A Goal-oriented methodology for network business process architecture in intermediary organization
Subject Areas :hani vahdani 1 , mir saman pishvaee 2 , Mohammadreza Rasouli 3
1 - University of Science and Technology
2 - Iran University of Science and Technology
3 -
Abstract :
In the current era, presence in collaboration networks and interaction with other organizations become a crucial issue for business. As a matter fact a new type of business model known as intermediary organizations was formed in this environment. The main functionality of these kind of businesses are identification and empowerment of an Industry’s member and matchmaking and intermediating among theme. Because of the unique nature of intermediaries, the usual business design methodologies and framework are not applicable; so it is necessary to develop and redesign new framework and methods upon the intermediaries’ characteristics and requirements. The main aim of this research is to develop a goal-oriented methodology for network business process architecture in order to fulfill non-functional requirement of intermediary organization. In the literature section a definition of intermediary and brief overview of process architecture methodologies is provided. The research used a design-oriented methodology so process architecture reference models are customized based on intermediaries’ requirements in to a goal-oriented process architecture for intermediaries is concluded. At the end the multi case study results are presented to show the applicability of the developed methodology. The developed architecture ensures alignment of the intermediaries’ network processes with organizational goals.
1. اساسنامه بنیاد فرهنگی خاتم الاوصیاء(عج). تدوین سال 1389
2. خسرو نجدی، ف. و قاسمی، س. (1395). شفافیت سازمانی؛ تضمین اعتماد و مشارکت بیشتر ذینفعان، روزنامه دنیای اقتصاد، شماره 3842.
3. صادقي، الف.، سعدآبادي، ع.، مزارعي، ح؛ و نوروزي، خ. (1394). بررسي نقش نهادهاي ميانجي نوآوري در صنايع الكترونيك، پنجمين كنفرانس بين المللي و نهمين كنفرانس ملي مديريت فناوري، تهران، انجمن مديريت فناوري ايران
4. کاپلان، ر. ونورتون، د. (2004). نقشه استراتژی: تبدیل داراییهای نامشهود به پیامدهای مشهود. ترجمه: اکبری، ا.، سلطانی، م؛ و ملکی، ا. (1386). گروه پژوهشی صنعتی آریانا.
5. گزارش پروژه بازطراحی فرآیندهای بنیاد خاتمالاوصیاء (عج): شناخت وضعیت موجود (1395). دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران
6. گزارش پروژه بازطراحی فرآیندهای بنیاد خاتمالاوصیاء (عج): ترسیم وضعیت مطلوب و توسعه برنامهگذار (1395). دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران
7. گزارش ساختارسازی و شکلگیری انستیتو توربین گاز: طراحی فرآیندهای کلیدی انستیتو توربین گاز (1396). دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران
8. Afsarmanesh, H., & Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2005). A framework for management of virtual organization breeding environments. In Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises (pp. 35-48). Springer, Boston, MA.
9. Al-Debei, M. M., El-Haddadeh, R., & Avison, D. (2008). Defining the business model in the new world of digital business. School of Information Systems, Computing and Mathematics.
10. Aldrich, H.E., von Glinow, M.A., (1992). Business start-ups: the HRM imperative. International Perspectives on Entrepreneurial Research. North-Holland, New York, pp. 233–253.
11. Bălănescu, V., Soare, P., Beliciu, V., & Alpopi, C. (2013). The Impact of Business Process Management on Organizational Strategy. Business Excellence and Management, 3(2), 21-28.
12. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-556.
13. Beer, S. (1979). The heart of enterprise, J. Wiley.
14. Beer, S. (1981). Brain of the firm: the managerial cybernetics of organization, J. Wiley.
15. Beer, S. (1984). The Viable System Model: Its Provenance, Development, Methodology and Pathology. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 35, No. 1, 7-25.
16. Bessant, J., Rush, H., (1995). Building bridges for innovation: the role of consultants in technology transfer. Research Policy 24, 97–114.
17. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K., and Mead, M., (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11 (3), 369–385.
18. BIZBOK (2016). A Guide to the Business Architecture Body of Knowledge. businessarchitectureguild.org
19. Burlton, R. T. (2015). Delivering business strategy through process management. In Handbook on Business Process Management 2 (pp. 45-78). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
20. Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2005). Collaborative networks: a new scientific discipline. Journal of intelligent manufacturing, 16(4-5), 439-452.
21. Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2007). A framework for virtual organization creation in a breeding environment. Annual Reviews in Control, 31(1), 119-135.
22. Carlsson, B., & Stankiewicz, R. (1991). On the nature, function and composition of technological systems. Journal of evolutionary economics, 1(2), 93-118.
23. Chai, S., & Kim, M. (2010). What makes bloggers share knowledge? An investigation on the role of trust. International Journal of Information Management, 30, 408–415.
24. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. housand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Dalziel, M. (2010, June). Why do innovation intermediaries exist? In Proceedings of DRUID Summer Conference, London (pp. 16-18).
26. Dijkman, R., Vanderfeesten, I., & Reijers, H. A. (2011). Designing a business process architecture: an overview of approaches and their use. Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands.
27. Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E., (2007). Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1), 25–32.
28. Fayez, Mohamed S.(2005), An Automated Methodology for a Comprehensive Definition of the Supply Chain using Generic Components, B.Sc. Alexandria University, Spring Term, ProQuest Information and Learning Company, pp.85-94.
29. Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J. & Sturgeon, T. (2005). The governance of global value chains. Review of international political economy, 12(1), 78-104.
30. Green, S., & Ould, M. (2005). A framework for classifying and evaluating process architecture methods. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 10(4), 415-425.
31. Grefen, P. W. P. J., Lüftenegger, E. R., Van der Linden, E., & Weisleder, C. A. (2013). BASE/X business agility through cross-organizational service engineering: the business and service design approach developed in the CoProFind project. Beta Working Papers 414. Eindhoven University of Technology Chicago
32. Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (2009). Reengineering the Corporation: Manifesto for Business Revolution, A. Zondervan.
33. Harmon, P. (2014). Business Process Change, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers
34. Howells, Jeremy. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation." Research policy 35.5 (2006): 715-728.
35. Honig, M. I. (2004). The new middle management: Intermediary organizations in education policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(1), 65-87.
36. ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 (2015). Systems and software engineering: System life cycle processes
37. Jolayemi, J. K. (2008). Hoshin kanri and hoshin process: A review and literature survey. Total Quality Management, 19(3), 295-320.
38. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy. California management review, 39(1), 53-79.
39. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action, Harvard Business Press
40. Kong, E. (2010). Analyzing BSC and IC's usefulness in nonprofit organizations. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(3), 284-304.
41. Lederer, M., Schott, P., & Kurz, M. (2015). Subject-Oriented Business Processes Meet Strategic Management: Two Case Studies from the Manufacturing Industry. In S-BPM in the Wild (pp. 13-34). Springer International Publishing.
42. Lynn, L.H., Reddy, N.M., Aram, J.D., (1996). Linking technology and institutions: the innovation community framework. Research Policy 25, 91–106.
43. Mantel, S.J., Rosegger, G., (1987). The role of third-parties in the diffusion of innovations. Adaptation and Growth. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 123–134.
44. March, S.T. and Smith, G.F., (1995). Design and naturalscience research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15 (4), 251–266.
45. March, S.T. and Storey, V.C., (2008). Design science in the information systems discipline: an introduction to the special issue on design science research. MIS Quarterly, 32 (4), 725–730.
46. Markovic, I., & Kowalkiewicz, M. (2008, September). Linking business goals to process models in semantic business process modeling. In Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, 2008. EDOC'08. 12th International IEEE (pp. 332-338). IEEE.
47. Meredith, J., (1998). Building operations management theory through case and field research. Journal of Operations Management, 16 (4), 441–454.
48. Olve, N. G., Roy, J., & Wetter, M. (1999). Performance drivers: A practical guide to using the balanced scorecard. John Wily & Sons Ltd.
49. Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2002). An eBusiness model ontology for modeling eBusiness. BLED 2002 Proceedings, 2.
50. Panayiotou, N. A., Stavrou, V. P., & Gayialis, S. P. (2017). The application of a business process modeling architecture in the supply chain of a manufacturing company: A case study. In Operational Research in Business and Economics (pp. 1-16). Springer, Cham.
51. Phillips, P. A. (2007). The balanced scorecard and strategic control: a hotel case study analysis. The Service Industries Journal, 27(6), 731-746.
52. [97] Quartel, D., Engelsman, W., Jonkers, H., & Van Sinderen, M. (2009, September). A goal-oriented requirements modelling language for enterprise architecture. In Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, 2009. EDOC'09. IEEE International (pp. 3-13). IEEE.
53. Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. G. (2003). Network competence: Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of business research, 56(9), 745-755.
54. SCC (2004), Supply-Chain Operations Reference-model: Supply-chain.org, Overview Version 7.0.
55. Sessions, R. (2007). Comparison of the top four enterprise architecture methodologies.
56. Shohert, S., Prevezer, M., (1996). UK biotechnology: institutional linkages, technology transfer and the role of intermediaries. R&D Management 26, 283–298.
57. Systems Engineering Fundamentals (2001). Defense Dept., Defense Acquisition University. Defense Acquisition University Press
58. Tennant, C., & Roberts, P. (2001). Hoshin Kanri: implementing the catchball process. Long Range Planning, 34(3), 287-308.
59. TOGAF® Version 9.1 Enterprise Edition (2011).
60. Van Aken, J.E., (2004). Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: the quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41 (2), 219–246.
61. Verdouw, C. N., Beulens, A. J. M., Trienekens, J. H., & Van der Vorst, J. G. A. J. (2011). A framework for modelling business processes in demand-driven supply chains. Production Planning and Control, 22(4), 365-388.
62. Von Alan, R. Hevner, et al. (2004) "Design science in information systems research." MIS quarterly 28.1: 75-105
63. Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N., and Frohlich, M., (2002). Case research in operations management. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 22 (2), 195–219.
64. Watkins, D., Horley, G., 1986. Transferring technology from large to small firms: the role of intermediaries. Small Business Research. Gower, Aldershot, pp. 215–251.
65. Witcher, Barry. (2002). "Hoshin kanri: a study of practice in the UK." Managerial Auditing Journal 17.7 390-396.
66. Witcher, B., & Butterworth, R. (1999). Hoshin kanri: how Xerox manages. Long Range Planning, 32(3), 323-332.
67. Yin, R.K., (2002). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68. Zachman, J. A. (1987). A framework for information systems architecture. IBM systems journal, 26(3), 276-292.
69. Zhang, D. (2006). A network economic model for supply chain versus supply chain competition. Omega, 34(3), 283-295.
70. Zimmermann, R. (2006). Agent-based supply network event management. Springer Science & Business Media.
71. Idro.ir
72. Iust.ac.ir