warehousing and OLAP technology , 1997, SGMD.

[21]  Keith Phalp,et al.  Improving the quality of use case descriptions: empirical assessment of writing guidelines , 2007, Software Quality Journal.

[22]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[23]  Jan Recker,et al.  Exploring cognitive style and task-specific preferences for process representations , 2016, Requirements Engineering.

[24]  Jan Recker,et al.  Towards a Science of Checklists , 2017, HICSS.

[25]  Christoph Meinel,et al.  An approach to capture authorisation requirements in business processes , 2010, Requirements Engineering.