Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Business processes in the agile organisation: a socio-technical perspective

  • Theme Section Paper
  • Published:
Software & Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper takes a cross-disciplinary view of the ontology of “business process”: how the concept is treated in the IS research literature and how related concepts (with stronger human behavioural orientation) from organisation and management sciences can potentially inform this IS perspective. In particular, is there room for socio-technical concepts such as technology affordance, derived from the constructivist tradition, in improving our understanding of operational business processes, particularly human-centric business processes? The paper presents a theoretical framework for understanding the role of business processes in organisational agility that distinguishes between the process-as-designed and the process-as-practiced. How this practice aspect of business processes also leads to the improvisation of various information technology enablers, is explored using a socio-technical lens. The posited theoretical framework is illustrated and validated with data drawn from an interpretive empirical case study of a large IT services company. The research suggests that processes within the organisation evolve both by top-down design and by the bottom-up routinisation of practice and that the tension between these is driven by the need for flexibility.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Here “operations” refers to those parts of the business involved with delivery of the core organisational capabilities, as opposed to “back-office” functions such as HR, finance and administration.

  2. A pseudonym.

References

  1. Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., Grover, V.: Shaping agility through digital options: reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Q. 27, 237–263 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Zammuto, R.F., Griffith, T.L., Majchrzak, A., Dougherty, D.J., Faraj, S.: Information technology and the changing fabric of organization. Organ. Sci. 18, 749–762 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Van, Der Weerdt, N.P., Volberda, H., Verwaal, E., Stienstra, M.: Organizing for flexibility: addressing dynamic capabilities and organization design. In: Bøllingtoft, A., Donaldson, L., Huber, G.P., Håkonsson, D.D., Snow, C.C. (eds.) Collaborative Communities of Firms: Purpose, Process, and Design, pp. 105–125. Springer, New York (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Rettig, C.: The trouble with enterprise software. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 49, 22–27 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Tallon, P.: The alignment paradox. CIO Insight 1, 75 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Morgan, G.: Images of Organization. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Feldman, M., Pentland, B.: Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Adm. Sci. Q. 48, 94–118 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Helfat, C.: The evolution of firm capabilities. Strateg. Manag. J. 21, 955–959 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Helfat, C., Winter, S.: Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: strategy for the (n)ever-changing world. Strateg. Manag. J. 32, 1243–1250 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pentland, B., Feldman, M.: Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Ind. Corp. Change 14, 793–815 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Leonardi, P.: When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Q. 35, 147–167 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Crick, C., Chew, E.: Towards a consistent cross-disciplinary ontology for business process. In: Bider, I., Gaaloul, K., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, H.A., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P. (eds.) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling (BPMDS 2014), pp. 230–241. Springer, Berlin (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Boisot, M., McKelvey, B.: Integrating modernist and postmodernist perspectives on organizations: a complexity science bridge. Acad. Manag. Rev. 35, 415–433 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dubé, L., Paré, G.: Rigor in information systems positivist case research: current practices, trends, and recommendations. MIS Q. 27, 597–635 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tsang, E.: Case studies and generalization in information systems research: a critical realist perspective. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 23, 174–186 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Volkoff, O., Strong, D., Elmes, M.: Technological embeddedness and organizational change. Organ. Sci. 18, 832–848 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gregor, S.: The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Q. 30, 611–642 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dosi, G., Nelson, R., Winter, S.: Introduction: The nature and dynamics of organizational capabilities. In: Dosi, G., Nelson, R., Winter, S. (eds.) The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities, pp. 1–22. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Giddens, A.: The Constitution of Society. University of California Press, Berkeley (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Latour, B.: Science in Action. Harvard University Press, Boston (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Orlikowski, W., Scott, S.: Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2, 433–474 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Nardi, B.: Activity Theory and Human–Computer Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Feldman, M., Orlikowski, W.: Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organ. Sci. 22, 1240–1253 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tallon, P., Pinsonneault, A.: Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: insights from a mediation model. MIS Q. 35, 463–486 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Melville, N., Kraemer, K., Tanniru, M.: Review: Information technology and organizational performance: an integrative model of IT business value. MIS Q. 28, 283–322 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Henderson, J., Venkatraman, N.: Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organizations. IBM Syst. J. 32, 4–16 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Becker, M.: Organizational routines: a review of the literature. Ind. Corp. Change 13, 643–678 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Majchrzak, A., Markus, M.: Technology affordances and constraints. In: Kessler, E. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Management Theory. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Yoo, Y., Boland, R.: Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organ. Sci. 23, 1398–1408 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Winter, S.: Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strateg. Manag. J. 24, 991–995 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schreyogg, G., Kliesch-Eberl, M.: How dynamic can organizational capabilities be? Towards a dual-process model of capability dynamization. Strateg. Manag. J. 28, 913–933 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tell, A.: What capability is not. In: Johansson, B., Andersson, B., Holmberg, N. (eds.) Perspectives in Business Informatics Research: 13th International Conference, BIR 2014, pp. 1–19. Lund, Sweden (2014)

  33. Stirna, J., Grabis, J., Henkel, M., Zdravkovic, J.: Capability Driven Development—An Approach to Support Evolving Organizations. The Practice of Enterprise Modeling. Springer, Berlin (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hafeez, K., Malak, N.: Core competence for sustainable competitive advantage: a structured methodology for identifying core competence. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 49, 28–35 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Volberda, H., Lewin, A.: Co-evolutionary dynamics within and between firms: from evolution to co-evolution. J. Manag. Stud. 40, 2111–2135 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McKelvey, B.: Avoiding complexity catastrophe in coevolutionary pockets: strategies for rugged landscapes. Organ. Sci. 10, 294–321 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Teece, D., Pisano, G., Shuen, A.: Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 18, 509–533 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Augier, M., Teece, D.: Dynamic capabilities and the role of managers in business strategy and economic performance. Organ. Sci. 20, 410–421 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Trkman, P.: The critical success factors of business process management. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 30, 125–134 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the Corporation: Manifesto for Business Revolution. Harper Business, New York (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Weske, M.: Business Process Management—Concepts Languages Architectures. Springer, New York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., Weske, M.: Business Process Management: A Survey. Business Process Management. Springer, Berlin (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Melão, N., Pidd, M.: A conceptual framework for understanding business processes and business process modelling. Inf. Syst. J. 10, 105–129 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Vidgen, R., Wang, X.: From business process management to business process ecosystem. J. Inf. Technol. 21, 262–271 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rosemann, M., Recker, J., Flender, C.: Contextualisation of business processes. Int. J. Bus. Process Integr. Manag. 3, 47–60 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Saidani, O., Nurcan, S.: Towards context aware business process modelling. In: Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (BPMDS 2007) (2007)

  47. Helfat, C., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D., Winter, S.: Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Blackwell, Oxford (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Teece, D.: Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 28, 1319–1350

  49. Henderson, J., Venkatraman, N., Oldach, S.: Aligning business and IT strategies. In: Luftman, J. (ed.) Competing in the Information Age—Strategic Alignment in Practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Pentland, B., Feldman, M., Becker, M., Liu, P.: Dynamics of organizational routines: a generative model. J. Manag. Stud. 49, 1484–1508 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Hevner, A., March, S., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28, 75–105 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Eisenhardt, K.: Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14, 532 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Eisenhardt, K., Graebner, M.: Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad. Manag. J. 50, 25–32 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Yin, R.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Siggelkow, N.: Persuasion with case studies. Acad. Manag. J. 50, 20–24 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Merton, R., Fiske, M., Kendal, P.: The Focused Interview: A Manual of Problems and Procedures. Free Press, New York (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Miles, M., Huberman, M., Saldana, J.: Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Sage, Los Angeles (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Lovelock, J., Atwal, R., Hardcastle, J., Hahn, W., Roster, J., Mazzuca, J., Orazio, V.D.: Worldwide IT Spending Forecast, 3Q13 Update—Impact of Emerging Markets. Gartner, Stamford (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Britz, B., Hale, K., Igou, B.: Agenda Overview for the IT Services Market, 2014. Gartner, Stamford (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Cao, R.Z., Ding, W., Su, Z.: Business outcome-based pricing models for IT services. In: Proceedings of 2012 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics and Informatics, pp. 468–473 (2012)

  61. Li, Z., Li, M.: A hierarchical cloud pricing system. In: 2013 IEEE Ninth World Congress on Services, pp. 403–411 (2013)

  62. Helfat, C., Peteraf, M.: The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles. Strateg. Manag. J. 24, 997–1010 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. McKelvey, B.: Emergent strategy via complexity leadership: Using complexity science & adaptive tension to build distributed intelligence. In: Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R. (eds.) Complexity and Leadership. Volume I: Conceptual Foundations. Information Age, Charlotte (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Ashby, W.R.: Introduction to Cybernetics. Chapman and Hall, London (1956)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  65. Boisot, M., McKelvey, B.: A socio/computational method for staying ahead of terrorist and other adversities. In: Suder, G. (ed.) Corporate Strategies Under International Terrorism and Adversity. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Leont’ev, A.N.: The problem of activity in the history of Soviet psychology. Sov. Psychol. 27, 22–39 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Virkkunen, J., Kuutti, K.: Understanding organizational learning by focusing on “activity systems”. Acc. Manag. Inf. Technol. 10, 291–319 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kuutti, K.: Activity theory as a potential framework for human–computer interaction research. In: Nardi, B.A. (ed.) Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human Computer Interaction, pp. 17–44. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  69. The Open Group: TOGAF version 9. The Open Group (2009)

  70. Zachman, J.: A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst. J. 26, 276 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Peppard, J., Breu, K.: Beyond alignment: a coevolutionary view of the information systems strategy process. In: Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Information Systems, Seattle (2003)

  72. Benbya, H., McKelvey, B.: Using coevolutionary and complexity theories to improve IS alignment: a multi-level approach. J. Inf. Technol. 21, 284–298 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Technology, Sydney, Australia

    Charles Crick & Eng K. Chew

Authors
  1. Charles Crick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eng K. Chew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles Crick.

Additional information

Communicated by Dr. Selmin Nurcan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Crick, C., Chew, E.K. Business processes in the agile organisation: a socio-technical perspective. Softw Syst Model 16, 631–648 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-015-0506-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-015-0506-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation