Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Process Performance Measurement System Characteristics: An Empirically Validated Framework

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Business Process Management Forum (BPM 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 360))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

With the proliferation of business process reforms in organizations, the need for process-centric performance measurement systems is discussed in several studies. However, although there is considerable research on Performance Measurement Systems (PMSs) in general business contexts, research on performance measurement in process-centric contexts (e.g. within the BPM field) is scarce, and the characteristics of such process performance measurement systems (PPMSs) still remain poorly conceptualized, hindering their design and implementation. PPMSs are different from traditional performance measurement systems as the data gathered, and the information generated and disseminated are focused on processes, rather than on functions. This paper presents a PPMS characteristics framework, resulting from a multi-staged study design. Initially 38 PPMS characteristics were identified through a structured literature review which were then re-specified and confirmed with two in-depth case studies. The study findings resulted in an empirically supported PPMS characteristics framework, consisting of 30 PPMS characteristics grouped within 7 core themes, namely; (1) Quality characteristics; (2) Measurement Scope; (3) Contextual features considered in designing PPMS; (4) Relationship to organizational systems and structures; (5) Efficiency of information gathering and use; (6) Feedback and reporting; and (7) Potential uses of feedback generated. This is the first evidence-based synthesis of PPMSs characteristics and it provides a clear conceptualization and an understanding of what aspects a PPMS should comprise. The resulting framework will assist practitioners in designing and redesigning measurement systems in process centric contexts, which could in turn better support processes such as identifying improvement needs, measuring improved processes, benchmarking and controlling the processes, process maturity assessments, and benefits realization. The findings will also facilitate future research on PPMSs.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See References provided in Appendix A.

References

  1. Bai, C., Sarkis, J.: A grey-based DEMATEL model for evaluating business process management critical success factors. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 146(1), 281–292 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alibabaei, A., Bandara, W., Aghdasi, M.: Means of achieving business process management success factors. In: Proceedings of the 4th Mediterranean conference on information systems. Department of Management Science & Technology, Athens University of Economics and Business (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Trkman, P.: The critical success factors of business process management. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 30(2), 125–134 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Vuksic, V.B., Glavan, L.M., Susa, D.: The role of process performance measurement in BPM adoption outcomes in Croatia. Econ. Bus. Rev. Central South - Eastern Europe 17(1), 117–150 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kueng, P.: Process performance measurement system: a tool to support process-based organizations. Total Qual. Manag. 11(1), 67–85 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Tregear, R.: Putting Process at the Center of Business Management. BPTrends September 2013, pp. 1–13 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Minonne, C., Turner, G.: Business process management - are you ready for the future? Knowl. Process Manag. 19(3), 111–120 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Abeygunasekera, A.W.J.C., Bandara, W., Wynn, M., Yigitbasioglu, O.: Nexus between Business Process Management (BPM) and accounting: a literature review and future research directions. Bus. Process Manag. J. 24(3), 745–770 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Choong, K.K.: Are PMS meeting the measurement needs of BPM? A literature review. Bus. Process Manag. J. 19(3), 535–574 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. vom Brocke, J., Sonnenberg C.: Process Management and Accounting-An Overdue Take on Measuring the Economic Value of Business Processes. Class Notes: BPM and Education and Research (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hernaus, T., Bach, M.P., Vuksic, V.B.: Influence of strategic approach to BPM on financial and non-financial performance. Baltic J. Manag. 7(4), 376–396 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Tregear, R.: Practical Process: Measuring Processes. BPTrends November 2012, pp. 1–9 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Vuksic, V.B., Bach, M.P., Popovic, A.: Supporting performance management with business process management and business intelligence: a case analysis of integration and orchestration. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 33(4), 613–619 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Edson, P.D.L., Gouvea da Costa, S.E., Angelis, J.J., Munik, J.: Performance measurement systems: a consensual analysis of their roles. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 146(2), 524–542 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lacerda, R.T.D.O., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S.R., Knoff, L., Martins, D.J.C.: Research opportunities in business process management and performance measurement from a constructivist view. Knowl. Process Manag. 23(1), 18–30 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kuwaiti, M.E., Kay, J.M.: The role of performance measurement in business process re-engineering. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 20(12), 1411–1426 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sonnenberg, C., vom Brocke, J.: The missing link between BPM and accounting. Bus. Process Manag. J. 20(2), 213–246 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bititci, U.S., Carrie, A.S., McDevitt, L.: Integrated performance measurement systems: a development guide. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 17(5), 522–534 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tung, A., Baird, K., Schoch, H.P.: Factors influencing the effectiveness of performance measurement systems. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 31(12), 1287–1310 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D., Sarshar, M.: Process improvement through performance measurement: the balanced scorecard methodology. Work Study 50(5), 179–188 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Franco-Santos, M., et al.: Towards a definition of a business performance measurement system. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 27(8), 784–801 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Keathley, H., Du, R., Olliges, K.: Review of performance measurement practices in military and government sectors. In: Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, Nashville, Tenn, pp. 1087–1096 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Beckley, G.B.: Metrics for continuous improvement: tapping the potential of legacy systems. J. Syst. Manag. 45(12), 20–21 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kueng, P., Krahn, A.J.W.: Building a process performance measurement system: some early experiences. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 58(3), 149–159 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Housel, T.J., Morris, C.J., Westland, C.: Business process reengineering at Pacific Bell. Plan. Rev. 21(3), 28–33 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. vom Brocke, J., Recker, J., Mendling, J.: Value-oriented process modeling: integrating financial perspectives into business process re-design. Bus. Process Manag. J. 16(2), 333–356 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kohlbacher, M., Gruenwald, S.: Process orientation: conceptualization and measurement. Bus. Process Manag. J. 17(2), 267–283 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Dawson, R., O’Neill, B.: Simple metrics for improving software process performance and capability: a case study. Softw. Qual. J. 11(3), 243–258 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nenadál, J.: Process performance measurement in manufacturing organizations. Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag. 57(6), 460–467 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rohloff, M.: Case study and maturity model for business process management implementation. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 128–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03848-8_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Rosemann, M., De Bruin T.: Application of a holistic model for determining BPM maturity. BPTrends February 2005, pp. 1–21 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kohlbacher, M., Gruenwald, S.: Process ownership, process performance measurement and firm performance. Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag. 60(7), 709–720 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. del-Río-Ortega, A., Resinas, M., Cabanillas, C., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: On the definition and design-time analysis of process performance indicators. Inf. Syst. 38(4), 470–490 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Glavan, L.M.: Understanding process performance measurement systems. Bus. Syst. Res. 2(2), 25–38 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Van Looy, A., Shafagatova, A.: Business process performance measurement: a structured literature review of indicators, measures and metrics. SpringerPlus 5(1), 1797 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wieland, U., Fischer, M., Pfitzner, M., Hilbert, A.: Process performance measurement system – towards a customer-oriented solution. Bus. Process Manag. J. 21(2), 312–331 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Crawford, K.M., Cox, J.F.: Designing performance measurement systems for just-in-time operations. Int. J. Prod. Res. 28(11), 2025–2036 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lea, R., Parker, B.: The JIT spiral of continuous improvement. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 89(4), 10–13 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Schalkwyk, J.C.: Total quality management and the performance measurement barrier. TQM Mag. 10(2), 124–131 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kutucuoglu, K.Y., Hamali, J., Sharp, J.M., Irani, Z.: Enabling BPR in maintenance through a performance measurement system framework. Int. J. Flexible Manuf. Syst. 14(1), 33–52 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Bond, T.C.: The role of performance measurement in continuous improvement. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 19(12), 1318–1334 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bandara, W., Furtmuller, E., Gorbacheva, E., Miskon, S., Beekhuyzen, J.: Achieving rigour in literature reviews: insights from qualitative data analysis and tool-support. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 37(1), 154–204 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Adams, R.J., Smart, P., Huff, A.S.: Shades of grey: guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 19(4), 432–454 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Creswell, J.W.: Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Corbin, J.M., Strauss, A.L.: Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  46. Wolfswinkel, J.F., Furtmueller, E., Wilderom, C.P.: Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 22(1), 45–55 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D., Mead, M.: The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Q. 11(3), 369–386 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  49. vom Brocke, J., Zelt, S., Schmiedel, T.: Considering Context in Business Process Management: The BPM Context Framework. BPTrends December 2015, pp. 1–13 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Sousa, K., Mendonça, H., Lievyns, A., Vanderdonckt, J.: Getting users involved in aligning their needs with business processes models and systems. Bus. Process Manag. J. 17(5), 748–786 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Leyer, M., Heckl, D., Moormann, J.: Process performance measurement. In: vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 2, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45103-4_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  52. Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Introduction to business process management. In: Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) Fundamentals of Business Process Management, pp. 1–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33143-5_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Albliwi, S., Antony, J., Abdul Halim Lim, S., van der Wiele, T.: Critical failure factors of Lean Six Sigma: a systematic literature review. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 31(9), 1012–1030 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Chakrabarty, A., Kay Chuan, T.: An exploratory qualitative and quantitative analysis of Six Sigma in service organizations in Singapore. Manag. Res. News 32(7), 614–632 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Colombo, Colombo, Sri Lanka

    A. W. J. C. Abeygunasekera

  2. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

    Wasana Bandara, Moe T. Wynn & Ogan Yigitbasioglu

Authors
  1. A. W. J. C. Abeygunasekera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wasana Bandara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Moe T. Wynn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ogan Yigitbasioglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. W. J. C. Abeygunasekera .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Thomas Hildebrandt

  2. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Boudewijn F. van Dongen

  3. University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany

    Maximilian Röglinger

  4. Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria

    Jan Mendling

Appendices

Appendix A

PPMS characteristics extracted from the Structured Literature Review, available at; http://www.workflowpatterns.com/janitha/Appendix%20A.pdf

Appendix B

Case study evidence supporting the changes made to the a priori PPMS Characteristics, available at; http://www.workflowpatterns.com/janitha/Appendix%20B.pdf

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Abeygunasekera, A.W.J.C., Bandara, W., Wynn, M.T., Yigitbasioglu, O. (2019). Process Performance Measurement System Characteristics: An Empirically Validated Framework. In: Hildebrandt, T., van Dongen, B., Röglinger, M., Mendling, J. (eds) Business Process Management Forum. BPM 2019. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 360. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26643-1_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26643-1_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-26642-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-26643-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation