Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The myth of accelerating business processes through parallel job designs

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Information Systems and e-Business Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses postulated advantages of parallel job designs compared with sequential designs in business processes. Until now, the literature suggests an overall dominance of parallel designs. An analysis of relevant application domains, in which parallel tasks are prevalent in order to accelerate processes, offers two remarkable insights: (1) parallel tasks can but do not have to speed-up business processes; (2) coordination efforts may reduce or even invert potential performance gains. Thus, this paper thoroughly evaluates interdependencies between parallel designs and coordination efforts through simulation experiments. Several process patterns for order processing in a real-world example will be examined. The results offer noteworthy characteristics of parallel designs which extent the existing knowledge: (a) gains from parallelization are reduced with increasing process variability, (b) small increments in coordination efforts neutralize gains from parallelization, (c) in high work load situations, the resource capacity for the coordination task is a severe bottleneck, and (d) if the findings (a)–(c) are carefully considered, only the parallelization of multiple tasks leads to significant performance gains.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achermann B (1998) Aufbau eines Outbound Telesales Centers in 12 Wochen. HMD 35(204):45–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Adler PS, Mandelbaum A, Nguyen V, Schwerer E (1995) From project to process management: an empirically-based framework for analyzing product development time. Manage Sci 41(3):458–484

    Google Scholar 

  • AitSahlia F, Johnson E, Will P (1995) Is concurrent engineering always a sensible proposition? IEEE Trans Eng Manage 42:166–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amdahl G (1967) Validity of the single processor approach to achieving large scale computer capabilities. Proc AFIPS Comput Conf 30:483

    Google Scholar 

  • Barua A, Ravindran S (1996) Reengineering information sharing behaviour in organizations. J Inf Technol 11:261–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blocher JD (1996) The customer order lead-time problem on parallel machines. Nav Res Logist 43:629–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bukchin J, Rubinovitz J (2003) A weighted approach for assembly line design with station paralleling and equipment selection. IIE Trans 35:73–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulgren WG (1982) Discrete system simulation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

  • Buzacott JA (1990) Abandoning the moving assembly line: models of human operators and job sequencing. Int J Prod Res 28(5):821–839

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzacott JA (1996) Commonalities in reengineered business processes: models and issues. Manage Sci 42(5):768–782

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi SH, Kin JS (1998) A study on the measurement of comprehensive flexibility in manufacturing systems. Comput Eng 34(1):103–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark KB, Fujimoto T (1991) Product development performance. Harvard Business School, Boston

  • Crowston KA (1997) Coordination theory approach to organizational process design. Organ Sci 8(2):157–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuiper R, Feldmann C, Rossgoderer U (1996) Rechnerunterstützte Parallelisierung von Konstruktion und Montageplanung. Z wirtsch Fabr 91(7):338–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport TH (1993) Process innovation: reengineering work through information technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

  • De Vreede GJ, Van Eijck DTT, Sol HG (1996) Dynamic modelling for re-engineering organizations. INFOR 34(1):28–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Edosomwan JA (1996) Organizational transformation and process reengineering. Delray Beach, St. Lucie Press, Florida

  • Eversheim W (1995) Prozessorientierte Unternehmensorganisation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  • Farrington P, Nazemetz JW (1998) Evaluation of the performance domain of cellular and functional layouts. Comput Eng 34(1):91–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerpott TJ, Winzer P (1996) Simultaneous engineering: Kritische Analyse eines Planungs- und Organisationsansatzes zur Erfolgsverbesserung industrieller Produktinnovationen. Zeitschrift Planung (2):132–150

  • Giannini PJ, Gruppe FH, Saholsky RM (1997) Reengineering through simulation modeling: optimizing a telephone ordering system at GPO. Inf Syst Manage 14(3):61–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Glücher R (1998) Durchsatzsteigerung in einem Image-Processing-System durch Parallelverarbeitung. HMD 35(203):58ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Goebel E (1996) Prozessorganisation—radikaler Neubeginn oder alte Wissensbestände im neuen Gewande. Zeitschrift Planung (4):309–318

  • Griffin A (1993) Metrics for measuring product development cycle time. J Prod Innov Manage 10(1993):112–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hächler G (1998) Die parallele Koordinationssprache ALWAN. HMD 35(203):38ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer M (1990) Reengineering work: don’t automate, obliterate. Harvard Business Review July–August:104–112

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

  • Handfield RB (1994) Effects of concurrent engineering on make-to-order products. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 41:384–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heiss HU (1994) Prozessorzuteilung in Parallelrechnern. Bl-Wiss.-Verlag, Mannheim

  • Housel T, Kanevsky VA (1995) Reengineering business processes: a complexity theory approach to value added. INFOR 33(4)

  • IEEE (1995) Special issue on microprocessors. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 83(12)

  • Jaenicke R (1998) Parallel processing: the future of embedded systems. Can Electron 13(3)

  • Johnson RV (1983) A branch and bound algorithm for assembly line balancing problems with formulation irregularities. Manage Sci 29(11):1309–1324

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelton WD, Sadowski RP, Sadowski DA (1998) Simulation with ARENA. McGraw-Hill, Boston

  • Kessler E, Chakrabarti AK (1999) Speeding up the pace of new product development. J Prod Innov Manage 16(3):231–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilman RH (1983) The costs of organization structure: dispelling the myths of independent divisions and organization-wide decision making. Account Organ Soc 8(4):341–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinrock L (1975) Queuing systems. Wiley, New York

  • Law AM et al (1991) Simulation modeling and analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York

  • Liebl F (1995) Simulation. Oldenbourg, München

  • Malone TW, Crowston K (1994) The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Comput Surv 26(1):88–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone TW, Smith SA (1988) Modeling the performance of organizational structures. Oper Res 36(3):421–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murmann PA (1994) Expected development time reductions in the German mechanical engineering industry. J Prod Innov Manage 11:236–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nissen ME (1998) Redesigning reengineering through measurement-driven inference. MIS Quarterly December:509–534

    Google Scholar 

  • Ould M (1995) Business processes: modelling and analysis for re-engineering and improvement. Wiley, Chichester

  • Piersma N, Romeijn HE (1996) Parallel machine scheduling: a probabilistic analysis. Nav Res Logist 43:897–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinto PA, Dannenbring DG, Khumawala BM (1975) A branch and bound algorithm for assembly line balancing with paralleling. Int J Prod Res 13(2):183–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Prietula MJ, Carley KM (1994) Computational organization theory: autonomous agents and emergent behavior. J Organ Comput 4(1):41–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmelzer HJ (1990) Steigerung der Effektivität und Effizienz durch Verkürzung von Entwicklungszeiten. In: Reichwald R, Schmelzer HJ (eds) Durchlaufzeiten in der Entwicklung: Praxis des industriellen F&E Managements, München, pp 27–64

  • Schröder HH (1994) Die Parallelisierung von Forschungs- und Entwicklungs-(F&E)-Aktivitäten als Instrument zur Verkürzung der Projektdauer im Lichte des “Magischen Dreiecks” aus Projektdauer, Projektkosten und Projektergebnissen. In: Zahn E (ed) Technologiemanagement und Technologien für das Management, pp 289–323

  • Seidmann A, Sundararajan A (1997) The Effects of Task and Information Asymmetry on Business Process Redesign. Int J Prod Econ 50(2–3):117–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanker K, Tzen YJJ (1985) A loading and dispatching problem in a random flexible manufacturing system. Int J Prod Res 23(3):579–595

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheu C, Babbar S (1996) A managerial assessment of the waiting-time performance for alternative service process designs. Omega 24(6):689–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemers C (1998) Paralele Programmierung—Nicht ohne Prozessor- und Rechnertechnik. HMD 35(203):9–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith B (1999) Breaking through the I/O bottleneck. Network World 16(34)

  • Stone HS (1987) High performance computing architecture. Addison-Wesley, Reading Mass

  • Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in action: social science bases of administrative theory. McGraw-Hill, New York

  • Trygg L (1993) Concurrent engineering practices in selected Swedish companies: a movement or an activity of the few? J Prod Innov Manage 10:403–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter ZD (1998) Workflow management in business processes. Dissertation University of Rochester. New York

  • Wildemann H (1993) Just-In-Time in Forschung & Entwicklung und Konstruktion. Zeitschrift Betriebswirtschaft 63:1251–1270

    Google Scholar 

  • Zangl H (1985) Durchlaufzeiten im Büro. Schmidt, Berlin

  • Zapf M (2001) Gestaltung flexibler Kundeninteraktionsprozesse im Communication Center: Theoretische Grundlagen und experimentelle Analyse, Dissertation, University of Bayreuth

  • Zapf M, Heinzl A (2000) Evaluation of generic process design patterns: an experimental study. In: van der Aalst WMP, Desel J, Oberweis A (eds) Business process management: models, techniques, and empirical studies, LNCS 1806. Berlin

  • Zapf M, Storch K (2001) Making simulation work for the organizational design of communication centers: challenges and practical experience. In: Proceedings of the 2001 Summer Computer Simulation Conference, Orlando

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. REHAU AG, Rehau, Germany

    Michael Zapf

  2. Accenture Germany, Munich, Germany

    Ute Lindheimer

  3. Information Systems I, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, 68131, Germany

    Armin Heinzl

Authors
  1. Michael Zapf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ute Lindheimer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Armin Heinzl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Armin Heinzl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zapf, M., Lindheimer, U. & Heinzl, A. The myth of accelerating business processes through parallel job designs. ISeB 5, 117–137 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-006-0039-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-006-0039-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation