No abstract

PurposeWhile organizations have learned to understand the importance of developing business process management (BPM) capabilities, digitalization now transforms business processes, and introduces new challenges. Extending prior research examining the value of BPM capabilities in organizations, this study examines the associations of BPM capabilities across direct and indirect digitalization benefits.Design/methodology/approachDrawing from the capabilities perspective of strategic management, the dynamic versus ordinary classification was used to classify eight BPM capabilities. An empirical investigation of associations between the eight BPM capabilities and 20 digitalization benefits is presented based on data collected from 165 BPM professionals across four continents. Factor analyses were performed to verify the framework measures for BPM capabilities and digitalization benefits. The Kendall's tau-b (τb) correlation coefficient was used to measure the strength and direction of associations.FindingsOverall results confirm positive associations between BPM capabilities and digitalization benefits, but the relationship was less dominant for ordinary BPM capabilities and indirect benefits. Furthermore, relationships between individual BPM capabilities and specific digitalization benefits vary both across and within the categories.Practical implicationsThese findings support the moderate capability-based view that puts ordinary and dynamic capabilities on equal footing in dynamic environments, while also providing insight for managers focused on specific outcomes with digitalization efforts.Originality/valueThis study reveals that the strength of associations between BPM capabilities and digitalization benefits varies. This highlights the relevance of ordinary-dynamic and direct-indirect distinctions, and the value of a more fine-grained understanding to better inform practice.

No abstract

Purpose -Identifying appropriate responsibilities and positions needed for successful business process management (BPM) initiatives has become a challenge. Past research efforts have been based on homogenous small samples. The purpose of this paper is to validate a BPM position and responsibility framework among a larger BPM community, by measuring the framework's validity, reliability, and level of agreement among BPM professionals. Design/methodology/approach -A survey of 111 BPM practitioners (19 percent outside of the USA), representing 98 different organizations (primarily in business services, manufacturing, public administration, and finance), was conducted to measure the construct validity and reliability of an existing BPM position and responsibility framework. Findings -The results indicate that the BPM responsibilities possess adequate reliability, and that the framework demonstrates excellent convergent and discriminant validity. BPM professionals indicated significant agreement with the four proposed BPM positions, along with responsibilities associated with the three higher level BPM positions. Interesting patterns of disagreement emerged for responsibilities associated with the lowest level BPM position. Research limitations/implications -This study furthers the understanding of BPM competencies required for BPM success. Continued research efforts are needed to understand how this BPM position and responsibility framework can work in actual BPM settings. Practical implications -This research relates to process organization and the core competencies required for BPM initiatives, assisting in the identification and alignment of appropriate responsibilities and positions required for BPM success. Originality/value -This paper represents the first large-scale study of industry best practices in defining and validating positions and responsibilities associated with the BPM field of work.

No abstract