skip to main content
10.1145/2037556.2037577acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesdg-oConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Public process management: a method for introducing standard business reporting

Published:12 June 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

Businesses have to file many reports to show compliance with rules and regulations. Regulators try to reduce the administrative burden, by providing a standardized representation format and agreements about reporting procedures and the use of technical infrastructure. However, developing and managing such a standardized reporting scheme is hard. It involves inter-dependencies between processes, data and technology and the interests of many stakeholders. Drawing on existing practice this paper presents Public Process Management (PPM): a general method for process management in the public sector. In this paper we apply PPM specifically to the problem of introducing a standardized reporting scheme in an application domain. The method is driven by quality management and process redesign approaches, but deals with unique characteristics of compliance reporting: legal data requirements, provenance, process compliance and multiple stakeholders. In particular, PPM stresses strict adherence to an iterative development schedule, and shared conceptual models of processes, data definitions, technological infrastructure and governance agreements. The usefulness and adequacy of the method are illustrated by a case study on Standard Business Reporting, a standardized reporting channel in the Netherlands for both public and private agencies.

References

  1. Power, M., The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. 1997: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Wimmer, M. A., Integrated Service Modelling for Online One-stop Government. Electronic marktes, 2002. 12(3): p. 149--156.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Alles, M., et al., Continuous monitoring of business process controls: A pilot implementation of a continuous auditing system at Siemens. Accounting Information Systems, 2006. 7: p. 137--161.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Tan, Y. H., et al., eds. Accelerating Global Supply Chains with IT-Innovation. 2011, Springer Verlag, Berlin. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. McAfee, A., When too much IT knowledge is a dangerous thing. MIT Sloan Management review, 2003: p. 83--89.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Heeks., R., e-Government as a Carrier of Context. Journal of Public Policy, 2005. 25: p. 51--74.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Algemene Rekenkamer, Lessen uit ICT-projecten bij de overheid Deel A. 2007, Algemene Rekenkamer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Keen., P. G. W., Information systems and organizational change. Communications of the ACM, 1981. 24(1): p. 24--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Hammer, M., Reengineering Work: Don't automate, obliterate. Harvard Business Review, 1990. Jul/Aug: p. 104--112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Janssen, M., et al., Uit het Zicht: Beleidsmaatregelen voor het versnellen van het gebruik van ICT-toepassingen voor administratieve lastenverlichting. 2010, Technische Universiteit Delft: Delft.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. OECD, Forum on Tax Administration: Taxpayer services sub-group, Guidance Note on Standard Business Reporting. 2009, OECD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. White, S. A. and D. Miers, BPMN Modeling and Reference Guide: Understanding and Using BPMN. 2008: Future Strategies Inc., Lighthouse Pt, FL.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Huemer, C., et al., B2B Services: Worksheet-Driven Development of modeling Artifcats and Code. The Computer Journal, 2009. 52(8): p. 1007--1027. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Robey, D., G. Im, and J. Wareham, Theoretical foundations of empirical research on inter-organizational systems: assessing past contributions and guiding future directions. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2008. 9(9): p. 497--518.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Hulstijn, J., et al., Continuous Control Monitoring-based Regulation: a case in the meat processing industry, in GRCIS 2011, M. Indulska, et al., Editors. 2011, Springer Verlag London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Power, M., Organized Uncertainty: Designing a World of Risk Management. 2007: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. de Bruijn, J. A. and E. F. ten Heuvelhof, Network and Decision Making. 2000: Lemma, Utrecht, Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones, C., Strategies for managing requirements creep. Computer, 1996. 29(6): p. 92--94. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Martin, J., Rapid application development. 1991: Macmillan Publishing, Indianapolis, IN. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Larman, C. and V. R. Basili., Iterative and Incremental Development: A Brief History. IEEE Computer, 2003. June. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Sage, A. and W. Rouse, Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management 2ed. 2009: Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Cardoso, J. and W. M. P. van der Aalst, Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling. 2009: Information Science Publishing, Hershey, PA, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Lankhorst, M., ed. Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling, Communication and Analysis. 2009, Springer Verlag: Berlin. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Davenport, T. H., Process innovation: reengineering work through information technology. 1993: Harvard Business School Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Davies, I., et al., How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice? Data and Knowledge Engineering, 2006. 58(3): p. 358--380. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Brooks, F. P., No silver bullet: essence and accidents of software engineering. IEEE Computer, 1987. 20(4): p. 10--19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Mintzberg, H. The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research. 1979: Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Knechel, W., S. salterio, and B. Ballou, Auditing: Assurance and Risk. 3 ed. 2007: Thomson Learning, Cincinatti.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Sandhu, R. S., et al., Role-Based Access Control Models. IEEE Computer, 1996. 29(2). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. P. Engel, et al., Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) -- Recommendation. 2003, XBRL International,.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Spies, M., An ontology modelling perspective on business reporting. Information Systems, 2010. 35: p. 404--416. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Wagenhofer, A., Economic Consequences of Internet Financial Reporting, in New Dimensions of Business Reporting and XBRL, Roger Debreceny, Carsten Felden, and M. Piechocki, Editors. 2007, Springer Verlag, Berlin, p. 99--124.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. A. W Duthler and M. Voulon, Het juridisch kader van betrouwbaar elektronisch berichtenverkeer. IT en Recht. 2010: Kluwer Academic.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Newcomer, E. and G. Lomow, Understanding SOA with Web services. 2005, NJ: Pearson Education. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Erl, T., Service-Oriented Architrecture - Concepts, Technology, and Design. 2006, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Marks, E. and M. Bell, Service-Oriented Architecture: A Planning and Implementation Guide for Business and Technology. 2006, Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Sambamurthy, V. and R. W. Zmud, Arrangements for Information Technology Governance: A Theory of Multiple Contingencies. MIS Quarterly, 1999. 23(2): p. 261--290. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Weill, P. and J. Ross, A matrixed approach to designing IT governance. MIT Sloan Management Review, 2005. 46(2): p. 26--34.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Eisenhardt, K. M., Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 1989. 14(4): p. 532--550.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Koppenjan, J. F. M. and E. H. Klijn, Managing Uncertainties in Networks. 2004: Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Public process management: a method for introducing standard business reporting

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            dg.o '11: Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging Times
            June 2011
            398 pages
            ISBN:9781450307628
            DOI:10.1145/2037556

            Copyright © 2011 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 12 June 2011

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate150of271submissions,55%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader